A permanent majority? Don’t count on it.

by | Feb 7, 2017 | Editor's Blog | 14 comments

Back in 2004, after George W. Bush won his second term, Karl Rove declared that Republicans were on the brink of permanent majority. Two years later, Democrats washed away GOP majorities in both the House and Senate in the 2006 wave. After 2008, Democrats had control of both Houses of Congress and the White House. So much for Rove’s theory.

Rove, though, is not alone. Democrats thought that they were on the verge taking control of government for the long haul. Some narratives speculated that Republicans wouldn’t be able to win the presidency for decades because of what Democratic analysts called the Rising American Electorate. Trump crushed that dream.

Now, some Republicans are predicting that Democrats will become a permanent minority. They reason that Democrats are part of a coastal party with no appeal to middle America. They have no real viable bench, the Daily Caller reasons and “The party could well find itself without a viable White House challenger to Trump in 2020.”

I’ve got a different theory. Both parties are out of touch with the American people. A plurality of voters is dissatisfied with the way the country is going and they’ve been voting against the status quo for almost a decade.

Only two recent elections have seen significant numbers of new voters enter the electorate—2008 and 2016. In both instances, voters showed up to support a candidate who they believed would overturn the status quo. After 2008, many of those voters never came out again.

In 2008, Barack Obama brought new voters into the electorate with a promise of hope and change after six years of war and a looming economic crisis. He excited African-Americans and young people as the first black president and with his desire to change the culture of Washington. When the economy was still bad in 2010 and the partisanship in Washington escalated instead of subsided, the young people stayed home, dismayed with the new president.

In 2016, Donald Trump brought out angry white voters who believe they’ve been ignored by politicians for decades. Many had never voted or hadn’t voted in years. They supported Trump because he promised to tear down the whole system and they are cheering his executive orders and fights with establishment politicians. However, if he can’t change the culture in Washington by 2018, those voters are likely to stay home, too. Traditional voters who aren’t happy with the Trump administration could easily cause another wave election by voting against Republicans like they did Democrats in 2010 and 2014.

Partisan dreams of a permanent majority never seem to pan out. The country is certainly in a cycle of Republican ascendancy but that’s as much a reaction against Democrats who recently held power as an endorsement of a conservative movement. Voters are fickle and self-interested, not ideological. As soon as they’re dissatisfied with the direction of the country, they’ll throw Republicans out and some Democrat will start talking about the permanent Democratic majority.

14 Comments

  1. MyTurnNC

    I’m not that hopeful Democrats will be able to take back control of the federal government any time soon. There are three main issues against it.
    First, as was said earlier, gerrymandering has locked in so many districts that for Democrats to win the majority of the seats would take a tsunami of a Democratic wave.
    Second,GOP efforts to suppress votes of those who might vote against them have worked and more such measures are planned.
    Third, if Trump gets at least two young Supreme Court Justices, they will find ways to justify gerrymandering and voter suppression as well as Citizens United. Republicans will flood the federal courts with young right wingers to cement their hold on power for generations.
    Democrats must continue to fight to keep their people on the street and otherwise pressure Congress and State governments, It’s the only way the tsunami will ever start but the battle is likely to be hard and long.

    • Stephen Lewis, Sr.

      My turn

      I disagree with you, but in a respectful way. Everything you say has accuracy to it. However I do strongly believe that a wave election is coming it would not surprise me if it is indeed 2018 but even if it is not it will happen by 2022 at the latest. Also the current political alignment we are in is also on its last legs. It has been around since 1968 but since around 2000 you can feel the nation is ready for a new one. I do not know how much you pay attention to what I call regular voters, folks who vote but are not active in political activity, but I stay in tune with them. What I am hearing is that while the political class is having some heated and impassioned arguments many voters find the issues themselves something they are indifferent to.

      • MyTurnNC

        I agree that at present it looks like a wave election is very possible for 2018 but will it be a high enough wave?
        With the three issues I mentioned stronger than ever, Democrats would need much more than 50% of the vote to get to the majority in the House and Senate.
        We can but hope – and act to encourage voter pressure to keep going. Elizabeth Warren persisted! Let all Democrats do the same.

        • Stephen Lewis, Sr.

