2000:
% of voters – 26%
Gore: 59%
Bush: 37%
2004:
% of voters: 24%
Kerry: 59%
Bush: 40%
2008:
% of voters: 21%
Obama: 59%
McCain: 39%
2012:
% of voters: 18%
Obama: 58%
Romney: 40%
2016: (preliminary)
% of voters: ???
Clinton: 52%
Trump: 44%
What was HRC’s game plan? Dems lost big in the 13 swing states … so she won the “popular vote”, big deal.
○ 2016 National Popular Vote Tracker
Legally, the popular vote is irrelevant. But I don’t think that it’s meaningless. It’s just that the meaning is open to interpretation and we’re a bit short on historical precedents to look to for guidance.
The multiple precedents in the 2016 election further compounds an ability to analyze this one. It’s difficult to find two nominees for an open seat that entered the electoral cycle with near 100% name recognition. Zero time in government office, either appointed or elected, may be unprecedented for a nominee (those candidates fall by the wayside early in the primary season or run as third party nominees with no chance). First woman and only the third nominee that’s directly related to a former POTUS. (JQ Adams, GWB, and Clinton, unless I’ve missed one.)
(Might be unfair to include JQ Adams because there were twenty-four years between the end of his father’s presidency and the beginning of his, John only had one term, and JQ had served in an appointed position before, during, and after his father’s term, and also a number of elected offices before and after his own term as President. Forty years between Taft and when his son lost out on the GOP nomination.)
Does second cousin count? Although I think Teddy was Eleanor’s second cousin.
No, Teddy was Eleanor’s uncle. He and Franklin were quite distant cousins. A Roosevelt family split many generations earlier — late 17th or early 18th century. There were the Hyde Park Roosevelts and the Oyster Bay Roosevelts. The former ending up as Democrats and the latter as Republicans.
When Ted, Jr. ran for governor of NY, his cousin Eleanor actively campaigned for his opponent, Al Smith. So, Ted, Jr. didn’t get off the launching pad to become another legacy President.
Don’t know if from 1788 until 1952 if anyone other than JQ was considered for a nomination. Of course WH Taft lost out on the nomination to IKE. So, over two hundred years with but one and in the past sixteen years we’ve had two. Are we regressing back to dynasties?
One of my favorite factoids is about George Washington’s family. When he and Martha married, he became the stepfather of her then two living children (ages two and five). His stepson, John, married young, had several children and died at age 26. Martha and George raised to of John’s children. The boy, G.W.P. Custis had Arlington House built which he intended would serve as a memorial to George Washington. His only child Mary inherited the property when he died. Mary was married to Robert E. Lee. Through a few twists and turns, what was constructed as a memorial to G Washington became a memorial to a major traitor.
Sorry — overlooked your subject line. Those numbers are how a specific demographic. Includes the size by percentage of all voters and how that demographic has voted in the past five most recent presidential elections.
Union Household? Seems high, but…
What else could it be? Maybe Obama should have put on his “walking shoes.”
A number of reasons why “union households” would decline more slowly than that of “union workers” but the trend is the same. Interesting that the advantage for Democrats in this demographic varied little from 2000 through 2012. Off the top of my head I only recall that unions reported a struggle in OH in this election, but the same problem may have existed in other central states.
If the 2016 numbers are correct, it is another area where Sanders would likely have outperformed Clinton.
And what have Democrats done for Unions this century except ask them to GOTV? And what do they get in return? A cadillac tax on union health plans?
Maybe the industrial unions should have thought twice about remaining on the pro-Vietnam War side after LBJ lost Cronkite. After LBJ began the peace talks. And bolted to Nixon in ’72. Difficult to do much for a faction that prefers the other side. All those “blue collar workers for Reagan” participated in their own demise instead of cleaning up their own union houses.
It was petty of Democrats to turn their backs on industrial organized labor because unions have a positive impact on workers and the economy beyond their organizations. OTOH, “doing something for them” requires political power which at the executive branch of the federal government was absent for over a generation. The members had an opportunity to switch horses when RR went after PATCO. Did they? My recollection is that they stuck with RR and not their union brothers and sisters.
So, it wasn’t a one-way street as you claim.
You make a good point, but it appears that the Dems said “So who needs you?” first to the unions then to blue collar workers in general and now say “How come you didn’t vote for us?”
