tv Campaign 2012 Demographic Changes CSPAN September 29, 2012 4:00pm-5:35pm EDT
comes back to washington, they better come back ready to work. all of you are doing everything you can to meet your responsibilities. it's time congress did the same. thanks and have a great weekend. >> nothing is more important than getting the middle class back to work. the unemployment rate in our state is 8.3%, more than the national average and unacceptably high. that figure does not take into account people who have given up looking for a job altogether. it does not reflect the struggles of families trying to keep from paying higher prices on everything from gas to grocery. i tell my neighbors, it does that have to be this way. we have employers who want to hire and workers who want to work, the government will not get out of the way. the united states, of the land of opportunity has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. pushes jobs to our
competitors. i agree with met ronnie m. paul bryant that we need to stop all the tax hikes -- mitt romney and paul ryan that we need to stop all the tax hikes. the president's health-care law is driving up costs. it is making it harder for small possesses to expand and hire -- businesses to expand and hire. let's rearepeal obamacare and replace it with common sense reforms that protect american access to care they need from the doctor they choose at a lower cost. we need to look at rainy and all the excess of red tape that is making it harder to work and do business. these ideas are in my job plan. republicans have common-sense
proposals to remove these. president obama puts governments first. he wants to raise taxes on small businesses. he wants to keep our energy races under lock and key including the keystone xl pipeline. he wants more spending that will put us in debt to china. more of the same. where are the jobs that no wonder jobs are fleeing overseas. let's bring those jobs home, back to america, back to local businesses. there is one more thing i tell people. i tell them i have made restoring the american dream my life work. without it i would not be where i am today. eiger up in an under privilege neighborhood.
i was the first person in my family to attend college. my mother and grandmother started cleaning the house is again when i did not have enough money for law school and my brother gave me everything he had. i would tell myself that if i ever got out of the environment i gear up when i would work hard to get others out and make it easier for them to have the same opportunities that have given me a chance to make a difference. that is why i am running for congress. it is why i know in my heart the matter are hard -- how hard this will be, we can get the job done. we can get the middle class back to work. we can restore america promise. thank you for listening. >> if i told you i did not want to dig out my debt problem so i go broke, you would say what are you talking about?
you are not going to pay your debt if you do not have the money. if things are going downhill, you are making the next impossible. we have to put the brakes on now and do this now. it can be done if we have the will. they should have the full support of the american people to get it done. >> watched the entire interview with ross perot on monday. he is interviewed by richard wolf on the economy, the deficit, and debt and how it has changed since he ran for president in 1992. that is monday night on c-span and c-span radio at 9:00 p.m. eastern. find the article in usa today on monday at usatoday.com.
>> ahead of next week's first presidential debate, at the center for american progress looked at both your demographics and how they affect campaign strategy. the report also talks about perceptions of the economy, medicare, and hispanic voters. this is 1.5 hours. >> good afternoon. i am buys president for american values and new communities. i want to thank you for the revisited.p i want to wish you a happy book your registration day. i am sure everyone is registered to vote. this is the list of by two great teams. two weeks before the election, i
know that may seem like a very short time. in politics it is a lifetime. we were interesting digging into what is happening in this space. what trends are occurring? how do people feel about the economy? you are the people who show up to the polls in november? we want to have a discussion about the implications for 2012. this is a follow up to a passage to 70 that was released in november of last year. they wanted to see what had changed and what it would mean for the presidential election. i am pleased to introduce ruy teixeira. after this presentation, he will lead a conversation with our
distinguished panel and we look forward to hearing from all of you as well. i encourage you to follow the conversation at twitter. he is a guest scholar at the brookings institute where he has directed politics on democracy. his recent writings include democratic change in the futures of the parties, and the rise of the middle-class. he holds a degree from the university of wisconsin madison. if you are from green bay, i apologize for the game yesterday. >> thanks for coming.
this report is a follow-up for the path of 270 that we wrote and released last november. it dealt with the relationship between democrats and economics. here we are in the heart of the political campaign. we did think it was appropriate to revisit our discussion, adding in a bit about ideology. ideology has been injected forcefully into this campaign by the republican side. it has become a very interesting race where we see a lot of the trends we discussed earlier pulling themselves out. let me get to that. this first chart here is titled demographic shifts of the election appeared issues to help minorities and why not college working-class voters voted in 2008.
on the right-hand column, you see how much of demographic change we have in the last four years based on current population serving eligible voter data appeared in the last four years, we have seen an increase of three points in the share of eligible voters or minorities. and a decrease of three points in the share of voters who are not college or working class. that is a change in a short amount of time. let's think about what these figures mean. even though it looks like the vote share should go up, let's say it does not. let's say that obama gets the '80s term of the vote he got not good to thousand eight. let's say he only loses graduates by four points. these are not implausible
assumptions. mitt romney would have to get double john mccain's margin of 18 points. could have to up to 36 points. that is if it does not change. d, ands does get realize if the white college graduates face about the same, it means that met romney would have to get north of 40 point margin of the white voter. let's take a look of where we are now. this is the gold standard.
breaks. this shows that obama is leading by 8 points. if you look at the averages, it is a bit high. the averages are running about four points. you are probably up by five points. this is within the averages. it is similar to the pole from the heartland monitor which will talk about later. overall top line, a look at the margin, 91 points. that is basically identical. 7222 among 852 margin. most have been showing this.