          If this thing goes the way I think it will then it will go beyond voter pressure. As to your other issues they exist but I am not sure they can stop the wave. If you look at what has happened in the last decade a group of Republicans are becoming restless. Some such as Arlen Specter, Charlie Crist, Lincoln Chafee have become Democrats, some others are have done this as well, in Hawaii a party switch is about to happen. There will be more coming the Democrats are about to pick up some folks who ten years ago no one would have ever thought this would happen.

          • MyTurnNC

            As they say – From your writing to God’s ear!

  2. Tom

    There is no majority. Trump’s opponents got almost 11,000,000 more votes than he. The national vote for the US Senate was a Democratic margin of almost 11,000,000 votes (51 million to 40 million); the national vote for US House was almost tied. Democrats have won popular vote for President in six out of last seven elections.In North Carolina, vote for Congress was 53% Republicans, 47 % Democrats; the vote for NC State Senate was 46% Republicans, 37% Democrats, 1 per cent Libertarians and 15% no one. Indeed there were almost 700,000 North Carolina voters who voted for no one for the State Senate. We have minority governments all over. No crime with that; we will survive. Just not smart to act like you have a mandate.

  3. Randell Hersom

    TbeT – Trump won the white house with hostile help – millions of suppressed votes as detailed in Greg Palast – The Best Democracy Money Can Buy. The Russians couldn’t hold a candle to that performance.

  4. Randell Hersom

    Great Post. How do you understand all this and still oppose Keith Ellison?

  5. TbeT

    First, extreme gerrymandering by the GOP in 2011 has made any “wave” for the Dems in the House in 2018 or 2020 very difficult to achieve.

    Second, and by contrast, the Senate could very possibly go back to a Dem majority in 2018–especially if GOP incumbents and candidates continue to paint themselves as lock-step apologists for the mistakes and shortcomings of a POTUS who prompts questions as to his own mental stability each and every day

    Third, for 2020, Trump (or Pence if Trump is impeached/convicted, or dies in office) may have a very tough time getting elected again. He won the WH (with hostile hacking help), but trailed his opponent by 3M popular votes; his inauguration was poorly attended; his popularity has fallen to record levels for an incoming POTUS; his first 19 days have been marked by the largest single day protest in our history, and protests at the nation’s international airports stemming from an ill-considered and rashly implemented executive order; he has raised the prospect of military conflict with Iran and in Crimea with Russia; he has chastised one of our longest and strongest allies (Australia); he has refused to disclose his tax returns and business entanglements, which could lessen or heighten claims of emolument conflicts; he has equated Russia murderous leadership with ours in the US, and mocked legitimate concerns about the great evidence of Russian hacking of our election. In short, based on performance to date, Trump/Pence would be facing an uphill fight for re-election—I’d even posit that, were the election be re-held today, Trump/Pence would go down by at least 5 points.

  6. Troy

    Balance. Reading today’s piece and the opinions thus far, it seems to me that the answer is balance. If we look around, that is what predominates our universe; balance. Nature, gravity, dark/light, magnetism; all have balance. Two factions in balance with the other. Without it, nothing works or if it does, not for very long.

    There are those among us who thing we need more choices in politics. That by having more choices, that will fix things. How? The Republicans started with 17 candidates for President. The narrative was wide and the party divided to the extent that many predicted that the Republican party was through. That prediction held until about 10:00pm 08 November 2016. Now, the pontificators say that the Democrats are in decline. Strange how everyone else’s crystal ball works but not mine. Anyway, now we much align ourselves to other parties, other ideas; niche groups who collectively fail to equate a whole. No, we don’t need more choices; we need better choices.
    Donald Trump promised to “drain the swamp.” What he didn’t mention is, once drained, what is he going to fill it back up with? He didn’t tell us that part and no one bothered to ask. Well, we’re seeing who and what is filling the swamp back up.
    For me, the problem today is that no one is willing to wait for results. We have become so accustomed to demanding and receiving that we lack the patience or the fortitude to see something through to fruition. Republicans don’t lack that, at least until they get to power. They’ve been planning for where they are and taking the steps necessary to get here for a very long time. They were patient, they suffered some setbacks, but they realize that the race is a marathon and not a sprint. Democrats and their supporters don’t seem to comprehend that truism. The same is true for politics in general. Politics is a perpetual journey, an endless series of small steps and at the end of our race, we pass the torch to the next.

