Politics, Science

The Demographic Reality Show: GOP Survivor?

By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger

birth-rateWell, much to the chagrin of our Republican brothers and without any obvious help from the train wreckers themselves, their base just shrunk. For the first time in American history, more non-hispanic Caucasians died than were born. This demographic milestone hits the Right at the worst possible time. With the incredible shrinking number of  minorities in its ranks (only 13% of Republicans identify themselves as a minority) GOPers could always rest assured of refilling their ranks with scores of Caucasians driven into a frenzy by racial fear mongering or to rage by claims  fiscal foolishness or to just about any other emotion … just pick your own  right-wing wedge issue. Couple that with the fact that last year over 50% of all babies born were non-Caucasians and that the Republican  record with women is well … sad, very sad … and you’ve got a demographic disaster looming for the GOP.

Or do you? Let’s see how are our brothers (and a precious few sisters) across the ideological aisle are dealing with the problem. Why full speed ahead on blocking immigration reform (Sen. Ted Cruz); rushing to impose invasive ultrasounds in heartland places like Wisconsin (Gov. Scott Walker); budget cuts for the poor (Paul Ryan); more  votes in the U.S. House on bills to  ban all abortion  procedures after 20 weeks regardless of rape or incest (Boehner & Cantor). These righties sure know how to woo a woman.

Are there any voices of reason on the deck of this Titanic? Well you’d hope so. The College Republicans, once the recruiting ground of bomb throwers like Newt Gingrich (in 1978 he implored them be “young, nasty people who h[ave] no respect for their elders”), now seems to be the crewman in the crow’s nest transfixed on the looming iceberg even as their older brethren play the same ol’ tune (Nearer My God to Thee was the reputed last song played on the ill-fated luxury liner–strangely appropriate now and then) that got them shut out in the last two presidential battles and lost the youth vote by 5 million votes. According to a new report by the baby Repubs, young people deemed “winnable” for Republicans increasingly are coming to see the GOP a ” closed-minded, racist, rigid, [and]old-fashioned.” (p. 69). Imagine what the “unwinnables” must think! The report also finds the GOP out-of-step with the under 25 crowd in terms of understanding young Americans reliance on  social media and non-traditional news sources like Comedy Central’s’ The Daily Show to get  news and hence their view of the world.  Just as distressing, the Republicans are hopelessly tone-deaf to the attitudes of young voters on issues like abortion, immigration, and negative political advertising.  Ignore them at your peril the collegians are screaming, but the Right just keeps chugging father right. Onward Christian soldiers!

You have to wonder how any political party can survive with shrinking numbers, unpopular views, and an institutionalized arrogance (that 47% line still resonates) a Roman emperor would envy. Maybe you don’t have wonder for very long. Ask a Whig. Oops there aren’t any.

And as for the Caucasian race in the U.S., it might be time to take a break from the rat race they so proudly created. “We’re jumping the gun on a long, slow decline of our white population, which is going to characterize this century,” William Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution, told the paper. “It’s a bookend from the last century, when whites helped us grow. Now it’s minorities who are going to make the contributions to our economic and population growth over the next 50 years.”

Was that a chill I just felt blowing over from the country club?

Source: Washington Post

~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger

154 thoughts on “The Demographic Reality Show: GOP Survivor?”

  1. From Has The Republican Party Truly Lost A Generation Or Can The GOP Retake The Youth Vote From Obama And The Democrats? by Laura Matthews, International Business Times

    Some political observers believe the answer to that question is “No,” that time may actually have already run out for the Republican Party. Most of the youth votes cast in the last two presidential elections went to Barack Obama — 66 percent in 2008 and 60 percent in 2012, according to Pew — which those observers interpret as a “modest realignment” indicating that a generation of long-term Democrats (or, at least, non-Republicans) may already be here.

    If that’s true, the GOP is in trouble. Two election post-mortem reports released this year concluded that the brand is tarnished, characterized by stereotypically old-fashioned, aging white men whose views find little resonance among most Americans. Increasingly, according to the reports, young people are rejecting the party’s platforms, its policies and, more important, its basic view of the world.

    ‘Millennial’ Concerns: Economy, Jobs And Student-Loan Debt

    The most recent evidence came June 3, when the College Republican National Committee, or CRNC, released its report on why young people are avoiding the party. It found the GOP is out of synch with so-called Millennials on the social and economic front. According to the CRNC, these people born between 1980 and 2000 care a lot about the economy, jobs and their student-loan debt, the latter of which the U.S. government estimates to be more than $1.1 trillion nationally. Although party elders are clearly concerned about the economy, they are having a hard time showing they truly care about the future, which will affect young voters to a far greater degree than it will affect older voters. The question is whether that apparent disconnect represents a political watershed.

