A major question for American politics in the coming years is whether the Republican Party can divest itself of some of its far-right commitments of recent years. The Republican Party has abandoned moderation and consensus-seeking politics in recent years, as its far-right reactionary fringe has effectively captured the party.
Republicans have essentially sought to couple 1920s-era pre-Great Depression, pre-New Deal economic policies with 1950s-style pre-Civil Rights, pre-Women's Rights social policies. They have embraced efforts to monitor and control individual behavior in seemingly every non-economic sphere of life.
Republicans have also enshrined anti-intellectualism as one of their core values, denying scientific evidence and facts while distorting history and espousing crackpot macroeconomic theories without intellectual foundation. On economic issues, they have opposed nearly all efforts to reverse
the thirty-year trend of rising income inequality, with an ever-growing
proportion of national income and wealth being absorbed by a small
percentage at the top.
Are we seeing the first vestiges of Republican re-thinking as some finally acknowledge that their preferred policy of limiting taxation for the wealthiest citizens lacks public support? Conservatives are seeking to misguidedly enforce austerity during a fragile economic recovery, a sure bet to plunge the economy into recession, though we now finally see signs of dissent from the preference for austerity.
The turn-back-the-clock approach was rejected in the 2012 election. Some Republicans have awakened to that fact. Yet some evince no understanding that their electoral losses were rooted in unpopular policy positions, not in a mere communication failure. The right-wing message is no longer popular, yet many Republicans cling to it.
Monday, December 10, 2012
Saturday, December 8, 2012
GOP post-election confusion
Post-election signs of national Republican Party confusion and conflict are rampant.
First came revelations that the Romney campaign and many other Republican pollsters misread the potential demographic composition of the 2012 electorate. That sparked a series of prominent Republicans to embrace the idea of immigration reform, or to speak of their party's need for more aggressive minority outreach. And there even have been Republicans making statements indicating recognition that their party's economic focus might need to change to become more appealing to middle-income Americans. Of course, some of these sentiments have met with resistance and outrage on the far right, but that was to be expected.
The long-term question for Republicans is whether it's possible for them to compete at the Presidential level under normal circumstances while avoiding splintering into two distinct factions, or perhaps even into two different political parties.
While the Republican Party's future ability to compete at the national level is worthy of contemplation and discussion, the current Republican intra-party debate also has consequences for current governance.
Most Republicans seem to be coming to the realization that they have little leverage in the current fiscal negotiations with President Obama. House Speaker John Boehner clearly would like to cut a deal, but he is constrained to some extent by conservatives' domination of House Republican ranks.
While Republicans have admitted revenues have to be part of the solution, there is clear Republican division on whether to acquiesce in raising tax rates on the wealthy by allowing Bush tax rates to expire. Republicans have refused to detail their demands for Medicare and Medicaid cuts.
Polls show the public prefers a deal with taxes on the wealthy increased, no cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, and would hold Congressional Republicans most responsible if there is no deal. Atop that, President Obama's Job Approval numbers are rising to their highest levels since 2009.
Weakness of the Republican position is being underscored by elements of the business community emphasizing resolution to the problem rather than specifics. The business community generally wants to avoid sequestration scheduled to occur in January if no long-term deal is reached. And they have been making sounds indicating they might start bringing pressure on Republicans to make a deal, regardless of political fallout.
Emblematic of that position is Business Roundtable Chairman and former Michigan Republican Governor John Engler's proposal that they agree to a five-year extension of the debt ceiling to break Republican efforts to hold the economy hostage each time the debt limit requires raising.
Republicans are in a rough spot politically, and are likely to lose on the policy front. The question of whether Republicans really want a deal is yet to be answered.
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Additional thoughts on the 2012 election:
1. State-based public polls were generally accurate in 2012, while the national polls clearly underestimated the Democratic vote. State polls indicated that Obama would likely finish with a minimum of 281 electoral votes, more likely 303, and possibly 332 if he could pull out a perceived upset in Florida. Florida was a must-win state for Romney that typically leans Republican, and in which Romney had shown clear leads in mid-October. Polling indicated Obama closing in Florida, with the aggregate polling results showing them roughly deadlocked.
