Posted on 02/03/2013 11:40:39 AM PST by DBCJR
Demography isn't destiny—and assuming that it is will likely make liberals overreach again.
Many are arguing these days that President Obama has forged a new majority coalition of women, minorities, young people and upscale cultural liberals so large and durable that he can do what no president has done before—pursue a very liberal agenda without serious opposition or defections from his own party. Demography is destiny, this argument holds, and it is irrevocably on the side of Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party.
Yes, there will be fewer whites and more minorities in the future, and Republicans will have to adjust. But the situation is more complicated than that.
Start with the obvious: If demographics were determinative, then Republicans shouldn't have gained 63 seats in the House of Representatives in 2010—the largest midterm shift since 1938—while also taking 30 governorships.
When presidential re-elections yielded realignments in the past, the winner earned a bigger share of the vote than he had in the past. FDR won 60.8% of the vote in 1936 after winning 57.41% in 1932. But Mr. Obama won 51.06% in 2012, down from 52.87% in 2008. Over the course of his first term, his support dropped among young people (a swing of 2.4 million net votes to Mitt Romney), women (a net swing of 1.6 million votes to Mr. Romney), and African-Americans (a net swing 945,000 votes).
And while Mr. Obama may believe he can ignore moderate and conservative whites, congressional Democrats would disagree. Mr. Obama won Florida by a razor-thin 74,309 votes (0.9% of the total), yet Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson won re-election by 1,065,184 votes, or 13%, many from white voters. In North Dakota, Democrat Heidi Heitkamp won a Senate seat by less than 1% while Mr. Obama lost by 20%, and in West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin won re-election by 24% while Mr. Obama lost by 27%. Such Democrats from swing states or districts will be uncomfortable with Mr. Obama's strategy of playing to his party's left wing.
The ideological composition of the American electorate hasn't changed dramatically. Self-identified liberals were 25% of voters in 2012 and 23% in 2008. Conservatives were 35% of voters in 2012 and 34% in 2008.
By some measures, voters are less liberal today than they were four years ago. In the 2008 exit poll, 51% said "government should do more to solve problems" while 43% felt "government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals." In 2012, 43% said "government should do more" and 51% believed "government is doing too many things." While 44% wanted ObamaCare "expanded or left as is," 49% wanted to "repeal some or all of it."
Another sign that Mr. Obama hasn't fundamentally changed America's political structure: Compared with 2008, there were 371,800 fewer white votes cast in Ohio in 2012, when Mr. Obama carried the state by 166,214 votes. Many whites who voted for him in 2008 couldn't bring themselves to do so again or to vote for Mr. Romney. Their staying home represented a tactical victory for Mr. Obama, not a strategic realignment.
Nor can Democrats count on young people forever remaining Democrats. Voters age 18-29 were those most likely to move away from Mr. Obama between 2008 and 2012, and Republican identification generally increases as people graduate college, start work and begin families. Of those who were 18-29 years old in the 1972 election, 47% were Democrats, 26% Republicans and 28% independents. By 2012, these same voters (now ages 58-69) were roughly 37% Democratic, 34% Republican and 29% independent. They backed Mr. Romney by 51%-47%.
Does anyone think every future Democratic candidate will enjoy the unusually high African-American turnout and victory margin of Mr. Obama?
Even among Hispanics, Mr. Obama hasn't locked things up. While Mr. Romney received only 27% of Hispanic votes nationwide, he received 32% in the seven battleground states with exit polling (including 42% in Ohio) and attracted more Hispanic votes than John McCain did in 2008 in California (by 8%) and Nevada (5%).
Republicans have a perception problem with Hispanics, but the GOP earned 44% of Hispanic votes in 2004 and can do so again with the right policies, many more Hispanic candidates and better messaging.
The major impediment is the harsh rhetoric of some Republicans regarding immigration. The solution is less about policy than about respect for the Hispanic community. If federal immigration law is reformed with substantial Republican support—including for a long and demanding but achievable process of earning legal status—the GOP can consistently earn 35%-40% among Hispanics. Having Sen. Marco Rubio as the GOP spokesman on immigration issues will hasten the GOP recovery.
