The Many Elections of 2012
description
Transcript of The Many Elections of 2012
The Many Elections of 2012
Elections and Lessons
Overview:• Congressional elections and polarization, 1950s to
2012, with a bit of Redistricting• The Republican Nomination – Two Elections and
Two Electorates• The Presidential General Election – The Economy
and…..?• The Tea Party and the Republican Dilemma• 2013 and Obama’s Second Term
US Presidential Election, 2012
US Congressional Elections, 2012
Congressional ElectionsPresidential Nominations
The Presidential General Election:What Polarization Looks Like:
• Elite – Congress, sorting and movement toward the extremes• Public Perceptions • Activists• Is the Public?
44 44 44 44
35
10
44 44 44 44 45
05
101520253035404550
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Num
ber o
f Mem
bers
Decile
Liberal Conservative Voting Records, 1997-98
Democrats
Republicans
44 4341
38
26
1614
7
12
7
13
6
19
2830
37
32
38
05
101520253035404550
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Num
ber o
f Mem
bers
Decile
Liberal-Conservative Voting Records, 1969-70
Democrats
Republicans
Sorting by Party in Congress
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Polarization of the Congress, 1968-2008
HouseSenate
Year
Aver
age
diffe
renc
e be
twee
n th
e Tw
o Pa
rties
1909
1911
1913
1915
1917
1919
1921
1923
1925
1927
1929
1931
1933
1935
1937
1939
1941
1943
1945
1947
1949
1951
1953
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Divergence: Polarization in the U.S. Congress, 1910-2010
House Senate
Year Congress opened
Rela
tive
diffe
rent
iatio
n be
twee
n th
e tw
o pa
rties
The Public Perceives Congressional Polarization
Polarization in the Electorate:Comparing Views of Presidential Candidates in 1968 and 2008
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
Polarization of the Congress and of Public Evaluations, 1968-2008
HouseSenatePublic
Year
Aver
age
diffe
renc
e be
twee
n th
e Tw
o Pa
rties
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Figure 6.5 Polarization of partisan identifiers and party activists, 1972-2008
Party Activists Presidential Donors Party Identifiers
Year
Diffe
renc
e on
7-p
oint
Lib
eral
-Con
serv
ativ
e Sc
ale
The Nomination Campaign
• Two major features
• Tradeoff between representing the beliefs of primary voters versus convincing them of the need to win the general election
• The public learning about the candidates
General Election
• The General Election is three contests
• Tradeoff between mobilizing the base and winning the center
• A referendum on the incumbent party
• A choice of the person to be president
The GOP and the Tea Party
The Tea Party is three things, relevant to here:
• First, it was a public expression of frustration
• Second, it was taken over quickly by the most right-wing leadership of the actual GOP and then assimilated quickly into the actual GOP itself
The GOP and the Tea Party
The Tea Party is three things, relevant to here:
• First, it was a public expression of frustration
• Second, it was assimilated into the GOP quickly.
• Third, it turns out that it really was both an economic movement and a broad, nation wide, that is to say non-southern dominated movement and organized, part of the Republican Party
The GOP and the Tea Party
The Tea Party is three things, relevant to here:
• First, it was a public expression of frustration
• Second, it was assimilated into the GOP quickly.
• Third, it really was not a southern dominated movement.
• Item: GOP leadership 1955 – 0 of 10 (House and Senate) GOP leadership 1995 – 7 of 10 GOP leadership 2011 – 3 of 10
The GOP and the Tea Party
The Tea Party is three things, relevant to here:• First, it was a public expression of frustration• Second, it was taken over quickly by the most right-wing leadership
of the actual GOP and then assimilated quickly into the actual GOP itself
• Third, it turns out that it really was both an economic movement and a broad, nation wide, that is to say non-southern dominated movement and organized, part of the Republican Party
• Item: GOP leadership 1995 – 7 of 10 (House and Senate) GOP leadership 2011 – 3 of 10
A Note on 2010• Our (Aldrich, Bishop, Hatch, Hillygus, Rohde) data show that 2010 had two
major features that turned what might have been a regularly slightly GOP year into a rout.
– 1. High turnout among those who approved of the Tea Party, above expectations, and
overtaking Blacks, Latinos, and youth voting from 2008.
– 2. High Republican vote among moderates, independents, and weaker Democrats who blamed Bush or banks/Wall Street for the economic collapse (about 2 in 3 in 2010, down to a slim majority today) but held Democrats responsible for not doing enough to fix it.
• These two are roughly equally sized groups.
• Opposition to “Obamacare” or the stimulus played a small role, if any role at all, above and beyond 1 and 2.
Tea Party 2012
• The 2010 elections were a zenith, although the Tea Party did not win in all cases.
• It remains (at least in 2012) a potent force in primaries.• It appears to be a vulnerability in general elections.
• Caveat 1: Redistricting helped conserve Tea Party victors.
• Caveat 2: They will not be replaced, if they are replaced at all, by bipartisan moderates.
Implications for the future?
• Further reduction of moderate office holders.
• Continued increase in the likelihood of the selection of candidates who are extreme relative to the middle of the spectrum.
• Elites recognize that party control is essential for policy success. Thus electoral success is a central consideration in all substantive processes.
• The Pattern of Future Policy Making – Gridlock or Lurching from the Liberal to the Conservative side and back again.
Where Polarization Comes fromWhere the Tea Party Comes from
Why the South is the primary driver
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Figure 7.2 Party unity and conservative coalition votes, U.S. House, 1953 - 1997
Conservative Coalition Party Votes
Congress
Perc
ent o
f Rol
l Cal
l Vot
es
1954
1956
1958
1960
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Figure 7.4 Party unity scores, U.S. Senate, 1954-2007
All Dem South Dem Rep
Perc
ent V
ote
for P
arty
on
Party
Vot
es