Britain and America

Richer Americans are Democrats

An article in The Washington Times alerted me to research from 6th November by Michael Franc at The Heritage Foundation.  Mr Franc shows that the wealthiest Americans are increasingly likely to vote Democrat:

"Democrats now control the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional jurisdictions. More than half of the wealthiest households are concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats control both Senate seats.  This new political demography holds true in the House of Representatives, where the leadership of each party hails from different worlds. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, represents one of America's wealthiest regions. Her San Francisco district has more than 43,700 high-end households. Fewer than 7,000 households in the western Ohio district of House Republican leader John Boehner enjoy this level of affluence."

And if that's surprising to some we should also remember the recent Arthur Brooks research that showed that conservatives give more to good causes:

"People who identify themselves as conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.  It is not that conservatives have more money. Liberal families average 6 percent higher incomes than conservative families." (Thomas Sowell for RealClearPolitics).

To greater and lesser extents the same breakdown of the income-voting relationship is happening across the world.  The path to conservative voters is not necessarily along a gravel path anymore.  George W Bush had to win over the soccer moms.  John Howard won four times with the votes of 'battlers' - and lost the premiership when they deserted him.  Stephen Harper has his 'Tim Horton' voters.  Electoral coalition-building is much more interesting as values compete with income as a determinant of voting behaviour.

Is America turning left?

That's the question asked on the cover of this week's Economist. 
A three page briefing includes the following evidences for the contention that there might be a leftwards drift:

• Republican pessimism: 40% of GOP supporters think that the Democrats will win in 2008 but just 12% of Democrats think the GOP will win.
• Less motivated Republicans: Only 36% of Republicans are content with their presidential candidates compared to 61% of Democrats.
• Superior Democrat fundraising: Clinton and Obama - the two leading Democrat candidates for the White House - raised nearly twice as much money as the two leading Republican hopefuls.
• An underlying increase in support for government: The number of Americans who believe that government should help the needy even if that means greater debt has risen from 41% in 1994 to 54% today.
• Democrat-friendly demographics: Only 35% of today's 18 to 25s identify with the Republicans compared to 55% in 1991.  70% of Hispanics voted Democrat in 2006.

The Economist believes that the Republican coalition is weak for a combination of factors.  It highlights the difficulties of the war in Iraq, disagreements with the President on immigration and anger at the failure of the White House and the Tom Delay Congress to control spending.

BritainAndAmerica is not as pessimistic about Republican prospects in the near term.  Here are some grounds for GOP optimism:

• Even at this low point for Republicans, with George W Bush's approval ratings at historical lows, the leading GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani is competitive in opinion polls with Hillary Clinton.  The former New York Mayor's reputation for competence, his tough stance on security and his record of fiscal discipline allow him to present himself as an antidote to Bush's failings.
• There are some signs that Iraq may be turning a corner thanks to the Petraeus surge.  Support for the surge is up to 31% amongst US voters from 22% last month.  If the situation in Iraq really starts to improve - and that remains a big 'if' - the Democrat campaign for early withdrawal will backfire.
• Growing tensions between Clinton and Obama present the possibility that the Democrats may not go into 2008 united.  The powerful netroots of the party may also find it difficult to unite behind any one candidate.
• The underlying attitudes to government aren't as bad as The Economist suggests either.  As BritainAndAmerica highlighted last week: (i) By 57% to 29% Americans believe that government makes it harder for people to get ahead in life; (ii) 62% also believe that things run by government tend to be wasteful and inefficient; and (iii) 83% believe that government would be more likely to waste any more money it had rather than spend it well.  Those attitudes still provide US Republicans with a lot to work with.

'An Election Like No Other'?

US News & World Report has a cover feature this week which identifies the five factors that purportedly make the 2008 race for the White House "an election like no other":

The changed primary process: historically the primary process - where registered party members in states vote for their preferred nominee - has been an extended affair.  It begins with votes in Iowa and then New Hampshire and the primary votes get gradually bigger and faster thereafter.  The virtue of this timetable was that insurgent candidates without big money could earn traction through low-budget, door-to-door canvassing in the small states and then become competitive against establishment candidates in subsequent states.  There'll be much less opportunity for that in this primary cycle.  Florida, a state rich in electoral college votes, decides its nominees on 29 January 2008 - just seven days after New Hampshire.  Then there's the 'megaprimary' one week later when California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey and other big states vote.  Only candidates who are by then able to afford a lot of TV, radio and direct mail advertising are likely to prosper.

The candidates: 2008 is the first primary contest for fifty years with no incumbent President or Vice President participating.  That means the race is wide open and the candidates coming forward are often 'firsts'.  Hillary Clinton would be the Oval office's first woman occupant.  Obama the White House's first black resident.  Mitt Romney would be the first Mormon Commander-in-Chief.  The tanking John McCain would be the oldest President elected.  Giuliani - the current GOP frontrunner - would be the most socially liberal nominee for his party in more than a generation.  If the GOP and Democrat candidates aren't intriguing enough for you, there is the possibility of an independent candidacy from New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg.  He hopes to feed on the fact that 67% of voters tell pollsters that they are unhappy with the current two party system.

Demographic changes.  Florida and Ohio have been the must win swing states for both parties in the last two elections but the Democrats see hope in states where the GOP has traditionally been strong.  Virginia, for example, which voted for George W Bush twice, has elected a Democrat Governor and Senator in recent years.  The GOP fear that the loss of Virginia would be the beginning of the reversal of the so-successful 'southern strategy' that Richard Nixon launched in 1968.  Democrat Chair Howard Dean is most hopeful about the rapidly growing Rocky Mountain region.  A big increase in Democrat-leaning Latino voters in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada mean that a total of 29 electoral votes could change from Republican red to Democrat blue.

The internet.  Nobody really understands the ways in which the internet might be important for the election but nearly everyone agrees that the Democrats are generating more enthusiasm from the internet than the Republicans (see the middle column of Facebook/ MySpace/ YouTube stats on TechPresident) and are also raising much more money via the medium - particularly Barack Obama.  If TalkRadio has been a right-wing medium, the internet in America - in marked contrast to the UK - is a largely left-wing phenomenon.

The issues.  The fifth factor that makes 2008 a 'wildcard election' for US News and World Report is the changing kaleidoscope of issues.  A message of hope and economic factors lifted Bill Clinton to the Presidency and kept him there.  Security issues and moral questions ensured re-election for Bush.  Immigration and Iraq might be the decisive factors in 2008.  McCain's support for the White House's troops surge - which John Edwards was quick to dub the 'McCain doctrine' - and for the President's immigration reform package have seen his candidacy on the brink of complete collapse.  He has had to lay off most of his key campaign operatives and his campaign is almost bankrupt.  If most issues that are moving up the salience league favour the Democrats there is one issue that could give Giuliani a big boost; crime.  For reasons that are not entirely clear crime is growing in a lot of US cities.  Mr Zero Tolerance might benefit from that issue's prominence.