The Democratic Majority that Wasn’t…Predictions of long-lasting electoral dominance have given way to a more sobering reality

Posted on February 10, 2015 by Curt ( 4 comments already! )

Michael Barone:

John Judis, co-author of the book The Emerging Democratic Majority, now says in an article in National Journal that that majority has disappeared. His title: “The Emerging Republican Advantage.”

The original book, published in the Republican year of 2002, forecast accurately the groups that would make up the Democratic majority coalition that emerged in the 2006 and 2008 elections: blacks, Hispanics, gentry liberals, single women, young voters.

But as Judis writes now, that coalition has come apart. That’s partly because of diminished support from Millennials and Hispanics, but mostly because of additional white working-class defections and erosion among suburbanites unhappy with higher government spending and taxes.

In fact, he now says that the majority he predicted endured for only two elections. President Obama was re-elected with a reduced 51 percent of the vote, but Republicans won the House in 2010, 2012, and 2014, and the Senate in 2014. Democratic strength in governors’ mansions and state legislatures is at its lowest level since the 1920s.

That’s in line with voting patterns that have been steady for two decades. In three of the last four presidential elections, both parties have won between 47 and 51 percent of the vote. And in nine of the eleven House elections from 1994 to 2014, Republicans won between 48 and 52 percent of the popular vote, and Democrats a bit less, between 45 and 49 percent.

Democrats have had the advantage in presidential elections because their clusters of base voters give them more safe electoral votes. Republicans have had the advantage in House and legislative elections because their voters are spread more evenly around the rest of the country.

To put this in historical perspective, neither party has really had a permanent majority for an extended period, as Sean Trende argues persuasively in his book The Lost Majority. And the two political parties’ coalitions over the years have been of a different character. The political cartoonists are right to portray them as two different animals.

The Republican party has always been built around a demographic core of people considered by themselves and others to be typical Americans, even though they are not by themselves a majority. Northern Yankee Protestants in the 19th century, white married people today. When they come up with policies that have broader appeal beyond that core, they can win majorities. Otherwise, they can’t.

The Democratic party has always been a coalition of disparate groups that are different from the Republicans’ core. Southern whites and Catholic immigrants in the 19th century; blacks and gentry liberals today. When they cohere, Democrats can win big majorities. When they split apart, the party is a disorderly rabble.

0 0 votes

Article Rating

Name*

Email*

Name*

Email*

4 Comments

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Bill

9 years ago

Liberalism is good for the country in that it shows the country how bad liberalism is for the country. It is apparent that no amount of logic, common sense or historic precedence can convince some idealistic people that there is a finite quantity of wealth available to right all injustices, including those invented on the spot to rally political support.

Liberalism is the only cure for liberalism, but sadly, the cure always fades away and requires another booster at some later date.

Thirteen

9 years ago

Hillary is a non starter if the EC goes against her.

“The first 2016 Electoral College Map looks bad for Democrats”

“Now then, I am not saying that the 31 states where Republicans control
the legislature will definitely go Republican in the 2016 presidential
race. But if they do, that’s 314 Electoral College votes. You need only
270 to win.”

http://donsurber.blogspot.in/2014/11/the-first-2016-electoral-college-map.html?spref=tw&m=1

Ditto

9 years ago

Yet the establishment leadership of the Republican party is doing it’s best to wrest defeat from the jaws of victory.

Meanwhile some Democrats are openly admitting that illegal immigration is their path to turning things around, and are working hard to make that happen.

Virginia Lawmaker Explains: Dems Need Illegal Immigrants to Vote

The reason for that is simple: Democrats need to create voters, and they hope formerly illegal immigrants will join their party.

In states across the country, liberals are losing power. Earlier this month, for example, Virginia State Sen. Dick Saslaw, a liberal Democrat, told a meeting of his constituents that the state legislature would be even more conservative next year, because “two Republican senators that we know of will be ‘primaried’” and replaced with more conservative members.

But Saslaw, a former Majority leader, says he has hope for the future of his Democratic party. The “ideologically pure” Republican right wing, Saslaw says, will lose influence “as a continually growing legal immigrant population begins to impact elections,” the reliably liberal Falls Church News Press reports.

