Pew’s political typology study always offers a comprehensive look at attitudes toward both parties — and this year is no exception. But while the results offer the most clues about the long-term direction of the country’s politics, it also tells us some important things about the 2014 midterm election.
- Democrats looking for a break from the glut of pessimistic news about the upcoming election won’t find it here. The survey finds that outside of their hardened liberal base, support for the party and President Obama has dropped precipitously and across-the-board since 2012. The drop-off is most acute among a group Pew calls “Hard-Pressed Skeptics,” which is older, whiter, and more downtrodden than the average Democrat. They overwhelmingly backed Obama in 2012, 65 percent to to 25 percent, but now a plurality of them, 48 percent, disapprove of his performance.
- This is a voting bloc Democratic incumbents in blue-collar states like Mark Pryor, Mary Landrieu and Mark Begich must reach to win reelection. They have some reason to think they can: Most Hard-Pressed Skeptics think government should do more to help the poor, and only one-quarter of them think the GOP cares about the middle class. With the right populist Democratic agenda and a smart outreach campaign, these voters could be persuaded to rejoin the Democrats. But doing so is still an uphill fight at a time when Democrats already have enough problems.
- Of course, persuasion is only half the battle. Democrats also need to make sure they show up to vote at all. The typology study shows Hard-Press Skeptics make up less than 10 percent of people who are politically engaged in America. It shouldn’t surprise that among the three groups Pew identifies as the most politically active, two are Republican while just one is Democratic. A lot of Democratic voters just aren’t that tuned in to elections, which explains the party’s traditional turnout problems in midterms.
Take a long look at the study — it’s worth your time. Just know if you’re a Democrat, you won’t find much reason for optimism.
— Alex Roarty
What We're Following See More »
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.