The age of centrism: Independents are now the plurality
My favorite national political Web site, politicalwire.com, has a story today about a recent study (release date: May 21) of Americans’ political attitudes by the Pew Research Center. Independents are now the largest group of voters (36%). Democrats are right behind at 35%. Republicans trail at 23%. This is the key language in the report:
The proportion of independents now equals its highest level in 70 years. Owing to defections from the Republican Party, independents are more conservative on several key issues than in the past. While they like and approve of Barack Obama, as a group independents are more skittish than they were two years ago about expanding the social safety net and are reluctant backers of greater government involvement in the private sector. Yet at the same time, they continue to more closely parallel the views of Democrats rather than Republicans on the most divisive core beliefs on social values, religion and national security.
This is good news and bad news for the Democrats. The good news is that the Republican party continues to hemorrhage voters. The bad news is that these newly minted independents are conservative. I recall a panel discussion last December, moderated by Evan Smith, that featured presentations by Republican pollster Mike Baselice and the UT Poll’s James Henson, in which Henson pointed out that the independents were (and I’m paraphrasing from memory) really disgruntled Republicans. He thought that many of them were likely to continue voting Republican, even though they no longer identified with the party. Baselice has similar numbers about Republican defections. The point is, the trend away from the Republicans means nothing unless the Democrats can win over these voters. Texas is not immune from these national trends, but the weakness of the Democratic party, which barely exists as an organization and is divided up among fiefdoms (Lone Star Project, trial lawyers, legislative caucuses, rivalry between blacks and Hispanics) makes it impossible for the party to challenge Republicans in statewide races. It is an amateur operation that lacks the will or the ability to do what the Republican party did in the eighties, which was assemble high-level political talent (Karen Hughes, Karl Rove, Bryan Eppstein) committed to organizing and taking over the state.
To link to the Pew study — great stuff for junkies — click here.
Tagged: independents, pew research center
John Johnson says:
I must be the epitome of the independent the Pew report refers to. Wendy Davis was the first Democrat I ever voted for in a senate, rep, governor or presidential race. While I don’t agree with her on all issues, she did District 10 proud her rookie session. I’m a big fan.
From my standpoint, the report also got it right when it mentioned that most of us lean to the right…but not far enough over to make Perry and KBH attractive. These two are “old school” and just mouthpieces for Big Everything.
I would consider myself a populist with a conservative lean who is not going to cast a vote for governor in the next election if Perry and Hutchison are the best we can come up with.
I’m still waiting for Schieffer to get pro-active, raise some money and get his message out. He’s just the kind of person I think the majority of my group would back if he gets organized and serious about it.
Reply »
Elsbeth Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 9:42 am
You don’t think Schieffer is “old school”? Why is that?
Reply »
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 10:36 am
John….
Wendy Davis impressed me during an early Senate Education committee hearing; she understood school finance. School finance is exceptionally complicated. Many veterans have no clue when it comes to school finance..
Don’t know much else about her – good or bad; but her grasp of school finance startled me. My first exposure came in the 1980s during the first Edgewood case with Judge Harley Clark … and it took years to reach a basic understanding.
Davis must be a quick study….
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Wendy Davis is smart … and she is independent.
Troy Fraser figured this out and, not only took pot shots at her, but also never brought up in his committee any of her consumer friendly bills dealing with utility issues. It doesn’t take much to show Fraser up, but she did so right out of the shoot as an incoming freshman. Ask Sen. Corona about Wendy. I know that he will give her high marks. She had just as firm a grasp of transporation issues as she did education.
Reply »
Elsbeth says:
Ug. I need lots more coffee after reading that list of “political talent.” I beg of you, please don’t mention any of them before noon ever again.
Reply »
General Sam Houston says:
Things can change fairly quickly in politics. Texas Democrats are fractured now, but hope is on the horizon. If Rick Perry gets renominated by the Republicans again, Democrats will instantly be in contention statewide. A respectable Democrat nominee (Schieffer, White, Sharp) would be favored for governor, and the Dem statewide ticket downballot would benefit. Takeover of the Texas House would be likely as well.
Reply »
John Johnson says:
I don’t know if I think Schieffer is old school or not Elsbeth. As I stated, I would like to hear what he has to say and how he says it.
I do know that Schieffer is not a cocky, brash, jekyll & hyde type. The two current candidates from the R side share some of these traits.
I don’t think that Schieffer would cater to the elite. I think that he might be a consensus builder who is capable of working both sides of the isle. I think that he would bring some civility to the job. I think his business background and ambassadorships would serve the state well.