While there was a clear disconnect between Republican/Romney campaign pollsters' expectations of the electorate's composition, national public polls also underestimated the minority composition of the electorate.
Most of the national public polls, especially those funded by major television networks and prominent newspapers, assumed a 24-26% non-white portion of the electorate. Yet exit polls indicate the non-white portion of the electorate was 28%, an increase from the 26% non-white share in 2008. While the aggregate of the national polls pointed to an Obama popular vote victory in the 1.0-1.5% range, he now leads by 3.6 points.
2. On the realignment question, demography is certainly against Republicans. Increased multi-culturalism, embodied both by the increased non-white share of the electorate, and younger whites' tolerance of diversity has destroyed Republicans' tight electoral college hold which existed in the 1968-88 era. 1988 was the last time the Republican Presidential candidate achieved 300 electoral votes. Democrats have won 332+ electoral votes in 4 of the last 6 elections, and have won the popular vote in 5 of those 6 elections.
Democrats' Blue Wall, comprising 18 states plus DC which have gone Democratic in all six post-1988 Presidential election, now total 242 electoral votes. That is a huge base with which to begin in Presidential elections. There are three additional states (New Mexico, Iowa and New Hampshire) totaling 15 EV which have been carried by Democrats in 5 of 6 of those post-1988 elections. That's 257 EV which clearly lean toward Democrats in a typical Presidential election in the current era. A Democrat need only hold those 21 states plus DC, and win Ohio, or any two of Nevada, Colorado or Virginia (all trending Democratic at Presidential level) to clinch electoral victory. This also could be accomplished by winning Florida, though Florida is the most Republican-leaning of these swing states, so my assumption is it will not be the "tipping-point" state. If a Democrat carries Florida, he is probably carrying enough other states by larger margins to ensure victory without Florida. Such was the case in both 2008 and 2012 when Obama carried Florida, but did not need it to win.
3. To sustain a realignment, Democrats will need to move beyond winning Presidential elections and gain and sustain full governing authority. This requires taking control of the House so divided government does not disrupt policy shifts needed to cement Democrats' majority over the longer term.
The clear obstacle here is that Presidential electorates do not resemble mid-term electorates demographically. Those voters who have become regular Presidential year voters but who fail to show up for mid-term elections disproportionately tend to vote Democratic. Republicans' success in 2010 was not merely a product of a struggling economy. The electoral result was also rendered by an electorate much whiter and older than the Presidential-year electorates of 2008 and 2012. Democrats' primary electoral challenge is to ensure that the younger voters and minorities adopt more habitual voting patterns including voting in the mid-term years and not only in Presidential years.
4. We have also reached a point where the Republican Party's policy choices and rhetorical emphases are not particularly popular outside corporate boardrooms, where the opposition to government regulation and taxes plays, and among white Southerners, where church, guns and antipathy to non-whites rules. This is an odd and tenuous coalition, at times frayed by tensions between non-Southern corporate types' aversion to cultural issue extremism, and Southern whites' attachment to cultural issues.
Southern whites (including those in Border South states like Oklahoma, Kentucky and recently West Virginia) vote differently than whites outside the south. Democrats, particularly Obama, have performed quite well among non-Southern whites, but run extremely poorly with Southern whites, particularly outside the South Atlantic states.
We seem to have reached a point where Southern whites, generally, have policy preferences which are out of step with the rest of the nation.
Romney represented, and was aligned with, corporate interests perhaps more clearly than any Republican nominee since Herbert Hoover. Turnout was down in rural areas, particularly in parts of the South. This had no effect on the electoral college outcome, but could have hurt Romney in the national popular vote. How long can the coalition of largely small-town and rural Southern whites and the corporate establishment be sustained?
1. State-based public polls were generally accurate in 2012, while the national polls clearly underestimated the Democratic vote. State polls indicated that Obama would likely finish with a minimum of 281 electoral votes, more likely 303, and possibly 332 if he could pull out a perceived upset in Florida. Florida was a must-win state for Romney that typically leans Republican, and in which Romney had shown clear leads in mid-October. Polling indicated Obama closing in Florida, with the aggregate polling results showing them roughly deadlocked.
While there was a clear disconnect between Republican/Romney campaign pollsters' expectations of the electorate's composition, national public polls also underestimated the minority composition of the electorate.
