Print This Post
Nov
19
Thanks to Andrew Sullivan for linking to this May 2008 post at Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball re: how the Republican base is shrinking. I don’t even immerse myself in all things GOP, but have written about the sense that there just isn’t enough of a base to be appealing to, if winning is the goal. But guest columnist Alan Abramowitz really makes the argument with graphs and numbers and analysis.
An excerpt:
The decline in the proportion of married white Christians in the American electorate has been going on for a long time. Moreover, the large generational difference in the prevalence of married white Christians in the contemporary electorate suggests that this trend is likely to continue for the foreseeable future. What cannot be predicted as confidently is how party leaders will respond to this trend. Right now, Democrats appear likely to benefit from a continued decline in the proportion of married white Christians in the electorate because this group has strongly supported Republican candidates in recent elections while voters who are not married white Christians have strongly supported Democratic candidates.
Since the potential for additional Republican gains among married white Christians appears to be limited, Republican leaders will need to find ways to reduce the Democratic advantage among voters who are not married white Christians in order to maintain the party’s competitive position. However, given the generally liberal views of this group, this will not be easy. In 2006, according to data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 57 percent of these voters supported a woman’s right to choose an abortion under any circumstances, 66 percent opposed a constitutional amendment to prohibit gay marriage, and 71 percent favored a single-payer health care system. Any attempt by Republican leaders to significantly increase their party’s support among voters who are not married white Christians would therefore require changes in some of the party’s longstanding policy commitments — changes that would clearly upset a large segment of the current Republican base.
Cue the Twilight Zone music because that all sounds awfully familiar if you’ve been following the Republican governors, Kevin DeWine and many other GOP pundits.
Update: Kathleen Parker with a column today echoing the same:
As Republicans sort out the reasons for their defeat, they likely will overlook or dismiss the gorilla in the pulpit.
Three little letters, great big problem: G-O-D.
I’m bathing in holy water as I type.
To be more specific, the evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn’t soon cometh.
Simply put: Armband religion is killing the Republican Party. And, the truth — as long as we’re setting ourselves free — is that if one were to eavesdrop on private conversations among the party intelligentsia, one would hear precisely that.
The choir has become absurdly off-key, and many Republicans know it.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 2:13 pm November 19th, 2008 in Government, Politics, Republicans
Comments
3 Responses to “[update] Why it was always a miscalculation to focus on appealing to GOP base”
Leave a Reply
-
Upcoming
This is really fascinating stuff. Re: Parker: I was unaware the Republicans HAD a “party intelligentsia.”
(rimshot) thanks, I’ll be here all weekend, try the veal.
But seriously, the problem, as I see it, is that their supposedly shrinking evangelical base are the few that can be counted on to really, really, really work their butts off for the GOP candidates.
Tick them off and the “intelligentsia” will have to walk precincts in the rain. Bet they won’t like that.
Also the other problem is this white, married and/or evangelically religious demographic vote like fiends - perhaps the largest percentage-wise of any other demographic group. And their GOTV efforts are unsurpassed - until this election.
So that’s the problem. I don’t think the GOP can wholesale jettison the fundies UNLESS Obama’s first term turns out to be a catastrophe.
The other problem, though, for the GOP is that, of course, they’ll want to broaden their voting base, they really can’t reach out to a lot of the groups they need without making the fundies suspicious and upset. Gay groups? Feminists? Single moms? Please! Might as well try recruiting from the pagan community.
(call me when they get a Pagan Republican caucus - (rimshot) - oh, I kill me! But seriously folks. . . )
(wrapup in somber tones ala Ted Koppel): there are no easy answers here for what some have referred to as ‘God’s Own Party.’ They may be, as one might say, damned if they do. . . and damned if they don’t.
Somebody say amen!
This is the Republican Party’s dilema. They simply have no other footsoldiers for their election efforts but the social conservative movement. To the extent that the GOP has become a regional, Southern, white Christian pary (as the 2008 electoral map suggests), means that the transformation of the GOP into a national party risks losing the only region in the nation in which the party dominates.
The anti-immigration rhetoric of the party, despite John McCain and President Bush’s efforts to the contrary, may end any chance of them to compete for the Latino vote– the fastest growing voting demographic nationally that the Republicans ever had a chance to compete with in foreseeable future.
The Republican efforts to appeal to African-Americans was already largely unsuccessful and was set back by the savage attacks over Rev. Wright. (A story that hasn’t gotten much attention, but I think African-Americans largely didn’t like how the GOP portrayed Obama. Just look at the Powell endorsement.)
Ironically, the attempt to remake the GOP will require a “leap of faith” of the party to be willing to take a step away from the party’s most faithful.
For the first time ever, I found myself agreeing with everything Kevin DeWine said after the election. Nothing does me more pleasure as a Democrat than to see the GOP shreek and recoil at the sage advice of DeWine and Parker.
Jill:
The analysis you quote impresses me as right to the heart of the matter. I do not see the Republican Party either being viable, or making itself viable in the forseeable future.
The best thing for the GOP and for the nation is for it to go into that good night, and replace itself with a strong paleoconservative or libertarian party, and leave a party for the Christian fundamentalists, which will only be regionally effective.