Ross K. Baker

Opinion columnist

Fault-finding by Democrats has been in abundance since Republicans swept all four of this year's special elections to fill vacant House seats. Georgia's 6th Congressional District, which appeared the most likely to flip after Democrats triggered a nearly $25 million avalanche of donations, was most disappointing of all. Some Democrats quickly blamed their youthful candidate, Jon Ossoff, for not embracing populist themes. But the recriminations also extended to House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, who drew criticism for everything from being too conspicuous a target for negative ads to simply having been around too long.

What few recognized was a single factor common to all four campaigns: The Republicans simply had better candidates.

Students of congressional elections use the term “quality candidates” to designate those most likely to end up as winners. What makes a quality candidate? One obvious factor is the ability to raise money. But strength on that dimension tends to obscure an element of equal importance in electoral success: government experience.

It may appear paradoxical that after having elected a presidential candidate who boasted of his remoteness from elective politics, formal qualifications are desirable in someone running for Congress. But voters have a much more complete picture of presidential candidates than they do of House candidates. That means job résumés loom larger in congressional races.

Democrats will keep failing until they do their own autopsy

Democrats can’t elect their own candidates: Your Say

So who did the Democrats put up? Let's start in the northern suburbs of Atlanta, a seat open because former Rep. Tom Price was named Health and Human Services secretary. Ossoff didn't live in the district and his political experience had been as a mid-level staffer in the House. He was also a documentary filmmaker. These are slender qualifications compared to his GOP opponent, Karen Handel, who had served as secretary of State of Georgia. That is not a major office, but it sounds to voters like a solid résumé entry. She was also characterized by Democrats as a perennially unsuccessful candidate, but that too counts as campaign experience that Ossoff did not have.

The contrast in the Montana race to replace Rep. Ryan Zinke, who became Secretary of the Interior, on the surface was not so clear-cut. Neither Republican Greg Gianforte nor Democrat Rob Quist had ever held office or been a candidate. But Gianforte had considerable business and entrepreneurial experience that often serves as a surrogate for office-holding. Quist was a folk singer with no government experience aside from having been appointed to the Montana Arts Council. Being a native Montanan should have been an advantage against the New Jersey-born Gianforte, but the usually-reliable charge of carpetbagging didn't persuade voters, especially in view of Quist's uncertain performances on the stump and a history of bad debts. A stronger candidate might have been in a position to win after Gianforte's assault on a journalist late in the campaign.

The experience gap was conspicuous in the special election contest in Kansas between former state treasurer Ron Estes and Democrat Jim Thompson, a first-time candidate. Estes benefited from a $120,000 cash infusion from the National Republican Campaign Committee, while Thompson was turned down by the Kansas Democratic Party for a modest $20,000 contribution. Had Thompson mastered the other attribute of a quality candidate — fund-raising prowess — he might have done better.

Georgia warning to Democrats: Trump isn't the answer. Yet.

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media

Finally, in the special election in South Carolina's 5th District, where Democrat Archie Parnell came closer to victory than Ossoff did on the same day in Georgia, Republican Ralph Norman, a member of the state assembly, was able to prevail over a political novice whose principal credential was being a tax lawyer.

A more dramatic erosion of support for President Trump among Republican voters in red-leaning districts might have pushed all four Democrats to victory. That time may come, but it was not sufficiently advanced this spring to help them.

The most fundamental impediment was that all four ran in districts with a preponderance of GOP voters. In such places, experience may be necessary to be competitive if not necessarily to prevail. There are many other less lopsided Republican-held districts, however, where a solid, qualified candidate could win. Democrats would be foolish to waste such opportunities on contenders like the ones we’ve seen so far this year.

Ross K. Baker is a distinguished professor of political science at Rutgers University and a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @USATOpinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To respond to a column, submit a comment to letters@usatoday.com.