The Enthusiasm Gap and the Progressive Strongholds

[alcibiades_mystery]

Last night, when things looked bleak for John Kitzhaber in Oregon, a report mistakenly cited voter turnout in Multnomah County as something like 37%. This pathetic number was immediately seized on by some posters to indicate that 1) the enthusiasm gap among core Democratic voting constituencies was quite real, and 2) that the fault lay with the way the Obama administration had putatively mistreated progressives. The numbers were a little screwy, so I decided to follow up. Was there a massive drop-off among progressive constituencies? The question itself is hobbled by vague definitions, of course. We hear terms like "professional left," and "liberals," and "progressives," and they're usually all conflated into the same entity, though it's also usually clear that nobody can really pin down what that entity might be. In order to get to the question, then, I've decided to focus primarily on "progressives," and I'll turn to geographical locations usually associated with that term, first, in order to admittedly sidestep the definitional problem, and second, because the claims made by the progressives on this board were already using such a procedure when they cited the supposedly low Multnomah County turnout.

So, I'm taking three "progressive" strongholds, or what could be called the urban areas most associated with progressive politics in the nation. The question here is simple: do the 2010 results indicate a light, moderate, or severe drop in voter participation in these areas? Or none at all? In order to get at this, I look at the 2006, 2008, and 2010 numbers. Obviously, the 2008 numbers will be much higher, but we can contrast them with the 2006 numbers, which should show the drop-off if there is any. I'll discuss other factors below.

So, first, Multnomah County, Oregon, home of Portland - a city George H.W. Bush once referred to as "Little Beirut."

2006 Numbers
Registered Voters: 380,298
Ballots Cast: 262,628
Percentage of Total: 69.06%

Governor's Race (R and D only)
Ted Kolongoski (D): 177,197 (68%)
Ron Saxton (R): 65,488 (25%)

2008 Numbers
Registered Voters: 426,567
Ballots Cast: 367,540
Percentage of Total: 86.16%

Presidential Race (R and D only)
Barack Obama (D): 279,696 (77%)
John McCain (R): 75,171 (21%)

2010 Numbers
Registered Voters: 417,622
Ballots Cast: 272,857
Percentage of Total: 69.06%

Governor's Race (R and D only)(NY Times lists precincts outstanding)
John Kitzhaber (D): 190,188 (70%)
Ron Saxton (R): 74,107 (27%)

If we compare the 2006 and 2010 numbers, we see a slight drop-off in percentage of ballots cast (4%), but this can be accounted for in the almost 10% increase in total registrations. Indeed, in raw numbers, more voters cast ballots in 2010 than did in 2006. More voters in raw numbers also cast their ballots for the Democratic candidate, whose percentage of total vote increased by 2% between 2006 and 2010. The Republican candidate also saw a 2% increase. What accounts for it? In 2006, almost 6% of voters cast ballots for third parties. In 2010, this figure was reduced to just over 2%. The other 4% of third party votes went the Democrats and the GOP. If anything, it looks like voters moved away from third parties and towards the major parties, and the major parties split that third party vote evenly.

Speaking strictly in terms of voter participation, these numbers do not suggest a drop-off between midterm cycles. There are, of course, a multitude of factors too numerous to list that could explain these numbers, most having to do with voter motivation. But on their face, again, we don't see a drop-off of progressive voters, at least in Multnomah County.

Over the next few days I'll add additional analyses of the same sort to this thread, looking at other progressive strongholds.

[DFLforever]

1. Interesting

Like to see data used to refute prejudice.

[MissMarple]

2. Badda bump.

:)

[leveymg]

3. I think one might draw the wrong conclusion from this - that it's okay to shit on the base

and that we'll turn out, anyway. The fact is, most committed progressives view voting as a civil religion. We truly will turn out, regardless - particularly when there is a decent incumbent to protect or candidate to elect. That's what these numbers don't encompass, is the quality (as measured in the eyes of the voters) of the candidates they support, despite their lack of enthusiasm about the policies of the Party's national leadership.

I guess one could say this is just a restatement of Tip O'Neill's axiom that "all politics is local." But, my point is that these numbers don't capture the depth of the disillusionment of the progressive base in '10, and the cost that the Party paid for this is manifested in other ways. For instance, many of us have in the past taken time off other work for candidates or campaign outside our own (relatively safe) districts. I think you will find that the number of those who did so this time are probably lower than the previous two cycles. Many of us did not give until it hurt this time, as well. Many of us did not give at all to the national party organizations, as we have before. These factors are harder to measure, but they add up.

There is, indeed, a substantial cost to be paid for alienating the progressive base.

[JTFrog]

4. The base WAS NOT shit on.

That would be a matter of perspective.

I don't think the 16% of Democrats who aren't happy with the President or his administration's performance can be considered THE BASE.

Just because there is a large faction at DU that seems to be a part of that 16% doesn't mean that little drop of water in the big ocean of politics means squat.