what this means is that the idea that obama could get 80% of the minority vote is quite logical based on these and other data that looks like what he will get. this shows you the break out for college graduates. , obama is doing a little bit better among white graduate voters than he did in 2008. among the college are less group, he is losing by 13. which is somewhat better than he did in 2008. remember what i was saying about the outlandishly large margin that mitt romney probably need to be competitive.
he is not anywhere close. that is the bottom line. this is true across many polls. you might say margin of 22 points. nowhere do you see these outside margins given how he appears to be holding the support and maybe been some. -- then some. that is where we are. these are not decided by the popular vote. and since we have this electrical vote system. the election really comes down to suit the outcomes that a number of -- the outcome of a number of swing states. you have six states in the
midwest area. you have to restate out in the southwest. you have three states in the north-south. the state are very different. the six states in the midwest are much more heavily watched. they are much more slowly changing. the new south has a much higher level of minority voters. the minority population as shooting a very rapidly. it is more favorable to barack obama. with that in mind, let's look at the particular swing states that are in play. maybe more so than any other
state, ohio was supposed to be the fulcrum on which this election might rest. it was believed to be accessible for mitt romney and that obama could hold. he is only four electrical vote s short. this is not happening. at this point is option a four or five point lead. if you look at some of the data, you see the worst group for obama in 2008 was the white working class. his hope is that he would be able to expand the marching quite a bit. you think it would not have been that part of a cell. it has been hard hit economically. a lot of ticked off factory workers. you think it would have been an ideal place. this is not to not to be the
case. bromley is not anywhere close to driving up the margin among white working-class voters. he is at best a few points later. he is doing no better among white college graduates. that is one reason why the state is looking pretty favorable to barack obama. if the election was held today to carry it buys much as he did not go to thousand eight. if you look at it geographically, obama is doing really well. he seems to be holding his support where it counts. this is the great state of pennsylvania. if the romney team could have play, itylvania and playin would have been a lot of
possibilities. pennsylvania is looking a lot more difficult. it is just not happening for the romney campaign. it comes back to what appeared to be their big hope. you in 2008 it was a 15. advantage for john mccain. the polls that we see coming out of pennsylvania show their bromley is not doing any better. in some polls, he is doing worse. he is making very little progress. the state is looking very similar in terms of the demographics and how they translate into political support. the same thing applies to the geographical distribution. it is stephanie looking like
brigitte is that you're looking like an advantage for obama in pat -- is definitely looking like an advantage for obama in pennsylvania. the look at the geographical pattern of the vote, 40 4% of the vote -- 44%, there's not going on for romney. they thought they could do it in wisconsin. the problem is it is twofold. if you look at the level of demographic change that is taking place in wisconsin, it is quite startling. you have three point increase in the share of minority eligible voters. a four. among white college graduates and a seven. decline among non-white college voters. it goes against what is and the
interest of the romney team. maybe they thought it they nominated paul ryan they would be able to take advantage of what they believe to be this mass of cultural conservatives like class voters. it does not seem to be happening. they're making some progress. it is not anywhere close to what is needed to take the state. there are not able to master this in the ongoing demographic change. florida is a state that if the romney campaign loses florida, their chances of winning the election are close to zero. right now the romney campaign is running a little bit ahead. if we look at the pattern of support among groups like hispanics and the white working class, it's a be the best group
for romney to make progress. we look at the break out from the polls that do provide them. we're not seeing any progress. we're not seeing a noticeably bigger margin. it is not happening. that is being translated into a similar margin here in the center of the state. minorities are going up. in virginia, the key to virginia for romney would be to widen the margin they would get.
mccain carried them by over 30 points. so did romney. it is basically about the same margin as mccain got in 2008. we see this burgeoning white college graduate group that obama lost by about 11. in 2008. the is basically about even. it makes it difficult for romney to put together a coalition that could put this. colorado has been closed. obama looks like he has a three or four. lead. -- thre or four point lead. it does not appear that romney is able to turn that demographic in his favor. he is not doing much better
according to the polls i have seen. he has made some progress outside the margin. he is not making nearly enough progress to take the state. if you break it down to a graphically comment the denver metro area is about half of the state. the poster child for demographic change in the united states and how it can shift is the great state of nevada. obama is running ahead of the not as far as he did in 2008. this is a little cut off here. you can see an incredible increase of nine percentage points and those that are minorities between 2000 and 2012. you can see that there has been a decline of five percentage
points in the share that are white non college. that is a very quick tour through some of the swing state of the 2008 election. -- 2012 election. maybe it is time for me to say why is this? why is this going on? why does obama have a solid lead he does? many argue that this should be an arguable reaction. the stimulus was looked upon unfavorably by lot of voters. it may have helped the economy come back. it did not turn into a picture
of help. what is going on? the first factor is the economy. it is not great now. it is better than it used to be. voters can remember a few years back. some maintain they cannot remember what they had for breakfast. i think we're seeing that there is an influence of what went before, who people blamed for what went before and how people see the current incumbent. as we're seeing consumer confidence gain sharing common it is helping to take the edge of this whole economic strategy for the romney team. obama is the president. vote for me. i will make it better.
