The HuntingPA.com Outdoor Community banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Editor's note: James Carville is a CNN contributor and professor at Tulane University and Rebecca Buckwalter-Poza is a student at Yale Law School. They co-authored "40 More Years: How Democrats Will Rule the Next Generation." Buckwalter-Poza served as deputy national press secretary of the Democratic National Committee during the 2008 election.

(CNN) -- In 2009, we wrote a book, "40 More Years: How Democrats Will Rule the Next Generation." Building on Ruy Teixeira and John Judis' 2002 tour de force "The Emerging Democratic Majority" predicting the 2008 election, we argued that America's diversifying and increasingly liberal youth voters would secure a lasting Democratic majority.

Our collaboration seemed appropriate then and is only more so now. On one half of the byline, you have James Carville, 68-year-old white man from Louisiana and professor at Tulane University. On the other side, you've got a 26-year-old second-generation Latina with a fiancée. Voters who look like James are on their way out; voters like Rebecca are our future.

A few reviewers missed the point of our focus on demographics. Others, primarily young, entitled, progressive men, critiqued us for not recommending that Democrats focus on appealing to young, entitled, progressive men. To this, we plead guilty. Our book was about demographic diversity and the future of the Democratic Party.

After the midterm elections in 2010, we were mocked viciously. Our thesis was laughable, Republicans hooted, ignoring the book's careful caveat that midterm election turnout differs substantially from that of presidential elections.

We would like to direct these critics to the Epistle of Jude, 1:10: "Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them."

Tuesday night proved our 2009 selves could not have been more right. "Mid-20th century, white men made up half of the electorate," we wrote in 2009. "In 2008, white men made up only 36% of the electorate ... and their vote share is dropping by a percentage point a year."

Our only error was in slightly underestimating the rate at which white men's vote share is shrinking. White voters were 74% of voters in 2008; they were 72% this year. White men comprised just 34% of the electorate on Tuesday.

In 2009, we also commented on the Republicans' reliance on the far right and evangelical voters: "The shrinking Christian right leaves a void in the Republicans' collection of base groups—and they can't look to any growing groups to replace those votes."

Mitt Romney outperformed Sen. John McCain, the 2008 GOP presidential candidate, by 5 points with both white voters overall (59%) and white men (62%). He also bested McCain's margin among Republicans, winning 93% of self-identified Republicans as compared to McCain's 90%, and white evangelical voters, 79% compared with McCain's 73%. Romney lost by relying on a tapped-out, ever-shrinking group of voters.

By way of contrast, Latinos now make up a greater share of the electorate than they did four years ago: 10% of all voters. Obama won 71% of Latinos, reflecting an increase in support of 4%. Similarly, the proportion of the electorate identifying as Asian increased from 2% to 3%, and Obama's support among Asian voters rose 11 points, from 62% to 73%.

There's an entire chapter in "40 More Years" on the importance of youth voters. Four years ago, 18% of the electorate was between 18 and 29. Now, youth are 19% of voters. We highlighted a critical trend within the youth vote: "Back in 1972, almost nine in 10 youth voters (87%) were white. By 2004, only 62% of youth said they were white." This year, about 58% of voters 18-29 identified as white; 42.1% of youth self-reported as African-American, Latino, or otherwise nonwhite.

We also predicted the implosion of Republicans' culture war strategy. Our conclusion was that "[w]hat Bush started in 2000 was a two-election trick that had met its natural and timely death by 2008." Our critics tried to answer our claim by citing the success of culture-war tactics in 2004 and their state-level effects in 2008. We ignored them.

As we said, "The consequence of Republicans' lingering preoccupation with the culture war is that it has led them to become a party of ridiculous positions." Republicans would "have to be certifiable," our sage selves circa 2009 warned, to ever try a culture war strategy again.

We could not be more delighted that Maine, Maryland and Washington became the first states in the country to pass same-sex marriage by popular vote on Tuesday. What we're downright thrilled about, however, is the fact that Mitt Romney got fewer votes than "traditional" marriage in every one of those states.

The Republicans did their damnedest to use the specter of homosexual marital bliss to incite their base voters to vote for Mitt Romney. In the past, that has worked. This time, the best they could do with millions of dollars and overt hate mongering—their favorite weapons—was mobilize a conservative minority that voted for "traditional marriage" but rejected Romney.