Most of the national public polls, especially those funded by major television networks and prominent newspapers, assumed a 24-26% non-white portion of the electorate. Yet exit polls indicate the non-white portion of the electorate was 28%, an increase from the 26% non-white share in 2008. While the aggregate of the national polls pointed to an Obama popular vote victory in the 1.0-1.5% range, he now leads by 3.6 points.
2. On the realignment question, demography is certainly against Republicans. Increased multi-culturalism, embodied both by the increased non-white share of the electorate, and younger whites' tolerance of diversity has destroyed Republicans' tight electoral college hold which existed in the 1968-88 era. 1988 was the last time the Republican Presidential candidate achieved 300 electoral votes. Democrats have won 332+ electoral votes in 4 of the last 6 elections, and have won the popular vote in 5 of those 6 elections.
Democrats' Blue Wall, comprising 18 states plus DC which have gone Democratic in all six post-1988 Presidential election, now total 242 electoral votes. That is a huge base with which to begin in Presidential elections. There are three additional states (New Mexico, Iowa and New Hampshire) totaling 15 EV which have been carried by Democrats in 5 of 6 of those post-1988 elections. That's 257 EV which clearly lean toward Democrats in a typical Presidential election in the current era. A Democrat need only hold those 21 states plus DC, and win Ohio, or any two of Nevada, Colorado or Virginia (all trending Democratic at Presidential level) to clinch electoral victory. This also could be accomplished by winning Florida, though Florida is the most Republican-leaning of these swing states, so my assumption is it will not be the "tipping-point" state. If a Democrat carries Florida, he is probably carrying enough other states by larger margins to ensure victory without Florida. Such was the case in both 2008 and 2012 when Obama carried Florida, but did not need it to win.
3. To sustain a realignment, Democrats will need to move beyond winning Presidential elections and gain and sustain full governing authority. This requires taking control of the House so divided government does not disrupt policy shifts needed to cement Democrats' majority over the longer term.
The clear obstacle here is that Presidential electorates do not resemble mid-term electorates demographically. Those voters who have become regular Presidential year voters but who fail to show up for mid-term elections disproportionately tend to vote Democratic. Republicans' success in 2010 was not merely a product of a struggling economy. The electoral result was also rendered by an electorate much whiter and older than the Presidential-year electorates of 2008 and 2012. Democrats' primary electoral challenge is to ensure that the younger voters and minorities adopt more habitual voting patterns including voting in the mid-term years and not only in Presidential years.
4. We have also reached a point where the Republican Party's policy choices and rhetorical emphases are not particularly popular outside corporate boardrooms, where the opposition to government regulation and taxes plays, and among white Southerners, where church, guns and antipathy to non-whites rules. This is an odd and tenuous coalition, at times frayed by tensions between non-Southern corporate types' aversion to cultural issue extremism, and Southern whites' attachment to cultural issues.
Southern whites (including those in Border South states like Oklahoma, Kentucky and recently West Virginia) vote differently than whites outside the south. Democrats, particularly Obama, have performed quite well among non-Southern whites, but run extremely poorly with Southern whites, particularly outside the South Atlantic states.
We seem to have reached a point where Southern whites, generally, have policy preferences which are out of step with the rest of the nation.
Romney represented, and was aligned with, corporate interests perhaps more clearly than any Republican nominee since Herbert Hoover. Turnout was down in rural areas, particularly in parts of the South. This had no effect on the electoral college outcome, but could have hurt Romney in the national popular vote. How long can the coalition of largely small-town and rural Southern whites and the corporate establishment be sustained?
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Is the South out of touch?
Republicans continue to win big in the South in Presidential elections, but struggle to compete in most of the rest of the nation. In short, the South appears out of touch with the rest of the country. The South exerts a reactionary pull on the Republican Party, leading to it endorsing many issue positions which are losers nationwide. Whether this difference between Southern Republicans and the remainder of the nation is primarily racially-based, or religiously-based is unresolved.
It is clear that Southern whites are decidedly more conservative than the national electorate on a wide range of issues. While Republicans win an overwhelming proportion of the vote among white southerners, the white vote splits much more evenly in other parts of the country.