Demography isn't destiny because nothing is permanent in politics—and Democrats' insistence to the contrary will likely lead them to overreach, ignoring issues such as jobs, anemic growth and deficits in order to tackle gun control and climate change. That would be good for Republicans. Governing from the hard left sunk Democrats in 2010 and would cost them again in 2014.
I can’t hear you, Karl.
Well, if you can convince people that the current batch of RINOs ARE Conservatives, then I guess you’ve got it pegged, Karl.
*SPIT*
I am, however, VERY proud of Wisconsin. We OWN it, now. If we can hang on and NOT shoot ourselves in the foot, life in The Dairy State will be grand! :)
Half pay no federal income taxes, thus no skin in the game. Advantage to the tax and spend Rats.
Half receive government money. Advantage to the big-government socialist-spending Rats.
Most people today are informed (misinformed) by entertainment, far leftwing media, and Rat lies. Advantage Rats.
Amnesty will add millions more voters with a track record of Rat voting. Advantage Rats.
The GOP establishment RINO liberals are even more worthless. Advantage Rats.
Vote fraud has been finely honed. Advantage Rats.
>Many whites who voted for him in 2008 couldn’t bring themselves to do so again or to vote for Mr. Romney. Their staying home represented a tactical victory for Mr. Obama, not a strategic realignment.<
.
Either way, the country got screwed and took many steps backward.
I am so happy that I’m old enough to know what it was like when America was still America. I look at my kds and grandchild and I feel a deep sadness flowing over me.
I read a few sentences, but when I saw it was written by Karl Rove, I stopped reading it. This pos does not say anything I want to hear.
Add free food to a cage of rats and the population will expand till the cage is full of rats. Cut off the food, and the rats will eat each other till the cage is empty.
Hand out money till its worthless in a welfare state and the same thing happens. Cities fill with rats...
Advantage, rats, for a short while. Then everything goes Galt on ya and the blood flows. Advantage then, those who can support themselves, cause now they dont have to feed rats...
Philadelphia, NYC, Chicago, Cleveland, Camden, Detroit.
90% of blacks vote for Obama. 117 electoral votes decided by racism.
The RATS perceived war on women didn’t work. The war on gays didn’t work. The war on Latinos didn’t work. What worked for the Democrats was ignorance and reverse racism.
It’s a fact of life that RINOS will never address.
F U K R!
“The major impediment is the harsh rhetoric of some Republicans regarding immigration. The solution is less about policy than about respect for the Hispanic community. If federal immigration law is reformed with substantial Republican support—including for a long and demanding but achievable process of earning legal status—the GOP can consistently earn 35%-40% among Hispanics. Having Sen. Marco Rubio as the GOP spokesman on immigration issues will hasten the GOP recovery”
I appreciate that K Rove has been in the business of political analysis for a long time, however, as one who makes a living analyzing data and designing successful strategies for moving forward, there are a lot of assumptions in Mr. Rove’s analysis that demand scrutiny. What evidence is there that Repubs have “harsh rhetoric” on immigration? I understand that Repubs want a properly managed immigration system, including border management that protects Americans from harm. I also understand that millions of people violate US law regarding immigration while people who follow US laws in many areas of life are concerned about their own treatment. Is there something harsh about these views? Is harshness actually part of Repub statements or is it simply a propaganda message created by non-Repubs? If you don’t know the difference, I don’t think your recommendations, Mr Rove, are well-founded.
Also, and perhaps more directly related to your predictions regarding future Repub election success, what evidence do you have that immigration legislation led by Repubs will lead to increased votes from Hispanics? And, if it leads to even 45% Hispanic votes for Repubs, isn’t that still a minority percentage, Mr Rove? Don’t you need 50+% of the votes to win? Will adding 11 million new voters and gaining 5million Repub votes be a victory, Mr Rove, if there are 6 million Dem votes? Consider the math Mr Rove.
I notice, Mr Rove, that you emphasize demographics and voter percentages. Missing is an explanation of WHY voters in the groups you identify voted the way they did. Why did they change their votes over the years? I am not so much interested in superficial percentages as I am in the reasons people vote the way they do. Write an article about the “why’s” of voting, and I will be much more interested. Lots of the election results would have differed if a larger percentage of eligible voters actually voted—you could change a lot and win a lot of elections if you find out how to motivate voters.
In Rove-speak, that means "if the Republican Party would just move more to the left".
Shut up, Karl.
