Recently, there have been a number of political commentators who look at the demographics of the 2008 election, and say that due to the changes reflected by the turnout, Republicans face a serious problem, and that it is so serious that it may be upwards of 40 years before the Republicans return to power as a leadership party. I don’t believe this is the case, and I state why in this paper. However, I do believe it still most be noted that it will take a serious overhaul before we can truly return as the majority party, and I cannot state that enough. It will take a lot of effort, but it is far from impossible.

Since his inauguration, Obama has instituted many direct changes which aim to create a more “permanent majority” for the Democratic Party, and many commentators seem to believe he can do just that. In the aftermath of the 2008 election, much was made of the fact that the demographics of the popular vote had changed since the 2004 election- “The problem for Republicans is that the population trends boosting the Democrats show no sign of slowing” (Brownstein, 2009). And Obama has made significant strides towards cementing the Democratic gains made in this election cycle, making legislation to create over 800,000 public sector jobs, assemble an “Organizing for America” campaign run by the DNC, expanding SCHIP which would cover health care for the children of illegal immigrants, and prepare for a nationalized health care plan (Patten, 2009). Some would argue that changes in demographics and the significance of the Democratic surge in this election, it may be as long as 40 years before the Republicans are able to re-gain their former leadership position. With consideration for the importance of the metrics taken into account, I respectfully disagree with this position. In examining the potential for a 40 year Democratic rule, three things must be considered- first, that the current and historical political landscape is too volatile to support any single given ideology for such an extensive length of time, second, that 2008’s figures do not create a realistic image of the electorate for the future, and third, that strategic realignment can significantly help the Republican Party make significant gains in the areas it has been failing.

The longest single-party rule this country has seen in the executive branch was from 1801-1829, when the Democratic-Republican Party enjoyed 28 years of continuous executive rule (Whitehouse.gov, 2005). Since then, the longest single-party executive rule has been from the Democratic Party, from 1933-1953 (Whitehouse.gov, 2005). The presidencies of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman spanned 20 years of Democratic presidential rule, however Roosevelt was the only president to serve more than two terms, and will probably be the only one to do so as 22nd amendment only allows two terms for later presidents (Encarta Online). This exception threatens the capacity for future Democratic long-term gains, as popular presidents will not be able to preserve their gains for multiple terms- more contemporary history points to high turnover for the White House, where there have not been more than two successive presidents from the same party since 1933, or more than three since 1885 (Whitehouse.gov, 2005). Part of this high turnover rate may have to do with temperamental electorates, or the fact that a leadership party naturally finds itself on the defensive more. Specifically, the majority party typically faces more potential for scandal- statistically speaking; increased numbers of politicians from a particular party will inherently represent a larger target for scandal, which will reflect badly on the party as a whole. According to James Carville:

“I firmly believe that there are streaks, and that political scandals happen in clusters… The Republican Party had its fair share of scandal and charges of deeply imbedded corruption preceding the 2006 election and leading up to the 2008 elections. It doesn’t hurt to point out that these types of things are also more likely to harm the party in the majority — Republicans had more elected politicians (315 Republican officeholders in House, Senate, and state governorships) leading up to 2006. With two big Democratic elections in a row, Democrats now hold a larger majority — 340 U.S. representatives, senators and governors. Simple math and history point to the fact that the more elected officials a party has in office, the more likely its politicians will get caught up in some sort of scandal” (Newsmax, 2009)

This will create an increased opportunity for Republicans to challenge the Democratic Party as corrupt and untrustworthy- while this is a historical cycle, it poses a serious challenge to the idea that a single party can retain leadership status for any significant length of time.

In examining the demographics of the 2008 election, there are several key issues with the turnout which makes it different from the 2004 election, all of which must be examined further before taking any prediction of future demographics seriously. Specifically, Republican turnout for the 2008 election was only at 25%, a drop of three percentage points, while Democrats had a six point advantage, their highest since 1964 (Gans, 2008). Identity politics created a significant advantage for Obama- one analyst said “It’s reasonable to assume that whenever Obama ran, he would have boosted black turnout”, which would create a disproportionate reflective turnout base for this specific election (Brownstein, 2009).  In fact, this result is so disproportionate that Curtis Gans predicted that “It is also virtually certain that when the Census Bureau comes out with its biennial survey on reported registration and voting, African-American turnout rates will have exceeded white turnout rates for the first time ever” (Gans, 2008). Obama represented an opportunity to break through a racial “glass ceiling” of sorts, and there is no evidence to prove that the significant gains he made among minorities will be reproduced in future presidencies now that the perceived barrier is no longer in place. Meanwhile, the decrease in Republican turnout created an even more disproportional view of the electorate-

“A portion of GOP registrants also likely perceived, as the campaign wound down, a Democratic landslide which made some discouraged and demobilized. It is also possible that some ‘Reagan Democrats,’ those who shared Democratic economic concerns but were driven to the GOP by 1970s Democratic excesses and cultural issues, didn’t vote. In these times, cultural issues took a back seat to economic concern” (Gans 2008).

