The Art of Politics

Red Dawn

If you think you're becoming surrounding with Republicans, it's not just you...

A new Gallup survey indicates that in the aftermath of the Bush victory in 2004, more respondents than ever identify themselves as Republican versus Democrat.

Hey, everyone likes a winner... but there is more to this than merely the afterglow of votus non-interruptus. The realignment of political party identification has been going on for years, all the while the parties themselves were undergoing internal constituent changes. As the Republican party became more Southern, more rural, more suburban, the Democrat party became more urban, less white, and more coalitionist. The results - Democrats ceded the white male vote to Republicans, and as a result, the largest, most potent voting bloc.

And yet, Democrat Bill Clinton showed it was possible for the Democrats to recapture much of that same slowly-ceded demographic. Mainly, because he was what they had lost - rural, southern, white, and male. Unforunately, Bill's mistakes and trevails hurt his post-term ability to act as a recruiting beacon for the party.

To understand identification, you have to understand what people think they are identifying with - a perception, both of men (in the gender neutral tense) and ideas. Right now, Republicans have the far more appealing, identifiable figures - from George W. Bush, a man often remisunderestimated but never beaten and, outside of the fringe, viewed as a genuinely likable fellow, to figures like McCain, Schwarzenegger, Giuliani, Powell - these are men that people like and look up to.

Who is the Democrat standard-bearer? Surely not Kerry - while he led the good fight in this election, he has never been, nor will ever be, someone who commands fealty through his persona alone. Not Gore, nor any other also-ran former candidates. No, the stardard bearers are Bill and Hillary Clinton. Bill, affable in public (though a real firebrand in private) but with a history that he'll never be rid of, and Hillary, who despite attempts to moderate herself on positions (and if she were to continue to pursue this, she'd be a very important Senator) is not going to gain the adoration of the masses.

This is a problem for the Democrat party - there is nobody anyone wants to really identify with. In fact, they have too many people you don't want to identify with - Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson? We'll admit to a grudging respect for Sharpton - he's intelligent and brings something to the debate. But he has a history in New York that he'll never escape. As for Jackson, his continued victimhood tour is anathema to average voter recruitment.

Democrats have, for the second election cycle, trumpeted a new hope within their ranks. This year, Barack Obama is the new great black hope of the Democrat party. Four years ago, it was Henry Ford Jr. of Tennessee who held that crown (and the one most likely to have a real national future of broad appeal). But overturning rocks looking for buried treasure is not a recipe for success - the party cannot depend on finding another Bill Clinton. It needs to work on manufacturing appeal to middle-of-the-road voters on issues and with leaders who share the same goals and values - and, it must be said, have that undefinable quality that creates confidence among voters.

As the red tide continues to roll in (who picked these bleeping colors anyways?), expect the mere momentum of the realignment to continue the trend, at least for one more election cycle...

Posted by MEC2 at December 17, 2004 11:24 AM