It is clear that Southern whites are decidedly more conservative than the national electorate on a wide range of issues. While Republicans win an overwhelming proportion of the vote among white southerners, the white vote splits much more evenly in other parts of the country.
Monday, November 12, 2012
Persistence of the "New" Electorate
While Republicans face the possibility that changing demographics might have relegated them to an underdog position in Presidential elections for a generation, the 2012 election brings the Democrats' primary electoral challenge into stark relief.
The overriding challenge for Democrats is to bridge the apparent structural gap between Presidential-year electorates and mid-term electorates. Democrats need to ensure that the voters who have fueled their 2008 and 2012 Obama victories, especially those who cast their first votes in 2008 or 2012, become habitual voters who show up at the polls in mid-term elections. The demography of 2010's electorate (much older and whiter) differed dramatically from the 2008 and 2012 electorates. Democrats need to change that.
If Democrats fail to ensure the persistence of the new electorate from Presidential elections to mid-term elections, they will continually face the prospect of losing Senate and House seats in mid-term elections.
The Presidential electorate continues to grow more ethnically diverse,with the non-white portion of the electorate now up to 28%, the highest in history. The non-white sector of the electorate is only going to continue to grow moving forward. Latinos comprised 10% of the electorate, African-Americans held steady at 13%, while Asians and other ethnic groups combined for 5%. The Republican challenge is to become more competitive within this diversifying electorate, while Democrats' challenge is to turn out this electorate in non-Presidential elections.
The overriding challenge for Democrats is to bridge the apparent structural gap between Presidential-year electorates and mid-term electorates. Democrats need to ensure that the voters who have fueled their 2008 and 2012 Obama victories, especially those who cast their first votes in 2008 or 2012, become habitual voters who show up at the polls in mid-term elections. The demography of 2010's electorate (much older and whiter) differed dramatically from the 2008 and 2012 electorates. Democrats need to change that.
If Democrats fail to ensure the persistence of the new electorate from Presidential elections to mid-term elections, they will continually face the prospect of losing Senate and House seats in mid-term elections.
The Presidential electorate continues to grow more ethnically diverse,with the non-white portion of the electorate now up to 28%, the highest in history. The non-white sector of the electorate is only going to continue to grow moving forward. Latinos comprised 10% of the electorate, African-Americans held steady at 13%, while Asians and other ethnic groups combined for 5%. The Republican challenge is to become more competitive within this diversifying electorate, while Democrats' challenge is to turn out this electorate in non-Presidential elections.
Additional Election Observations
Democratic Presidential candidates have now carried 18 states (the "Blue Wall") plus DC in six consecutive Presidential elections (1992-2012). These states include 10 East Coast states stretching from DC northward to Maine excluding New Hampshire; the four Great Lakes states of Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin; and the three West Coast states of California, Oregon and Washington, plus Hawaii. These states now account for 242 Electoral Votes, providing a huge Democratic base.
There are three additional states (Iowa, New Hampshire and New Mexico) currently totaling 15 electoral votes which Democrats have carried in five of the past six elections. Iowa and New Mexico went Republican in 2004, while New Hampshire went Republican in 2000. If these three states are added to the "Blue Wall," the Democratic Electoral College advantage becomes even more stark. It is challenging for Republicans to win so long as states possessing 257 Electoral Votes clearly tilt Democratic.
There are three additional states (Iowa, New Hampshire and New Mexico) currently totaling 15 electoral votes which Democrats have carried in five of the past six elections. Iowa and New Mexico went Republican in 2004, while New Hampshire went Republican in 2000. If these three states are added to the "Blue Wall," the Democratic Electoral College advantage becomes even more stark. It is challenging for Republicans to win so long as states possessing 257 Electoral Votes clearly tilt Democratic.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
2012 Elections data and observations
Several notable facts from 2012 elections:
1. With votes still being counted, President Obama's popular vote lead continues to widen. His national margin is now up to 3.25 million votes, boosting his portion of the vote to 50.6%, and a 2.7 point lead over Republican Romney. This is apparently going to wind up being a 51-48 election, instead of a 50-49 election as it seemed to be through much of Tuesday night and Wednesday morning.
2. With Florida being called for Obama, he finishes with 332 Electoral Votes, losing only two states (North Carolina and Indiana) which he carried in 2008. He did not win any states he lost in 2008.
