Presumably alarmed by the perceived tilt of today’s Democratic Party, Nate Cohn and Kevin Quealy have an article in the New York Times analyzing the actual political beliefs of Democrats and they’re somewhat different than the advance press might have led you to believe:
In reality, the Democratic electorate is both ideologically and demographically diverse. Over all, around half of Democratic-leaning voters consider themselves “moderate†or “conservative,†not liberal. Around 40 percent are not white.
Roughly a quarter of Democrats count as ideologically consistent progressives, who toe the party line or something further to the left on just about every issue. Only a portion of them, perhaps 1 in 10 Democrats over all, might identify as Democratic socialists, based on recent polls.
Traditional liberals — another relatively white, well-educated bloc of Democrats — are also overrepresented on social media. They’re united with the progressive activists on the issues that divide Republicans and Democrats. They split on whether American society is fundamentally and unacceptably unjust, with liberals optimistic about compromise and satisfied with a cautious approach, and progressives demanding bolder action to redress injustice in society.
The article has lots of eye-catching infographics.
Get that? About 30% of Americans consider themselves Democrats and about a quarter of those AKA 8% are democratic socialists. Quite a voting bloc.
I also think that the authors fail to appreciate just how conservative many black voters are. Assuming that black voters will simply salute and vote faithfully for whatever candidates the party puts forward is a dangerous strategy. That was reflected in the recent mayoral primary elections here. More black Chicagoans voted for the most conservative candidate running for mayor than for either of the two black candidates running against each other in the general election. Voter turnout was catastrophically low.
My explanation for low voter turnout is not disinterest but something more like resignation or even despair. Candidates who don’t really resonate with the Democratic rank and file will only carry the party so far.
“Get that? About 30% of Americans consider themselves Democrats and about a quarter of those AKA 8% are democratic socialists. Quite a voting bloc.”
Unfortunately, in our two party system Democrats will have a choice between Trump and whoever gets the Democratic nomination. We could easily see an unpopular candidate get the nomination – after all, Trump won the nomination and general and I don’t think his positives were ever above 50%.
The way to get more Trump is for Democrats to keep doing what they’re doing.
The Democrats are just doing what the GOP did that resulted in Trump, though I think not quite to the same degree. I think the extremes on the left are a smaller percentage than the extremes on the right. Will admit that is hard to tell since once a POTUS is in office since the party generally closes ranks. It is possible that there are a significant number of Republicans who are genuinely unhappy with some of the really awful things Trump has done, we just wouldn’t know since they dont speak up, even anonymously. (The Never Trumpers are pretty much gone in case no one has noticed.)
Steve
Steve
I still think the 2020 election is likely to be like the 2018 Florida Gubinatorial – a contest between two unpopular candidates nominated by activists minorities in each party. It will be a battle of the weak and the negative IMO.
which has worked out so well for Republicans.
My candidate for surprise plot twist that affects the 2020 election; the surprisingly high approval ratings of the Florida governor – https://www.orlandosentinel.com/politics/os-ne-ron-desantis-voter-approval-poll-20190313-story.html
As to the Democratic nomination race; until voters start tuning in the fall it is not clear what they think.
It’s interesting you mention that, curious. There was a piece on radio just this morning on him. In short, so far so good. They love him. Reasons? Water is really the more appropriate label than environment. Lots of water and water management issues down here. Second, he has this curious habit of focusing on what he promised in the campaign. Funny that. A politician following through.
Water isn’t much of an issue nationally but it will be. Consider, for example, a California that just doesn’t have enough water for all of its people.
And AZ.
FL knows how to move water very well. They are trying to figure out what to do with runoff and flows from Lake Oc south.
Nearly all of the Western states have water problems and many of those problems are interlocking. It’s a wonder that any water makes its way from the sources of the Colorado River to its outlet in the Gulf of California. The Rio Grande has a similar issue.
Guarneri:
Those sinkholes don’t just come from immaculate conception. Too much groundwater is being pulled out.
“which has worked out so well for Republicans.”
They won.
Steve
They lost the House, some governor’s mansions, and net seats in state legislatures. Basically, Trump is an even bigger disaster for the Republican Party than Obama was for the Democrats.
There’s plenty of water in the west for people to drink – agriculture remains by far the biggest water user and tension between agricultural and urban use play into the urban-rural political divides in much of the western US.