Just my gut feelings … like I said, I would like to hear more about what he has to say and how he says it.
Reply »
irish83 Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Me thinks you need a vacation, John… typing “isle” instead of “aisle” is the first sign!
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Thanks for correcting me. It was definitely Freudian.
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
Burka needs to know that SOONER OR LATER, GOP dominance in this state will end in 2014 (once Perry wins reelection in 2010 to a 3rd full term) and Texas Democrats make their comeback by winning down-ballot statewide offices, plus taking back the Texas Legislature in not one, but both chambers.
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Bold predictions like you make, TD, are full of holes. The state Democratic party is in very poor shape, if you consider that woo’ing the independents in is what it is going to take to make you successful. You had better find others to support you than high dollar thieves in plantiff’s attorney clothing who shut down steel mills and worked out a deal with our state AG which paid them billons for doing nothing but copying what the state of Florida did. I’ve still got a burn going over that.
Reply »
Eric in Dallas says:
The report, I believe is accurate.
Among other things, it is why there is such a large number of Southern Conservative Democrats in Congress.
The GOP is committing political suicide by pushing itself too far to the right and by ignoring what works in the real world. When I was young, I was attracted to the GOP because they were “real businesspeople” who knew how to “get things done.” Now they are predominantly ideologues who spit out theory that is not connected to reality. People have not abandoned conservative fiscal principles as much as the GOP has failed to connect principle with reality.
While the Democrats have some areas of weakness, do not “misunderestimate” the Democrats in Texas or the South.
I speak as a former GOP member who is now an active Blue Dog Democrat. I know I disagree with a lot of folks in this Democratic tent, but the tent is big enough for me and for disagreement.
Will Rogers was right when he said that he was not a member of an organized political party because he was a Democrat. That will not change, but soon the Democrats will be winning some statewide races in Texas.
Reply »
Prince Royal says:
But what percentage of people have their fingers in their ears screaming “la-la-la-I’m not listening to you” when faced with different opinions? What percentage are the true believers–the litmus testers on the liberal and conservative sides that believe any compromise is bad? (You know, the GOP ones that hate Specter or the Dem ones that hate the blue dogs? Does the survey tell us that?
Reply »
Otis says:
I think the “age of centrism” is not accurate of what is going on with the rising number of “independents” who are not comfortable calling themselve Dem or Rep.
I find myself in that category. I just have no confidence that the system worked hard by the Dem and Rep produce the kinds of candidates that impress me.
I am not sure anyone who would impress me could reach the top of either ticket. I can’t get excited about any candidate that has to do the things a candidate has to do to get there. You can’t get to the top of either ticket without selling your soul to a variety of special interests.
I am a conservative leaning independent. I would support a left of center candidate who was a good person. No good person will do what they have to do to get elected these days. The disaffection will continue.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Eric,
Please do tell what “conservative fiscal principles” you find that stand out in the practices of the current presidential administration that you seem so enamored with? For intsance, do you think that higher taxes are a good prescription in a weak economy characterized by a high unemployment rate?
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Higher taxes for who?
Reply »
Calculatin' Coke says:
Since the days of Coke Stevenson, there has never been strong parties in Texas, only ad hoc confederations around the ambitions of individual candidates. It can only be an age of Texas centrism if someone can identify, organize and fund the centrists.
Reply »
slick says:
Karen Hughes is not high level political talent. Her role, and she performed it well, was to spend the early 90s beating up on anyone and everyone elected in Texas with a D behind their name. Pick up a newspaper from the era and every day, she’d be quoted with something negative to say about Gov. Richards or others, most of it half-truths that fed into some fear or apprehension. This was not Phi Beta Kappa work, but it was effective, and it made good copy for a pliant press corp.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
If it was so easy, why haven’t the Democrats been able to do it during TEN YEARS of a governor they think is a lightweight?
Reply »
Texas Democrat Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
Burka, maybe because Perry is being pressured by the Religious Right to bring up Voter ID (which is going to be passed one way or another) during the special session this summer as he seeks to join Shivers, Daniel, and Connally as the 4th Texas governor to serve 3 terms.
Reply »
Eric in Dallas says:
Anonymous:
First tell me what the GOP in the last 9 years has done for conservative business principles by taking President Clinton’s balanced budget (and 800 Billion surplus) and moving to a massive deficit of 1.2 Trillion deficit. Were does this 2 Trillion dollar swing come from?