    Of all age groups, young voters — those between 18 and 29 — are the least likely to turn out in elections, says Paul Beck, a political-science professor emeritus at Ohio State University whose research includes voting behavior. Turnout rates increase as voters age, which means, Beck says: “If indeed they are a Democratic generation — I think they are — the effect of that Democratic generation is going to get larger. You and I are going to have to pay attention for a decade to see what happens. In a way, it’s a modest realignment. These changes tend to take place all the time.”

    A political sea change that links a generation to a certain party would not be a new phenomenon. Political scientists widely agree the 1932 presidential election was the critical event in what became a classic example of voter realignment. Americans of the day had lost faith in Republican incumbent Herbert Hoover, whom Democratic opponent Franklin D. Roosevelt blamed for the Great Depression and poor economy. Roosevelt won the election in a landslide, ending 12 years of GOP leadership and ushering in two decades of Democratic rule in the White House. A new realignment was initiated again in 1968, this time in the Republicans’ favor with the election of Richard Nixon. That, too, was the beginning of a long-term political shift in what had been the solidly Democratic South to the Republican stronghold it remains today. Only two Democrats were elected president between 1968 and 2008 — Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton (ironically, both from the South).

    Then it was time for the Republicans’ reascent, until the Iraq war and the financial crises of 2001 and 2007 under former President George W. Bush tarnished the brand, which led to the next shift — the election of the nation’s first African-American president, who also happened to be comparatively young. A gifted campaigner and speaker, Obama and his technologically inclined campaign team took his White House run to both the grassroots level and the realm of social media, using Facebook Inc. (NASDAQ:FB) and the privately held Twitter as new outreach channels. He managed to draw Hispanics, one of the fastest-growing voting blocs, to him. Latinos supported him by a margin of 71 percent to 27 percent last year, according to Pew.

    Obama’s re-election appeared to confirm that the pendulum had swung far into the Democratic zone, yet some observers believe it would be a mistake to try to extrapolate too much from that about the future of American politics. Instead, Obama’s crossover votes among the younger electorate may represent a dealignment, meaning voters are becoming less wedded to any party. That is the view of Matthew Woessner, an associate professor of political science and public policy at Penn State Harrisburg and a public-opinion expert.

    “In many ways, Americans are disillusioned [with] both parties,” Woessner says. “So while the youth have swung more for Obama than they have for previous presidents, it’s not clear yet whether that is a permanent feature of Democratic politics or whether it’s merely a phenomenon driven by Barack Obama himself.”

    Don’t Discount The Politics Of Whim

    Woessner isn’t alone in thinking that. Charles Franklin, a political-science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who is also a public-opinion expert, says he thinks the idea that Obama’s success with young voters signals some form of intrinsic Democratic advantage is false. If anything, the rapid change in the under-30 generation only means the group is ripe for the picking by any party, and certainly more so than those in their 40s who are less likely to be easily swayed by what Franklin describes as the “short-term attractiveness of a candidate” or the “short-term mistakes made by a party.”

    “For those reasons, I think Republicans can be hopeful of greater success in the future with the youngest group of voters,” Franklin says. “We should think of it as meaning there will be a handful of percentage points more Democrats, not that they will be 15 or 20 points more Democratic forever.”

    Experts agree that people tend to form their political allegiances early on, including tendencies toward partisanship, and when a shift in allegiance occurs, it does so gradually. Didia believes, as the CRNC does, that the Republicans can start making inroads with young voters. After all, he also thinks support for Obama may be a fad, and one that will end once he leaves office. That’s when the GOP should be prepared to strike, he says.

    “Republicans need to have better outreach,” Didia says. “They don’t have to change their message, just the outreach. Maybe on some issues you can say that they want to move a little bit to the left or the center in general. But they have to know the times. They have to take whatever technology that is coming out and use it to their advantage.”

    Beyond that, the party also needs the right face. Didia is thinking someone multicultural — like U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., or Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

    “That’s where our country is heading, obviously,” Didia says. “[They] are pretty up-there on the list of contenders. I think they are very strong opponents for any Democrats out that would be opposing them.”

    Both Rubio and Cruz are Hispanic, the youngest ethnic group in America, according to the Pew Research Hispanic Center. The median age among all Latinos is 27 years, and it is 18 years among those who are native-born (for non-Hispanic whites, that age is 42). Pew estimates the Hispanic bloc will double in size in one generation and be responsible for 40 percent of the increase in the eligible electorate by 2030. That will be a crucial factor for both parties.

