Can Democrats Win When Obama’s Not on the Ticket?

None

National Journal
Josh Kraushaar
May 13, 2014, 7:09 p.m.

By now, it’s ac­cep­ted wis­dom that Demo­crats per­form bet­ter in pres­id­en­tial elec­tions, when the elect­or­ate is more di­verse and young­er, while the GOP’s strength is in midterm elec­tions, when their core voters are like­li­er to turn out. But it’s worth re­mem­ber­ing that this is a re­cent phe­nomen­on, thanks to the chan­ging makeup of the Demo­crat­ic Party un­der Barack Obama’s pres­id­ency — and there’s no guar­an­tee it will con­tin­ue un­abated.

It wasn’t the case in 2004, when George W. Bush ef­fect­ively mo­bil­ized con­ser­vat­ive voters to over­come grow­ing pub­lic dis­sat­is­fac­tion to­ward his pres­id­ency. It wasn’t the case in 2006, when the Demo­crat­ic Party cap­it­al­ized on in­creased sup­port from older, white voters to re­take the House and Sen­ate. And it wasn’t the case in the dec­ades pri­or, when Demo­crats of­ten re­cor­ded sig­ni­fic­ant gains or out­per­formed ex­pect­a­tions in midterm years (1982, 1986, 1998), while Re­pub­lic­ans won five of sev­en pres­id­en­tial elec­tions from 1980 to 2004.

What’s changed is the makeup of both parties’ co­ali­tions. Seni­ors, who fre­quently voted Demo­crat­ic over pock­et­book is­sues like So­cial Se­cur­ity and Medi­care, have mi­grated in­to the Re­pub­lic­an column. White blue-col­lar voters, once a staple of Demo­crat­ic co­ali­tions past, have be­come es­tranged from their old polit­ic­al home over cul­tur­al is­sues. In their place are what my col­league Ron Brown­stein la­bels “the co­ali­tion of the as­cend­ant”single wo­men, minor­it­ies, and mil­len­ni­al voters. Voters with­in these groups turned out at high levels in the last two pres­id­en­tial elec­tions to off­set Demo­crat­ic losses else­where.

The chal­lenge for Demo­crats in this year’s midterms is get­ting these “as­cend­ant” voters en­thu­si­ast­ic about show­ing up to the polls when Obama isn’t on the bal­lot — something that Demo­crat­ic turnout spe­cial­ists are work­ing over­time to achieve. Even if they don’t show up and Re­pub­lic­ans re­take the Sen­ate in 2014, the as­sump­tion is they’re bound to re­turn at sim­il­ar levels for the next pres­id­en­tial elec­tion. That’s not ne­ces­sar­ily the case.

To be sure, the grow­ing di­versity of the elect­or­ate presents Re­pub­lic­ans with fun­da­ment­al chal­lenges, re­gard­less of the turnout rates of the core Demo­crat­ic groups. But it’s also clear that the his­tor­ic nature of Pres­id­ent Obama’s can­did­acy helped him rally Afric­an-Amer­ic­an voters to the polls in re­cord num­bers and at re­cord levels — a dy­nam­ic that’s un­likely to re­peat it­self in the fu­ture. For the first time in his­tory, Afric­an-Amer­ic­ans voted at a high­er rate than whites in 2012, with 66.2 per­cent of eli­gible black voters cast­ing bal­lots. That’s up six points from 2004, the last pres­id­en­tial elec­tion in which Obama wasn’t on the bal­lot. In many urb­an, heav­ily Afric­an-Amer­ic­an pre­cincts, sup­port for Obama ran close to 100 per­cent. Without that same de­gree of sup­port in the fu­ture, Demo­crats will need to make up lost ground with white voters, while main­tain­ing the over­whelm­ing ad­vant­ages with His­pan­ic and Asi­an-Amer­ic­an voters they en­joyed in 2012.

A postelec­tion ana­lys­is from Brook­ings In­sti­tu­tion demo­graph­er Wil­li­am Frey found that if turnout rates from all ra­cial groups re­mained at the same levels as 2004, Mitt Rom­ney would have won the pres­id­ency — by 9,000 votes. And if only minor­ity turnout dipped to its 2004 levels (with white turnout at its lower 2012 rate), Obama would have barely de­feated Rom­ney. Giv­en the grow­ing share of His­pan­ic and Asi­an-Amer­ic­an voters, that’s far from en­cour­aging news for Re­pub­lic­ans, but it’s also a cau­tion­ary tale for the party de­pend­ent on demo­graph­ic des­tiny to win fu­ture pres­id­en­tial elec­tions.

In­deed, Demo­crats could find them­selves re­li­ant on brand-name can­did­ates to gen­er­ate the same de­gree of en­thu­si­asm that Obama offered like-minded voters over the last two pres­id­en­tial elec­tions. Hil­lary Clin­ton fits the bill, giv­en her unique ap­peal among wo­men and po­ten­tial to im­prove on Obama’s per­form­ance among work­ing-class voters. But would Joe Biden or any gen­er­ic Demo­crat­ic of­fice­hold­er provide them with the same ad­vant­ages? (Think Mar­tin O’Mal­ley versus Marco Ru­bio.)

Des­pite the di­ver­si­fy­ing Demo­crat­ic co­ali­tion, the party’s bench is vir­tu­ally devoid of minor­ity of­fice­hold­ers. There are only four Demo­crat­ic gov­ernors or sen­at­ors of col­or, com­pared to sev­en Re­pub­lic­ans. Obama hasn’t brought along many oth­er Demo­crats who present the same post-ra­cial ap­peal he show­cased in 2008. Even Obama cam­paign strategist Dav­id Axel­rod ac­know­ledged the Demo­crat­ic Party “needs to do a bet­ter job” of re­cruit­ing more minor­ity of­fice­hold­ers on an Amer­ic­an Hos­pit­al As­so­ci­ation pan­el in which we both par­ti­cip­ated. Without those land­mark pres­id­en­tial can­did­ates in the fu­ture, it’s hard to see minor­ity voter en­thu­si­asm main­tain its healthy rate.

“Al­though long-term demo­graph­ic trends “¦ are fa­vor­able for the Demo­crats, trans­lat­ing those trends in­to true polit­ic­al and elect­or­al dom­in­ance will re­main dif­fi­cult so long as Demo­crats rely on simply turn­ing out core Obama co­ali­tion voters. Their mar­gins will be too thin and sub­ject to back­lash, es­pe­cially be­low the pres­id­en­tial level,” polit­ic­al sci­ent­ists Ruy Teixeira and An­drew Levis­on wrote last spring in The New Re­pub­lic. They later con­cluded: “If in 2016 white work­ing-class sup­port falls to or be­low the 33 per­cent it hit in 2012, a GOP pres­id­ent be­comes a very real pos­sib­il­ity.”

Teixeira, who pres­ci­ently an­ti­cip­ated that chan­ging demo­graph­ics would spur polit­ic­al re­align­ment in the land­mark book The Emer­ging Demo­crat­ic Ma­jor­ity, is now sug­gest­ing the lim­its Demo­crats face de­pend­ing en­tirely on the Obama-forged co­ali­tion. Mean­while, Obama’s job ap­prov­al among non­col­lege whites hit 29 per­cent in this month’s ABC News/Wash­ing­ton Post poll.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4947) }}

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×