Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Initial comments on Tuesday's election; warning the GOP not to fool themselves



While waiting for the breakdown of who voted for whom yesterday, there are some broad, initial observations:
It was an election of demographics and get out the vote techniques.   Verification of some early pundit analyses and exit polls will await pollsters and political scientists combing through election night results. Nonetheless, here are some probable factors that led to Obama’s victory that leap out at us the morning after.
Per exit polls, the Latino vote that once went 40% to Republicans went over 70% to Democrats and their absolute numbers increased.  It was particularly evident in Florida where the non-Cuban vote turned out in strength, and the Latino turnout played a role in turning Virginia and Nevada blue.   The Colorado Latino vote is as yet not analyzed, but was a likely a factor in Colorado’s keeping its trend of the past couple of years of turning from red and purple to blue.
  It was not so much that Obama won the Latino vote as the GOP lost it.  True, Latinos were disappointed that the President had not put immigration reform on his priority list. Obama did  partially offset the disappointment  by administrative edicts putting into effect  the Dream Act and on resetting the deportation  policy to give priority to deporting   criminals, giving  the law abiding, undocumented  some breathing room.
 However, Republicans in the primary and in state legislatures like Colorado had shown hostility toward those not liked them, especially opposing a path to citizenship for Latinos with venom calling it “amnesty”.   Hispanics took it as inferring all illegals were criminals. Romney promoted supporting policies that were so anti-immigrant that they would “self deport” to their native homes. The GOP opposition to the Dream Act was viewed by Hispanics as heartless. Arizona type “show me your documents” laws added to Latino’s support of Democrats. Romney  embraced the Arizona law, stumbled over his hiring undocumented contractors,  and was unable effectively to shed  the impression he was anti Latino by contending near the end of the campaign that  he only supported the e-verify portion part of the Arizona law, but not the rest.
 Even if Republicans compromise on the “amnesty” position in immigration reform in the next four years, the bitter taste may linger through future election cycles.  History may repeat itself…It possibly may be like Democrats’ support of civil rights legislation that turned post-civil war Republican African Americans into dedicated Democrats.  It is possible  2012’s  Republican’s legacy will be a loss of Latino votes for some time in  the future as the Latino population continues to increase their percentage of registered voters.
The voter suppression efforts of Republican Secretaries of State backfired, especially among the African American population who viewed that action as a continuation of their civil rights’ struggle they should overcome. Cutting down early voting hours, especially on Sundays, made it harder for the poor and older African Americans to vote and it resulted in long lines in the few voting sites. The proof of citizenship based on a government issued ID was a direct challenge to Hispanic voters, an insulting inference that if a person looked “Mexican”, that person was probably unqualified to vote.  The suppression efforts became a rallying cry for minorities to turn out to vote.  They had marched before to secure their rights and now they stood in lines for hours.
The gender gap played the most obvious role   in the election of several women to the Senate, defeating their Republican opponents who had taken extreme positions on women’s health. If the GOP does not take that evidence seriously and if they continue to claim that the women’s vote was only motivated by the economy, they are fooling themselves in most instances. There is an exception.  Elizabeth Warren’s victory in Massachusetts was owed not so much to the gap, but to a Senate seat returning to its Democratic roots and her populist, popular pro consumer positions on issues, especially Wall Street Reform.  However, Massachusetts has been known to be hostile to female candidates in the past so that Warren’s victory could be seen as an increased acceptance of women politicians in that state.
The Ohio voter results ran contrary to the gender gap argument, too, as Obama increased his margins in the auto manufacturing centers, per Chuck Todd on MSNBC this AM.  White working class men in the Midwest voted for Obama at a higher rate than that same demographic in the rest of the country. This was the fallout from Romney’s unfortunate letter a couple of years ago to the New York Times and doubling down on his position in 2012…to let the auto industry go bankrupt.  He could never shake it. The nail in the coffin appeared to be his Hail Mary attempt to claim that Jeep jobs were going to China, when it was called a lie by everyone more informed, even auto manufacturing executives, and then continuing to run the ad even after that. It exposed him as willing to promote a known lie if it served his purpose. It was a comment on his character, a verification of what many had suspected or charged him with earlier, his willingness to stretch the truth or to say whatever was necessary to get elected.
Youth?  Comments heard on TV this morning indicate that in Colorado the young voters turned out for Obama even at a higher rate than in 2008 so that the apathy that conservative pundits had touted was their wishful thinking.  No doubt the winning ballot issue in Colorado, legalization of pot, motivated more youth than usual to go to the polls. 
Fox pundits who contend that Romney lost the race solely because Superstorm Sandy stopped his momentum are also fooling themselves. It may have been a factor, but it was not the determining or the only one. Obama was in peril; he could have fumbled the response to the storm and he did not.  New Jersey’s Republican Governor Chris Christie’s heartfelt expressions of gratitude and praise of Obama accomplished one thing if indeed Sandy was a factor: it showed Obama and a Romney supporter could come together and put politics aside…a wish shared by so many of us.  It also gave an opportunity for Obama to correct the impression the GOP tried to spread that Obama was a weak leader so  it repaired some of  the damage Obama did to himself in that first debate. However, for those in the Midwest and in the West, Sandy did not have the impact as much as did demographics and policies that were preferred by the middle class.   Many had voted before Sandy happened and the polls showed basic consistency on the issues and attitudes that persisted through Tuesday. 
Going forward is a topic that deserves some serious attention, and a future column will be devoted to the subject.







No comments:

Post a Comment