then i believe the strategy has been pretty effective. i think he has understood what this means for the country and for the political coalition. the make sure they are enthusiastic. he has been emphasizing a lot of the issues on things like medicare, cuts to education, tax cuts to the rich. he has been very forceful about contrasting his views on things. they would do all sorts of things. they had some success with it. the way he has tried to paint romney as an out of touch private equity guy who would not know a white working class
person it became up and bit them and the nose. romney needed to reach the huge number to be competitive. i think the obama team realized that there are some very opposite things about romney. i think this has been successful. we cannot leave this without saying a word about republican performance. if they had sat down and try to optimize the things they might say that may tick off the democratic party and raise concern, and it probably could not have done much better. way theflects the republica republican capture the elements that are far away from the media voter.
social and economic issues, the whole business of paul ryan and embracing this kind of ayn rand approach to american society and economics. it is far away from the political center. the 47% that came out with information not be read as a gap but as delightfully honest about where today's gop is coming from in terms of their attitude toward economics of public policy. i think that has really been a millstone. this would not have been a gimme election for them either. that is my take on what is going on. i hope you will check out the report. there will be a short quiz later. i want to bring up this great panel that is going to discuss all of these issues and more
excruciating detail. why don't you all come up here? we will get started. >> do you want to be here? that is fine. i will be here. sit where you want. let me very briefly introduce the panel appeared to my left is anna greenberg, what my very favorite pollsters. not only did she go out and take the polls for the nation, but she always has intelligent things to say. to my right is my very favorite right wing person, reihan salam, who does an excellent blog. if you're going to read one thing from the conservative side, i highly recommend reihan
salam's blog. it is great stuff. ronald brownstein is political director of atlantic media. a longtime columnist and analyst about voter demographics. if you're just going to read what columnist about the 2012 election, ronald brownstein would be the guy to do it. frank sharry does all sorts of fantastic work on immigration reform. i am still i did you can all be here to discuss this with me. let's start with you, ron. you just had a new poll come out. >> let me try to take what you said and put in a broader framework. to do the lasty 40 years of presidential politics. if you think about 1968-1980,
republicans won the white house five out of six times. in the '80s, we talked about the republican lock on the electrical college. if you look for 1992-2012, if obama wins, it democrats will have won it five out of the six elections. i think you can look at this as a state era appeared only two things have changed. the first is the changing composition. in 1994 when reagan won, 65% of the college votes were non- white. 20's or more college educated white. . the college white share has kicked up. you are projecting that it will slip even further.
share ofake reagan's the vote and projected them on the actual elector in 2008, in his vote goes down to 59. the second thing that changes the class and version. the democrats did better among non-college than college whites. that began to change in the 70's. the republicans what downscale. it was to the point where under clinton the alliance converged. it was four. better in college white than non. today it is nine or 10. i would argue to be that if obama wins the class and version will get wider. for all the numbers we're talking about, and the obama
formula for victor can reduce to two numbers, 80-40. he only needs 40% of white to win. the internal composition of the is changing in a way that is more accessible. you have to live not only at education but gender. if you look at 2008 and college white man, a non-college white men, and on college white women, obama was at 42 or below. he will drop in all of the quadrants this time. his numbers are running a little lower. the fourth quarter for the college educated white women. he won the majority of them last time.
in all polling, he is holding the majority. the mac a gift to for the republicans is that if obama can hold as among the minorities, if he can hold his 52% among college white women, romney has to win 2/3 of all other white to win. he can do that. republicans were in that ballpark. they were in that neighborhood. 2/3 of the other quadrants of white is what reagan 1 in 1984 during the most decisive landslide in modern times. i will end. there is not an entirely comforting message for democrats. the general trend here is allowing them to win a majority with a smaller number of whites. there also winning a smaller majority than they used to.
if you look at the last four times they had a unified control of government, each time they suffered a fairly catastrophic decline among vote share among white appeared there not been able to articulate a vision. the other part for the republicans is certainly going to be a big point of debate. it is possible that mitt romney will run as well against whites as any republican challenger ever. romney could come in right in that range and lose. it is bound to participate -- precipitate a conversation. one said this the last time
anyone will try to do this, is simply a national majority on the back of white voters. it is unrealistic to ask them the existing coalition is so dependent on those who are uneasy with the change, and they are paralyzed. they have to reach out to hispanics. the republican platform says that any state that provide in- state tuition should be barred from all federal education money. every white kid in texas cannot get a pell grants. that is what they are grappling with versus if you talked to carl rove in understanding that we have a way to reach out to
hispanics. they have a leash. if obama wins, it is hard to imagine that conversation. >> what are you saying in your polling? >> absolutely. it is all consistent. you were talking about the way the parties in the media have been talking about the women's vote. it drives me crazy you. talking about the educational difference, there is no women's vote. what is interesting about 1 in women voters, they have been underperforming for obama. ireally since 2009.
this is the group that should be reporting. that plays out in the 2010 election. what we're seeing now is that we're taking a long time to bring women back to where they were. obama is still under performing. right now he is winning web i've got nine points. he cannot win this without a majority of women. what is interesting about women's issue, it does have a limited attachment to this. i do not see in the next couple of cycles the republican party
becoming more liberal. i think abortion is such an important litmus test. it is hard to see that changing any time soon. >> tell us a little bit about how you see the hispanic vote building. how are they leaning? why is that? what is animating that? will they show up? >> what will be the margin? what will be the turnout the da? there has been disappointment in the latino community on obama and immigration. the margin is quite high. george w. bush and karl rove had a brilliant strategy of outreach to hispanic voters.
