Washington Post (Plum Line)
By Greg Sargent
July 10, 2015
If
you want to understand why the debates over the Confederate flag and
Donald Trump’s immigration outbursts have so many senior Republicans
reaching for their acid reflux
pills, take a look at this bracing new demographic analysis from
Charlie Cook and David Wasserman.
Cook
and Wasserman note that historical patterns should favor the GOP in the
2016 presidential election, because the same party rarely keeps the
White House after previously
holding it for two terms. But that advantage will be swimming upstream
against these demographics:
The
modern GOP’s increasing reliance on a shrinking pool of older, white,
and working-class voters — and its failure to attract nonwhite voters —
would seem to present
an enormous obstacle to the eventual Republican nominee. In 1980, when
nonwhite voters were just 12 percent of the electorate, Ronald Reagan
won 56 percent of white voters and was elected in a landslide. But in
2012, when nonwhite voters accounted for 28 percent
of the electorate, Mitt Romney took 59 percent of white voters — and
lost the presidential race by 4 percentage points. Without a total brand
makeover, how can Republicans expect to prevail with an even more
diverse electorate in 2016?…
If
the electorate evolves in sync with the Census Bureau’s estimates of
the adult citizen population (admittedly, a big if), the white share of
the electorate would drop
from 72 percent in 2012 to 70 percent in 2016; the African-American
share would remain stable at 13 percent; the Latino portion would grow
from 10 percent to 11 percent; and the Asian/other segment would
increase from 5 percent to 6 percent. If the 2012 election
had been held with that breakdown (keeping all other variables stable),
President Obama would have won by 5.4 percentage points rather than by
his actual 3.85-point margin.
In
addition, the group with which the GOP does best — whites without
college degrees — is the only one poised to shrink in 2016. President
Obama won just 36 percent of
these voters in 2012, while 42 percent of white voters with college
degrees pulled the lever for him. But if the electorate changes in line
with census estimates, the slice of college-educated whites will grow by
1 point, to 37 percent of all voters, while
the portion of whites without degrees will shrink 3 points, to just 33
percent of the total.
In
other words, the GOP doesn’t just have a growing problem with
nonwhites; it has a shrinkage problem as well, as conservative white
seniors are supplanted by college-educated
millennials with different cultural attitudes.
Political
scientist Michael McDonald, who analyzes voting and demographic
patterns for the U.S. Elections Project, has been taking a hard look at
the demographics of
2014 and 2016, and he agrees with Cook and Wasserman about the
declining white vote share.
“The
ongoing changes in the demography of the U.S. as a whole, and within
key battleground states, are not favorable towards the Republican
Party,” McDonald emails. “From
the mid-1990s up to the present, the non-Hispanic white share of the
electorate dropped ten percentage points. Preliminary analysis of the
2014 elections indicates the slide is not abating, confirming Census
Bureau projections of the country’s changing face.”
There
are plenty of caveats. There is the aforementioned historical pattern
favoring the non-incumbent party. As Ed Kilgore notes, it is hardly
certain that Hillary Clinton
will be able to pump up turnout among core Dem voter groups to Obama
levels. And as Cook and Wasserman also note, if the 2016 GOP nominee can
manage just marginal improvements over Mitt Romney across the
demographic groups, he can win. As they note, demographics
are “no guarantee” of a Dem victory.
Still,
even these caveats suggest what a gamble it might be for Republicans to
count on winning the White House without a serious effort to improve
the GOP’s appeal among
non-whites. After all, it’s possible Clinton could improve on Obama’s
performance among whites, even if blue collar white voters continue to
back Republicans at high levels. As Ron Brownstein has noted, polls are
already showing her outperforming among a key
subset, white college-educated women. What’s more, a contrast is
developing between Clinton and the Republicans on a number of issues —
gay rights, health care, climate change, even possibly a negotiated
settlement with Iran — that could help her among college
educated whites in general. (The Clinton camp reportedly thinks she can
also make a play for blue collar white women, which seems at least
possible.)
It
would be absolute folly for Democrats to get complacent about their
seeming demographic edge. Still, for the above reasons, I wouldn’t be
all that surprised if GOP
establishment types make a huge push for Jeb Bush in the not too
distant future. As I’ve noted, Bush, with his Mexican wife,
Latino-American kids, and fluency in Spanish, can plausibly argue that
only he combines leadership heft with a genuine opportunity
to improve the GOP’s cultural appeal to nonwhites. And imagine the
panic that could set in among GOP elites if Donald Trump keeps it up,
and garners cheers at a GOP debate when he calls for an
alligator-stocked moat along the Mexican border?
Of course, whether GOP primary voters will share in that panic is another question entirely.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment