The Numbers
A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer
Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer has won two Emmy awards for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq, and The Numbers blog was honored this year as winner of the 2008 Iowa Gallup Award for Excellent Journalism Using Polls.
ARCHIVES
SUBJECT INDEX
RECENT POSTS
- Views on the Terror Trials
- Sarah Palin: Rogue for President?
- Chasing Feathers
- Tomorrow's Elections: An Obama Referendum?
- Schwarzenegger's Nastygram: One in 10 Billion?
- Executive Pay? Cut Away
- Pols, Polls and Pushback
- On Nuclear Iran, Diplomacy and Sanctions are Preferred to Hostilities
- Polling, Politics and Nobels
- The War in Afghanistan: Reassessment, Eight Years On
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Is it Transformational?
November 05, 2008 4:06 PM
The key question of the 2008 presidential election is whether it represents just a change in administration – or a change in our politics. Is it a reactive election like 1992, or a transformational one like the New Deal, the Great Society and the Reagan Revolution?
Time will tell. But the possibility is there.
There are three reasons this election may represent more than simply a one-time protest against an unpopular incumbent and a poor economy. One is the youth vote; another, the possibility of partisan realignment; and the third, the role of race. Each is worth a look.
Young voters, age 18 to 29, did not turn out in disproportionate numbers; they accounted for 18 percent of voters, compared with 17 percent the past three elections. But their vote was astonishingly lopsided, 66-32 percent for Barack Obama over John McCain – a 34-point gap. The previous biggest margins among young voters were 19 points for Bill Clinton in 1996 and 19 points for Ronald Reagan in 1984. John Kerry, counting on a boost from young voters in 2004, won them by just 9 points. Al Gore essentially split them evenly with George W. Bush in 2000.
First-time voters – two-thirds of them under age 30 – voted similarly this year, 69-30 percent for Obama, again far surpassing Clinton’s 20-point margin among first-timers in 1996, Al Gore’s tepid 9 points in 2000, Kerry’s 7 points four years ago.
We know that voting is habit forming; its best predictor is having voted previously. The question here is whether the Democratic preference of young and first-time voters in 2008 carries on in their age cohort. If so it could have long-lived implications.
Next is partisanship. Reagan forged a fundamental shift in political party allegiance in this country, one that lasted a generation – until Obama upended it yesterday. As reported in our full exit poll analysis, In the 1980 election Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 15 percentage points, 45-30 percent. Reagan won his “Reagan Democrats,” and four years later they’d become Republicans; the Democrats’ advantage in 1984 contracted to a mere 2 points, 38-36 percent. And there it roughly stayed: 3 points in 1988 and 1992, 4 points in 1996 and 2000 and then pure parity in 2004, when 37 percent of voters were Democrats, 37 percent Republicans.
This year, the shift: Democrats accounted for 39 percent of voters in this election; Republicans, 32 percent – their lowest turnout in 28 years. If it’s a one-off, it means little. If it endures, like the Reagan transformation, it would mean much.
Finally there’s race. The country is changing: In 1976, 90 percent of voters were white. That has declined in every presidential election since, to the point where this year white voters slipped under a quarter of the electorate, 74 percent. That’s one reason Obama could lose whites by 12 percentage points yet still win the election.
Obama does not appear to have lost whites chiefly because of his race; after all, Kerry lost them by 17 points, Gore by 12, Mike Dukakis by 19, Walter Mondale by 29, Jimmy Carter, in 1980, by 20. But it’s true, too, that previous Democratic winners did better with whites – Carter lost them by 5 points in 1976, Clinton by 1 in his first election and by 3 in his second. Given the stiff headwinds for the Republican Party this year, it’s fair to wonder why Obama didn’t do better with whites.
Affinity voting may be part of it – the notion that some voters, perhaps less rooted in ideology, may be inclined to support the candidate who seems to have the most in common with their own experience. Greek-Americans for Dukakis. Blacks for Obama. Some whites, yes, for McCain. And certainly, yes, racism may be a part as well.