Now, Saslaw couldn’t be speaking about legal immigration. It will be at the same level this year as it was last and the year before that. If those immigrants haven’t boosted Democrat fortunes, there’s no reason to expect them to in the future.

The big change in immigration, of course, is amnesty. President Obama wants to make five million or so illegals into legal citizens. That, Saslaw seems to think, would be enough voters to influence elections even in Virginia, no border state.

More Cities Following D.C.-Area Lead, Debating Non-Citizen Voting Rights

More cities are trying to follow in the footsteps of D.C.-area jurisdictions to give non-citizens the right to vote in municipal elections.

Though many of these proposals have failed, the Washington Post notes that activists in Amherst, Massachusetts, Madison, Wisconsin, and Burlington, Vermont are also clamoring to give voting rights to non-citizens. In New York, as Breitbart News has noted, Mayor Bill de Blasio has said he would like to “continue the conversation” this year on giving voting rights to non-citizens.

Six Maryland jurisdictions and Chicago allow non-citizens to vote in some local elections.

The Post notes that opponents believe the campaign to grant voting rights to non-citizens “is part of a political scheme to create more Latino voters, who polls show tend to prefer Democrats,” especially since the “largest number of green-card holders are from Mexico.”

D.C. Council member David Grosso introduced a bill to give non-citizens the right to vote in local elections, but ” he acknowledged that the new proposal is unlikely to go far.” As the Post notes, voters in Portland, Maine, and San Francisco have rejected proposals to give voting rights to non-citizens.

Exclusive: California DMV Ordered to Overlook Identity Theft by Illegals

Illegal aliens may enjoy a free pass on identity theft due to a new investigative policy at California’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

The policy, issued last year and effective as of Jan. 1, 2015, directs DMV investigators to overlook identity theft by applicants “who may have attempted to obtain or been issued a license or ID card previously through submission of false information.”

A DMV source who asked to remain anonymous provided Breitbart News exclusively with a copy of the newly-enacted internal policy memorandum. The document informs DMV investigative officers that past identity theft is acceptable when the illegally-acquired IDs were only used to obtain a driver license, and where the license or ID was not used to commit any other crime.

It is unclear how investigators are meant to determine whether a falsely obtained driver license or ID was used solely for driving, or also to commit other crimes, such as using a fraudulently-obtained driver license to open a bank account, to apply for a loan, or even to purchase alcohol.

Or, (dare I say,) register to vote, or steal the vote of the person who’s identity you have stolen?

Ohio Official Warns Obama: Executive Amnesty Could Harm Election Integrity

Husted raised his concerns about the integrity of Ohio’s elections in the wake of the administration’s executive amnesty in a recent letter to Obama and one of his senior advisors Valerie Jarrett.

“In spite of our diligence maintaining accurate voter registration rolls, however, the recent executive actions could jeopardize their integrity by making it much easier for people who are not U.S. citizens to illegally register and cast ballots,” Husted wrote in a letter dated January 27. “As the chief elections official for the state of Ohio, I simply cannot allow this expanding loophole to go unaddressed.”

According to Husted, the fact that Obama’s executive amnesty will enable millions of illegal immigrants to obtain Social Security numbers and driver’s licenses represents the root of the problem, as under federal law any person with those forms of identification can register vote if they claim eligibility.

“In short, by enabling millions of non-citizens to access valid forms of the types of identification required to register to vote, the recent executive actions have increased the risk that non-citizens may illegally register to vote and vote in our elections,” he wrote.

Husted’s office notes that after the 2012 presidential election, it was able to cross-reference data with the state’s DMV and determine that 291 non-citizens were registered to vote in the state. Of those, 17 cast ballots.

Oh, FA trolls will no doubt show up and say that there is “nothing to see here,” but we have fellow Democrats above admitting to their plans.

Bill

9 years ago

@Ditto: Un-fettered illegal immigration is all about diluting the electorate with a fresh supply of government dependents. Once they have ID’s, the door to voter fraud is swung wide open. It is totally transparent why the left propagandizes so hard against voter ID; to leave the fraud door open.