I don’t have independent confirmation of these numbers, but I trust Jon Chait to get them right:
The white share of the electorate has been falling steadily for two decades, from 87 percent in 1992 to 83 percent in 1996 to 81 percent in 2000, 77 percent in 2004, and 74 percent four years ago.
That’s a very consistent line. Every four years, the percentage of the electorate that is white declines by about three percentage points. Based on the recent trend, we should expect the white vote to make up between 70-72 percent of the electorate this time around. Yet, for some reason, Gallup is projecting the white vote to be 77% of the electorate this November. Data from the 2010 U.S. Census (pdf) indicates that the non-hispanic white population fell from 69.1% in 2000 to 63.7% at the end of the last decade. That doesn’t seem to support a reversal in the trend. Did something happen between the last presidential election and the upcoming one that would stop and reverse the downward trend?
The answer is that the sharp decline in the economy that started in 2007 but really got going in September 2008 wound up dislocating a lot of non-white voters. A lot of Democrats have moved and need to reregister. Of course, we can add to this the many new Photo ID requirements that disproportionately affect people of color. And then maybe blacks won’t be quite as enthusiastic about voting for Obama the second time around. A combination of all these factors could conceivably stop the trend. Could they go so far as to actually reverse it? Could the electorate of 2012 really look like the electorate of 2004, as Gallup projects?
I think that is a stretch. If Gallup really believes that, they should explain their reasoning. Because it isn’t any secret that Romney is polling better than Obama among non-hispanic white voters. And if Gallup has the demographic model skewed badly to reflect a much bigger white vote than is realistic or justified by the available evidence, then their poll numbers are going to skew towards Romney all year long. Right now, Gallup is polling more like Rasmussen and the Washington Times than they are like more respectable outfits. Hell, even Fox News has Obama with a seven point lead. Gallup says Romney is up by one.
What was the white share in 2010? That seems a relevant consideration.
If the difference between the white share between 08 and 10 is significantly higher than the difference between 04 and 06 or 00 and 02, then we might have some small cause to suspect that white backlash to Obama’s election might result in above-trend turnout.
Not that it matters, since we’re talking about Mitt F’n Romney at the end of the day. The President will be comfortably reelected in November.
“The President will be comfortably reelected in November.”
Oh??
Sorry, I’ve heard this all before. Back in 1998-1999, prior to the term “blog” was even invented, I spent alot of time at the public forum at Salon.com.
There, numerous “progressives” predicted a landslide victory for Al Gore in 2000. There was plenty of heehawing and knee-slapping over “that nobody, dumb hick governor in TX” and there’s “just no way bush could win”.
Well? What happened?
Here’s what: then, just like now, the democratic party was arrogant. They assumed Gore was a lock.
Gore lost Ohio by three percent. Clinton won Ohio both times he ran. It’s hard to convince progressives in Bloggo world it’s more or less impossible to win the POTUS election without winning Ohio.
How did Obama do in Ohio last time? He carried the state by just over 200,000 votes, again, three percent-hardly a big margin.
Underestimating the pissed off, unemployed, white voters in states like Ohio is a mistake, a big mistake.
unemployment is going done faster in OH than the rest of the nation and the auto industry is big there
You think anti-auto rescue Mitt is going to do well with Ohioans?
I’ve been wondering why Gallup’s numbers seem like Rasmussen’s, even though I don’t think Gallup is trying to skew rightward, unlike Rasmussen. This would explain it.
I think Gallup skews rightward. This isn’t new. But they aren’t normally is Rasmussen territory. Their model needs explaining because it seems unjustifiably skewed.
I think Gallup’s about right. I expect a lot of “I’ll crawl over broken glass if that’s what it takes to get That Awful Negro out of the White House” turnout.
2008 was, in part, about what’s best in this country. This go-round will be about what is worst, to the exclusion of most everything else.
why so pessimistic?
“Why so pessimistic?”
You’re kidding, right?
A PPP poll recently indicated 39% of union households in WI still support Scott Wanker errr Walker. You think they’re voting for O this time?
Keep in mind this “recession” hit men, particularly white men, very hard. Millions of them are not back to work yet.
In typical recessions, white men have been spared to a degree. Minorities and women were the first fired and the last hired when the recession ended. That’s not happening this time.
I think the pissed off, unemployed, anti-incumbent, racist voters in Ohio are going to matter. Obama won Ohio last time by just over 200,000 votes. that’s hardly a huge margin.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html
You may be right about the “crawl over broken glass…to get That Awful Negro out of the White House” turnout.
Just a hunch, but I expect that by the time we get to the first week of November there’ll be a sizable “crawl over broken glass to keep our President in the White House” crowd that turns out to vote.
I’ll take the fundamental depravity of mankind, and give the points.
I never bet against St. Augustine.
Call me naive, but I like to think that today’s Silent Majority is with Obama, the calm adult in the room.
You don’t suppose they’re factoring-in all the voter suppression efforts, do you? Or is this just me be cynical.
I’ve been getting alot of polling calls from Rep outfits lately; all of which are by companies I’ve never heard of. They’re actually pretty entertaining because their inflammatory skewing of the questions is so obvious.
For example, ‘where do you get your news, Fox, radio talk, or social network?’
The heavy handed-Conservative pitch has given us a country where 50% of the country hates a president whose persona literally doesn’t exist.