Regardless, with whites at 74 percent of voters and shrinking, purely race-based voting by whites matters less. And those whites who voted against Obama out of racial discomfort now have four years to think about it. The fascinating question – the one that will answer whether we're seeing a transformation – is what they, like the young, first-time and partisan voters of 2008, do in 2012.
November 5, 2008 in 2008 General Election | Permalink | User Comments (54)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Reactive, and the Dow closes down at almost 500 points! :(
Posted by: aware2u | Nov 5, 2008 4:31:50 PM
TRANSFORMATIONAL.
The American people collectively and DECISIVELY REPUDIATED the politics of division and fear that have been promulgated by the extreme right-wing for the last 20 years.
GOD BLESS OUR PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!!!
GOD BLESS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!!
Posted by: Ed from MA | Nov 5, 2008 4:53:31 PM
As I was watching Obama's acceptance speech I looked at the crowd and thought about the amount of diversity I saw. You had young and old, blacks, whites and asians etc. It wasn't one particular group but a snaphot of what America is really made up of.
I am glad that we have broken that barrier of race in this country by electing a biracial candidate. I had tears in my eyes when they announced that he had one.
I wasn't a big fan of his in the primaries, but he has shown that he has the determination to do what is best for this country to get us back on track.
Posted by: Jwench | Nov 5, 2008 4:53:59 PM
If Obama moves slightly to the right of center for the good of the country and his supporters stay with him, we might just have a chance at getting our country back on track. I'm hopeful. Please, Obama supporters, keep supporting him as he does what needs to be done even if it seems to go against what he promised in his campaign. This is what Joe Biden was referring to - decisions he will have to make that seem to be wrong, but are actually "right".
Posted by: Kitty | Nov 5, 2008 4:55:33 PM
I did not vote for Obama and I do not think he has the knowledge and experience to deal with our issues.
Having said that, I do feel sorry for him for the position he is assuming. The people who voted for him and support him are living in some sort of dream where they believe once he takes that oath, all of our problems will be solved. The Federal government simply does not have the power to get us out of this mess. It will take years, and Obama said yesterday it may take the entire four years just to straighten things out. There are people posting on these websites who already have that tax cut spent and who think they will have free health care come the end of January. With a deficit in the trillions, there is no way he can cut taxes, and he backed away from unniversal health care for everyone but children a couple of months ago. And even with just that, there is no money to pay for it. With FDR and the New Deal, people were no longer starving in numbers and began to recover somewhat but the country remained in a recession/depression like state for 8 years until the start of World War II and all of the factory orders for supplies and weapons and the need for troops put people back to work.
What people do not realize is how much time it will all take. The reality is that many more people are going to lose their homes and jobs. The recession will get worse and may go into a Depression before it turns around. The stock market today is a case in point. Usually, the day after an election it will soar if the investors feel the right choice was made. It dropped like a rock today.
In all likelyhood, Obama can run for reelection in 2012, and make the same promises for free health care and tax cuts, because we still won't have any of it by then.
Posted by: Melanie | Nov 5, 2008 4:58:50 PM
Posted by: Kitty | Nov 5, 2008 4:55:33 PM
I agree. He won't be able to do everything he promised, but will steer us in the right direction.
Posted by: Jwench | Nov 5, 2008 5:02:39 PM
My hope it puts the far right and the far left in the category of fringe politics.
Our only hope is to move towards the center
Posted by: Thinking | Nov 5, 2008 5:05:18 PM
"My hope it puts the far right and the far left in the category of fringe politics.
Our only hope is to move towards the center"
***********************************
Thanks, "Thinking"!
The FAR Left and Right have made a mess of this Country. I think it will be the "CENTER" that fixes it.
Posted by: ajax | Nov 5, 2008 5:14:38 PM
If that that this election achieved was to end the politics of division, then that would be more than enough to call it transformational. A return to civility would be great. If it happens.
If you look at the older senators like Byrd, Kennedy, Inouye, McCain and Stevens. They might be on opposite sides of the aisle, they might not agree, but they remain civil to each other -- and actually like each other. But the 90s brought in a different breed of politicians. They favor a more "scorched earth" policy. Unfortunately, the McCain who ran for president adopted the same divisive rhetoric that he's usually railed against.
