Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Reagan Democrats Are Not Coming Back

Posted by Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon at 9:59 AM on May 27, 2008.


How do you win a demographic that votes against it's economic interests?
reagan1

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Yesterday at TPMCafe, Rick Perlstein kicked off a week-long examination of his new book Nixonland: The Rise of a President and the Fracturing of America. I’ve been asked to join this week’s cafe (a fun departure from writing about politics through a feminist lens), and I recommend checking it out, because the book is wonderful. And very relevant to today’s post topic: “Reagan Democrats“. The seeds of creation for this group of voters means they’re probably more “Nixon Democrats”, a name that would at least show how fruitless getting them back into the fold might be.

Ezra’s post gently puts to rest the ancient Democratic hobbyhorse of lamenting the loss of that percentage of white working class voters that long ago quit voting their economic interests and started voting against uppity black people and women, and against the “liberal elite”. Interestingly, the “elite” label doesn’t quite cut it when it comes to liberals—the lower you go on the income ladder, the more liberal you tend to be statistically speaking:




So why do Republicans win when (because of Republican policies no less), the number of people falling below the cutoff line greatly outnumbers the people falling above it? In part, because the higher you get up the income ladder, the more likely you are to vote. Also, there’s racial issues (gender a bit less, because while women are more liberal than men, they also vote more regularly, so it probably evens out):

(Results from 2006 election poll results.) I’m not sure how we win back the “Reagan Democrats”—white people, men especially, who would rather vote to screw those less privileged than themselves than to lift themselves up. They don’t even have to be most working and middle class white men. You just need a percentage of them who’d rather scapegoat than seek solutions to give Republicans that edge to get to 50 + 1%.

Trying to win over people who vote their resentments hasn’t worked. Look, Reagan won when I was 3 years old. The people who voted for him and are still voting for Republicans aren’t coming back to the fold. Their resentments are calcified at this point, which is why Republicans are still winning by fighting the same battles they fought in the 60s and 70s—sex in the schools, women’s lib, black people out of control. We’ll stop seeing them voting this way when they start dying off. An entire generation has been born and come of age since he won. Time instead to look ahead, where things are getting sunnier if we can actually harness younger voters.

What the Republicans did to change the political landscape was to be opportunistic. How and why that opportunity came up is an interesting story, and one you’ll get more of if you read Nixonland, but if we want to learn something from Republicans, it’s not “Get that resentful percentage of white working class men”, but “See opportunities and grab them.” The opportunities at hand are a younger generation that isn’t nearly as badly saddled with racist, sexist, and homophobic resentments and that has the numbers. The other opportunity at hand is the browning of America—a handful of states have already become minority majority states, and more will come. Focus on getting disadvantaged people to the polls instead of longing for that group of white people that will vote bread off their own tables if they can get bread and water off the table of a black neighbor.


Broken Glass
This is no doubt one of the ugliest periods in American political history.
Post by DCap. October 11, 2008.
Bipartisan Concern About the Dangers of McPalin’s Hate-Mongering
"I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate ..."
Post by Emptywheel. October 10, 2008.
Stock Market Drops 107 Points During Bush's Speech on the Economy
That's the kind of confidence Bush inspires these days.
Post by Amanda Terkel. October 10, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
F the "Reagan Democrats"
Posted by: Xynyx on May 27, 2008 10:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We definitely need to do without them. They were never reliably progressive, anyway.

I was 18 for Reagan's second election, and I voted against him. I knew back than that his success was the beginning of a seriously downward spiral in politics from which it would be difficult for the nation to recover. The beginning of the primacy of the right-wing conservative Christians was easy for me to see, and we have the Reacan Democrats to thank for all of that.

FUCK them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let me see if I've got this straight:
Posted by: hurricane hugo on May 27, 2008 11:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm supposed to worry about our side's ability to "win back" a bunch of dumbasses who have consistently voted against their own interests - especially financial - for as much as 40 years?

I'm sorry, but if they were going to acquire some common sense, they would've done it already. Fortunately, they're already starting to die off.

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jeanne
Posted by: jeanna on May 27, 2008 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Gop underwent a "sea change" when they nominated Reagan. Unfortuantely many, otherwise intelligent, Republican voters did not see where his election would take us, they just wanted to win, no matter the cost. They appealed to the southern Democrats, who were upset with Johnson's administration for passing the Civil Rights Bill. They no longer supported the Equal Rights Amendment, & they moved to the far right, and appealed to the racist & intolerant instincts of the so called Reagan Democrats.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Social issues are key
Posted by: larycham on May 27, 2008 11:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think we need to understand the Reagan democrats in terms of economic and social issues and the dynamic relationship between them. At one time Democrats chose the party because they were union members, and thereby almost automatically Democrats. Nixon, Reagan and later Republicans have tapped into social resentments and prejudices, pulling them away from their economic interests. They saw civil rights, women's movement, anti-war leaders as radical elites because they were in many ways so far removed by culture, etc. Reagan Democrats did not say, "Oh, to hell with my own economic interests, I'm voting for the guy who is anti-abortion or anti-women's rights." As unions lost their influence over these people, they were increasingly motivated by the social issues that became emotional magnets for them. Now, after years of school efforts to teach tolerance and multiculturalism, some of our citizens are still burned by those who seem to have an unfair advantage--including immigrants. We have a real challenge.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And Yet They Voted For Hillary
Posted by: desidid on May 27, 2008 5:53 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
she won their support in KY, PA, WV, and OH. And she sought them out, her campaign used the codewords they understand. And as I've said before they may not like the idea of a woman president, but they damn sure don't like the idea of an uppitty negro for president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

History And Anti-Racism
Posted by: bc430 on May 28, 2008 9:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.redroom.com/video/
tim-wise-creation-whiteness-clip


John Henrik Clarke - "A Great and Mighty Walk" - 94 min
video (downloadable)
http://video. google.com/ videoplay? docid=-578475681 9358533059& hl=en

This video chronicles the life and times of the noted
African-American historian, scholar and Pan-African
activist John Henrik Clarke (1915-1998). Both a
biography of Clarke himself and an overview of 5,000
years of African history, the film offers a
provocative look at the past through the eyes of a
leading proponent of an Afrocentric view of history.
From ancient Egypt and Africa's other great empires,
Clarke moves through Mediterranean borrowings, the
Atlantic slave trade, European colonization, the
development of the Pan-African movement, and
present-day African-American history.

Hope Dr. Clarke's life can inspire poor W.Va., KY, Oh, Pa, voters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What liberal elitists don't seem to understand about average Americans
Posted by: jeanmo on May 28, 2008 2:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is what the Democratic party doesn't seem to get -
- Average Americans have little access to an honest, unbiased media - it is all canned, corporate controlled and right wing, from the radio talking heads, to the tv talking heads, to the editorial pages - just pick up any paper in the country besides the NY times or Washington Post, and you will see it yourself.

How are people supposed to vote their interests, when they are not told the truth about what is going on in their govt?

It is not prejudice, or stupidity that keeps people voting against their interests - it is the lack of a truly free and independent press

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So why do Republicans win?
Posted by: Bearzerker on May 29, 2008 1:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...because of greed graft and cronyism!

and buying votes and vote rigging and dirty tricks...
and illegal wiretaps and laptop stealing and political black ops...

this was introduced 40 years ago by Nixon... and carried forward ever since... even by Clinton!

when will we finally undo the stupid policies of failure and instill a vision of hope and promise?

dunno... i don't see much hope...
maybe Obama, probably not though...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]