June 26th, 2013
I know, I was as surprised as anyone. But here’s Sean Trende AND Ruy Teixeira making very similar cases as to the importance (dominance?) of white voters.
Every once in a while, when I’m talking with someone about the changing demographics of American elections, I ask them what percentage of the electorate they think is non-Hispanic white. The answers I get are nearly always in line with Gallup’s awesome findings about Americans’ perceptions of the gay population:
In surveys conducted in 2002 and 2011, pollsters at Gallup found that members of the American public massively overestimated how many people are gay or lesbian. In 2002, a quarter of those surveyed guessed upwards of a quarter of Americans were gay or lesbian (or “homosexual,” the third option given). By 2011, that misperception had only grown, with more than a third of those surveyed now guessing that more than 25 percent of Americans are gay or lesbian. Women and young adults were most likely to provide high estimates,approximating that 30 percent of the population is gay. Overall, “U.S. adults, on average, estimate that 25 percent of Americans are gay or lesbian,” Gallup found. Only 4 percent of all those surveyed in 2011 and about 8 percent of those surveyed in 2002 correctly guessed that fewer than 5 percent of Americans identify as gay or lesbian.
-
Of course the white vote matters, but the question is how to actually get it. The Democrats would be wise not to forego the white vote for the reasons that Texiera mentions.
The problem is, in a nutshell, Texas. It becomes really, really hard for the GOP to remain competitive without holding on to Texas (and Arizona and Florida) even if they almost sweep Big Ten country (minus Illinois and Jersey).
Texas remains in the GOP despite California-like demographics primarily on the strength of the white vote, along with a greater share of the Hispanic vote. But there aren’t many more white votes in Texas for them to get. And with or without amnesty, it’s not looking good past the short term.
Without Texas, the GOP would need the likes of Washington and Oregon, or the northeast (not just Maine and NH), to remain competitive.
It’s hard for me to see how a page isn’t going to need to turn here. If not now, then at least at some point. That will mean either bringing Hispanics into the “white fold” (a la Italians and Irish), or having to pander.
I’m genuinely not sure how you get there. Especially while thinking that the white vote is going to save them. JVL has a lot of good ideas, and I think it’s more easily done with versatility on the economic side than the culture side, but those ideas are going to need to bring more than just whites aboard, past the short term.
-
Yes, quite true—whites are only a minuscule 66% of the population. Hispanics will have to turn out in greater numbers in future elections to compensate for black voter participation reverting back to the mean—-they won’t turn out for a white candidate the same way they did for Barry.
-
Poll respondents wildly overestimate all minorities: gays, blacks, Jews, whatever. If you went through all the estimates and added them up you’d get something like 300%. This seems to be a basic bias of cognition.
troy garrett June 26, 2013 at 11:10 pm
Yea Whites are 70+% of the voters. But that is not the share of the population. Hispanics are 14% of the population and 7% of voters. If Hispanics ever get excited and vote in the numbers the rest of America votes, their vote share will double. It is worth noting that for the first time ever African Americans had higher voter turn out than whites.