Sure, recent studies show 37% of this swing was caused by the economic downturn, but all but 10% was caused by Bush Administration policies (tax cuts on the left side of the Laffer Curve and new spending). New Obama spending (including the Obama Stimulus package) accounts for only 10% of the swing, and this is 7/10 of this amount is temporary spending or temporary tax cuts in the stimulus bill (which was 1/3 tax cuts).
In other words, the vast majority (90%) of the difference between Clinton’s surplus and the current deficit is not Obama’s.
For the last 8 years, the only group that was consistently talking balanced budgets were Blue Dog Democrats. Where was the GOP then?
As for your specific questions; No, raising taxes in a recession is not good economics. A stimulus package that includes tax cuts for the vast majority of Americans is.
As far as future policies to balance the budget, making Pay-as-you-go the law is one good start. Getting the economy moving is a second priority. Insuring that the Stimulus package programs are allowed to end and not create “permanent programs” is also a must. But these items alone will barely get us halfway.
Gaining victory in Iraq and Afghanistan will also help (notice the falsely elevated Obama deficit numbers many cite are based on the fact that Obama moved both wars onto the budget, but Bush had both wars off-budget). We have started getting TARP Funds back – getting all the bailout funds would greatly help the debt, and lower debt payments will reduce the deficit.
Even with all of the above, we still would have only be about 2/3′s of the way home. The Heritage Foundation and liberal think tanks working together in the bipartisan Concord Coalition agree that ending government waste cannot bridge the remaining gap.
There are not too many options remaining which are politically tasteful options.
Now, do you have any real world solutions to bridge the Gap?
Reply »
Jeff Crosby says:
First, the Pew Poll says that Independents are more conservative than in the past. That doesn’t mean they are conservative like your average Republican. In fact, it would have been just as accurate to say they are less liberal than in the past.
The Republican Party is in a downward spiral nationally because its core messages have been discredited and their leaders are loons. In Texas, Republicans are obviously doing comparatively better, but the gap in party self-identification percentages continues to narrow.
Second, the Texas Democratic Party is not an amatuer operation. I have worked with TDP for more than 20 years, and I’ve seen the good, the bad and the horrible. Today, the party’s budget is larger than ever, which has allowed them to hire a large, professional staff that gets the job done.
With all due respect, Paul, you need to acquaint yourself with the current leadership and staff.
Third, the Democratic Party is not divided by rivalries. This was true during our nadir. It’s not today.
More importantly, just like the Democrats, Republicans have factions: the God Squad, Libertarians, Big Business and country clubbers (moderates). How well have these Republican factions been getting along lately? How many candidates are running against the current RPT chair?
In my experience, party rivalries worsen as party fortunes decline. In other words, the D’s will get more united while the Republicans will descend further into civil wars.
Fourth, Democrats are not incapable of winning statewide. That’s as ludicrous as saying Republicans are incapable of losing.
Are we ready to win statewide races in 2010? Hell, I don’t know, and neither does anyone else. Obviously we’ll need attractive candidates who can raise money. Otherwise, the outcomes will depend on too many unresolved or even unkowable factors.
None of this is easy, and only a fool would say it is. Both sides busted their collective arses in 2008, and the Democrats picked up seats in the Texas House and nearly took over Harris County. I suspect you’ll see more of the same in 2010 — up and down the ballot. It’s gonna be a helluva ride.
Reply »
Phillip Martin Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Paul Burka, June 7, 2008:
Reply »
Glenn Smith says:
Once again, Paul, you are so hung up on process and technique that you assume an equal playing field. It’s not like the playing board is swept clean every cycle and all the voters are once again available to the side that does the best.
For one thing, Texas Republicans have exploited a virulent conservative racism that’s turned our state into a backward, Third World place of ignorance and enforced poverty. It didn’t take “talent” on the GOP side to exploit racism and ignorance. It took an immoral disregard for the lives of Texans.
Let me tell you, it is far easier to exploit racism and greed than it is to defeat them.
Still, you are wrong about your prediction, and your petulant, uninformed comment about an “amateur operation” betrays your real agenda: protecting the GOP you were so gleefully pimping back in the late ’70s and ’80s.
They are your people, and they deserve, precisely, your continued defense. And nothing more.
As for a divided Democratic party, have you talked to any Republicans lately? Have you heard the moderate business types complain of Perry’s race-baiting “secession” talk? Did you listen to Sens. Corona and Deuell complain about the extremists in charge of the GOP in Texas?
Your transparent attempts to discourage investment in Texas Democrats is a disservice to the state. You may be sincere, you may be offering your best opinion based on your experience, but I have to really wonder what kind of Texas you want to leave behind.