3. Obama becomes the first Democrat since Franklin Roosevelt to win 50%+ of the popular vote in two elections.
4. He becomes the first President since FDR to be reelected with a smaller share of the popular vote and electoral college than in his previous election. This happened to Roosevelt in his 1940 and 1944 elections. And he becomes the first since Andrew Jackson to win a smaller share of both the popular vote and electoral college in his second election.
5.Democrats won the national popular vote in the House of Representatives, but appear likely to be limited to 200 seats in the 113th Congress. Combination of redistricting providing Republicans a distinct advantage and Democratic votes being heavily concentrated in urban areas will give Republicans sizable edge in the House.
1. With votes still being counted, President Obama's popular vote lead continues to widen. His national margin is now up to 3.25 million votes, boosting his portion of the vote to 50.6%, and a 2.7 point lead over Republican Romney. This is apparently going to wind up being a 51-48 election, instead of a 50-49 election as it seemed to be through much of Tuesday night and Wednesday morning.
2. With Florida being called for Obama, he finishes with 332 Electoral Votes, losing only two states (North Carolina and Indiana) which he carried in 2008. He did not win any states he lost in 2008.
3. Obama becomes the first Democrat since Franklin Roosevelt to win 50%+ of the popular vote in two elections.
4. He becomes the first President since FDR to be reelected with a smaller share of the popular vote and electoral college than in his previous election. This happened to Roosevelt in his 1940 and 1944 elections. And he becomes the first since Andrew Jackson to win a smaller share of both the popular vote and electoral college in his second election.
5.Democrats won the national popular vote in the House of Representatives, but appear likely to be limited to 200 seats in the 113th Congress. Combination of redistricting providing Republicans a distinct advantage and Democratic votes being heavily concentrated in urban areas will give Republicans sizable edge in the House.
Friday, November 9, 2012
Democrats net two Senate seats
Democrats increased their Senate majority to 54, with possibility of it reaching 55 seats depending on whether Independent Maine Senator-elect Angus King caucuses with Democrats. No incumbent Democrat lost, though Democrats lost the Nebraska seat previously held by retiring Ben Nelson, the Senate's most conservative Democrat. Democrats were able to take two Republican seats, in Massachusetts and Indiana.
Democrats won all the close Senate races, though only the North Dakota race was decided by fewer than 4 points.
Democrats won all the close Senate races, though only the North Dakota race was decided by fewer than 4 points.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
State polls had it right
There were numerous polling controversies of 2012. They included whether established pollsters were accurately capturing the likely electorate in partisan and demographic terms; whether poll aggregators were missing the boat with their probabilistic interpretations of various state projections; and whether state or national polls are more accurate. The election outcome confirmed that the state polls, as is usually the case, had it right.
National polls with more generous non-white shares of the electorate more accurately forecast the national popular vote as the non-white portion of the electorate reached a new high of 28%, according to exit polls. The Republican Party's inability to compete among the non-white portion of the population threatens to relegate it to minority party status for a generation. Democratic strength continues growing in more demographically diverse areas of the nation. The Democratic strength in industrial states Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin attests to the continued inclusion of white union workers, a staple of the traditional Democratic New Deal coalition, in the evolving 21st century coalition. Unmarried women also continue as a staple of the Democratic coalition.
This election was one in which Democrats had both the superior campaign and the superior candidate, plus the advantage of an incumbent President running with a united party. Exit polling indicated that voters considered President Obama the candidate who most understood people like them and who most favored the middle class by wide margins. Unsurprisingly, he won handily among voters for whom those were important concerns.
These perceptions were likely attributable to several first-term policy decisions invoked throughout the campaign, and to devastating media advertising characterizing his Republican opponent as a plutocrat. Among the previous policy choices that were emphasized most were the Auto Rescue, his executive order allowing immigrant youth to avoid deportation, and his health care requirement that employer-provided insurance cover contraception, and passage of the landmark Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. His quest for "tax fairness," requiring the wealthy to do their fair share, further reinforced his identification as the candidate of a battered middle class.