george bush won for these arm of the vote. -- 40% of the boat. -- vote. now romney is pulling at best in the mid-20's. his own campaign has said they need to reach 30% in order to be competitive in the states or the latino vote will be critical. what the republican party has done is lurch to the right instead of george w. bush, john mccain. let's reach out and let's make immigration reform something we are for. he has promised a veto. he is for radical policy description, and the idea of making life so miserable that immigrants are purged from the country.
this lurch to the right is hurting badly. their strategy means the southwest is out of reach because of this. they pulled out of new mexico. they have a shot in colorado and nevada. essentially, the hispanic strategy has been let's talk about the economy. the cuban americans are in florida and hope they can peel off enough of them. maybe that will be the trick. the fastest-growing group are the non-portrait in immigrants for whom this is a defining issue. i suspect he is glad to have a hard time winning florida in part because of the latino electorate. >> what do you think about all
of this? you wrote this great book on this calling for a new type that appears to be the mistake that the romney campaign is making. what do you make of this? >> i disagree with a lot of what has been said. there was a fascinating moment during a republican debate that happen like last year. you had mitt romney and newt gingrich agree we needed immigration reform. what about the border effect that there were having this conversation. it was completely ignored. mayor ronnie gave a speech -- mitt romney gave a speech. this is an utterly marginal issue.
it has more skilled immigration than you do less. this is not mean any kind of changes. it is also true that the immigration debate is framed in some ways and others by others. i guess i see these emergence strategies versus ... strategies. when you're talking about a party. you have this large number of non-college educated white voters. these folks are facing these economic structural changes. they have anxieties that flow from that. in 2004, you won a lot of these voters. suddenly you are counting social
security reform. that is something that democrats capitalize on effectively in 2005. on the other hand you look at the affordable care act. what happened? you have this republican party where they recognize a lot of our voters are older. a lot have anxiety. there is this an emerging strategy in which you have thinkers saying they are creating a new entitlement and they are drawing on an old entitlement. the message for many just wound up being "they are cutting this entitlement." it is the difference between an delivered strategy.r i they recognize these opportunities that arise when we have debates. they are backed into it.
and they are not actually going and looking at how we move to the center on some of these issues? they are getting to that after a teammate this a larger policy to parliament. this is a huge problem. if you're going to have to make those arguments regardless, you want to do that in a way that seems consistent. if my romney loses in 2015, if you have one from florida or new jersey, you're going to have some. you are talking about dense coastal state in which you are forced. colorado is a state where president obama was supposed to over perform. you have a large number of voters to work performing. he is not doing quite as well as many of us had anticipated.
in ohio, and he is doing better. it goes back to the emergent thing. if you have a different nominee, connecticut is an area. there are these target of opportunity. you want to think deliberately about the way you frame your policies. paul reichmann, there is this idea about what he believes. that isays someone careful to say i support a safety net. we want to make it more sustainable. that message has gotten drowned out in part because it does not resonate with a let you hear activists.rvative activate partly because it does not seem organic or natural to them. if you have someone who could make any more compelling well, someone from a postal state is used to it. maybe we would see different
results. >> you talk about republicans being backed into it appeared the nature of the primary electorate. its hard to see how you have delivered strategies and have a base of the republican party that is the force of backing mitt romney in more conservative issues than he might normally take. >> that is a great point. when you see people who are able to overcome that, george p. bush is an example. he had a series of natural advantages. he had name recognition. mitt romney, think about it. in a state he had been running for some time, he barely won the gubernatorial election. the key issue was a round english language learners.
it wound moving the election. this is not someone who had a deep and organic connection with the republican party. >> i think it has gotten worse. it is not just that bush was good and romney is not. >> i think it is really important. no question that the current republican primary electorate is a leash on the party in terms of its ability to reach out. if you look at polling, whites divide exactly in half on whether this is good or bad for the country overall. for those that think it is bad, romney leaves a three-one. these are voters who get very
little leeway on immigration. there's no question that more important than any taxable decision, the big reason he is having difficulties our strategic decisions in the spring and the choice to use immigration as the cudgel from the right and the willingness to get caught up on the movement of social issues. that has allowed obama to hold those critical hispanic and white women. the idea that he could increase the share among them is unbelievable political malpractice. it is interesting to watch the reverse. he would say that why didn't they do this. i think it was largely for fear of losing voters they have already lost. it was fear of losing voters to a lot of blue dog democrats.