As long as you are advising the Repukelicans, and they’re stupid enough to listen to you, there will continue to be a communist majority voted in to office, you ignorant, RINO-loving, bloviating dumba$$.
Morality is destiny.
That is presupposing there aren't factors outside in the world's wings waiting to move in and take advantage of such discord. It's a bad route.
It would be better to get a handle on it sooner. Very easily solved problem with a just system of voting -- "just" being that Americans who are charity cases to the government recuse themselves from voting. A nasty, hard, fight, but a just one.
The first debate where Obama looked like an idiot should have clinched the election for Romney, but his idiot advisers didn't press home the attack and we all know the results.
With the right candidate the GOP can sweep the election in 2016 especially if he or she runs like Reagan on the misery index and "Are you better off?". The next four years of Obama will be a disaster and I hope even some of the low information voters realize their mistake and will want change.
What I fear is that Obama will gain total control of the media by killing talk radio, muzzling Fox News and censoring the Internet. Then we will be in a dictatorship.
“In Rove-speak, that means “if the Republican Party would just move more to the left”.
Yup. What he’s saying is “press 2 for Spanish and visit your local welfare office.”
I have read about and heard about a lot of former Republicans changing their affiliation from Republican to Unaffiliated after the last election. I am one of them. And it makes sense. If these voters wanted to vote for a Democrat, there is already one on the ticket. No need for your party to nominate their own like happened in 2012.
I heard many of these people say that the GOP will notice these defections and change in order to bring back the disenfranchised. Unfortunately, I believe the GOP will notice and will change. It won’t be a change to draw these voters back. It will be a change to draw the Hispanic, minority, feminist, and takers. The GOP will move towards being a slightly more business friendly version of the Democratic party.
I’ve said it before: RINO’s are no longer the Republicans who act like Democrats. The Republicans who act like Democrats are the majority of the caucus, at least on the Federal level. The RINOs are now the ones who are conservative.
Every year 2.5 million (mostly white, mostly old, 65% R voting) people die.
And are replaced by (mostly minority, >70% D voting) people.
Decades of “progressive” education, liberal control of internet media, and onslaught of illegals makes the future a real struggle.
Obama's majority coalition is likely based on information-starved voters as much as the decision to get an abortion is based, in probably many cases, on the intentional lack of information about health and psychological risks in getting an abortion imo.
In other words, many women, minorities and young people evidently do not understand that Obama and the Democrats, but also including Republicans, have been establishing federal spending programs outside the framework of the Constitution, many social programs based on wrongly ususped state powers.
While I never agreed with the ,"Romney's no different from Barry", school of thought, a lot of people did and they simply stayed home. In contrast, there was a lot of excitement in the 2010 midterms, with grass roots Tea Party organizations, so conservatives came out in droves. In other words, Karl, your side (the RNC/RINO) wing of the party wasn't running things in that election and we did great.
The lesson I take from all this is GET OUT OF THE WAY KARL!!!!!
Rarl Kove, you vile and disgusting little has been..........FU and the rest of the shi’ite RNC establishment.
California is one of the nation’s crystal balls. The Democrats there have demonstrated that vote buying themselves into 51% control of everything is not enough. They’re now up to 2/3rds super majorities in all branches of state government, and they’re just getting started. The objective is the total and unconditional surrender of America. Meanwhile over in the USSR they have a 13% flat tax, a conservative government, and an oversupply of blue eyed blonds. They exported all their communists to us.
“Demography isn’t destiny….”
The first thing I did when I saw this, is to check to see who the author was.
When I saw it was Rove, no need to read any further.
Keep believin’ in that, Karl. Keep whistlin’ past the graveyard.
And ask the remaining Euro-Americans in California if demography ain’t destiny….
The turd blossom is now the shiny turd blossom.
This clown has become a multimillionaire by offering bad advice. He took a landslide election in 2004 and turned it into a near loss.
He makes no mention of the law and lawbreakers when he states:
“The major impediment is the harsh rhetoric of some Republicans regarding immigration. The solution is less about policy than about respect for the Hispanic community. If federal immigration law is reformed with substantial Republican support—including for a long and demanding but achievable process of earning legal status—the GOP can consistently earn 35%-40% among Hispanics.”