Some analyses have tried to make 2012 about single women or educated white women or some other narrow slice of the electorate. They're thinking small. The big picture is this: Democrats are continuing to win big with the demographic groups that are growing; Republicans are still struggling to increase support with shrinking base voter groups.

Republicans made critical, unforced errors in 2008 and 2012. Our present hope is that Republicans continue to mock rather than read "40 More Years," and that Democrats take heed. It's not that we like saying we told you so. It's just that we wrote an entire book telling you so.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/opinion/carville-buckwalter-poza-election/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Nothing to see here, move along!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
26,979 Posts
Yeah James Carivell is someone who speaks the gospell.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I'd say he knows elections a bit better than Rove.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,479 Posts
That slanted eye freak makes my stomach turn.Even hearin his sickening voice peels paint.That scumbag was one of the dimwits that swore their was a right wing comspiracy against Clinton in the bimbo chick scandal and that it was all lies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,479 Posts
That slanted eye freak makes my stomach turn.Even hearin his sickening voice peels paint.That scumbag was one of the dimwits that swore their was a right wing comspiracy against Clinton in the bimbo chick scandal and that it was all lies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,108 Posts
He's right. The democrats are the party for losers. Their ranks are growing because there are far more losers in this country than there used to be. Far more people all to willing to have government hold their hand all their lives. Pretty soon there won't be enough people paying in to support all these losers. Will it effect you and I? Probably not. But my children will pay for all these losers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,190 Posts
I'd say the question is how do the republicans expand their base to include these "growing demographics"?

I'd say to have any chance they'd have to do the following;

- Simply agree/support any womans desire for abortions and taxpayer provided contraceptives of whatever flavor they may demand on a whim.

- and agree that Churches and Mosques should provide this as well to their employees w/no grumbling whatsoever

- Never, EVER, under any conditions, provide anything besides unconditional support for any position advocated by any person who claims to have even one blood cell in their bodies of African descent (else they alienate the African American vote).

- Never, not once, ever again, bring up voter fraud as an issue. The minute they do this it brings up issues of how to combat it, and that is ALWAYS code-speak for disenfranchising every other demographic besides white republican men.

- Provide new guvmn't programs to attend to whatever issue "college kids" now say is a problem for them, else they alienate the "young voter". Oh my, now we have to pay off college loans, boo hoo- OK, taxpayer pays it all for you. I have a C- average from high school and can barely read, but want to go to college but have no money- OK, here's grants to pay for your college.

- Never, EVER, consider any sort of sensible review of guvmn't health care expenditures. Some company comes up w/a $500,000/month cancer treatment that may provide 3 days more on life support than the next drug that only costs $50/month- what if it was YOUR mom? Just pay it- to even look at the numbers is insensitive, alienates the Medicare Crowd.

- DON'T EVER do anything but nod your head in agreement with anyone who says "the rich should pay more in taxes". Don't do it. Let "them" define "rich" and propose any level of taxation they think is fair. Else you alienate the OWS knuckleheads and the academic Marxists like Obama.

- Never ever complain about any new regulation, tax or unfunded mandate foisted on business. Just don't. In fact, you need to come up with some outrageous ones yourself just to prove your street cred.

- Come up w/new ways to provide benefits to illegal aliens. Don't ever mouth a word against anything somebody else says to this effect- else you alienate the Latino crowd.

- DO NOT FIGHT GUN CONTROL- else you alienate the yuppie urban vote.

- Always pay homage to the organized labor crowd. Never take a stance that's not in lockstep support of them. Don't want to alienate "labor".

- Doesn't matter if your tax base can't support it. Never, ever, think of anything that may even scrutinize long term obligations (pensions, health care) to guvmn't employees at any level. Else you alienate "labor".

- Never, EVER, let anyone make any statements based on faith that is counter to anything the Left is proposing. This is construed as imposition of "Sharia Law". You can, however, go on ad nauseum about how your Christian faith stimulates you to expand the welfare state. That's OK

Do all that, and you win elections by "including" the growing demographics. You become "Dem" in the process, but who cares? It's about winning elections, right?

BH
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,328 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The answer I guess is for the GOP to just become the white man's party. Then they can become a total fringe party. Like the Golden Dawn Party in Greece, they'll win a few seats and try to feel relevant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,786 Posts
And the final prize when we end up with only one political party will be a banana republic where everyone is poor. The exception will be the elite in the government.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top