The myth of the Obama supporter voting GOP in 2010

[Alcibiades]

One wrong idea that has gained currency of late is the idea that voters abandoned the president in droves to support the GOP in 2010. This simply didn't happen. According to ABC's analysis of the exit polls,

"Thirteen percent of Obama voters defected to Republicans for Congress, while 8 percent of McCain voters favored Democrats." http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2010-midterms-political-price-economic-pain/story?id=12041739

This might seem terribly significant, until you note that only 46% of the 2010 electorate voted for Obama in 2008. This means that the folks who voted for Obama in 2008 and who voted Republican in 2010 amounted to 5.98% of the electorate. This may have been the margin in many races, for sure, but the larger story is that the vast majority of Obama voters voted Democratic and the vast majority of McCain voters voted Republican. Among those who voted.

And that's the key. 2010 really was about the enthusiasm gap. The good news is that this is the best performance Republicans can possibly achieve, as virtually all of their voters got to the polls. Some of our own rather lackluster performance may have been due to less activism by active democrats. I know I canvassed far less than in 2008, and our local signup sheet had a fraction of the number of names it did in 2008.

To the extent that this was the fault of the administration and the Democratic establishment, it was a problem of messaging. All too often, our party's answer to the issues of the day was, and still is, "It's complicated." Liberals generally are, and I have been in the past, big fans of this worldview. People who know a lot about politics are inclined towards nuance, towards seeing the big picture. That's all well and good when it comes to our own internal dialogue, but it's a poor message to use to motivate grassroots activists and average voters. If you present one set of people with a simple message and another with a complex one, who is more likely to take action? The ones presented with the simple message.

The president's best selling point in this election was the "They drove the car into the ditch, and now they want the keys back" story. And yet even this message got longer with each telling, with more and more elaborations piled on, until it became too long, just another hiss in the endless stream of white noise confusing the Democratic voter. Folks were suffering from information paralysis. Hell, I'm doing it here: what I had intended to be a short, concise post is getting longer and longer.

My wife almost didn't vote in this election. This tells me everything I need to know. I apparently didn't talk with her enough about why it was important. She's an intelligent woman with a doctorate who is fiercely independent, knows her own mind, and despises the Republican Party. And she almost didn't vote, offering up a litany of excuses on election day: "I had thought we were going to the polls together" (We never do this, as I always vote early so I can volunteer on e-day), "I'll never vote for our incumbent Democratic representative, because he's been unresponsive on some issues my union things are important (as if the lunatic GOP challenger could possibly be any better), etc. I finally cajoled her into voting after work on election day, and to vote the straight Democratic ticket. When she came back, she said she was glad she did.

The problem is, like most people, my wife has a life. As any rational choice theorist will tell you, the mere act of voting entails certain costs: you might want to take the time to educate yourself on the issues, to learn who all the candidates are, and the mere act of voting itself means you are foregoing some other, presumably more inherently pleasurable activity. In a world where the GOP is dominated by a crowd more reactionary than any since the Goldwater campaign, it should not be too hard to offer a compelling reason why Democrats ought to vote. And yet it is.

Why? It's complicated. KISS.

[Clio the Leo]

1. It was a bad combination of apathetic Dems and left leaning Indies....

.... along with EXTREMELY fired up Republicans.

And the incoming GOP needs to realize they DO NOT have a mandate from the nation as a whole or they'll be out the next time around.

[patrice]

5. Apathetic and giving-up Dems, Left & Right Leaning Indies, and Libertarians, all of whom are still

here and still WORKING on taking the Dems down for good in 2012.

[Alcibiades]

10. Right you are

The difference will be that there is going to be a presidential election, with an incumbent Democrat. The rural Republican base gives them a natural edge in the electoral college, and their appeal to older, conservative voters gives them an edge in midterms. But the poorer, younger, less white folks who have always been the least likely to vote in midterms are the same voters who swept Obama into office, and they will turn out again in two years. The national Republicans have said nothing, so far, that will make them popular with the broad middle.

We just need to work as hard as we can to counter the loonies on the fringe who are the GOP activist pool.

[patrice]

14. Thanks for your response . . .

I feel like I'm going crazy, watching all of this, and so few seem to understand what the WHOLE situation is, so they're making hay while the sun shines on their own issues exclusive to those of anyone else. Went to a Movement to Amend (organizing against Citizens' United) meeting yesterday and folks were disavowing political labels, but when a traditionally DEMOCRATIC issue like Labor's right to Organize came up, that got shut-down in no uncertain terms, "It doesn't matter. We have to beat Citizens' United."