what i find interesting about the obama campaign is that to a far greater extent than romney, he has made the conceptual leap to what the democratic coalition is. he has taken a series of positions on contraception with the catholic church, immigration, and gay marriage or they have accepted the idea that he can deepen the problems at the price of mobilizing this new coalition which essentially young people, minorities. they made a leap. if romney well among whites and loses, it is hard to imagine that there would not be a conversation about whether that strategy is viable. >> what do you think about that in terms of hispanics? what is the origin? is a really just about
immigration? >> immigration is a gateway issue. do republicans get a hearing on their of their views if they're good enough on immigration? this is where romney is not getting a hearing on other issues even though many of the positions the republican party takes are not in favor with the hispanic population that is investing in their young people to be educated and have support so they can have a shot at the american dream. do the experiment. what did jeb bush was the ticket
this year? we would have a very different discussion about the hispanic vote. we will be talking about this appointment. how jeb bush is perfectly conditioned to maybe when 50's arm of the latino vote instead of 25%. it would shift the electoral map so dramatically that we will be talking about the southwest in a very different way. the republicans have an opportunity to reposition themselves with the hispanic community. john mccain himself says it starts with immigration. how does the republican candidates run the gauntlet of a primary season. we saw it with meg whitman. she was determined to run. she brought out pete wilson has
said she would be tough as nails. she wanted to deport her nanny by the end of the election. the spanish vote turned out in huge numbers for jerry brown who did little to win their affection. >> we could be easily having this conversation about the difficulties. if you have the candidates will have the hispanic vote, we would ask why obama was going to drop even lower. republicans have set themselves a hurdle that is so high by allowing democrats to get a these are of this population, and the share of light that have to win becomes the reagan-esque. >> you can not just as soon
because there is a group of hispanic votes that they are democrats. an african american republican gets very few african american votes. if in the long run republicans can get themselves right on immigration, i think there is every reason to believe that republicans could do better. as multiple generations ago, and they become more moderate. they might have some traction. that is not sure if you look at places like new mexico where you have hundreds of years of hispanic residents. young people are very liberal. you have a moderation on those
issues. at any rate it is very complicated. >> lebron had said something about the hispanic unemployment rate. i say this is a complicated way. they will become more likely to support republican candidates. this is not been a fair republicans. that is a open question. if we are looking at an era of stagnation, that this plan to have a particular impact on the electorate. he talked about how that this is not racially polarized. it varies. if you look at this idea that
mexican americans are a group that has been rationalized, when you look at the politics of a city like los angeles, identity is strong. it is a localized phenomenon. stagnation will further deepen those things. one in the difficulties is that republicans really need upward mobility in order to make this and move away from the idea that it is a single issue consistency. another thing about taxes that i mentioned is that this is why i keep thinking about this. i take your point about primaries. tax is a pretty big issue. if you're looking for a candidate who does well, very big constituency. romney is not strongly over
performing. you think a tax cut message might resonate. the politics have changed considerably. there are many conservative folks who have talked about the idea and some of calling for marginal tax cuts, why don't you call for a dramatic expansion of the child-care tax credit th. >> some say it barack obama represented the gary hart vote as well as jesse jackson. will you ever have a republican primary candidate who can unite those sensibilities as well?
the problem that mitt romney faces is that initially he had a plan that was less have the capital and then tax for middle earners. a total marginal change. then he felt right santorum might defeat him. he reached a plan designed to appeal to the editorial page. we said let's do a really big tax of one and then let's get back on them on one that would get these urban socially liberal voters in states we're not going to win regardless. you get parents of children to pay dramatically lower taxes. that is a thing i would imagine would resonate with voters.
i think this is a problem for some of the candidates. >> the electorate is now. it is exactly even. is not disproportional. romney was the upscale candidate. this was a real class to survive. there is not an overwhelming balance. >> you can imagine someone else threading the needle difference. you have a mike huckabee who has greater credibility with the upscale republicans. you could see someone. >> i would argue with you. mitt romney did not have to do the things he would do on immigration in particular.
>> the democrats have become much more assertive. that is a big change. on immigration, rahm emanuel himself said to stay away from this issue. when you bring it up, it put to on the defense. he leaned into the issue. he said we're going to lose downscale white voters if you do .his year it' response was quite remarkable. it did lead to an uptick in enthusiasm among hispanics. a lot of praise from progressive. swing voters were glad somebody did something on an issue.
it put republicans on the defensive. republicans have not only painted themselves into a corner, democrats are learning how to take advantage of that. > whites they are part of your coalition. what should -- the democrats to eat and vision that has acted as 70. -- need a vision of activists dominant. >> in many ways, this will begin
a trace 40 years later of upper middle class whites. obama consistently runs better among working-class whites denny guys anywhere else. -- that he does anywhere else. the numbers are better. he's running at 45% in ohio, say. part of that is bain, the auto industry. the big anomaly. unemplioymeoyments rates are
very low. they are buffeted by this economy. niether party has shell and a cantilever positive economic results -- has shown they can deliver, as an economic results. so the republicans are running at 60% nationally. i think it is going to be very difficult for democrats to give back ticket a poo a point wheree winning national it get in a spray and looked like the bottom was falling out. to figure it's hard out how you integrate this into
collar voters. >> do you have a view on this? it is a big part of your book. is it just a matter of your benefits? >> it if you look at ohio and iowa, their economies have feared much better than the national economy. why is romney talking about deficits, given that we have unemployment crisis? they looked at states that they thought of as a target, new hampshire. this is an issue that resonates with swing voters. i think that is one thing to keep in mind. you have these strands that cannot always cohere in a way that works for you if you are candid. that is one thing to keep in mind. it is interesting to think about -- and again when you have the stagnation for much of the country including a lot of these
