The most objective periodic study of the American electorate has now been updated for 2011. The findings are neither new nor surprising: the nation is divided right down the middle politically and it is impossible to predict how things will turn out.
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press has issued its fifth major snapshot of the nation since 1987 using a voter “typology” that ranks Americans going across the political spectrum as: Staunch Conservatives, Main Street Republicans, Libertarians, Disaffecteds, Post Moderns, New Coalition Democrats, Hard-Pressed Democrats and Solid Liberals. The groups are roughly similar in size but the first four groups tend to vote Republican and the rest go Democratic. A ninth group is called Bystanders who do not vote at all. The actual Pew percentages in each category could be questioned but there appears to be a slight Democratic party registration edge but a greater likelihood that Republicans will actually vote.
Staunch Conservatives are socially traditional, economically free market and pro-military. Main Streeters tend to hold similar values but are much more pragmatic in applying them. Interestingly, while voters have increasingly deserted political parties and turned independent this has not led to more moderation. Indeed, the Independent Libertarians are as ideological as the Conservatives and vote as highly GOP as do the Main Street Republicans. Not surprisingly the Libertarians are more anti-government and deregulatory than the Main Streeters (but not the Conservatives) and a majority of them even say religion is important in their lives and oppose homosexual marriage—although less than the other GOP groups; and a plurality are less anti-abortion.
In general, all four Republican-leaning groups believe national government spending is wasteful—but so do Hard-Pressed Democrats—the difference is that the right wants to cut that power back. Unlike the Hard-Pressed who will rarely desert the Democratic Party, Independent Disaffecteds lean more to the Republican Party but are more liberal in supporting national government aid to the poor. Both Main Street Republicans and Disaffecteds are critical of corporations, with the former more wealthy group quite supportive of environmental regulation even if it means lost jobs. Only Staunch Conservatives and Libertarians have any great interest in reforming Social Security or Medicare. Even Libertarians are not convinced cuts in spending will create new jobs.
On the other side of the political fence, only the Solid Liberals are ideologically progressive across the board and are positive about government intervention. Independent Post Moderns are socially liberal, well-educated, financially-secure and support environmental regulation over creating jobs. Post Moderns (and Hard-Pressed Democrats) desert the Liberals by questioning affirmative action and they worry about debt even if incurring it would help the poor. Conversely, New Coalition minorities and Hard-Pressed whites want more aid to the poor and are suspicious that environmentalism costs jobs. Both political parties are split over immigration. The Democratic New Coalition and the Hard-Pressed have substantial policy differences with the Liberals but they simply do not trust Republicans and thus tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic.
The recent Republican loss of the 26th Congressional District special election in New York over reforming Medicare was prefigured in the Pew poll. Republican primary voters support reforms like those offered by Rep. Paul Ryan but once independents and Democrats get to vote things get dicey. Actually, Ryan’s is a very modest proposal and will have no positive or negative effect on Medicare for ten years. Even then, the changes are modest. President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act is much more radical. It sets Budget targets that allow an Independent Payment Advisory Board to devise ways to slow spending and to recommend to Congress that Medicare actually be cut. If Congress refuses to act or cannot secure a majority in both houses, the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary must cut spending. This is rationing in all but name. The voters were not told this in the New York race and with the electorate’s innate skepticism about government, the results were preordained.
Newt Gingrich’s fear that voters were not ready for Medicare reform was well-founded but suicidal once expressed publically. Almost every House Republican had already voted for it and most of its Senators joined them a few days later. Its primary voters are supportive too and it is unlikely a dissenting presidential candidate could be nominated. The Republicans are stuck with Medicare like it or not. The good news in the Pew survey is that this might not matter. A majority in all the categories except the Solid Liberals concede the deficit to be a problem that needs to be addressed. More important, there are almost one-fifth in the Democrat groups who are strongly opposed to the president’s record and leaning toward voting Republican if given a reason to do so.
GOP success will require a simple but difficult strategy. The natural process in a presidential election is for it to be a referendum on the incumbent president, especially when he is running himself. Did he do a good enough job to deserve reelection for his party or not? That tendency must be turned into the whole campaign to make the strategy successful. The platform is important too but decidedly secondary. What is essential is to make the whole election a referendum on how well President Obama performed. The Republican candidate needs to have a sound record and be conservative enough for the base but he need be no superstar. Indeed, these often have just as large negatives as positives.
As many have warned, it is necessary to better explain the Republican Medicare plan but only in juxtaposition to Obama’s which is more ruinous; so the case can be made. The same critical minority that is worried about the GOP plan is worried about the Obama one too, especially the Post-Moderns and Hard-Pressed Democrats. No one likes the idea of government rationing. No other issue really matters except as used to motivate the base, which with the close electoral division will be essential and should use targeted rather than mass communication. All mass media spending must make the case that the Obama record on jobs, prosperity and health care has been disastrous and must be corrected with a more optimistic and positive Republican plan based on less regulation and more growth.
The electorate is closely divided but in the present economy the odds are against the incumbent. It is up to the Republicans to decide if this opportunity will be realized.