    Where have we failed in our plans? To look long range. Who we are, where we want to be and most importantly and what I think most of this discussion is about, how do we get there. How is the differential. How is both an independent and dependent variable but critical to winning and understanding.

    We don’t need to continually muddy the water by draining the swamp; we need to clean it up, make it potable, and make it work to derive the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Yes, that’s my metaphor of the day for the Democratic party and it needs to fix itself and come back into balance.

  7. Christopher Lizak

    The only way that the 1% can govern the 99% is if they keep them divided 49.5% vs. 49.5%.

    So whoever is “down” gets all the assistance from the media and other organs of elite power in order to restore “the balance”.

    It’s not a balance of what different factions of American society actually want, it is a balance to give the decisive vote to the 1%.

    So the more things change, the more they stay the same.

  8. jane

    “Both parties are out of touch with the American people. A plurality of voters is dissatisfied with the way the country is going…” Count me in. In most other areas of my life I have more than two choices. Why not in politics? “I’m proud to be a Democrat” is a sentiment I can no longer assert. The current 2-party system is not about healthy debate, respectful disagreement, or thoughtful attention to issues. It’s about entertainment ratings and blind loyalties. My 2 cents.

    • Stephen Lewis, Sr.

      Jane you may be onto something, I am not exactly sure what you are trying to say but we may be on the same page. The two party system itself is not the problem it is the fact that our current political alignment is out dated. To some extent a lot of it has to do with certain element of both parties obsession with Ronald Reagan. To the Republicans every nominee since Reagan claims to be the next Reagan. I think this has to do with fact that Reagan was a very popular president. But in some ways in reminds me of the NC State basketball fans waiting for the next David Thompson. And too many Democrats are still wanting to destroy Reagan’s popularity. Sometimes I think there are Democrats more interested in fighting Reagan popularity then they are with the fights of today. My children are now older than I was when Reagan was first elected. It is past time to archive the man after all he passed away 12 years ago. to the Democrats its time to understand we lost that fight sometimes we do and lets move on.

  9. Norma Munn

    Your analysis is based on the past experience, which is usually a reasonable barometer. At this moment, I think the propaganda from the past campaign demonstrates a degree of success that I don’t see in our past. The past cycles also did not include social media, with its constant barrage of bite size information — some of which does not pass the smell test, but is still believed.
    I agree that many Trump voters are likely to become disillusioned over the next few months if the ACA is eliminated and tax reform includes taxes on imports from China and other countries. Add to that any foreign policy mis-steps whch escalate into armed conflict, even minor or just a very close call, and I can see a lot of support for Trump disappearing. I do not see many of those people moving to the Democratic party. I see more non-voters, and more partisan outcomes with more gridlock.

    In an earlier post, you pointed out the distinction between movement politics (or what I have long referring to as crusading politics) and the “party” system (or what I think of as electoral politics). Both have a place in our attempts at being a welcoming, change oriented, capitalistic, diverse society and economy. They mix poorly, but both parties have always had crusaders and dedicated change agents within them. Ordinary people, who do not really have any great desire to participate in the party processes, choose to vote based on self interest. Nothing surprising about that. I do the same, and no one could pay me to actually be part of the day to day operations of either party, despite my decades of serious political work and interest. (Yes, I have worked for candidates. Long and hard as a volunteer for months.)

    But the image that the Democratic Party conveys is important and at least some passion for significant change that improves the economic well being of low income and middle class people is essential. It is hard to have passion without some movement politics involved. Otherwise, I see little electoral change in the status of the Democrats in 2018 or 2020. I think both parties will see lower voter turnout, and those who do vote will be the diehards, who refuse to give up on this country or who share the Bannon/Trump approach.

    Yes, local people know what is most important locally, but I doubt that will shift the federal elections as long as spit tickets are an option. The growth registration of Independents has come largely from the GOP. Why should that continue? And what are young people now thinking about either party? Do they even see a party affiliation as important? Without more information, I would not predict a swing to the Democrats, only less voting generally and more polarization.

    I would be pleased to be wrong, especially about less voting.

Related Posts

GET UPDATES

Get the latest posts from PoliticsNC delivered right to your inbox!

You have Successfully Subscribed!