folks, you have household income growth for people at the high end. what does that mean? one thing it means is that if you look at snap enrollment, people talk about how increase in three years. it increased since 2000. medicaid. when bill clinton gave his talk at the democratic national convention he was incredibly shrewd because he did not talk about medicare. why did he not talk about medicare? medicare is not the real difference in terms of numbers between these two campaigns. it really is medicaid. when you look at medicaid and who benefits from medicaid, it is a lot of white, working-class folks, as well as underrepresented minority backgrounds. when you think about how republicans need to talk about it, i think that is that funny thing about ryan and ryanism. he has in some respects gotten it right in talking about how
you want to talk about how we actually care about the safety net. it matters a lot to us and a free enterprise society, and a dynamic society we need to have this. it is not a side thing that we put a garnish on the salad, but it is an incredibly important part of making the system work. the problem is that -- ryan, the reason he excites activists is for other reasons. the way in which he sometimes uses a very apocalyptic language about the threats to free enterprise. i think that is one reason why governors have a big advantage over legislators. if you look at someone like mitch daniels. mitch daniels -- he attracted a surprisingly high share of the african-american and latino vote in his state. he is someone who talked about conservative ideas. he rolled back collective bargaining rights in his state. in prosaic ways that were not very ideologically charged. people that share his
proclivities recognized him as one of them. on the other hand, he was able to reach beyond the base -- this is a very basic level -- of how to improve the provision of services. he was deeply interested in the workings of the medicaid program. and making it more accessible and improving its workings and containing costs. so i think that is a very attractive model. i think all lot of conservatives think, what would a dentils campaign have looked like? he has a lot of liabilities -- what would ed daniels campaign look like? on the other hand, it would have been an interesting contrast with the president. >> you noted the my narrative share of the eligible voter possible -- it is not clear whether that would be reflected in the electorate. how closely does the growth in ep track with the change in the
electorate. all of the rodney calculations are based on the the white vote remaining the same. >> it tracks pretty closely. that is the problem with the romney strategy of assuming there'll be no change. that flies in the face of historical trends. the reason why the minority share of voters as increase like clockwork, two points every year for decades is because the share of the population and of eligible voters have increased by about that right. the two things tend to attract each other and it is not certain that it will and this election, but it is a safer bet that it will then it will not. i can understand why they like the eye -- the assumption of the whites. it just makes the a barrier they need to cross so much higher if they have to factor in that we might have another couple points
with minority voters. it seems that it is totally insane. >> if it goes up to 28, and obama's share goes to 81, the white number he needs becomes almost a small. 37%. people, that is going to be a big adjustment here what it means to be in that country. white majority have picked the president. obama was the first winner ever to those whites by double digits. no one has done that before. i think there are issues for democrats. in terms of long-term stable majority, winning 40% of whites. the idea is a moment, a wake-up call for the country that we are living in a different place than many of us grew up, especially in the baby boomers, which is a white generation occurred >> that is reinforced by what is quite to happen in congress. they talked about the majority of the democratic caucus in
congress in 2013 will be women or minorities. white men will be the minority. >> first time ever. >> if obama wins, you have a female and minority caucus. it reinforces how different the democratic party will be from the republican party. in the short run, it will cause anxiety and stress among certain groups of white members. >> which may already be happening. >> it is. >> i cannot resist, since you are the representative of the conservative side of the spectrum. let's say for the sake of argument that in fact obama does win this election. it seems more probable than not heard there will be allowed a disappointment on the republican side. how do think the debates are. to play out? how closely are people going to grapple if this does happen? >> i think it will play in a way that will disappoint conservative activist and
disappoint democrats. the reason why ideologues' like the care about this election is the affordable care act. when you look at a lot of folks on the right, there is a real belief that an affordable care act creates -- will prove problematic in a lot of ways. you hear this from all lot of liberal policies scholars as well. the divide between esi and the exchanges is tricky. it's hard to see how that will play out. we could have a debate -- that is the idea that this will prove an expense. yet, it is extremely difficult to retrench. when you have a coverage expansion of this kind, people say, bill clinton cozy health security act was defeated. over 20 years, can you had a number of expansion efforts, medicaid programs that had seen to it that the public role in
providing coverage has expanded dramatically. so i think it is very hard to see how he reverse the creation of the exchanges. it will evolves into a different system. something conservatives and liberals will do it out over. it will make coverage absolutely central to our politics. then you are calling to see a generation of republicans who are born to reckon size -- reconciled themselves. how do we fix it? when you look at the estimates for how much medicare would cost 30 years out, they did not come true. the picture round of being extremely different. in a way, it is a lesson for republicans. in 1964, you had cold water. what was the result? you had enormous democratic super majorities in both houses of congress. you were able to see the creation of programs that when you think about conservatives, fiscal conservatives, they are still wrestling with the legacy of medicare and medicaid,
programs that have been created during that period when we get this people who was an ideologically appealing canada but who paved the way for a dramatic change in the size and structure of the federal government. i think you'll have, linda lingel running in hawaii said she does not want to get rid of the affordable care act. that will become a common solution. that is what a lot of progressives were hoping for. what it means is that part of -- partisan democrats might actually experience losses while the progressive goal of coverage expansion proven durable may be achieved. >> ok. fantastic discussion. let's turn it over to the audience of that. in the front row? >> hi. i am with owners illustrated magazine, that deals with urban entrepreneurs. what you are talking about deals with our coverage. per the 2010 census and you if
you extrapolate the data out to what they are projecting out, you are looking at 38% to 62% as far as white minority to minority split, and non- hispanic whites. then you add in about 120 minorities. -- 120 million minorities. is there any data you have? even if it is 28%, you are tracking 10% less than the actual population composition in america. so do you have data to showed that the population democratic breaks down in comparison to the of voting participation? >> the per-share of eligible voters and the united states who are minorities is a 28% or 30%.