After three decades of Best-and-Worst analyses, analyses that have, at least in the past, been influential, we have become just another Mississippi. In other words, your influence must share some of the blame. I thought Texas Monthly was devoted to a different vision of the Lone Star State.
Reply »
Sidd Finch Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Glenn –
I’m one of those independents that we’re talking about here. I’m certainly disappointed with the Republicans and I find myself looking more often to the Democrats to see if I can find areas of agreement with them. Voted for Obama after twice voting for GWB. I’m ready to listen to what the Texas Democrats have to say.
But Glenn, I have to say that you do your cause no favors with such an angry, mean-spirited, partisan rant. Most of all I want to hear about good policy choices from reasonable people; one of the things that drove me away from the R’s was its lean toward angry, extremist positions, and quite frankly I can’t tell much difference between those positions and the one you posted above. I mean, let’s be a little more careful about throwing out the “racism and greed” card, tone it down a little (actually, tone it down a lot), and tell me why I want to cross over.
Make your case because I’m ready to listen.
Reply »
Texas Ranger says:
Interesting. I don’t understand how a poll showing a massive and fairly sudden disaffiliation of voters from the Republican Party is in any way “bad news” for the Democrats. This is good news for Democrats. Period. There is nothing “bad” about having a larger subset of voters who are more amenable to your message.
Why has this post inspired so much commentary about the ineffectiveness of the Democratic establishment? I think the only lesson today is that it’s the *Republican* brand that’s busted, and that it’s by most counts headed for years of increasing irrelevance.
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 11:21 am
It also stands to reason that quite a few left-leaning independents (and embittered liberals embarrassed by their party’s inadequacy over the last decade) will now more readily admit to being actual Democrats, which also would make the ‘Independent’ voter profile look more conservative.
There’s an interesting study to be done on last years’ presidential #s here in Texas. Obama was ~+700,000 over Kerry’s 2004 total, while McCain was ~-45,000 from Bush’s 2004 final. and about 675,000 more total votes in 2008. One would be tempted to say the Democrats swept that entire increase, but how much of Obama’s +700K was from urban/suburban moderates who swung away from Bush and the Rs, and how much was new voters? And if BO took significant R votes from 2004 (and I think it’s clear that he did), where did the GOP make up that loss? Did the GOP in fact bring out more ‘new’ voters (didn’t vote in 2004) than the Democrats? And how many of them will return in 2010?
The Rs dropoff downballot tells me maybe not. In the middle of the ballot – RR Comm & SCOTEX, the most telling in terms of base vote – the Rs lost nearly ~500K from McCain’s total, while the D’s lost only about 100-150K. Obama’s voters filled in and stuck with their party most of the way; many more R voters went off the reservation downballot, or simply pulled the lever for McCain & maybe Cornyn, and walked away. This anomaly is exploitable, IMO, for the right Dem candidate.
In the big picture, it appears the GOP has peaked and is now treading water, while Dems pick up independents (reliable voters) and still have tremendous growth potential, particularly in heavily Hispanic areas where turnout was relatively low last 2 cycles.
Reply »
John Johnson says:
I think you are dead wrong, Ranger. The people leaving the R team arent’ being drawn by something that the D team is doing right. There are radicals on both ends of the spectrum who most folks just don’t want to listen to anymore; and certainly don’t want to have their name associated with.
A prime example in national politics is Palin on one side and Pelosi on the other. Is this the best we can do? In Texas, we have Perry & KBH on one side and who on the other? No one. Just a fractured bunch of bit players.
The R’s are, indeed, losing ground, but it’s not to the D’s. It is strictly to the middle.
My opinion, of course.
Reply »
General Sam Houston says:
Glenn Smith never misses an opportunity to be petty, personal, offensive, nasty, and downright repulsive. Instead of arguing his point, he questions the motivation and honesty of anyone holding a different opinion, as if Glenn Smith was the only ethical person in the room. And he wonders why nobody listens to him. Does any Democrat still think he’s effective?
