Posted on 11/07/2012 12:42:40 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Mitt Romney's loss on Tuesday laid bare a Republican demographic problem that, if not addressed, could transform the GOP into a permanent minority party.
Romney dominated among white voters, who made up 72 percent of the electorate: He won that group by 20 percentage points, according to the national exit poll. But he was crushed among Latinos, who broke for President Obama 71 percent to 27 percent.
The former group is shrinking as a portion of the electorate. In 1988, they were 85 percent of all voters. By the year 2000, that was down to 81 percent. It's fallen nine more points since them. The Latino population, meanwhile, is growing at a staggering pace: Latinos accounted for more than half of the U.S. population increase between 2000 and 2010, according to the 2010 census. The black and Asian vote, which also broke overwhelmingly for the president, is also growing. Blacks were 13 percent of the electorate this year, up from 10 percent in 1988; Asians have risen from one percent of the electorate to three percent over the past two decades.
It's a demographic reality that already has some Republicans calling for a new course in the wake of Romney's defeat.
"The conservative movement should have particular appeal to people in minority and immigrant communities who are trying to make it, and Republicans need to work harder than ever to communicate our beliefs to them," said Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.
On "CBS This Morning" today, newly-elected Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz argued that "the values in the Hispanic community are fundamentally conservative, but you've got to have candidates that connect with that community in a real and genuine way and communicate that the values between the candidate and the community are one and the same."
Romney's weakness among Latinos cost him dearly in the battleground states of Nevada, Colorado, Virginia and Florida; if future Republican candidates don't perform better among that group, red states like Arizona and even Texas are on a path to become battlegrounds themselves.
"Immigration has caused the Republican Party to leave votes on the table," Gary Segura of Latino Decisions said Wednesday. Pointing to the president's margin of victory, he argued that "For the first time in American history, the Latino vote can plausibly claim to be nationally decisive."
The GOP's demographic problems don't just break down along racial lines. Voters under 30 supported the president 60 percent to 37 percent, and voters between 30 and 44 years old backed Mr. Obama by seven percentage points. Some of these voters may become more conservative as they grow older. But rapidly shifting views suggest they almost certainly will not embrace the GOP's opposition to same-sex marriage. And young women, who overwhelmingly backed the president, will most likely continue to oppose Republicans when it comes to access to contraceptive health care coverage and abortion rights. Al Cardenas, the head of the American Conservative Union, bluntly told Politico that his party "needs to realize that it's too old and too white and too male and it needs to figure out how to catch up with the demographics of the country before it's too late."
The question now facing Republicans is whether they shift toward the middle or instead try to appeal to growing demographic groups while staying planted firmly on the right side of the political spectrum. There are those who will look at the past two presidential cycles, in which relatively moderate Republican nominees fell short, and conclude that the party needs to nominate a true believer willing to stand behind core conservative principles. Rubio, who is already being discussed as a leading 2016 presidential contender, is the kind of candidate that could energize those who want to reach out to new types of voters without abandoning the party's beliefs.
John Hudak of the Brookings Institution argues that the best past forward for the GOP is to move - slowly - toward positions that hold appeal for groups that voted for Mr. Obama this year.
"If they move too quickly to the middle, it's going to alienate a lot of people in their party," he said. Fifty-nine percent of voters in the exit poll said abortion should be legal, but if Republicans suddenly embrace abortion rights, evangelicals and values voters could abandon the GOP. If they shift leftward too quickly on fiscal issues, it could prompt Tea Partiers and libertarians to do the same.
Hudak said the GOP's handling of same-sex marriage provides a template. In the 2004 election, Republicans used opposition to same-sex marriage to drive voters to the polls. But as attitudes shifted, Republicans for the most part simply stopped talking about the issue.
"That's the first step to neutralizing these social issues," he said. "It's not to change your mind. It's just to not speak your mind. And that way people can think this isn't that aggressive party anymore, and it opens the door for them to vote for you based on other issues."
"It's definitely a challenge," Hudak added, "but I don't think it's insurmountable."
Frankly, I no longer think its about all about race. It's about Takers vs. Makers. Race is more like jerseys - it identifies the team you "should" be on. All getting a minority on the Maker side does is invoke an allergic response from the Taker side, since they shouldn't be there and must be put in their place.
