Secrets of the Reagan Democrats

Newsmax ^ | March 27, 2000 | Dan Frisa

[Dave Burns]

Secrets of the "Reagan Democrats” Dan Frisa Monday March 27, 2000 The mainstream media and the chattering class have long hawked a theory that has caused serious confusion and a wide-spread misconception: that Republicans must appeal to Democrats to win the White House. In order to ‘explain’ the election of Ronald Reagan, many attributed his success to his ability to attract crossover votes from Democrats. Therefore, this concept holds, it is essential that Republicans court the mythical "Reagan Democrats” in order to win the Presidency.

While this theory seems sound on its face, its continued acceptance has caused Republicans to lose their way - as well as the last two elections – because they don’t know the Dirty Little Secrets:

Democrats ALWAYS get the same turnout

The Republican vote VARIES GREATLY based on the turnout of conservative base voters Democrats have gotten virtually identical turnouts in each of the last five presidential elections. The following chart dramatically illustrates this startling fact:

1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 Voting age population in millions 157.6 172.8 180.7 185.6 194.8 Democrat votes in millions 35.5 37.5 41.8 44.8 45.6 Percent of Democrat votes 23% 22% 23% 24% 23%

Regardless of the Republican candidate or his message, Democrat performance is consistent from election to election.

It is the Republican message -- and its effect on the conservative base -- that determines Republican success in presidential elections.

The fundamental reason for the victories of Ronald Reagan (1980 and 1984) and George H.W. Bush (1988) is that they ran on a solid conservative agenda that was easily understood, and believed, by conservative base voters.

Both President Bush (1992) and Bob Dole (1996) lost because their campaigns lacked conservative credibility, resulting in fewer Republican votes as the conservative base abandoned them by either staying home or registering a protest vote for Ross Perot.

The mainstream media and the chattering class, knowing these Dirty Little Secrets, continue to use the "Reagan Democrat” argument to get Republicans off their game by insisting that Republicans must appeal to moderates to win. To do so is fatal.

Republicans must present an easily-understood, credible conservative agenda. When we do, we win; when we do not, we lose. Now that the secret is out we should heed this simple truth.

Republican Dan Frisa represented New York in the 104th Congress (1995-1997).

[Dave Burns]

I thought this was worth reposting from a few years ago. The major determinant of the election in not the swing voter but the intensity of the vote and pollsters can’t gauge turnout. The pollsters just make assumption. Rasmussen just weights his raw data according to last time.

[garbanzo]

Note that Bush's poll numbers shot through the roof after the GOP convention. I'm hoping he keeps up the basic conservative message through the end of the campaign.

[elizabetty]

Right you are. And when he uses data from "last time" he is not including the Republican blow out in the 2002 mid term elections.

[MNJohnnie]

I thought this was worth reposting from a few years ago. The major determinant of the election in not the swing voter but the intensity of the vote and pollsters can’t gauge turnout. The pollsters just make assumption. Rasmussen just weights his raw data according to last time.

1 posted on 10/24/2004 11:20:25 AM PDT by Dave Burns


That is really, really interesting. One of the things I have heard wisphered around the net is how the polling models are all based on pre 9-11 models. No one really knows how 9-11 may have effect the intensity of voters.

[truthandlife]

Thank you for posting this again. I posted this article back in 2000 on FR and nothing has changed except for the amount of voter fraud that the Dems have turned out.

After the 2000 election Karl Rove said there were new constituencies out there that have been created and Bush needed to go after them.

Rove realized this assumtion was wrong during this campaign Nothing has changed and there are not new constituencies. The name of the game for Republicans to win this election is getting out their core constituency of conservative voters.

The name of the game for Dems is to make sure Vote Fraud is in full effect.

[MNJohnnie]

Note that Bush's poll numbers shot through the roof after the GOP convention. I'm hoping he keeps up the basic conservative message through the end of the campaign.



Am, those weren't real. The news media changed it sample. They over weight for Repbos in Sept. Then after the 1st debate they went back to the standard more D then R models. No one really knows where we are.

[atari]

I met alot of people in Massachusetts that would vote for the gop, but might not be turning out. the reason being is the gop candidates never win. hopefully i get them to go to this election atleast.

[MNJohnnie]

Rove realized this assumtion was wrong during this campaign Nothing has changed and there are not new constituencies. The name of the game for Republicans to win this election is getting out their core constituency of conservative voters.

The name of the game for Dems is to make sure Vote Fraud is in full effect.


Yes, that is one of the intresting things about this year. I have been hearing on the talk shows about "how risky" Rove's strategy of turning to the right at the end of the campaign is. It may be the only thing that saves the Repbs from the massive voter fraud going on

[20mm lib babies in city dumps]

The new generation of voters is more conservative and republican thanks to mass murder of liberal families' babies over the last thirty years. Thanks to Roe V. Wade Gore came up just short fours ago. As liberals continue to thin out their numbers via abortion the nation will drift to the right.