Data Matters
Waiting For A Wave That
May Never Come
By Michael Hais
Claiming to be the
"first independent
analyst to push the
argument that Democrats
would likely suffer
significantly higher
midterm losses than
average for the party in
power," Charlie Cook now
expresses some doubt
about his prediction
that 2010 will see a
wave election similar to
that of 1994 in which
the Republican Party
swept overwhelmingly to
control of Congress. The
primary cause of Cook's
recent uncertainty is
the results of last
week's special election
to fill the seat in
Pennsylvania's 12th
congressional district
left vacant by the death
of 18-term Democratic
Representative John
Murtha. Murtha's
legislative assistant,
Mark Critz, won that
election for the
Democrats in a district
considered ripe for a
Republican takeover.
Overwhelmingly populated
by working class whites
that have been trending
away from the Democratic
Party for decades, it
was the
only congressional
district in the
nation to vote for
Democrat John Kerry in
2004 and Republican John
McCain in 2008.
Cook and other
inside-the-Beltway
observers attributed the
Critz win (the 11th
consecutive Democratic
victory in a special
congressional election)
to a large turnout of
Democrats brought to the
polls by a hotly
contested U.S. Senate
primary, a superior
Democratic ground game
and get-out-the-vote
effort, and more
appealing and persuasive
TV advertising by Critz
than his Republican
opponent's. Undoubtedly,
all of those factors
contributed to what DC
pundits saw as a
Democratic upset.
But, what happened last
week in Pennsylvania 12
might not be the upset
that many in Washington
believe it to be. That's
because, as we have been
saying in this space for
the past year, 2010 is
not 1994 and the chances
of a Republican wave
building off shore are
far lower now than they
were then.
For one thing, the
United States is a
much different country
demographically than it
was in 1994. A decade
and a half ago, over
three quarters of
Americans were white.
That number has dropped
to just over 60% now and
is on the way to falling
below 50% by the
midcentury. In
particular, the
percentage of Latinos in
the U.S. population has
nearly doubled (from
about 9% to 16%) over
the same period. In
addition, half of a new
generation-Millennials
(born 1982-2003), the
largest and most diverse
generation in American
history-has joined the
electorate.
All of these changes
have worked to the
advantage of the
Democratic Party and are
should continue to do so
in the future. In NDN's
February survey of the
21st century American
electorate, Millennials
identified as Democrats
over Republicans by a
2:1 margin (42% vs. 21%)
and non-Caucasians did
so by over 4:1 (57% vs.
14%). Women also
strongly identified as
Democrats (44% vs. 24%
Republicans). By the
way, the other half of
the Millennial
Generation, all those
now under 18, already
live in a world where
whites are in the
minority, promising an
even larger Democratic
edge in the future.
At least in part as a
result of these major
demographic changes, the
Democratic Party now
holds a clear lead among
voters in party
identification,
something it did not
have in 1994. In the
most recent
Pew national survey
(pdf) released earlier
this week, the Democrats
enjoy a nine-percentage
edge over the
Republicans in party ID
(45% vs. 36%). In 1994,
the two parties were
tied at 44% each and in
1995, the year after the
GOP won control of
Congress, more Americans
identified with or
leaned to the Republican
Party than the Democrats
(46% vs. 43%).
Moreover, while it is
true that attitudes
toward the Democratic
Party have declined
during 2010, contrary to
1994 the Republican
Party is not seen as a
viable alternative by
most voters. In 1994
favorable ratings of the
Democratic Party fell in
Pew's surveys from 61%
when Bill Clinton was
elected president in
1992 to 50% by the time
of the midterm election.
In that same time
period, positive
perceptions of the
Republican Party
increased dramatically
from 46% to 67%. While
Pew's
March 2010 survey
(pdf) showed Democrats
with only a 40%
favorable rating, down
from 57% in the fall of
2008, positive attitudes
toward the GOP also
declined since President
Barack Obama's election
from 40% to 37%, still
leaving the Democrats
with a slight advantage.
These demographic
changes and attitudinal
configurations have put
the Democratic Party in
a stronger position now
than in 1994 to hold off
a possible Republican
wave. Furthermore, as
they have enacted major
portions of the Obama
agenda, Congressional
Democrats have improved
their standing in
comparison to
Republicans on the
generic ballot since
earlier this year. All
of the public surveys
conducted during the
past week show the
Democrats with at least
a modest lead. Over the
last few months there
has been a net shift of
six-points toward the
Democratic Party.
|
|
March/April
Democratic
Preference
|
March/April
Republican
Preference
|
May
Democratic
Preference
|
May
Republican
Preference
|
|
Gallup |
44% |
48% |
47% |
46% |
|
CNN |
45% |
49% |
47% |
46% |
|
Quinnipiac |
39% |
44% |
42% |
36% |
|
Average |
43% |
47% |
45% |
43% |
An examination of a few
key findings from some
recent polls shows why
that shift has occurred.
First, while voters do
not yet believe that
America has returned yet
to prosperity, there is
a clear perception of
progress. In the
Quinnipiac survey,
the number believing
that the nation's
economy is getting
better rose from 19% in
April 2009 and 28% last
December to 32% now. The
belief that the economy
is worsening is down
from 32% to 24% over the
same period. President
Obama is getting some of
the credit for the
perceived improvement in
the economy. His
approval score for
handling the economy is
up from 39% in March
2010 to 44% currently.
More specifically, the
percentage approving of
President Obama's
performance in creating
jobs has risen from a
low of 34% last January
to 40% in May.
Second, after a year of
rancor, voters are
increasingly positive
about the Democratic
health care reform plan
that passed Congress and
was signed by the
president in March.
According to a recent
CBS News poll,
approval of the plan
rose from only 32% in
early March to 43% in
May. As a result, the
president's approval
rating for handling
health care in the
Quinnipiac poll has
risen from a low of 35%
in January and February
to 45% now.
As proof that nothing
succeeds like success,
the perception of an
improving economy and
the increasingly
positive reactions to
the newly enacted health
care reform law have led
to the most favorable
job approval scores for
both the president and
congressional Democrats
this year. For most of
2010, in the Quinnipiac
poll, a slightly greater
percentage of voters
disapproved than
approved of the way
President Obama was
handling his job. But in
May, for the first time
since early February the
president's approval
score was in positive
ground (48% approve vs.
43% disapprove). Over
the same time frame, the
job performance approval
of congressional
Democrats has gone up
from 28% to 34%. By
contrast, the approval
score for congressional
Republicans is down from
a high of 34% in March
to only 26% in May.
Of course, none of this
should be taken as an
indication that the road
forward to November for
the Democrats will be
smooth and easy.
Historically, during a
president's first term
his party suffers on
average a midterm loss
of about 25 seats in the
House and half dozen in
the Senate. Only once,
in 1934 when voters
overwhelmingly endorsed
Franklin Roosevelt and
his New Deal, did a
president's party make
first term midterm
congressional gains. In
addition, the enthusiasm
and involvement of
Democratic voters
continues to trail that
of Republicans, although
the Democratic Party's
legislative successes
have lessened that gap
over the past couple of
months and continued
progress on matters like
financial and
immigration reform
should reduce it even
further.
Still, in spite of the
challenges ahead, the
forecast of another
Democratic election
disaster like that of
1994 seems premature and
unlikely in today's
changed demographic and
political environment.
Those expecting a wave
may well be left
standing on the shore
vainly waiting for a
high tide that will
never come.