It would be more correct to say that Democrats kept hoping they would return while they had nothing they could offer them due to limited power. But Democrats continued their alliances with union leaders and depended on their money in campaigns. Still do. Some may have come home in ’92. More likely they voted for Perot which tipped the balance to BC and half of them came home in ’96 with the balance sticking with Perot. Then the Perot dead-enders moved back into the GOP camp in 2000.
As their numbers dwindled, they became small enough that both parties could say, “Who needs you?” (Democrats retained the advantage with non-industrial union members.) At a mere 18% (in 2012), Hillary losing six percent (which may have been sexism and not related to her position on unions dominated by men), only cost her 1% in the popular vote and Trump only gained 0.7%. Was that enough to flip any state?
I don’t buy the limited power. In 1992-1994 and 2008-2010 Democrats held the Presidency and the Congress. They could have done something but they didn’t. If they had chosen to do something, particularly in 2008-2010, I don’t think they would have lost the Congress, but I’ll admit I’m not as good at this as you and Booman.
Two separate time periods.
1992-1994. Democrats in Congress were so thrilled to have a D POTUS that they were willing to give the guy some time to get up and running in the job. Two scandals were brewing, the Congressional Post Office and The House Banking scandal came. Both surfaced in ’92 but it took a year for Newt to begin capitalizing on both. Rostenkowski was indicted in 1994 and resigned. Kolter was also indicted but has lost his seat in the 1992 election.
Then there were all the Clinton scandals (before and after taking office) that were coming to light. Synergy. What a freaking mess. By the time they were beginning to figure out who BC really was, 77 were out of the House and 8 were gone from the Senate. And BC was schmoozing with the GOP because the D minority wasn’t so keen on the GOP crap that he was peddling.
On principle they couldn’t let him be convicted for lying about an extramarital affair, but they throw their principles under the bus so frequently that perhaps one more time wouldn’t have made much difference and then we wouldn’t have had to deal with the Clintons for an additional eighteen years. And maybe Gore would have seen the light earlier and junked his DLC stuff and been a halfway decent replacement POTUS. (The GOP House wasn’t doing so well on their scandals by then either.) If Ford could almost get elected in ’76, no reason why Gore couldn’t have done better in the ’00 election. Since I’m fantasizing, Glass-Steagall my not have bit the dust and the CFMA could have been killed off or vetoed.
’09-’10 not a priority for Obama. Not that he had much interest in it anyway. But as with the ’93 Democratic Congress (and without the plague of scandals), they let the top guy run things and never distanced themselves from him as he proceeded to push GOP-lite. Bernie was right; Obama should have been primaried in ’12. Except for one teensy-weensy problem. Okay maybe two. And both sort of biggies. The Party would have lost the AA vote for a generation. And Hillary would have jumped into the race and probably won the nomination as white folks that had viewed them as equally qualified in ’08 and ended up going with Obama because they preferred his demeanor were having second thoughts by early 2011.
Democrats can’t operate their party and unions can’t keep their house in order. And a nasty cartoon is the soon to be President elect.
White females?
If I’m right (I haven’t checked) or even if I’m not, I would add that the gender gap is greatly misunderstood. Single women traditionally vote D in large numbers. Married women often vote more like their husbands then like single women, with the gender gap completely vanishing in some cases. The gender gap is also overstated due to a large difference in eligible voters between black females and black males.
All true, but the white female voting population while declining is larger than 18%. The only (and best numbers I could find) is that it was 41% in 2004 and 38% in 2012.
fladem got it — union households.
“a large difference in eligible voters between black females and black males.” Don’t get that at all.
Arrests and incarceration.
Figures?
Black males are overrepresented among those barred from voting due to felony records, especially after the war on crack. In some southern states, close to 1/3 of black males can’t vote.
Astounding! One third felons!
Perhaps much more concerned about abortion and workplace equality? Even today, lots of the married women have jobs, not careers and an accidental pregnancy is not a catastrophe.
Against my better judgement I’ll venture that it’s easier to “just say No” to a husband than a boyfriend?
An important new report, but no other place to post it today:
Rolling Stone — ‘San Antonio 4’ Declared Innocent by Texas Court of Appeals
Each of the women were imprisoned for a dozen or more years.
Long and good 2014 write-up in the Texas Observer — The Mystery of the San Antonio Four
Another travesty of justice gone wild.