How Much Trouble Are We In?

Crowing by the likes of Mark Mehlman that Bush’s victory is the stuff of realignments really makes me chuckle. It's a classic psyche job.

Let me describe the Republican story before ridiculing it. The right-wing "analysis" goes like this: the election demonstrated that personal characteristics and values issues have a higher valence than substantive issues. Conservatives have successfully transformed elections from referenda on ideas to referenda on beliefs, and have managed to destroy the old Democratic lock on the working class because of the great valence of values issues. Despite a weak economy and the problems in Iraq, Bush managed to improve on his 2000 performance. Of particular importance is Bush’s greater margin in victory in "red" states - the Republicans now have a total lock on the South. Furthermore, he eliminated the gender gap and improved his performance among Latinos, the key growth constituency. And the Republican margins among the fastest-growing communities was simply crushing. Finally, the Republicans ran a candidate with the most conservative administration in U.S. history, lost among moderates, and still won the election. Over the next term the right wing will finish destroying the infrastructure of the Democratic party by consolidating their hold over corporate PACs, purging K Street, and crippling trial lawyers. The Democrats are dead, and only getting deader.

Wow, that all sounds pretty scary, doesn't it? Too bad it's total crap.

What we have is an election in which an incumbent running for re-election during wartime manages to get only 51% of the vote and a razor-thin margin in the electoral college. Bush's improved performance was uninspiring, given that he was an incumbent. His 3 point margin was unremarkable given that the average margin of victory for an incumbent since WW II is 10 points (including the Carter and Bush I fiascos). In addition, Bush's electoral vote margin is unimpressive. Normally the electoral vote totals magnify the popular vote margin, but Bush eked out a narrow electoral vote win despite his 3-point. Nixon and Kennedy's razer thin victories produced 300 electoral votes, but Bush got 286. Whoop-de-doo.

Statistically, the Republican do have an advantage because there are twice as many conservatives, but this has been the case for a long time. Republican party identifiers are no higher than they were ten years ago. Party id is probably a better indicator of the comparative balance between the 2 parties than ideology, precisely because the Republicans have trouble with moderates.

Looking at specific constituencies, there are some question marks about Bush's supposed improvement among Latinos. He clearly sees this as a continuing problem area, given the high-profile cabinet appointment of Hispanics. Bush did significantly better among women, but this is more likely due to 9/11 than values issues. The geographic playing field is also scarcely certain, given that the combined rural/exurb share of the vote is not rising (as pointed out by Ruy Teixeira), while Bush continues to slip in major metro areas.

As for the efforts to consolidate the victory, only time will tell. But history has not been kind to 2nd terms, and the brewing financial crisis and inevitable retreat from Iraq are scarcely likely to improve the electoral prospects of the Republican party. The Democrats are building an alternative infrastructure that will be much harder to pressure than K street. And they will be hunting Republicans with dogs and flashlights if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

The regional analysis does seem favorable to the Republicans, given the decline of the North and the rise of the South, and Republican were more competitive in the upper Midwest. This is the most significant challenge for Democrats, but we should remember that we are doing better in the fastest growth area, the West. If you look at the bigger demographic picture, things look better. Republicans do best among the white, upper-income, devout protestant, anti-gay, college educated, and married voters. What they have a growing share of a shrinking market. America is becoming browner, more secular, more tolerant, and the middle class is under increasing pressure.

Which bring me to the final piece of the supposed Republican advantage: the decline of issues & economics as voting cues. Given the probable direction of the U.S. economy and foreign policy in the next four years, we are certainly going to see this hypothesis tested. Frankly I don't think that people are going to care much about gays when they are out of job, paying 25% on their credit cards, forking over 5 dollars a gallon for gas, and waving goodbye to their son as they march off to Iraq. But we'll see.

None of this means that the Democrats are on the verge of their own realignment. It only means that the Republicans are operating with a very small margin of error. They have managed to conceal the consequences of their mistakes so far, but I'm doubtful they will continue to do so. I still believe that incompetence and arrogance come at a price, however it may be delayed. Hubris precedes Nemesis.