Freaked - me - OUT!

Thanks for your support! I guess I'm not going crazy.

[Crazy Dave]

2. Polls, theories, speculations, etc.

The dems lost and in a big way no matter how, who or why.

The BS that they thought would work during the campaigns didn't so I hope somebody in Washington starts paying attention to the voters vs. the polls and the lobbyists for special interests.

[Alcibiades]

3. It wasn't that big

For nearly my entire lifetime, the Democrats enjoyed a much larger majority in the House than the Republicans will when the next Congress begins, but there was no "tsunami" talk then. You're right to point out that we did lose, of course, but it does matter why, so that we can make a better case to voters next time.

[karynnj]

4. Not to mention look at the 2008 results versus the 2010

Note that the media is comparing the number of seats that changed - not the absolute number of seats. This to back the idea that they have an incredible mandate. Yet they saw NO such mandate in the 2008 numbers.

In the House, there were 435 independent races in both years. In 2008, we won 257 of them. This year, even if all 7 as yet undecided races go Republican, the maximum they will have is 246. (to put our 257 seat majority in perspective, they had 230 in the 1994 election. )

Their tsunami result is smaller than our (by their definition) not representative 2008 result!

[Crazy Dave]

7. Then why is the president acting so defeated?

Hell the new congress doesn't even seat until next year yet our side is already talking compromise and going along with "the new congress". Until next year we still have the majority in both houses. There's still a lot of time left to actually work and get some things done but they're too worried about which lobbying firm they can get a job with and making sure the tax breaks for the rich get extended because now they're the ones who are filthy rich.

[karynnj]

9. I suspect that he is rather stunned by the enormity of the loss

It might also be part media spinning. Obama has after all been out of the country for most of the time since the election. I think he thought it respectful of the process to acknowledge the Republican win - even though they didn't accept his.

Like you, I do think that he should try to best use the lame duck session. He then should work on coopting the Republicans by pushing popular items. He really will need to appear more confident and positive - even though he may have taken the election to heart.

[Alcibiades]

11. Excellent observation

They may partly accept the idea that the Democratic Party is the natural majority party--certainly, folks who know their history know that it's simply normal for Democrats to have a majority in the House.

Of course, they rarely say that explicitly, because that would be pointing out that most of the time, Americans reject the GOP agenda every two years.

[Crazy Dave]

6. Not a better case

Do what the voters who put you there asked you to do. Quit trying to think of ways to bullshit the voters just to stay in office. Do your job and earn your vote because you are not entitled to it.

[Alcibiades]

12. They have done OK in this regard in my book

Though there's still the lame duck session to get through, this has been the most successfully progressive, in policy terms, presidency/congress dyad since LBJ. And even he had Vietnam.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Voter turnout in Oregon was 69%

Democrats won. One of the reasons we get better turnout is that we vote by mail or drop off, which makes the entire voting process, including learning about the candidates and issues, much easier on the voters. Oregonians never stand in line to vote. Hell, I don't even stand. My polling place is a pillow. You get to use the internet, you have unlimited shoutouts to pals who actually know these judges, and you can take days to complete your ballot if you want to. Or minutes. Freestyle voting.

[Alcibiades]

13. This is one reason why Republicans hate to make voting easier

We have no excuse absentee voting here in North Carolina. Almost everywhere in the country, making voting easier for people advantages Democrats.

[Awsi Dooger]

15. White women are killing us

That's the story, every cycle. The white female vote used to mirror the national percentage, as recently as 2000. Post 9/11 they have trended more and more conservative. This year it was 58-39 in the national exit poll.

In midterms the single white females who lean left do not show up.

Unless Obama rescues a significant chunk of that white female demographic, he's in huge trouble in 2012. Every other major group voted in logical percentage, in fact some more favorable than I expected, given the national tide.

[Alcibiades]

16. As you point out, it's married white women

Specifically, older married white women. Especially Republican older married white women. Our best performance among the white electorate, if you really want to carve up the electorate, was among college-educated white women.

The folks who really stood out for shooting themselves in the foot were white men generally, non-college educated white women, and white seniors.