National polls with more generous non-white shares of the electorate more accurately forecast the national popular vote as the non-white portion of the electorate reached a new high of 28%, according to exit polls. The Republican Party's inability to compete among the non-white portion of the population threatens to relegate it to minority party status for a generation. Democratic strength continues growing in more demographically diverse areas of the nation. The Democratic strength in industrial states Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin attests to the continued inclusion of white union workers, a staple of the traditional Democratic New Deal coalition, in the evolving 21st century coalition. Unmarried women also continue as a staple of the Democratic coalition.
This election was one in which Democrats had both the superior campaign and the superior candidate, plus the advantage of an incumbent President running with a united party. Exit polling indicated that voters considered President Obama the candidate who most understood people like them and who most favored the middle class by wide margins. Unsurprisingly, he won handily among voters for whom those were important concerns.
These perceptions were likely attributable to several first-term policy decisions invoked throughout the campaign, and to devastating media advertising characterizing his Republican opponent as a plutocrat. Among the previous policy choices that were emphasized most were the Auto Rescue, his executive order allowing immigrant youth to avoid deportation, and his health care requirement that employer-provided insurance cover contraception, and passage of the landmark Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. His quest for "tax fairness," requiring the wealthy to do their fair share, further reinforced his identification as the candidate of a battered middle class.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Obama Dominates Battlegrounds in Reelect
President Obama has been reelected, carrying every battleground state other than North Carolina. In fact, Obama appears to have lost only two states, Indiana and North Carolina, which he carried in 2008. With Florida still uncalled, Obama has 303 Electoral Votes, Romney 206. Obama leads in Florida by fewer than 50,000 votes with approximately 95% of vote counted, and seems virtually certain to win the state's 29 Electoral Votes. Florida would boost Obama's final Electoral Vote total to 332.
Obama's winning margins in the eight battleground states varied from roughly seven points in Wisconsin and Nevada to between one-half and one percent in Florida. In fact, Obama carried 10 states decided by fewer than eight points, while NC was the only state carried by Romney by fewer than eight points.
The margins, as currently reported, in those states won by the President by fewer than eight points, compared to official 2008 results are as follows:
State 2008 Margin 2012 Margin
Minnesota 10.24% 7.6%
Wisconsin 13.89 6.7
Nevada 12.50 6.6
New Hampshire 9.61 5.7
Iowa 9.57 5.6
Pennsylvania 10.32 5.1
Colorado 8.95 4.7
Virginia 6.30 3.0
Ohio 4.54 2.0
Florida 2.81 0.6
The President's national popular vote margin is about two points, as he leads currently by nearly 2.8 million votes.
Obama's winning margins in the eight battleground states varied from roughly seven points in Wisconsin and Nevada to between one-half and one percent in Florida. In fact, Obama carried 10 states decided by fewer than eight points, while NC was the only state carried by Romney by fewer than eight points.
The margins, as currently reported, in those states won by the President by fewer than eight points, compared to official 2008 results are as follows:
State 2008 Margin 2012 Margin
Minnesota 10.24% 7.6%
Wisconsin 13.89 6.7
Nevada 12.50 6.6
New Hampshire 9.61 5.7
Iowa 9.57 5.6
Pennsylvania 10.32 5.1
Colorado 8.95 4.7
Virginia 6.30 3.0
Ohio 4.54 2.0
Florida 2.81 0.6
The President's national popular vote margin is about two points, as he leads currently by nearly 2.8 million votes.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Enduring Democratic Majority?
The American electorate's changing demographic composition has fueled the rise of the Obama coalition. This coalition features wide majorities of ascendant demographic groups, as the non-white share of the electorate has steadily risen in recent elections.
One significant variable in 2012 will be whether that expansion of the minority vote continues. Non-whites cast barely more than a quarter of the vote in the 2008 Presidential election. Will they again constitute a quarter of the national electorate? Is the non-white percentage more likely to continue inching upward, perhaps as high as 27-28%, or to recede below 25%? The exact percentage of the total vote cast by non-white voters could be a telling factor in the 2012 outcome, as an electorate less than 25% non-white could yield a Romney popular vote edge. Conversely, if more than 26% of all votes are cast by non-white voters, President Obama could outperform his final national poll numbers.
If President Obama is indeed reelected, a major question going forward involves the potential lasting power of the Democratic Party's current demographic advantage in Presidential elections. Does the Obama coalition indicate an enduring Democratic majority, at least in Presidential years?
