UNDERSTANDING THE 2012 ELECTIONS| 221
Republican-controlled state legislatures would use
redistricting to put Democratic incumbents in vul-
nerable districts. Moreover, Democrats controlled
23 (i nclud i n g 2 i ndependent s who caucus w it h Dem-
ocrats) of the 33 seats that were contested in the
campaign and had several vulnerable incumbents.
Surprisingly, Democrats won one additional
Senate seat (counting 2 independents expected
to caucus with Democrats) and gained 8 House
seats. Their success was due to two factors. First,
Republicans’ control of redistricting was limited
by the fact that in some states, redistricting is
determined by nonpartisan commissions, while in
others, Democratic governors had to approve dis-
tricting schemes. Republican prospects were also
constrained by their large gains in the 2010 elec-
tion. There were not that many vulnerable Demo-
cratic incumbents in 2012 because many such
candidates had been defeated or had retired in
- Conversely, Republicans faced the problem
of securing their gains from that election, help-
ing a large class of freshmen House members get
re-elected. Moreover, while there were vulnerable
Democratic senators in 2012, some Republican
senators were vulnerable as well, most notably
Scott Brown of Massachusetts, who won a special election in 2009 in a state that
typically sends Democrats to Congress. Brown was defeated by Democrat Eliza-
beth Warren in 2012.
Democrats also benefi ted from campaign gaff es by Republican candidates. For
example, Representative Todd Akin’s prospects in running for senator in Missouri
were severely harmed by his claim during an interview that it was nearly impos-
sible for a woman to become pregnant from a rape. After this remark produced a
nationwide fi restorm of protest, many organizations, including the Republican
National Committee and Senate Campaign Committee, refused to support his
candidacy. His opponent, Claire McCaskill, who was regarded as one of the most
vulnerable Democratic incumbents, ultimately won re-election.
Analyzing the 2012 Elections
It is always easy to attribute an election outcome to a single event or factor. We
might say that Mitt Romney lost the presidential election because he was a Mor-
mon or because of his remarks at a campaign event that 47 percent of Americans
want to be dependent on government. If Obama had lost, we could attribute it to a
poor performance in the fi rst debate, dissatisfaction with his health care or eco-
nomic stimulus proposals, or the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate
in Bengazi, Libya, which killed the American ambassador and three others.
Sometimes campaigns do turn on a single event or decision. Todd Akin prob-
ably lost his Senate race in Missouri because of his comments about rape and
pregnancy— polls showed that Claire McCaskill gained considerable support after
the remarks and never lost it.
SENATOR CLAIRE MCCASKILL OF
Missouri— shown here canvassing
for votes in the state— was one of
several Democratic incumbents
considered vulnerable in 2012.
However, McCaskill prevailed after
her opponent Todd Akin’s remarks
about rape drew wide criticism.