    Overall, Ohio State’s Beck believes it’s possible lifelong Democrats may have been created in the last elections. But he says the CRNC report makes the right recommendations for swinging the pendulum back in the Republicans’ direction. Doing so will require translating those recommendations into meaningful action when making policy decisions and during future political campaigns, he says, adding: “That’s a problem. That is their problem, I think. [Republicans] talk about trying to appear to be more moderate on social issues. That’s going to be easier said than done. The younger generation is simply more progressive. Some of the issues that moved their parents and grandparents are really not a concern for them. … My response would be, ‘Good luck.’”

  2. And they may still be screwed by the President….

    Waiting on the Supreme Court, and Obama’s Pen, While Democrats Still Cower

    ….While we wait for the Supreme Court’s decision on DOMA (as well as Prop 8) any day now, the Democratic President of the United States isn’t exactly falling all over himself for gays, refusing for over a year now to sign an executive order banning employment discrimination against LGBT people among federal contractors. In the face of relentless pressure from activists, and calls from prominent LGBT donors to withhold money from the Democrats, Obama doesn’t seem even close to signing what the White House now dubs the “hypothetical” order. Every day he waits, companies like Exxon Mobil, which refuse to implement anti-discrimination policies for gay and transgender people, are able to fire LGBT people, many of whom tremble in the closet at work, fearful of losing their jobs. Doesn’t exactly sound like the omnipotent gay lobby, does it?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/waiting-on-the-supreme-co_b_3420377.html

  3. Read last night that the Sct is going to issue its ruling on DOMA Monday….

  4. nick Most democrats I know are not smug. We know we could lose the senate in 2014. Just hope 2014 isn’t as bad as 2010 when that whole crew of tea party governors got in and Russ Feingold lost.

  5. nick, There was initially some support among young people for Ron Paul but it did not translate into votes once young people became aware of his positions on other issues. Young people did not turn out in large numbers in the republican primary to vote for him. One issue young people are pretty much united on regardless of party is gay marriage. If a candidate is not for gay marriage, he or she can forget the youth vote.

  6. I don’t have any double blind studies, but here is my take on young people. I base this on returning to college in 1998 to get my teacher’s license, teaching high school, and from living in a liberal university town where I speak often w/ students.

    This past election the most enthusiasm I saw among young people was for Ron Paul. Obviously, in 2008, young people went all in on Obama. And, like myself and millions others, were bitterly disappointed, for a myriad of reasons.

    The Dems should not get too smug. Young people are repulsed by the Republican party because of their stand on social issues. However, young people don’t like, trust, or think govt. is the answer. Oh, the kids brought up in hardcore ideologue families do, but they’re a distinct minority. Young people see SS for what it is, a Ponzi scheme that has not been dealt w/ for decades and something that is going to be ass raping them when they’re in their 50’s. Both of my kids started Roth IRA’s in their teens as have many of their friends. They don’t expect the govt. to “take care of them” like many of the baby boomers do.

    Here’s what is most positive. You all remember, I’m one of the few positive commenters here. Young people are not fans of the duopoly. If a fresh, new part were to emerge that spoke to them they would jump on that bandwagon in a NY minute. Young people are maligned, some of it warranted. But, they are way ahead of the curve on social issues, and realizing the limitations of govt. They will lead us out of this duopoly and give this country and culture the slap up side the head it so desperately needs.

  7. I’m not so sure the Repubs really care all that much about a shrinking electorate. After all, they are not all that powerless. If the focus is just on national elections, their future doesn’t look so good. But that’s not their focus. If you take a look at what they are doing to affect peoples’ lives at the state level, they are very powerful where they have been able to pass some very draconian laws. They also are very effective at the national level by hamstringing the Congress. This is possible because of their state level shenanigans. By gerrymandering the voting districts, by messing with the voter laws, and by owning the voting machines, they have control of pretty much anything at the state level and at the same time they’ve hamstrung the Congress. While the focus has been on who’s the Prez and the unconstitutional powers that have been grabbed there with the help of Republican in terms of making previously unlawful and unconstitutional powers legal and immune from judicial review, the Republican party is being used to attack the populace from “below”.

    This “game” is being played with a “good” team/ “bad” team approach. We are to think that it matters which team “wins”, but the two teams are really working together and what counts to the teams is to run up the total score regardless of the individual team scores.

  8. Mark,

    I’m not a fan of tripe…..now I am a fan of Tribe on constructional law…. Hopefully his book does not need to be amended toooooo much….

  9. If anything people are waking up slowly to the fact that Republicans are just as statist and pro thugerment as much as the Democrats are. The ideological fight between conservatism and liberalism is just red statism vs blue statism.

    The race component just gives racial nationalist losers like Pat Buchanan, Frosty Wooldridge among others something to “warn” about to get donations out of their supporters.

  10. Immigration has been a “perceived” problem since the mid 1700’s. The English King and Parliament were obsessed with the population explosion in the Colonies due to immigration and its effect on the declining population at home in Great Britain. Many of their draconian acts were put forth to discourage and curtail immigration to the Colonies … these acts combined with other factors led to the Revolutionary War.

