December 28, 2003
RUN UP THE WHITE FLAG:
-For 2004, Bush Has Strength in the White Male Numbers: His wide advantage in that right-leaning group may trump Democrats' edge elsewhere. (Ronald Brownstein, December 27, 2003, LA Times)
White men compose just under 40% of the electorate, with white women just over 40%, and minorities composing the rest.White men have given Democrats problems in presidential elections for decades. Since the 1970s, Democrats have won when they keep the Republican advantage within sight and lose when they can't.
"It's a damage minimization strategy," Teixeira said. "If it's too much of a landslide with white men, it just creates a hole you have to dig out of."
But just reaching that minimal standard of support hasn't been easy for Democratic nominees. Republican incumbents Richard Nixon in 1972 and Ronald Reagan in 1984 carried white men by 35 percentage points en route to landslide reelections, according to network exit polls.
In 1988, George H.W. Bush beat Democrat Michael S. Dukakis by 27 percentage points among white men, the same advantage Reagan enjoyed over Jimmy Carter in 1980.
During the 1990s, Bill Clinton significantly reduced those margins, losing white men by just 3 percentage points in 1992 and 11 points in 1996, according to exit polls. But Clinton didn't win a much higher percentage of the white male vote than Carter, Mondale and Dukakis did; the GOP margins fell in the 1990s because independent candidate Ross Perot siphoned away so many white men from Bush in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996.
With Perot off the ballot in 2000, the Republican advantage among white men ballooned again, as Bush carried them by 24 percentage points over Al Gore. That margin was just small enough to allow Gore to narrowly edge Bush in the popular vote by running strongly with other groups.
But now leading strategists in both parties say Bush has the potential to run even better with white men in 2004 — which could create a deficit too great for Democrats to overcome.
"I don't know if it can get back to the [Reagan] level, but he does have the potential of widening the margin from 2000," said Matthew Dowd, the polling director for Bush's campaign.
Stanley B. Greenberg, the pollster for Gore in 2000 and Clinton in 1992, agreed. "Younger, married white men are disastrously, overwhelmingly Republican," he said. "They are trending more Republican over time. Everything about George Bush speaks to them."
Recent polls underscore the challenge for Democrats with white men. In an ABC/Washington Post survey released last week, white men preferred Bush over an unnamed Democrat in 2004 by 62% to 29%, a head-turning 33-point margin; by contrast, white women gave Bush just a 10-point lead.
"just a 10-point lead"? Posted by Orrin Judd at December 28, 2003 8:57 AM
I guess they still figure that they can cheat their way past a mere 10 point lead.
Posted by: Uncle Bill at December 28, 2003 10:46 AMUncle Bill;
No, the 10% lead is among white women. The Democratic Party is the Mommy Party and if it's behind at all among women, it's in deep trouble.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at December 28, 2003 11:13 AMSince '80, the left has been crowing about the gender gap. I think they never quite figured out that it was, by definition, perfectly bilateral.
Posted by: David Cohen at December 28, 2003 12:09 PMDonks are totally dependant now on African Americans to make up these gaps.
Roughly 12% (and sinking) of the populace is African American, but Donks get over 90% of this vote. Its difficult to believe that this level and intensity of preference is going to continue to be stable over time.
Scrape off 10% from this (i.e., get back to Nixon's level of support among African Americans), and its tough to see what's left of our Donk friends on a national level.
Posted by: AML at December 28, 2003 2:33 PMAML,
If Donna Brazile was in the game and if there was any hope of retaking the House or Senate the black bloc might be a factor. Quick, which of the five high potential candidates has a proven rapport with black voters? I'd say Gephart followed by Edwards but I'd also say that neither of them would be likely to lay claim to the "second" black president title. What's Gephart's position on vouchers?
As to the "soccer mom's" vs "NASCAR dad's" debate, wasn't the previous election divide over economic security issues? The 2002 exit polls indicate that women went Republican to a higher extent due to physical security issues (who will do a better job on eliminating terrorism). That puts the Dems in a rather unenviable position.
Posted by: RDB at December 28, 2003 3:27 PMAnd note that these polls pit Bush against "an unnamed Democrat". Unnamed candidates tend to do better in polls than named candidates because they have no specific flaws. Put Bush against, say, an angry pacifist who wants to raise your taxes, and Bush's numbers get even better.
Posted by: PapayaSF at December 28, 2003 3:30 PMI believe the last Democrat to win a majority of the white male vote was LBJ in 1964.
Posted by: George at December 28, 2003 4:26 PMMeanwhile, down here on Earth, if these numbers hold up, 11 months from now Bush will be coronated with fifty states and an equally unheard-of plurality. Reality doesn't work that way, and SOMETHING will happen to bring these numbers down. The alternative would be an electoral defeat for the Donkey that would be the end of the party as a coherent force.
In that case, the new party that would emerge, while populist, would have to line up to the RIGHT of the Elephant.
Posted by: Michael Gersh at December 28, 2003 4:40 PM"Reality doesn't work that way, and SOMETHING will happen to bring these numbers down."
Ah, but sometimes reality *does* work that way.
Try as I can, I just can't come up with a scenario that has a party whose platform is "ask permission from France for our defense", "we will raise your taxes", and "we hate Bush" is likely to win a significant number of votes.
"The alternative would be an electoral defeat for the Donkey that would be the end of the party as a coherent force."
Yes, and?????
When's the last time the Whigs were on the ballot?