saidercent -- it's as you -- if we get 28%, that is still below of the share of eligible voters, which is below the share of the population because of the citizenship issues and the age issue is. that is the reason why you see that difference. that is primarily driven by hispanics and asians. that there is such a difference between the minority share of the population and the minority share of eligible voters. >> bill frye at the brookings institution says the gap between the minority share of the population and the minority share of the vote should narrow at an accelerating rate over time because so much of the minority population growth are native-born hispanics who are citizens. 50,000 native-born hispanics turn 18 every month. and will do so for 20 years.
so in theory, this 8 po;inint gap should be a narrowing of more quickly than it has become so much of the growth is a natural increase from people who are citizens. >> on the hispanic vote, there is a large number of eligible hispanics who will not vote this time. there are 23 million eligible hispanic voters. the top estimate is that at 12 million will vote. that is about half. on the other hand, that 12 million is a 26% increase over four years ago. both things are happening at the same time. huge increases and hispanic voters, even though there is a gap between eligible and participating voters. >> [inaudible] >> yeah. it's hard to overestimate their importance. there are mitigating factors that mean the increase in
minorities does not automatically, does not translate into the well fall, voters. -- voters go up in tandem. people should not assume just because minorities, hispanics, are less likely to be able to vote, that the trends will not increase. that would be an incorrect inferences. >> right there? >> my name is steven sshore. there were two swing states you did not talk about -- missouri and in. are those those couptwo in the romney camp. >> maybe people on the panel would disagree. there is no evidence that obama is within shouting distance in
indiana. the best he has done in missouri is to be four or five points down. missour is interesting. there are demographic and geographical ships that are taking place that seemed to make it more conservative rather than less. that is unusual for states these days. even though it is within margin, i think most people see that margin as getting much wider this year and the direction of the gop. >> people often point to wake county in north carolina as a county that is making our state more democrat-leading. people come to wake county from somewhere else. in general, if they are coming from the northeast, that could theoretically make a state like pennsylvania more competitive as people go to northern virginia. now, could still be true even if pennsylvania is overwhelmingly democratic. >> basically, what has happened
is we have gone from the 1980's, the races were decided by midwestern swing states, which are white, older, and heavily blue-collar. now what has emerged in the last 8 years, is a second pathway that is available to democrats. in heavily read states. it is the opposite. they are shaped by the same forces that obama and bodies. they are well educated and the purse. -- and diverse. nevada, colorado and new mexico with arizona and georgia beat behind. in the long run, it is striking how well obama is holding up and the midwestern states. in the long run, a place like this where democrats build a coalition of minorities and college-educated white seems to
be more the future of the party. obama's strength in the midwest, it surprised me that he has been able to run as well as he has among blue-collar whites in those states. >> there are different flavors taking place in these midwestern, rust belt states. if you look at ohio, according to the eligible voter data, there has been no increase in minorities in ohio and the last four years. there has been a slight increase in the share of white, non- college boaters off. it is interesting, despite all that, romney is not doing any better than mccain. that is different from states like wisconsin, where there is a lot of democratic change. pennsylvania is a state where there is a lot of demographic change. we see burgeoning minority populations in the eastern part of the state where the growth is taking place. an increase in college-educated whites. these states vary in types of
the democratic -- demographic change. some states are not changing. some states are changing rapidly, even in the midwest. sorry. will do the person back there. i am a fellow at the university of maryland. i would like to know if there is any research data on the voters'enthusiasm in the last few weeks, especially among democrats? we see there was the bounds of -- after the convention. but i do not know if there is a danger for the democrats that romney seems so weak that they turn off. >> right. people in the campaign were worried about that, but the most recent data we have, the best pew research poll says the
enthusiasm gap between republicans and democrats is a vanishing. something is clearly happening to rev up enthusiasm on the democratic side. it is possible that if romney appears to run a troubled campaign, maybe they will think it is in the bag. i doubt that will happen. you were talking earlier about the latino enthusiasm that seems to be growing as well cared >> earlier this year, the numbers were terrible. we actually were working with latino decisions. they were in the field when obama made his announcement in may to protect the young people eligible for the dream act. we were able to do a before and after. it was a remarkable difference. the question was whether the enthusiasm would be sustained until election day. according to the tracking polling data released, it has gone even further up. we saw this in 2010. there was a narrative that hispanics will not turn out in
2010. to a large extent, they did not, except in nevada, colorado and california where they were largely the fire wall that saved the senate for the democrats in the way the election, the first time since 1930 that both chambers did not flat. a pretty remarkable performance. again, these were states that george w. bush carried in 2004, nevada, colorado, new mexico. new mexico is basically no longer a battleground state. >> that gentlemen way back there? two of them. take them in sequence. >> to what. -- thank you. there are a group of voters that described as socially liberal and fiscally conservative. is that a large group in numbers, and if so, why do they seem to be getting very little respected during this election cycle? >> broadly speaking, that
defines a lot of the white upper-middle-class who is thought of to be right of center on economics and left of center on social issues. the increasing prominence of those issues since the 1960's is a principal reason for the clash in version, the fact that democrats run better among white collar than blue-collar whites, which is our were pattern for the liberal party. the reality of it is being reflected. if you think about whites as four quadrants, obama is unlikely -- today i would say that -- the road from his position in three-four -- college-educated men, he is running three points down. blue- collar men, five points down. blue-collar women down three or four. college, white women who are the most affected by social issue is holding his number from 2008.