[leveymg]

5. That's your opinion.

I can certainly be considered the base. I'm a member of my local Democratic Committee, I knocked 4,000 doors outside my district in '08 (but far, far fewer this cycle), and I've held paid campaign jobs and worked for DSCC/DCCC on and off since the mid-1980s.

The large percentage of us here who see things this way do mean squat, as do those like us at DKos, TPM, FDL and the other netroots. Thanks for being obnoxious about your difference of opinion - that means a lot.

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Very thoughtful post

Thanks for that.

Yes, I did mention the numerous other factors (including regional issues) in the OP, and I think you're right to point to the other manifestations of enthusiasm. The local thing is really crucial. In some cities, there did seem to be a massive downturn in turnout in the Democratic] strongholds, especially in the border states (Missouri, for instance).

My only point here is that, as a metric, voter turnout in Mulnomah County doesn't register any drop off. Whether other metrics do is an analysis I'll leave to others.

In terms of the upshot, that it's "okay to shit on the base," of course I'm not saying that. I'm in conversation with people who said "shitting on the base" caused lower turnout among progressives. As far as Mulnomah County goes, that doesn't appear to be the case. The analysis cannot provide general conclusions, but it can point to specific data. That's all.

I should also say that I don't know what I'll find as I do this. I'm not cherry picking, and the local character of the analysis might tell us more than any national generalizations we could draw from it. I only hope others are likewise careful in their claims.

[leveymg]

9. You might want to also look at Arlington, Fairfax, and Prince William Cos, VA, (VA-8 and 11).

This is Northern VA suburbs just south of DC. We have reknowned county Democratic organizations that have been well organized for decades. As a result, the VA-8 seat (Arlington and Fairfax Cos.) held by Jim Moran is so safe that large numbers of us formed into "brigades" and in the last several election cycles have worked the surrounding districts.

The Fairfax and Arlington Co. Democrats were instrumental in helping Gerry Connolly get reelected in a real squeaker (just a few hundred votes) in VA-11 (includes areas of southern Fairfax and Prince William Cos., which is much more Purple) - he was first elected two years ago by six or seven points against the same GOP candidate, Keith Fimian. You should look at Connolly's campaign this year and compare it to '08, as there are few variables that have changed other than the national political climate.

Based upon my own personal observations on the ground, and as a paid organizer in '08, I have to tell you that there was intensely-felt disillusionment and a decline in volunteer participation among the progressive base this year -- add to that the lack of Obama for America coat tail effects this time (the follow-on organization, Organizing for America, is not nearly as effective or as grassroots-oriented) -- did have a substantial impact on the level of activist participation and energy from the base that went into the VA-11 race. We came very close to losing Connolly, as we lost a number of Democratic seats across the Commonwealth this year.

[alcibiades_mystery]

10. Comparing with 08 is not, to my mind

methodologically sound. The Presidential election years will certainly see more activity and enthusiasm than midterms. The real comparison would be 06, both for that reason, and because 06 would provide a "cleaner" look at whether supposed attacks on progressive in the last two years have produced the effect.

Second, I think we're getting into the definitional issue of the "base," "Democrats," "progressives," and the like. I want to take geographical regions that are almost "over-the-top" progressive, for which Portland is a good example. That might be a methodological problem stemming from the attempt to stiff-arm the definitional issues, but it nevertheless strikes me as a good measure for determining whether the progressive (as opposed to, say, merely "Democratic," base turned out. Northern Virginia certainly strikes me as liberal, in something like a classical sense, but this is fairly recent, and nobody would put it in the same progressive category as Portland, Oregon. I'm looking for the latter regions in these analyses.

[leveymg]

12. There are few places in America with a Dem party base that is more progressive than NOVA

I've worked party operations and campaigns in NY, CT, MA, CA, PA, and VA. I can tell you that many (if not most) of the Democratic activists in Northern Virginia are every bit as progressive as Santa Cruz, CA and the Bay area - and they don't get much more Left than there.

VA-11 was long Tom Davis' seat until '08, so you can't go back to '06 there, but you could certainly look at VA-8 as a paragon of long-term Liberal-Progressive activism.

[alcibiades_mystery]

13. OK, sold. I'll add it to the list

[CBR]

8. Who is the base? nt

[leveymg]

11. Broadly, here's my definition:

Anyone who repeatedly volunteers or is paid staff for Democratic campaigns or organizations in any capacity qualifies as part of the base. I would distinguish them from people who are members of single-issue groups, but there is obviously enormous overlap.

The Democratic base includes active participation in new media, the "netroots." Bloggers who are generally supportive of Democratic Party candidates and issues who actively post are part of the netroots, even if they are extremely critical of more centrist elements of the Party. This means, yes, that people who post a lot at DU on political topics related to the elections or political issues are part of the Party's netroots base. Communications is an essential part of building the Democratic Party base.

[LWolf]

7. Multnomah County put Kitzhaber over the top

and prevented the loss of the governorship to Republicans. I'm grateful.