And his math is what one might expect from a Republican consultant. Even if they got 40% of the Hispanic vote, that would mean a net gain of 2.2 million votes of that 11 million for the Democrats.
The reality is that there are 30-40 million illegals in the country which will be proven when they are amnestied. And with chain migration another 40 million parents, siblings, and others will be allowed in. With a 40%/60% advantage democrats in Rove’s most optimistic estimate, that would be a 6 million to 16 million net gain for democrats.
Let’s see you put that on your whiteboard, Rove, you moron.
Karl “Kommie” Rove just starting to help the DNC win in 2014 & 2016.
Detroit is destiny.
White flight started in a few inner-city neighborhoods. Then Whole interior sections of cities. Then entire cities. Now we’re on to entire states like California where the productive are fleeing.
When I started coming on this site, I figured we had maybe 5-10 years to get things turned back around nationally. In restrospect, I may have overestimated. I think it’s probably time decent productive people start making arrangements to man the lifeboats.
I think we may start to see “white flight” on a national level as opportunity continues to dry up here for wage earners. And our political scene is devolving into a 3rd world banana republic.
Conservatism will never die, but the GOP may. Our national body politic is incapable and unwilling to vote for decent principled governance. Our nation has already been turned into something I don’t want my children growing up in.
Not sure how many feel the same way I do, but it is telling that 40% of the 18-24 population of this country would already prefer to live elsewhere. And the 24-35 demographic is starting to move abroad in record numbers. Unlike coming to America, leaving the country requires a marketable education and demonstrated ability to support one’s self. These are our best and brightest fleeing the country in search of economic opportunity.
Call it a “brain drain” or “white flight” or whatever, but it will continue until our gov’t and banking system quit waging war on wage earners. So maybe the GOP is right in trying to replace conservatives as their base. The old ones are dying off, and their potential replacements are leaving the country in droves.
Well said.
I mentioned many times in 2012 if Baraq won again, it was going to be “bolt or revolt” discussion 24/7/365 on FR in 2013.
Karl Rove eh? Karl Rove spewing statistics eh?
He must think people are feeling a tingle....
I’m thinking they’re feeling a tinkle...
He’s really not too swift. Like a typical GOPe ringleader, he is missing the essence of the defeat.
History is full of examples of forces winning against all manner of numerical odds as Obama did in 2012.
And yet Rove is spewing statistics trying to find some reason why the party has hope in numbers.
What they don’t have is spirit.
Spirit trumps all the demographic chit-chat of dingle berries like Rove.
One charamatic Tea Party figure that can make people proud to be American can grab the full spectrum of demographic spreads. One leader to make Americans proud can swing the hispanics, the blacks and women to their expression.
But the GOPe has no one to make Americans proud; no one.
Rather than spew statistics and plot to isolate and marginalize Tea Party conservatives, an effective party would be crawling the earth and checking under every stone to find the new talent they need to win back power. They would measure the potential of discovered talent not my how they fit the grand design, but how many people they touch with their spirit.
It is important to understand that people will remember not what was said or what was done but rather how they were made to feel.
We remember Reagan because he gave us optimism and he made us proud to be Americans. Those are feelings he himself with the force of his character and personality imparted to so many Americans and beyond even into foreign countries. Reagan was loved; that’s a feeling. His principles and values were not preached to us but were expressed by the spiritual essence of his being. Others could have given his same speeches and they would have fallen flat. But Reagan’s spirit and essence made us take a time out and listen. We grew to believe him, he helped us get in touch with our feelings as to what it means to be an American, and it felt great.
Today’s leaders of the GOPe pace about to ponder demographics and mission statements, weasel worded policy planks. Then they search out persons who they think they can control to act as messengers, who will fit the mold. That is mechanical, that is wonkism...it is not spiritual, it is not the essence needed, it does not resonate with being an American. And we see through the phoniness of it all.
And the lack of leadership will continue until the GOPe capitulates and hands the keys to the executive board rooms to people like Sarah Palin, Governor Jindal and others. New blood is badly needed and the failures like Rove need to withdraw.
Doesn't seem to have helped Republicans with black voters. It was Republicans who encouraged and made possible the Civil Rights legislation that black folks so love, but you never hear that from black leaders or the MSM. I'd venture to guess that if asked, most black people would say that it was Democrats who fought for their civil rights, instead of actually trying to stand in the way of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.