This shift is significant as it means that any predictions made off of the current data will necessarily under-sample traditional Republican voters and oversample minority voters, where these votes may not represent a trend but a single-election anomaly- “There is nothing in either the 2004 or 2008 election that indicates a durable return to high levels of engagement on a sustaining basis” (Gans 2008).

When considering the turnout, there is also promise of a future coalition for the Republican Party, starting with an emphasis on social conservatism. Right now for the Republican Party, “culturally conservative, working-class whites are today its most reliable voters” (Brownstein 2009). McCain did not represent these voters well- “It is likely that GOP voting decline started at the top of the ticket—with some of the culturally conservative Republicans not seeing McCain as one of their own” (Gans, 2008). A return to social conservatism will help get these voters to return to the party- McCain only led Obama with these voters by 58% to 40%, leaving much room for improvement (Brownstein 2009). Meanwhile, this increase in social conservatism will help the party make gains in minority groups where social conservatism is important- in California, around 70% of African American voters and 53% of Latino voters voted for Proposition 8, a measure limiting marriage to heterosexual unions (Harmon, 2008). Already, many key Republican strategists are working on how to appeal to these voters- Scott Baugh, chairman of the Orange County Republican Party, stated “We did not lose because of social issues. The vast majority of Republicans are anti-abortion. Voters in the state favored Obama, but they voted down gay marriage. And there is widespread opposition to illegal immigration.” Chuck DeVore, candidate for U. S. Senate seat has stated “The future of the Republican Party isn’t in white voters… That demographic is dying” (Wisckol, 2009).  Clearly there will be greater attention paid to the minority voters- previous attempts to create such a movement have failed, but this does not have to be the case in the future- political parties have a way of coming back when all else seems to be against them.

While the losses from the 2008 election for the Republican Party are hard to overstate, it appears that many of the predictions for future elections overstate the potential for future Democratic gains. When examining the historical factors of the American presidency, the demographic single-election changes and the potential for rebirth in the Republican Party, the case for a 40 year reign of the Democrats as the leadership party seems to be implausible at best, based on predictions from exceptional and unique election turnout data. It also requires the suspension of disbelief- an assumption that not only will the Democratic Party be able to avoid historical challenges and inevitable corruption, but the Republican Party will fail to learn from its mistakes. While 2008 represented a year of great change, it remains to be seen that these changes will constitute a larger and more permanent movement in national politics- it will take far more than reversible government legislation to create a permanent ideological majority in this country.

ed. note: Michael Connery at Future Majority responds

Bibliography

——————————————————————————-

Brownstein, Ron. “Dems boosted by demography, destiny- Population trends that gave party November edge show no sign of slowing.” National Journal. Jan. 9, 2009

Encarta Encyclopedia Article. “Franklin D. Roosevelt.” Available online: http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761562953/franklin_d_roosevelt.html Accessed February 1, 2009

Gans, Curtis. “African-Americans, Anger, Fear and Youth Propel Turnout to Highest Level Since 1960” American University’s Center for the Study of the American Electorate. December 17, 2008

Harmon, Steve. Oakland Tribune. “Minority vote on Prop. 8 key to GOP future?” Nov 23, 2008 Available online: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_/ai_n31036791

Newsmax “Carville Predicts Democratic Scandal Streak” January 3, 2009. Available online: http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/carville_predictions/2009/01/03/167402.html Accessed February 1, 2009

Patten, David A. Newsmax.com “Obama’s ‘Blue Wall’ Locks in Democratic Gains” January 25, 2009 Available online: http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/obama_blue_wall/2009/01/25/175047.html?s=al&promo_code=78AA-1 Accessed February 1, 2009

Whitehouse.gov “THE PRESIDENTS” Available online: http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/  Accessed February 1, 2009

Wisckol, Martin. OC Register. “Republican party struggles over social divide” January 2, 2009 Available online: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/party-issues-social-2272501-baugh-voters Accessed February 1, 2009

Last 5 posts by Brad Tidwell

• Voter Fraud- There's an App for That? - April 14th, 2010
• Obama and International Perception - October 20th, 2009
• The Healthcare Debate, Simplified. - October 2nd, 2009
• Win $100 for Reporting Campus Leftist Abuse! - September 30th, 2009
• Serena, Kanye, Wilson and the GOP's Crisis of Coverage - September 22nd, 2009