In California there is also tension between the North and the South. Southern California obtains most of its water from the North.
In “California there is also tension between the North and the South. Southern California obtains most of its water from the North.”
This year N. CA got too much rain water, and the southern portion received more than it’s used to getting. The snow packs are over 150% of normal. The reservoirs are almost full, with more to come when the snow pack melts.
What we still don’t have, though, is state governance that will proactively build new reservoirs and seek additional ways to collect water in the “good” years. Instead, former Gov. Brown spent his time on the train to no where and other impossibly expensive social upgrades. His replacement in 2018, another democrat, muses about college for all and some kind of universal health care plan, as he continues to protect our unpopular sanctuary state status in order to attract even more illegal immigrants to a state already having the highest number in the country (including the component of high welfare).
California can’t quite come to terms with the reality that its population will need water whether it’s a heavy rain/snow year or not.
I might add how disappointed I am in the hubris and increasing hypocrisy of the democrat party. The current crop of candidates, IMO, are flamboyantly embarrassing and out of step with what I think represents this country’s values. However, if one of them wins they will certainly fit in nicely with the democrats now empowered in the House. Â
Just as an example of the pathetic conduct of the left, I just watched a Real Clear Politics video clip on Candace Owens testifying before the House and how they disingenuously and disrespectfully treated her appearance there. Jerry Nadler’s condescension and Rep Lieu’s dishonesty are timely examples of the unsavory behavior that 100% turns me off. Turkey vultures are what they remind me of….Â
I don’t believe that’s true. What I think is true is that there are groups with drastically different values living cheek-by-jowl with one another. That’s what “multiculturalism” means, no?
What we’re trying to determine is whether multiculturalism is stable, whether it can persist within a country without its people going to war with one another.
Dave, CA has experienced ups and downs in it’s years of over-hydration vs drought. Conveniently, the latest drought has been re-purposed as more evidence of unchecked global warming — although, such a premise has been disputed and attributed more to changing trade winds etc. However, what always stays constant in this state are battles between the dems and Rs over the prioritization of funds. Infrastructure improvements that are direly needed (dams, roads, electric grid, replacement of old sewers and water systems) seem to occupy the bottom of such lists (unless a crisis arises), while social and environmental demands are front and center.
It’s frustrating to live here and watch how lame our one-party state has become in making frugal but imperative decisions in how CA functions.
Dave,
Each to his own opinion on how these democrat hopefuls are viewed. However, I don’t see how “cheek-by-jowl” living is entirely responsible for such irresponsible and sometimes outlandish remarks made by the majority of these presidential candidates.
I also find it mind-blowing, with all the trials and tribulations going on in the rest of the world (Venezuela, France, Mexico, even Canada with it’s health care delays) — on what is not working — how these people can encourage the US to basically take the same ideological, policy paths.
“However, I don’t see how “cheek-by-jowl†living is entirely responsible for such irresponsible and sometimes outlandish remarks made by the majority of these presidential candidates.”
This coming from a Trump supporter. Also, since I cannot pass up on health care, remember that Canadians like their health care system much more than we like ours. It covers everyone and most of what you hear is bad about it is stuff that is actually just made up by right wing think tankers and blogs. Suggesting that we follow the same path that would result in 30% lower spending, everyone covered, and health care at about the same quality hardly seems like folly.
Steve
Steve,
If there was someone better to support than Trump I would do so — no matter what party they are representing. Party affiliation is becoming more and more unimportant to me. In fact, in 2008 I had high hopes for Obama. However, that was the last year I have ever supported a democrat. And, the way the D party is going I doubt I will ever vote for a dem again, I am so disenchanted and disgusted with them.
As for healthcare in Canada, It’s not as great as you say it is. The wait times are horrendous. And, many Canadians come across the border for more timely care in the US. Our problem in the US is primarily cost. But with zero cooperation between parties, cost is overridden by ideology every time in creating better policy or approaches to healthcare access and individual affordability. As far as the popularity of Obamacare, it has not engaged the numbers that were originally predicted it would. Plus, there are various reports of Doctor burnout — the main reason cited being all the paperwork and electronic reports required of them, mandated by Obamacare, taking time away from meaningful face time with patients.