So I don't hold out much hope for a return to civility. It might take another civil war before people figure it out.
Posted by: cjsamms | Nov 5, 2008 5:47:09 PM
Its transformational. This is the dawning of the new age. The aquarian age is upon us and this is the first sign. We will see two things happen.
Posted by: babbayaga | Nov 5, 2008 6:07:06 PM
It will be interesting to watch the faces of those who elected Barack Obama - they will rapidly change from their wide-eyed wonder - to confusion, then to apprehension, then to disbelief, and finally to horror as they discover their new leader is as hollow as the promises he has made.
Joe Biden is right - Barack Obama will be tested, and the entire Democrat-controlled Congress will be tested - and they will not have the luxury of blaming anyone else for their own failures.
And fail, the Democrats will.
And fail, Barack Obama will.
And then comes the judgement of the American people.
And it will be severe.
No more whining, Democrats - now you get to be the punching bag - and deservedly so.
And this includes YOU, Liberal Media.
YOU are the ones that have betrayed America with this Trojan Horse Socialist imposter, Obama.
Posted by: One_American | Nov 5, 2008 6:47:05 PM
dont expect blessings for this country from God when we elect a candidate who supports murder of children, homosexuality, and the like. more likely we will pay for our rebellion to him!
Posted by: pace | Nov 5, 2008 6:58:08 PM
both
Posted by: javi | Nov 5, 2008 7:04:18 PM
The 2008 election did nothing more than show how much money is required to buy an election, and how impressionable many people are (biased media). This country is in worse trouble now than it was before. God help us!
Posted by: MyFellowAmericans | Nov 5, 2008 7:12:01 PM
Yes, we have control of the government. And yet, i believe the republicans had control of the government a few years ago, and those weren't the greatest years. and a "trojan horse socialist impostor"? really? because he wants the government to help people who dont have the benefit of health care, and give tax breaks to those who need the money to pay their grocery bill, instead of those who just use it to pay their country club membership?
Barack Obama may change the way politics operates, but i doubt there will be a drastic change of policies. Sure, a few more bills favoring democrats instead of the GOP, maybe something saying the government can't put there nose into people's love life. But saying that the democrat controlled government will lead to doomsday is a ridiculous stretch. When it comes down to it, they are still all politicians.
As for the liberal media, you have conservative media too, you dont hear us complaining about a certain unnamed news network (dont want to advertise for other networks). Give you a hint, think 20th century ____.
Posted by: Another_american | Nov 5, 2008 7:15:21 PM
Can the posting please have the courtesy to accept that change was decided not by people abroad but by us, those who live here, those of us who are not in the majority, those of us who have suffered and been excluded for being Latino, black, women, handicapped, gay, foreigners... the victory is for us and for our children. No one thinks that Obama will solve all our problems, but we have hope in ourselves and our fellow citizen that one man achieved what others couldn't. That's what Obama represents, hope. If we go into this election thinking he will solve our country's problems, then we might have as well chosen McCain, but no, we understand he's not a savior, just a person with a new view.
Posted by: Enrik Van Depaalm | Nov 5, 2008 7:15:58 PM
One_American..
Dems can say what they want but they will eventually have to live up to their idiocy when they realize "change" wasn't for the better. McCain too had changes he wanted to see through. But then again.. they will have to live with their own decisions.. oh lordy.
Posted by: foxychick87 | Nov 5, 2008 7:23:11 PM
One_American You have a right to your own opinion and the right to STATE them. Shows true colors eh??! I voted McCain also but will still give Obama the benefit of the doubt. He is after all, our president now. I am curious to see how all this turns out...
Posted by: foxychick87 | Nov 5, 2008 7:27:59 PM
TRANSFORMATIONAL ? You bet, we've thrown the Founding Fathers under the bus.
Posted by: Ron | Nov 5, 2008 7:40:29 PM
Why do we need him to lead just right of center - what is wrong with slightly left of center?
Posted by: jozy | Nov 5, 2008 7:43:30 PM
Post a comment
