I know the election is over and it is time to, as they say, “Move On”. But not quite yet.
Presidential elections can fit many patterns, and this one was no exception. In retrospect it has a certain (and false) sense of inevitability. Unpopular president, bad economy; these things don’t bode well for an incumbent party. Yet nations, like individuals, possess a kind of free will, and formulaic determinism will always fall short.
But one pattern jumps out. This was an election in which the domestic economy was the “top topic” on voters’ minds. When that has happened recently, Democrats usually win.
By contrast, in 2004, war, terrorism, and international tensions were the top topics. When that happens, Democrats usually lose – at least since 1972. That was the year that George McGovern set the style for pacifist anti-military presidential candidates. Not one has varied from the McGovernite style since then. It is not a problem for them when domestic issues (primarily the economy) dominate our concerns. That explains Obama, Clinton, Carter, and even (looking only at popular vote) Gore. 2008, like 1972, 1992, 1996, and 2000, were domestic elections. All the others were dominated by security and foreign affairs, and Democrats lost. Every one.
The only recent election that Republicans won despite low interest in foreign affairs was Bush pere in 1988. I guess even voters unconcerned with defense were put off by Snoopy Dukakis riding in his tank.
The amazing thing is that in at least two elections (1972 and 2004) discontent with unpopular wars (Vietnam and Iraq) made up a large part of the public focus on foreign affairs. Yet the incumbents running those unpopular wars were not punished; they were re-elected!
Conclusion? The Democratic Party’s ingrained pacifism is unacceptable when Americans are thinking about electing a Commander-In-Chief. The Party may want to take a few minutes to worry about this someday.
0 Responses to “Democrats win another domestic election”