No she would not have been for the following reasons
1. She is attractive, but she is not as pretty as Palin.
2. She is a lawyer, daughter of Immigrants.
3. She is Hispanic.
I don’t believe Romney lost because he is a RINO. To me it’s demographics with more and more free loaders that won it for Obama and the Dems and this trend will continue for the distant future. That being said there is no excuse anymore for not running real conservatives. We have yet to try that approach.
Foreign policy was the top issue with only 2% of the public. Dwelling on it would have sounded like a clanging cymbal to the rank and file and, in addition, would have given Obama another chance to beat his chest about killing OBL.
In addition, Romney did not want to risk the chance that the media would turn the Benghazi thing into a Petraeus vs. Romney thing (Petraeus was reciting the video line).
Romney was no slacker...he fought very hard for the Presidency. I think most people recognize this although you apparently don't.
The reality is that the GOP must lead on an illegal immigration solution and not follow.
As long as there is no movement, Latinos will always think the Dems provide a better chance for a deal.
Until the illegal immigration issue goes away, there are many more yesterdays in our future.
Romney surprised me in the 1st debate when he came out punching. Impressive.
To beat the dirty democrats, we need a street fighter, someone who is not afraid to go to the mats or roll in a ditch.Sarah is her name.
She would have NEVER called Obama a ‘nice guy’ and would have HAMMERED him on the economy and especially the whole Lybia affair.
STOP TRYING TO BE ‘NICE’ to the democrats and punch them in the gonads.
Who’s the next moderate establishment Republican in line for “their turn” come 2016?
Amen, sister. Amen.
so despite all that support from Latino’s, obamugabe squeaked out an election win, receiving 10% less votes than he did last time against a candidate who received 5% less votes than the GOP candidate from 2008...in an election that brought in less cumulative votes than 2004...
does the GOP need to do a better job outreaching to latinos/hispanics/blacks?? absolutely...do they need to panic and offer giveaways based on the numbers from yesterday?? no freakin way...
also- if you thought the nation was polarized during obamamugabe’s first four years wait until we see what the next four bring, based on the numbers....
None of that matters. The fact of the matter is the majority of Americans honestly want to give socialism a shot, spearheaded by college students and minorities. Things will have to get a lot worse before they turn around.
Sorry to disagree. Her best bet for a political future is to switch to “D”. Same goes for Rubio. Both great people, but unless they put on a Santa Claus beard, the D’s won’t vote for any “R”...race be damned.
Soul searching? I just saw a note that undecideds broke 15% for Obama after he looked so caring after Sandy. Let the voters get the spanking they voted for its been a long time coming.
Nothing that yet another move to the left won't cure, eh, Hudak?
Count me out. Romney was a bridge too far for me and if the Republican Party thinks the way to recover from McCain and Romney is to move even farther to the left, I'm sure I won't be the only one leaving.
The left and MSM doesn’t care. Palin was a reformer. All that got buried because she was a threat.
Mitt Romney had a socially liberal record and ended up having to beg for the support of social conservatives. Even, though, he eventually won many over, he still lost hundreds of thousands of social conservatives. That is the primary reason he had less votes than John McCain.
Karl Rove is no social conservative. But, he worked with Ralph Reed to build a ground game among churches and pastors that pulled out the 2004 election for Bush. Mike Huckabee won Iowa with little financial resources in 2008 by putting together a similar ground. The next Presidential candidate will have to do the same thing.
If the GOP establishment gets the wrong message and abandons social issues, though, the Republican party will be doomed to regional status and have to be content at winning in Congress and at the state level.
Agreed. A good start is to let sequestration happen, let the tax rates go up, and let the debt ceiling expire.
Romney drew first blood so no excuses. Time to get it that America land of the brave and home of the free in now Land of the depraved and home of the freebie.
There is no justification for the stupid party to exist anymore the country need a real opposition party and the republicans have proved over and over they are not it....
Time to sit back and watch the Cloward–Piven strategy work its magic.
Yep. When I brought up the issue here a couple of weeks ago, saying that Romney ought to fight by exposing the RAT party's methods AND Benghazi, the response from a prominent poster was "Winners don't do that!", to which I replied, "And winners lose." Our "Winner" lost. Could he have lost any worse, and would it have mattered, if he had tried to go above media's heads and educate the voters a little, and expose the shenanigans a little?! Nice guys finish last, the voters remain as uninformed, as misinformed as before the start of this circus show last spring. Nothing was gained and everything was lost.
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.