Reply »
Anonymous says:
These poll numbers are about the break-up of the old Republican coalition: (1) The Rs who aren’t members of the Flat Earth Society (FES) aren’t so happy with the marriage anymore because the public is too educated now and the FES is a weight around their necks; (2) The Rs who are “fiscal conservatives” are disaffected, too, even though most still won’t own up to the fact that their beloved Ronald Reagan was anything but a “fiscal conservative” and that George W. Bush just followed in his footsteps.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
OK, Anon … say we give you the benefit of the doubt and allow all your opinions to be placed into play. Are we better off with King O at the helm? If your answer is “yes”, please let me know how. He’s giving our money away, doesn’t know where it is being used, or how it is being used;
the jobs that were supposed to be created haven’t been; the hedgefunders that were supposed to rained in, haven’t been; his party wants to look backwards and spend precious time trying to get Cheney into jail rather than address the wall of problems in front of us; he wants to initiate an energy policy that will further drive us toward financial ruin. We are all standing around with our fingers crossed hoping that he knows something that the rest of us don’t, because commonsense tells us that the dog is going to hit the end of the chain shortly; commonsense tells us that we can’t spend our way out of debt. Commonsense tells me that we are going to crash and burn.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
June 10th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
My answer is “yes.” GWB and the GOP had 8 years to get us into this hole. And just like it took Clinton awhile to turn the Reagan economic mess around (and he did), it’s going to take Obama awhile, too (and he will). But Obama inherited an even worse mess than Clinton. It’s been less than 6 months, and most of those who are screaming and kicking now just wanted him to fail in the first place. (And the Newtster’s already decided he’s failed — give me a break!)
Reply »
Anonymous says:
P.S. We already hit the end of the chain — it happened just before the election, when GWB was still in office.
Reply »
dickbird says:
It’s Bush’s fault? We’ve heard it before. Quit looking back. You answered “yes”, but you didn’t answer the follow up question.
Absolutely nothing that O promised after handing our money out has come to pass.
No new jobs created that we know about, so now they are telling us that they have SAVED umpteen million jobs. This is just straight out and out bullshit. How do you determine when a job is “saved”. It’s more of the same. Quit making excuses.
You can’t spead money you don’t have to get out of debt. I know – I’ve tried it before.
Now, can we get back on topic?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 8:11 am
I’m thinking you voted for someone else and are invested in criticizing Obama no matter what. I’m totally ok with waiting a couple of years and seeing where we are then. Unusual circumstances (yes, Bush’s fault) demand unusual remedies. And the circumstances changed drastically just before the election, so campaign promises and expectations did in fact have to change. Give your partisan rhetoric a rest and let it be long enough to see whether what Obama is doing works or not. If you’re in business, I’m guessing that you know it takes more than 6 months to know whether something new is going to work or not. You gave Bush years to finally get it right in Iraq — a place we never should have been in the first place.
Reply »
John Johnson Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Forget about what caused the problems, Anon. All we should be concerned about now is trying to fix them. What I think many are saying, including those that still have overall good feelings about Obama, is that a plan to spend more money to get out of debt is ludicrous. Our OBM even disputes the figures that Obama’s staff is throwing out.
You can tell us that you have faith in Obama’s economic ideas, but the majority of Americans, both Repub’s and Dem’s, think otherwise, as recent polls attest.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
John, here’s the problem I have with all the Obama critics: Obama’s spending spree was necessitated by the economic conditions created by the George Bush Administration. Virtually everyone with any economic expertise said that putting more money into the system was what was required. Sometimes governments have to do what they have to do in order to get the economy back on track — then, when the economic machine gets rolling again, government can back off. The policies espoused by Obama’s critics are Hooveresque and destined only to make things worse instead of better. It may be that we ultimately have to deal with inflation as a result of current spending, but the alternative is a depression. I’ll take inflation any day.
Anonymous says:
Let’s have this discussion in June 2010 – if nationwide unemployment is at 10.5% (as some economists are predicting) then Obama may be an anchor around the neck of Texas Democrats that will drown them – and poor Glenn Smith will either be working to elect California Democrats or managing a Burger King.
And I’d still like to know what mental health facility Texas Democrat is a guest of…
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Who is Glenn Smith? Is he a character in a Rand novel? Is he kin to John Galt?
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Anon, I’m NOT a mentally challenged person, you HATE me because I’m Hispanic of Argentine descent.
Obama will NOT damage the Democrats in 2010 as they will pick-up Senate seats in NC, NH, OH, MO, and KY, plus picking up governorships in CA, HI, NV, RI, Minn, AL, GA (if Barnes is the nominee), AZ, CT, and FL.
Reply »
Calculatin' Coke says:
Take the Obama debate to Fox.com or CNN.com. This is for Texas politics.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
No, CC, it’s about a Pew poll that looked at the proportion of Ds, Rs, and Is nationally.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Says who? Are you Burka’s sergeant at arms?
Reply »
Texas Democrat Reply:
June 11th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
You must be a BITTER Texas Independent who doesn’t want the Democrats to succeed in the state anytime soon, do you ?
Bill White’s got a good shot at winning KBH’s Senate seat whenever she quits maybe this fall.
Reply »