A second in a series exploring political realignment in the United States post the election and was provoked by the comments of BTF reader Hir.
As those of us who are political junkies and have a historical bent look at the 2008 US Election, we can not help but ponder the significance of Obama’s win in the longer term. While I do believe that demographics is political destiny and that the demographics in certain parts of the country favour the Democratic party, I would not also necessarily conclude that the GOP is over and done as a political force in the United States. One of the keys to this election especially in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida were voters with incomes over $75,000 that in the previous cycle broke decisively for Bush but in this cycle split more evenly between Obama and McCain.
Charlie Cook tackles a number of key points in a thought-provoking piece in the National Journal.
What did we learn from this election? The results certainly confirmed that Republicans are demoralized. President-elect Obama’s vote total — 66 million — was about 4 million higher than President Bush’s total of four years ago. Sen. John McCain’s 58 million tally was about 1 million votes fewer than Sen. John Kerry garnered last time. As expected, overall turnout went up, but much of the gain among Democratic voters was offset by a decline among Republicans.
Although young people turned out in higher numbers than they did four years ago, the increase was proportionate with the electorate as a whole. Most non-Republican voters turned out in higher numbers this year than in 2004. One key to Barack Obama’s victory, however, was his overwhelming support among voters ages 18 to 29, whom he won by 34 points, 66 percent to 32 percent; and his support among those ages 30 to 44, whom he carried by 6 points, 52 percent to 46 percent. Those numbers are ominous for Republicans looking to 2010 and beyond.
Moreover, this election reminded us yet again that organization matters. Where the huge Obama machine was at work, Democrats tended to do very well. In states that his campaign didn’t target, his party fared less well. Democrats looked quite strong in some parts of the country but much less so in others, flipping five state legislative chambers into their column while losing four others. Where Obama was an asset, he really was, and where he was a liability, he really was that, too.
We also learned that there are two Souths. There is a “New South,” which includes Virginia, North Carolina, and, to a lesser extent, Georgia. In this South, which has lots of suburbs, transplants, and younger college graduates, Obama and other Democrats won or ran well above the norm for their party. In the older South, which has more small-town and rural voters, fewer transplants, and a more downscale electorate, Obama actually performed worse than Kerry.
In general, in the higher-growth segments of our country, Republicans lost ground, prevailing only in small towns and rural areas. When Democrats win the suburbs, Republicans are in trouble.
Republicans have lost an enormous amount of support among upscale voters, basically just breaking even among those with household incomes above $50,000 a year, a traditional GOP stronghold. Similarly, McCain’s losing to Obama among college graduates and voters who have attended some college underscores how much the GOP franchise is in trouble. My hunch is that the Republican Party’s focus on social, cultural, and religious issues — most notably, fights over embryonic-stem-cell research and Terri Schiavo — cost its candidates dearly among upscale voters.
(more…)