Posted on 11/09/2006 4:58:44 AM PST by Leroy S. Mort
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Republican Party ceded the center of American politics and its many groups of swing voters to the Democratic Party in the 2006 midterm elections - with predictable results.
The GOP lost the House and the Senate.
Republicans lost badly among independent voters, suburbanites, white Catholics, the middle class and Hispanics - groups it had been courting successfully in recent years, exit polls found.
``The one thing that is so frustrating is when you hear the Karl Roves and Ken Mehlmans talking about focusing on the base because there are no swing voters,'' said GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio, who says there are still plenty of swing voters.
A fourth of voters this year were independents, according to exit polls, and they voted heavily for Democratic candidates.
Fabrizio was referring to Rove, top White House political strategist, and Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee.
Mehlman's spokeswoman, Tracey Schmitt, countered that the RNC chairman has been working hard for the last couple of years to expand the party ``to expand the number of swing voters who call themselves Republicans.''
Using a playbook that has served them well over the past few elections, the administration and GOP strategists turned out Republicans and conservatives at the usual levels.
``The Republican base turned out and held,'' said Whit Ayres, a GOP strategist. ``To generate a Republican turnout in this climate was remarkable. ... But for the first time in a decade, independents preferred Democratic over Republican House candidates, this time by 18 points.''
Anger at the Bush administration and its war in Iraq drove part of this shift toward Democrats, exit polls found.
The evaporation of the political center had Republican strategists searching for answers. Many acknowledged that the party is not likely to regain ground with swing voters as long as the war in Iraq drags on. The exit polls found heavy opposition to the war from voters who cast their ballots for Democrats.
``Republicans are going to have to look at how to rebuild this coalition,'' said GOP strategist David Winston.
Some Republicans didn't want to acknowledge publicly that the midterm losses and loss of the political center to the Democrats are very large political problems.
``It comes from mistakenly believing you can own an issue forever - terrorism,'' Fabrizio said. ``It's mistaking voters going along with you on a single issue with a political realignment.''
More than two-thirds of voters said terrorism was very important in their vote on Tuesday, and they divided their support between Democrats and Republicans.
Among the swing groups that tilted heavily toward Democrats:
Independents backed Democrats by 57-39 - after voting for the GOP by 48-45 in 2002.
Moderates backed Democrats by 60-38 - after voting Democratic 53-45 in 2002.
Suburbanites backed Democrats by 50-48 - after voting for the GOP 57-40 in 2002.
Those in the middle class - those who make more than $30,000 a year but less than $75,000 a year - backed Democrats 52-45 after more than half supported the GOP in 2002.
Hispanics backed Democrats 69-30 - after backing Democrats 61-37 in 2002.
The 2006 results come from a national exit poll of 13,208 voters conducted for The Associated Press and television networks by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International.
Results for the full sample were subject to sampling error of plus or minus 1 percentage point, higher for subgroups.
The loss of the swing voters and the political center may be only a temporary setback for the GOP.
``It wouldn't surprise me to see them come back and vote for a Republican for president in 2008,'' said Ayres. ``That depends on who's nominated and whether things change in Iraq.''
AP polling director Mike Mokrzycki, AP manager of news surveys Trevor Tompson and AP news survey specialist Dennis Junius contributed to this story.
"Hispanics backed Democrats 69-30 - after backing Democrats 61-37 in 2002."
Well, if you believe the exit polls. They were 5% to 7% off.
It really does not tell that much, because we lost voters across the board.
GOP screwed up the vote incentive. Voters go to the polls to vote FOR something, someone - not to vote AGAINST someone, something. Voters told the "base", "Shape up your candidate and give us a reason to vote FOR them or else." Republicans may have "kept the base" - the mindless "R" pullers who give little thought to who/what wears the initial, but the independent voter, the swing voter voted just as the GOP viewed them - they didn't matter, it didn't matter - so the initial didn't cut cartwheels with them either way.
The media is definitely another factor. Now that it worked, they are only going to get worse. Here in Tennessee we had more Republicans voting for our democrat governer then the Repub challenger cause for all intents and purposes, our gov hasn't made the news much, the economy is pretty good, so they reelected him in a landslide. But if he had ben a Republican and did the exact same things, the media would have crucified him.
