Presidential coattails can also have negative effects 

A popular political parlor game around this time in a presidential election is to speculate not only about which party will capture the White House, but how that presidential candidate’s success may, or may not, affect down ballot races for the U.S. House and Senate — the so-called coattail effect.

The word “coattail” has been around since at least 1600, defined as the long, back flaps on a gentleman’s coat. Today, we associate that mode of dress mostly with formal wear (e.g., white tie and tails).

The political use of the term is of more recent vintage. In an 1848 speech, then first-term Rep. Abraham Lincoln (Whig-Ill.) rebutted Democratic criticisms that the Whigs were hiding under the “military coattail” of their presidential nominee, Gen. Zachary Taylor. Lincoln hurled back that Democrats were guilty of hypocrisy for having spent two decades hiding under Andrew Jackson’s coattail.

The term “coattail” did not fully emerge into common political parlance until the mid-20th century, associated mainly with presidential landslide elections that swept into office congressional candidates of the president’s party who likely would not have won on their own: think Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952, Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 and Ronald Reagan in 1980. In each instance their overwhelming margins of victory bolstered their parties’ voting strengths in Congress.  

“Landslide” Lyndon Johnson’s success enabled him to enact his ambitious Great Society panoply of progressive social and civil rights laws. By March of 1968, however, he announced he would not run for reelection given the fallen state of a nation plagued by urban riots, Vietnam anti-war protests and political assassinations. His vice president, Hubert H. Humphrey, was not able to right the party’s ship as its presidential candidate, and Republican Richard M. Nixon (Calif.) edged him out that November with 43.4 percent of the popular vote and 302 to 191 electoral votes.

What we witnessed with the collapse of the LBJ presidency in 1968 was what has been termed “negative,” or “reverse coattails.” In 2016, when Donald Trump was losing badly in all the polls to former Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton, Senate Republicans were in such a panic about losing their majority that they were internally debating how best to distance themselves from Trump.  

One seasoned political observer, Larry Sabato, director of the Politics Center at the University of Virginia, opined in June 2016 that Senate Republicans were “whistling past the graveyard....To deny there’s coattails is laughable.” Nate Silver’s respected polling organization, FiveThirtyEight, projected that Clinton had a 71.4 percent chance of winning compared to Trump’s 28.6 percent chance. However, Trump turned things around and beat Clinton in what Politico termed, “the most stunning upset in American history.”

Although Clinton did win a narrow majority of the popular vote — 48.2 percent to 46.2 percent, she lost the Electoral College, 227 votes to Trump’s 307 votes. Hers were not exactly negative coattails, as Democrats did pick up six House seats and two Senate seats. However, the GOP retained control of the House, 241 to 194 seats, and the Senate, 52 to 46 seats.   

Former Vice President Joe Biden won the presidency in 2020 with 306 electoral votes to Trump’s 232 votes. Neither party could claim down-ballot negative or positive coattail effects from that contest. And despite Biden’s impressive legislative record of accomplishments in his first two years as president, Republicans regained control of the House in the 2022 midterms, picking up nine seats for a 222 to 213 majority.   

A potentially disastrous negative coattail effect was looming for both Democratic House and Senate races in 2024 as President Biden’s support dwindled following an abysmal debate performance against Trump. Biden decided in July to withdraw from the race and endorse Vice President Kamala Harris to succeed him. The polls have since turned in her favor, and her party has responded with renewed energy and enthusiasm over their newly minted nominee for president. Similarly, the prospect of large down-ballot party losses has diminished considerably.

As things now stand, Democrats have regained some of their lost yardage, with Harris narrowly leading in national polls among registered voters, but with Trump still leading in some key battleground states and on critical issues such as the economy, inflation and immigration.

Perhaps all the high-tech pollsters and prognosticators will get it right this time on presidential and congressional election results, but don’t bet the farm on their forecasts. Instead, take a coin over to a corner, and start flipping it. Chances are, your results will be at least as accurate, if not more so, than the so-called experts. 

Don Wolfensberger is a 28-year congressional staff veteran culminating as chief-of-staff of the House Rules Committee in 1995. He is author of, “Congress and the People: Deliberative Democracy on Trial” (2000), and, “Changing Cultures in Congress: From Fair Play to Power Plays” (2018).