    It’s always amusing to watch Americans don the robes of George the III and scream about immigration as “a chill blows over the country club”.

    BTW … in the latest Gallup poll only 14% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing and the latest Rasmussen report done this month puts that number at 6%.

  12. The authoritarian types prefer the GOP and as long as the GOP keeps acting authoritarian, they have their base. After all, when only 50% vote in presidential elections, the GOP only needs 26% of the total electorate to win an election. With lies and fear tactics, they took the entire country to war over WMDs, so they can do it again.

    Maybe if Dems weren’t so spineless they may have more appeal and Obama leans more Reagan than FDR, so he’s no progressive shining star. Dems are the old school GOP and GOP is now the crazed Tea Party. Some choice.

  13. Bruce: Ross Perot said ” as soon as 50% of the voters depend on the government for their income were screwed”.

    Who is the “we” that are screwed? What does “depend” mean? If 50% of the voters have government jobs (including military jobs, and civil service jobs) then their work is creating value, they are earning their way in life, so who are they “screwing?”

    Billionaires like Ross Perot?

    Bruce: The democrats want to give everyone everything, and crap on the tax payers.

    No they don’t. I was a Democrat for thirty years (and now call myself an independent, but I am a social liberal that favors a wide safety net and collective at-cost infrastructure). I have no desire to give everybody everything, I think our military could be at least halved, I do not want to pay for able-bodied workers to watch daytime TV.

    My desire is NOT to give everyone everything, my desire is to maximize human potential by giving everyone a level playing field, so we do not waste the minds and talents of humans because of pointless hardships that were not under their personal control. Like being born into poverty or just a bad economy, and as a result being malnourished, poorly educated, physically ruined by preventable or addressable medical issues, unsafe in their neighborhoods or circumstantially forced into menial labor jobs to survive, and therefore unable to reach their potential as contributors to society in whatever form they like best.

    I don’t want to give everybody everything, I just want everybody to have, as best we are able, the same lack of roadblocks to becoming what they are capable of becoming, the same ability to pursue their desire.

    I believe the world would be a better place if that happened, that we throw away 75% of the born talent that we have, talent that could be doctors and end up as salesmen, talent that could be inventors and end up as drug dealers, talent that could have been research scientists and just end up dead in a foreign swamp while pillaging oil rights on behalf of multi-billion dollar corporations.

    What I want is a meritocracy on a level playing field, instead of a plutocracy where the rich stay rich by oppressing the non-rich. I still want everybody to work and contribute to the best of their ability, and I still want them to be rewarded proportional to their ability, even if that is millions for some and not for others.

    The difference between us is that I do not think an inability (or even refusal) to work for whatever reason (laziness, drug addiction, mental illness or disability, emotional instability, acquired physical disability) warrants ruining the lives (or finances) of the person’s children, spouse, siblings or parents. I do not believe in visiting punishments upon people for crimes they did not commit. In particular, I do not believe the futures of children should be discarded because their parents were irresponsible, stupid, or poverty stricken and desperate enough to commit crimes or become drug addicts (all of which may be the result of a self-perpetuating cycle in which their futures were discarded for the same reason). I believe in breaking those cycles, because I think we are all better off if we do, and any fantasy that people can break that cycle on their own is 99% a crack pipe dream.

  15. Nick,

    Play nice… Yes I used to practice before the depression set in…. This is a good article… Maybe the prof can set a thread to exhibit differences of opinions… Based upon personalities…. It’d be a good showing….

    Other than than please do not detract from the value of the thread….. I’ve gleaned a great deal of information these past few years…. Especially this last week…. This is a serious topic…. Lets keep it that way…

    Btw, I’m impressed of all the things you say you’ve done…. You can relate well…. Let the dogs bark at the moon…. You’re walking through the Forrest….. Thank… Russell

  16. Gene, How many demerits has Marv gotten. I think he’s Marv Albert, who just turned 72!

  19. Marv: As a liberal, progressive, half-socialist, I thank the fates for angry bitter Republicans just like you. You are the very reason only 13% of minorities identify as Republican; they see those snakes squirming in your head, give you the finger and vote for family, community, compassion and a level playing field.

    Sure, both sides can get screwed by corruption and lies, but they aren’t going to vote for somebody that is actively telling them they are despised freeloaders that deserve poverty and oppression.

  20. Bruce:

    The choice is between forced deportation and splitting up families and more law. As a citizen from a town where splitting up families happened on a weekly basis at the downtown slave auction, I’ll take more laws.

    I don’t think Obama is a particularly good leader but neither do I think those who vociferously criticize without offering substantive, workable solutions are leaders either.

Comments are closed.