Trump at the top: Case study of a down-ballot Republican

The Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton frame shapes down ballot races.

Something is playing out in Southern Oregon in my immediate view that may be playing out nationwide.  What it means to be a Democrat hasn't changed much from the Obama years,   It is still the party of Obama.

But the nomination of Trump has shaped and changed what it means to be a Republican--unless a local candidate openly condemns Trump.   The national Republican brand now incorporates resistance to demographic change, distaste for immigration, suspicion of Muslims and economic elites and a retrenchment back to a more traditional good-old-days when white males set the standards for normalcy.  One does not need to be a Trump-style Republican to be a Republican but it is undeniable that Trump took on and defeated a multitude of non-Trump options.   Voters in Oregon had the choice in May between Trump and Kasich and they overwhelmingly chose Trump.   For better or worse, for Oregon Republicans this is Trump country.

There is an interesting election taking place close to my home.   An incumbent moderate-liberal physician has held an Oregon state senate district for some ten years.  The district is one of the few senate districts that have near-parity of Democrats and Republicans.   It pairs a house district that is dominated by a liberal college town, Ashland, which elects a reliably liberal-progressive-pro-choice-environmentalist-pro-gay-rights supporting member with a moderately Republican-leaning house district which elects establishment-oriented Republicans. 

The popular Democrat--Al Bates--held the senate seat that represented both districts in large part because of his unusual energy and personal appeal.  To the dismay of many, he died suddenly, at age 71.

Democrat Tonia Moro

Democrats quickly chose a local attorney from a slate of ten potential candidates to fill the seat.  Tonia Moro presents as a good-government, pro-Transit District, Sanders-oriented but OK- with-Hillary Democrat, at least as I view her.   She consolidated Democratic activist opinion and proved herself to be an acceptable, electable Democrat.

Since the Republican replacement was chosen by the party, not via a hard-fought primary election, there was no showdown between Tea Party or Trump supporters or Chamber of Commerce oriented candidates.   There was no time for a establishment moderate candidate to be "primaried" out by an angry Tea Party Republican, the kind who, currently, has an excellent chance of winning a Republican primary.  What happened was a moderate Republican from the civic-minded businessman Chamber of Commerce part of the party, bringing with him a reputation for significant personal wealth stepped forward in the tight three week window for choosing a nominee.  He was the only candidate.

Republican Alan DeBoer

This Republican could have had a tough time in a contested Republican primary.  His presents as a businessman (a car dealer) not an ideologue.  He was a non-partisan mayor of that liberal city, Ashland and had a successful tenure.  Surely he did things in Ashland that were reasonable for Ashland but anathema to Republicans generally.   He supported a dollar a gallon gasoline tax, which sounds reasonable to me but which I suspect would cause him problems in a Republican primary.   

What makes sense in Ashland are exactly the things that the national Republican party thinks are breaking down the traditional pillars of American strength and decency: taxes to support civic improvements, racial diversity, multicultural tolerance, rights for the LGBTQ community, strong land use laws protecting solar access and forbidding big-box stores.  He was a city mayor, a member of that group of that "civic-minded, make-government-work, Chamber of Commerce, Rotary Club" type Republicans who used to dominate the Republican party but who now are beaten in primaries by the Talk Radio/Fox News ideological faction of the party which has accepted as true the Reagan notion that government does not solve problems, government is the problem.

So now we have an odd showdown: a regular Democrat in a district with a modest Democratic advantage against a man who presents as a moderate Republican business leader, on a Republican ticket headed by Trump, in a constituency that chose Trump over Kasich.

One final fact to add to the mix:   The state senate is closely divided on whether the Democrats control the budget process, so the state parties are enormously interested in the race.  The Democratic Senate Caucus and the Republican Senate Caucus will each spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on the race, money which goes a long way in this small media market.  The race will become highly partisan in tone, I expect, because of the involvement of upstate political interests who are keenly interested in which party has control of the senate budget process.

What is the campaign strategy likely to be pushed by the state parties?   Some sharply negative attacks on something each candidate has no doubt said or done in the past ten years would be the likely approach.  The state party campaigns like to do it that way.   DeBoer's proposal of a gas tax of a dollar a gallon would be a good example of a political vulnerability (again, notwithstanding my own feeling that such a tax would be an excellent idea.  Good for roads, good for steering people toward more fuel efficient cars, good for the environment, and the revenue that could be rebated back, thus reducing reliance on the income tax.)  But Democrats can make him sound like a road crazy proponent of a regressive tax and we may see ads on this.  

[Later addition/correction:  Mr. DeBoer has communicated with me that the dollar a gallon suggestion was said tongue in cheek.] 

From local party Facebook page

The Democrat supports the transit district and is a Sanders-oriented progressive.  Surely, she has said some things that can be made to sound anti-car, or socialist, or likely to flood the community with homeless immigrants needing social services.  I don't know what they are, but she has been around and is a progressive Democrat so there likely will be something out there on video or in print that can be made to look foolish or anti-American.   The track record of the election is for the state parties to run negative campaigns against a cartoonish exaggerated and ugly version of the other candidate.

My own guess is that the Republican will stress his independence from his party and present himself as a good government independent voice in the legislature. He likely cannot openly condemn his own party, in part because his caucus will spend big bucks trying to elect him.  Yet his party will be his biggest point of vulnerability: the party of Trump.    Trump-style xenophobia and playing to white resentment and distaste for "others" are anathema in the Ashland part of the district, and it will be a mixed bag in the more conservative part.

One cannot stand for election in this district and stand behind the kinds of things Ted Cruz says about triumphant Christianity or Trump says about non-whites or the GOP platform says about LGBTQ issues.  The most important cultural organizations in Ashland, the college and the Oregon Shakespeare organization, actively promote diversity and tolerance.  Republican identity politics go too far for a majority of the voters, yet Cruz style conservatism and Trump style ethnic politics are the two powerful ideological strains in the Republican electorate this year.

I expect Democrats will attempt to confound any effort the Republican candidate makes to look independent.  He will--he must--vote within his caucus on leadership issues or else he really is not a Republican.  So he would be voting to put into power people whose GOP Platform oriented policies and values are easy for Democrats to expose and condemn.  It won't necessarily be DeBoer himself who is the target; it will be his allies at the state level all the way up to Trump himself.   No need to make a cartoon adversary out of DeBoer when the GOP caucus in Oregon and Donald Trump as President are such available targets.  

It is the problem that Senator Arlin Spector had in Pennsylvania and Bob Packwood had in Oregon.   Being a Republican caused them to support Southern racists like Jesse Helms for positions of party leadership.  They had to defend their caucus votes.    A down-ballot Republican either condemns his party or is forced to explain why he doesn't.   

Can a candidate for a partisan office be a Republican but not be tagged with enabling Republican policies and values?    Can you wear a Republican uniform but not support the team captain?   Maybe he has no choice but to accept and make the best of his party affiliation and its policies.   The Republican brand has heavy baggage this year.

This question will be played out over the next two months in Southern Oregon.   I will report on what I see.