How did Mitch McConnell end up winning so easily?

As recently as last month, Sen. Mitch McConnell's Democratic challenger was neck-and-neck with him in polls. But Senator McConnell is a seasoned politician who ran a smart campaign.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R) of Kentucky, joined by his wife, former Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, celebrates with his supporters at an election night party in Louisville, Ky.,Tuesday.

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell won reelection easily on Tuesday, defeating Barack Obama in his Kentucky Senate race.

What, Mr. Obama wasn’t on the ballot? Senator McConnell’s opponent was Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes?

Yes and yes. But McConnell tied Ms. Grimes to Obama and administration coal policies that are highly unpopular in coal-dependent sections of the state. He hammered that connection home in ad after ad in the closing days of the campaign, helped by Grimes’s fumbling response to the question of whether she’d voted for the president from her own party.

Obama’s approval rating in Kentucky is some ten points lower than his low-40s national average. That was an obstacle for Grimes that she just couldn’t overcome.

“Make no mistake: tonight is a repudiation of President Obama’s policies,” said Sen. Rand Paul (R) of Kentucky at McConnell’s victory party, according to the Louisville Courier Journal.

McConnell also took the possibility of defeat seriously from the start of the campaign. He was not going to be Richard Lugar, the veteran Indiana Republican swept from his Senate seat in 2012 in large part because voters decided he was a creature of Washington, not a Hoosier.

McConnell’s mediocre approval ratings drew a tea party-backed primary challenger, businessman Matt Bevin. But Bevin’s polished manner wilted under harsh attacks on his business practices from McConnell and establishment GOP super political action committees.

Grimes ran a hard campaign and Democrats hoped for an upset in a state where Obamacare, repackaged as the state’s Kynect health exchange, was fairly popular and successful. As recently as early October some polls showed her only three or so points behind.

But the fundamental rightward tilt of Kentucky reasserted itself in the end. By Election Day most forecasters had McConnell as the overwhelming favorite and the race was quickly called in his favor after polls closed. National Democrats may wish they’d diverted money from the state to closer races in Georgia and Iowa, in the end.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.