That pretty much describes the rats.
The RNC has been infested with RINOs and mealy mouthed country clubbers who ditched the girl they courted because she is from the wrong side of the tracks and they got pressured by the overly rich Democrats to choose between their society and the girl. Pretty in Pink, any one? I hope the Country Clubbers feel the sting of this election for a long time. And if we have another attack, I will be singling them out first. THEY ASKED FOR IT.
We are sunk then. This is a different enemy. One that has dug in world wide and blends in with society. We will be fighting this enemy for the rest of time.
I wish the same could be said for the electorate.
Someone is going to need to level with American people.
We are 9 trillion in debt, with another 60 trillion in unfunded liabilities (Soc. Security, and Medicare) this means we can not afford the entitlements we have today without doubling taxes. So, we certainly can not afford more entitlements.
After the honesty we appeal to their optimism and their individualism that their futures are in their hands and that they can make it on thier own and they are going to have to because the American government is essentially bankrupt.
This may not be the message they want, but it's the truth.
I thought Bush tried that with Social Security. The Congress really jumped on that issue didn't they?
I am optimistic that the electorate will understand the Muslim threat.
This is not like most wars where 19-22 year old uniformed males are killed crippled and maimed in the conflict on both sides, while the rest of their countrymen party on.
This is a religious war, Muslims against Infidels, and the civilian population eventually will be hardest hit. So people who usually can stay above the fray will be targeted also. When influential people who are usually immune from conflict get hit, it will cause a reality check.
I stress influential people because killing 3,000 office workers in NY on 9-11 didn't do it.
However if one of the planes had hit congress and wiped out some senators and reps it would have been a whole different reaction. Maybe next time. -Tom
Even though its the AP, the article is correct. Notice that the final pre-election polls understated RAT strength. The RAT candidate did better than the polls said.
For example, Santorum was down 10-15 points. He lost by 20.
Steele was either tied or trailing by 5. He lost by 10.
Talent was deadlocked. He lost by 2.
It appears that the last moment undecideds tilted to the RATS.
I love your tagline.
Bush tried to paint SS as bleak without admitting that Medicare was worse. Instead of being seen as restoring our fiscal house it was seen as a Wall Street scheme AND since he was the same guy who pushed through the Medicaire Presicription drug bill (which costs atleast as much as SS reform would have saved)...cynicism may have been merited.
And if the people really don't want SS privatized then we'll just wind up means testing it. That really doesn't bother me either.
Incindiary rhetoric? You would be an expert on that Dane. Voters weren't happy about Hayworths association with Jack Abramoff (friend of the whitehouse, remember him?)Plus getting on the illegal immigration bandwagon late in the game didn't help him much.
http://grades.betterimmigration.com/view_history.php3?District=AZ05&VIPID=44
It's going to take more than McCain or Guilani to get me back to the polls in 2008.
Oh and more honesty:
We are running a war on terror with a peacetime sized military. This won't work either.
Ultimately somone is going to have to level with the American people. Either us or the Dims are going to have to do it.
Then you must be young. :-) But seriously, means testing really annoys me because it's just another breach of faith from what the forced program was intended. They took my money for most of my life with the promise I'd see some of it back when I couldn't work. Now, because I worked hard and saved too, they're going to punish me? You expect conservatives to run on means testing? Good luck future and present minority party. By the way, what IS the conservative agenda on medicare? Are you going to tell grandma that she really doesn't NEED that heart medicine because she still owns her own trailer? Good platform, that's a real winner. ;-)
I don't necessarily agree with your premise. This sounds like more Army grumbling about money going to special ops but lets say you are correct, caveman. Finish the thought. Are you recommending a draft or stepped up recruitment? Exactly what?
But Mehlman turned out to be correct... If even Chafee had survived, Republicans would have held the Senate.
Mehlman always does a good job communicating on tv and radio; he made the choice very stark for viewers: the moonbat Dean on their side, reason and principle on ours. That voters chose the moonbat is not his fault.
The fact is, Mehlman represented the Republican establishment and did a good job of it. Change in the party just shouldn't be expected to come from that quarter-- change comes from the outside. Republicans need more groups than just the Club for Growth to support the conservatives in primaries and after--- we have the think tanks, they have the fund raising 527s.
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.