in many polls, exceeding its slightly. getting up to 54-55%. this is part of the issue for republicans. a strategy built on emphasizing the economy and economic discontent. a big chunk of obama's vote between minorities and the college-plus white women are not economically-based voters. they are voting on the other stuff. the women are voting on social issues. the minorities are voting on a sense of respect. do you want me here or not? that is what if the immigration stuff gets down to. it does matter a great deal. as you are saying before, it creates a real challenge for republicans in that while they may move -- it is easier to amanda moving and immigration and some of the issues making it so easy for democrats. college test plus white women have voted democratic and four- five elections. this is not something new. this is a structural change that is part of our politics since
1992. a big reason roy these white- collar suburbs outside philadelphia, detroit, and cleveland have shifted from republicans to democrats cents. what we saw in 2008 were places like northern virginia, charlotte and raleigh and the denver follow them. this is why those states are following them. michael been won 60% of college white women in 2010. it was not just hispanics. it was socially liberal white women in the suburbs. obama today, he is at 58% among college white women in denver, colorado. >> abortion is a high intensity issue of both sides of the debate. it is important to think about. >> -- on things like defunding plan. a. at republican in doorstep.
i agree. abortion. is what it is. you have this divide. contraception came in and a way that was not previously -- all of this is allowing obama to hold his vote among those women, despite -- feingold change that. the democrats posted the first wave of campaign finance regulations, having to rely an upper middle-class voters. that shapes what is the issue mix that campaign spending the most time on. >> immigration is not an issue that is a court-based, republican conservative issue. there is a minority group within the party who cares deeply about. but why has it become the position of the priority, when in fact, there is a huge and growing voter bloc for whom it is an important issue? >> we might have different views about this. i think that when it is framed
it -- when it is refracted through the prism of the media that is, this stuff does not really matter. all that matters is are you going to build a fence. there are folks that believe, we need more rigorous immigration. that is the reason why the obama administration embraced it. it is all about how are these things are presented and what are you obligated to say when you are pinned down? do you believe in enforcing these laws that seem problematic or not? the idea of the tree back, is that well, these are the good kids -- the idea of the dream act, is these are the good kids. it does not mean you are a bad kid if you have a criminal record. it does not make you a bad person. there is something very disingenuous about the debate we have are rounded. that is because advocates want to structure the debate and a certain way. i do not believe this is rooted
in believes that our prior to the way we structure the conversation. i think advocates have structured the conversation is very advantageous the, which is their job. >> thank you. >> a couple more questions. then we are going to have to cut it off. maybe back there. and also to your right. >> hi. i was wondering if you could address the millennials, looking forward in terms of democratic party strength. >> and also the gentlemen over there. >> thanks for the forum today, to the catalyst. mr. brownstein, i can give a dem about the passions of d.c. you are the derek jeter a political analyst. >> is that the first time you have gotten that? >> could you examine the role of the old dominion in northern virginian, loudoun counted, the
target-rich environment for the obama campaign, the former governor who is very popular in richmond and the president is popular in the tidewater area, and how emblematic that race might the for the nation. the other thing is, and given the long habit of being the pay of patrilineal succession, who is in the on deck circle? for the republicans, should governor romney lose this cycle? >> gleneagles, virginia, and republicans a session geared >> i feel like virginia is the tipping point state this year. when state --i have always felt it is virginia. now it might actually be. it is not of high. -- not ohio. it shows the two modern coalitions. it is a playing field on which the two modern coalitions are arrayed. there is a growing minority
population. was there to% minority in 2008. including 10% need or white or black. hispanic growth is important. it is broadening. it is reaching places it has not been affected by it. then you have the upper middle class, socially liberal white voters that we see. on the other side, you have a strong evangelical, blue collar rural presents for romney. in polling, the class and version is water in virginia than anyplace i have seen this year. obama is polling 49%, college was carried down to 32% among non-college whites. it underscores the changing class nature. non-college whites are no change. from 44 to 48%.
there is this enormous gap. mcdonald drove to the numbers to 29%. right now obama has the edge because he has the edge nationally. in the senate race, look, we're seeing routinely, as the average 85% of the people who vote for obama are voting for the democratic senate candidate. we are moving into a parliamentary system by voters as well as by legislators. i think it is very likely that whichever candidate wins the presidential race in virginia, there party will win the senate race. >> when you're looking at the affluent voters in northern virginia, many of them are connected to the boom in public spending. that is something that shapes your perception. >> yes, but the numbers are close to national, which is different from the college
whites. it is a little better. the non-college whites are a little worse. it goes back to the point where in states where the blue-collar whites are evangelical, obama is struggling. >> you have a view on the succession question? >> i would be interested to hear what you think about that there are very strong candidates. i think a lot of conservatives to think that there is a very large number of strong candidates. the really interesting question is what with the democratic primary look like, because hillary clinton is a figure who is not as intensely disliked by less affluent republicans than is commonly understood. she is someone with a very distinctive political identity. >> on succession, the basic question will be -- is there a voice that says the party has to change direction? particularly minority voters. does that debate develop? there are no shortage of
candidates who would be a champion for the conservative wing -- ryan. christie, the voice from the bleachers shtick it did not scale. world crammed in running for president did not look as good in camp but as it should have -- ralph cramdon running for president did not look as good the bigger question is, is there a candidate who advances the jeb bush analysis if romney loses? obama after three great weeks is at 50. it is not like he is at 54. if romney does lose, i think the big question will be -- is there someone who challenges the party on issues, immigration and maybe on social issues? >> i think someone who is possibly makes that case would do worse. look at bob mcdonnell in virginia. not that hwi