The development of the Obama coalition, with the ever-expanding Latino vote a key component, also has looming potential policy implications. Will Congressional Republicans, in view of their party's poor performance with Latino voters, be open to comprehensive immigration reform in the next Congress to avert a potential generation in the electoral wilderness? Or will right-wing anti-immigrant reactionaries among House Republicans prevail, and prevent immigration legislation? The immigration question and how to adapt to a growing non-white portion of the electorate could divide the Republican Party in 2013.
One significant variable in 2012 will be whether that expansion of the minority vote continues. Non-whites cast barely more than a quarter of the vote in the 2008 Presidential election. Will they again constitute a quarter of the national electorate? Is the non-white percentage more likely to continue inching upward, perhaps as high as 27-28%, or to recede below 25%? The exact percentage of the total vote cast by non-white voters could be a telling factor in the 2012 outcome, as an electorate less than 25% non-white could yield a Romney popular vote edge. Conversely, if more than 26% of all votes are cast by non-white voters, President Obama could outperform his final national poll numbers.
If President Obama is indeed reelected, a major question going forward involves the potential lasting power of the Democratic Party's current demographic advantage in Presidential elections. Does the Obama coalition indicate an enduring Democratic majority, at least in Presidential years?
The development of the Obama coalition, with the ever-expanding Latino vote a key component, also has looming potential policy implications. Will Congressional Republicans, in view of their party's poor performance with Latino voters, be open to comprehensive immigration reform in the next Congress to avert a potential generation in the electoral wilderness? Or will right-wing anti-immigrant reactionaries among House Republicans prevail, and prevent immigration legislation? The immigration question and how to adapt to a growing non-white portion of the electorate could divide the Republican Party in 2013.
2012 Election Forecast
Polls and media analyses finally seem to be converging on election eve. All except the most deluded on the right are moving to projecting the reelection of the 44th President, Barack Obama. There is widespread disagreement about just how close the outcome might be, and how late we might have to wait before the official call is made tomorrow night (pre-midnight or post-midnight), but there is growing agreement that the incumbent will be reelected.
My Electoral Vote projection is Obama 303, Romney 235. That would have Obama winning all "battleground" states other than Florida and North Carolina. And while the popular vote will be closer, it now looks as though Obama will eke out a popular vote victory which approximates two points. My projection is: Obama 50.3%, Romney 48.2%, Others 1.5%.
The battleground states can be arrayed along a continuum from most favorable for Obama to least favorable for Obama. Such a continuum would include:
Nevada, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado, Florida, North Carolina.
Obama is likely to carry the first five of these, along with Pennsylvania and possibly Minnesota, by 5 points or fewer. The next three states, Virginia, Colorado and Florida appear to be true tossups likely to be decided by no more than 2 points in either direction, with North Carolina leaning slightly in Republican challenger Mitt Romney's direction. The 303 EV total assumes Obama will win both Virginia and Colorado, though the outcomes in those two states and Florida might not be known until Wednesday.
My Electoral Vote projection is Obama 303, Romney 235. That would have Obama winning all "battleground" states other than Florida and North Carolina. And while the popular vote will be closer, it now looks as though Obama will eke out a popular vote victory which approximates two points. My projection is: Obama 50.3%, Romney 48.2%, Others 1.5%.
The battleground states can be arrayed along a continuum from most favorable for Obama to least favorable for Obama. Such a continuum would include:
Nevada, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado, Florida, North Carolina.
Obama is likely to carry the first five of these, along with Pennsylvania and possibly Minnesota, by 5 points or fewer. The next three states, Virginia, Colorado and Florida appear to be true tossups likely to be decided by no more than 2 points in either direction, with North Carolina leaning slightly in Republican challenger Mitt Romney's direction. The 303 EV total assumes Obama will win both Virginia and Colorado, though the outcomes in those two states and Florida might not be known until Wednesday.
Saturday, October 27, 2012
Upcoming Presidential Election
Is the Reagan coalition finished as an electoral force? Or is the "emerging Democratic majority" that seemed on the horizon in the 21st century's first decade now a reality, at least in Presidential elections? That is what the 2012 election is likely to tell us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)