Is Demographics Destiny?

Erskine Bowles

If someone would have told me that Romney would have received almost the same percentage of votes from gays as Hispanics or Asian voters, I would have said no way.  Romney’s defeat can be attributed to two things, a massive turnout among minorities and retrenchment among many white voters.  Call it the double whammy in which many blue collar whites stayed home and the Democratic base came out in full force.

For every new black voter Obama obtained, Hispanics provided five new voters.  Republican percentages among Hispanics has gone from over 40% to 27% since 2004 and the Republicans right now are at an Electoral College disadvantage.  Now a few notes on Demographics.

While media harps on the women vote, what is missing is that there are two major factors why women vote Democratic.  The first is single women are becoming a greater percentages of women voters and the second is that single women are more likely to be poorer, less educated and minority.  So the women gap is as much a minority gap.  Women, like their white counterpart, are ten points less likely to vote Republican than their male counterparts.  White women as a group including single women voted Republican by an eight point margin.  The reason that women vote Democratic and Men vote Republican is not because Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus, but because single women are more dependent upon government aid for their income compared to married women.  For some single women, the government is both daddy and husband and to vote against the Democrats is divorcing yourself from those government programs.

Youth voters voted Obama.  But again, young white male voters voted Romney.  So the driving force behind the youth votes going Democratic is a minority problem for Republicans as much as anything else.  Minorities make a larger share of young voters than any other group and this represents the difference.  Young Hispanics voters are one of major driving factors behind the complete collapse of Republican support among Hispanics.  In 2008, young Hispanics gave Obama a 3 to 1 margin and they did in 2012.  What changed is that many of these young voters who were 26 years or older in 2008 continued their three to one margin when they turned 30.  Hispanics voters 30-39 were similar to younger Hispanics in their margin for Obama.

The biggest surprise was that Asians voted even more for Obama than Hispanics and that could be a reflection of what they perceive as Republicans being anti-immigration.  More Asian immigrants came into the United States than Hispanics in 2011, so immigration may play a bigger role with Asian voters than previously thought.

The other aspect is that many blue collar whites did not vote, as those voters Obama viewed as “Bitter Clingers” simply stayed home as they may have not liked Obama; they obviously weren’t thrilled with Romney.  Jewish voters moved closer to the Republicans in this election and depending upon Obama’s policies towards Israel may determine whether more Jewish voters move.

Another aspect is African-American voters.  As Sean Trende noted, there were only 300,000 additional voters and the question that remains, can Democrats get much more African-Americans?  Republicans are so far behind in obtaining support from Blacks but a smaller turnout or Republicans grabbing a few extra votes could tip the balance of many Midwest states back to Red.  Democrats are not going to keep getting 95% of Black voters in the future and any drop in African-Americans’ turnout changes the dynamic of many races throughout the region.

The final aspect of this election is the myth that lower voter turnout benefits Republicans.  This has been proven wrong as Democrats GOTV team showed that in an election where voter participation went down; they can out hustle Republicans.  If anything, the Republicans needed an increase in voter turnout in 2012 since they did not maximize their potential and the left did.

He has analyzed the election better than anyone so far

American history has shown that coalitions don’t last forever and often break up as many different groups rebel against each other for what their Party should stand for.  Both Parties have problems with their coalition.  The media has covered Republican problems but has ignored what occurred on the left.  Obama built a leftist coalition of minorities, public sector unions, rich liberals and environmentalists.  What Obama has going for him is a pliable media that has become an auxiliary of the Democratic Party while parroting his views as gospel truth.  Obama and the left have destroyed the Democratic Center.  As Brit Hume noted, many moderates who prefer not to identify themselves with the left gave around 55% of their vote to Obama.  However, many of these voters are closer to Erskine Bowles, who chaired Obama deficit commission.  What the media fail to recognize, the Bowles-Simpson report was the complete rejection of Obamanomics and the nation is still split.

Both Parties have their problems but for the long term, good policies are still good.  Obama’s policies are not good policies as the Middle Class have seen their income drop in what Obama called a recovery.  Obama has managed with help from the Media to convince more than half of America that today’s economic situation is Bush’s fault.  In 2016, the failed policies of Obama can’t be blamed on Bush any longer.  We may see the fruit of Obamanomics blossom in the next four years and that fruit will be bitter.  That will change the dynamic of Obama’s leftist coalition.

Tags: Election, GOP, Voter Demographics

This entry was posted on November 13, 2012 at 6:30 am and is filed under Elections, GOP, Republican, Tom Donelson. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.