Rock the Vote just came out with a nice two-page fact sheet that lays out the essential numbers behind the surge in turnout for young people in the 2008 campaign. We’ve been talking a lot about this phenomenon, and we had a Rock the Vote person speak at our day-long event last Friday, but sometimes it’s nice to look at the cold, hard facts.
Young people from age 18 to 29 have doubled their numbers in the presidential primaries this year. This is the combined number of all youth in both parties and is measured against the last competitive primary (2004 for Dems and 2000 for Republicans).
If you look at individual state numbers, some of the states tripled the turnout of young people, and no state with valid numbers showed less than a 40 percent increase.
So you may say that, sure, youth turned out, but so did all kinds of groups. However, youth increased their turnout by much more than any age group. This is measured by the all-important percentage “share” of the electorate. If you consider all ages taking a slice of the pie of the electorate, the Millennial Generation’s slice grew by taking more of the pie from the slices of the other age groups.
In the average of all Democratic primaries, youth went from 10 percent of the 2004 primaries to 14 percent of the 2008 ones.
In every single state that held a Democratic primary so far, the youth “share” of the electorate went up. In Iowa, they went as high as 22 percent of the electorate. Almost a quarter of all voters were Millennials there, in the state that started Obama’s rise.
The Republican numbers for increases in share of the youth vote are less dramatic, and in a few states they did not increase, but nevertheless, the general trend is playing out there too. Youth of all ideological stripes are more engaged in politics than we have seen in a long time, though that is particularly true on the Democratic and progressive side.
We at the New Politics Institute have been promoting this important constituency for years and it is incredibly gratifying to see this playing out so dramatically on the ground and so graphically in the numbers.
As a way to set the mood for today's West Virginia Primary, I will go with the obvious choice and ask you to listen to John Denver's classic.
Today, voters from Wheeling to Weirton will head to the polls in the Mountain State from 6:30 a.m. until 7:30 p.m. to allocate West Virginia's 28 delegates. At 7:45 p.m., Keith Olberman, Wolf Blitzer and Bill O'Reilly will all call the race for Senator Clinton.
Former President Bill Clinton is predicting an 80-20 victory for the Senator from New York in tonight's primary which would be relative to Huntington, WV's Thundering Herd of Marshall University's 48-23 loss last season to their upstate rival from Morgantown, the Mountaineers of West Virginia University. Chances are very good that Senator Clinton's staff will be burning their couches as is the tradition in West Virginia following a big win (or a disappointing loss).
Two central dynamics are now taking over the Presidential campaign - the enormous, even historic, structural advantage of the Democrats, and Obama's new "surge", brought about through the early stages of his imminent victory over Senator Clinton.
Poll after poll these last few years have documented the emergence of a whole new political dynamic in American politics - the end of the conservative ascendency, the collapse of the GOP brand and the rise of the Democratic brand. Simply put, the country is more Democratic today than it has been since at least 1982 and perhaps all the way back to the 1960s. Today's Washington Post has a new national poll which again captures the yawning gap between the two parties, and the strong wind blowing behind the Democrats as they head into 2008 (for further evidence of this note huge fundraising and turnout advantage for the Dems so far in 2008).
A big looming question over the Presidential race has always been would the Democratic nominee be able to match the 10-15 spread between the two parties, resulting in what could be a truly realigning election and the dawn of a new progressive era? So far there has been little evidence of this, and indications have largely pointed to a very close general election.
But in the last week, there are signs that Obama's slowly emerging "victory" over Senator Clinton is beginning to alter that dynamic. Winners often get a bounce from their victory. It can be a few points or much more. And given that Senator Clinton is still in the race, it would be surprising for the Obama bounce to be more than a few points. But looking at the Post poll, the new LA Times poll, Rasmussen and Gallup, there is evidence that Obama is in the early stages of a bounce. He now leads Senator Clinton in all these polls by a larger margin than he has at any time in the campaign, consistently in double digits now (destroying her argument to be a stronger general election candidate). But he also is now starting to show three, six and in the Post poll, seven point advantages over Senator McCain.
While the Post makes the case that at this point McCain is outperforming the GOP and is showing remarkable early strength, I think that interpretation, while partially true, does not really capture what is happening in the race (particularly on the day GOPer Bob Barr entered the race, again showing how hard it is going to be for McCain to take full control over his party). Given the nature of the Democratic race, we really have no idea what a true McCain-Obama match up looks like. Senator Obama has yet to go through his ascension to be the Democratic chief, and all the public benefit that accrues from winning. This week, we are starting to see the public in the early stages of seeing Obama now as the Democratic nominee, and his numbers are rising across the board. But has he has not yet really won yet. I don't think at this stage he has risen as far has he will once Senator Clinton drops out of the race. He is in a sort of "mid-bounce." Which given that Senator Obama is now up mid- single digits now without having fully won, and given that the structural gap between the two parties is between 10-15 points, means he is likely to keep climbing over the next few weeks.
So, to me, this new Post poll should not be a comfort to the GOP, but yet another reminder of the catastrophic legacy of the age of Bush, and another early sign of what may be an historic realigning election to come in 2008 (the Mississippi U.S. Senate special election will be another sign).
For more on the dawn of a new political era, be sure to read our recent magazine article, The 50-Year Strategy: A New Progressive Era.
Moveon.org has just announced the winner of their Obama in 30 Seconds ad contest. It has been a very successful project with over 5.5 million votes cast and over 1,000 videos submitted. Peter Leyden discussed the contest earlier on our blog here.
Personally, I find the winning ad to be quite powerful. It strikes a nice bi-partisian tone while simulatenously packing in a multifaceted agrument that addresses many of Obama's perceived weaknesses. It features a white male (maybe working class?) who is a military vetern (national security) and at one moment appears with a flag flying in the background (patriotism). While not as creative as many of the other submissions, the ad is able to present a strong advocate that may appeal to a constituency that Obama has struggled with as of late. This ad certainly shows the wisdom of the crowd, and perhaps, the wisdom of Ben Affleck, one of many celebrity judges.
MSNBC reports that MoveOn.org will air the ad in Ohio, Wisconsin and Colorado spend around $200,000.
John McCain has a new ad up and is giving a speech today in Oregon on climate change, a signature distinction that he likes to draw between himself and President Bush. McCain’s strategy on this issue is to try to position himself as a moderate, and this will be a key issue for him to build his maverick image upon.
Take a look at the new ad:
This ad places McCain in the middle on climate and strikes at others as being "extreme," presumably mainstream Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other. Look for more messaging like this out of the McCain team as the campaigns move into general election mode and McCain tries to neutralize climate change as an issue for the Democrats as he hunts for the middle that he will need to win in November.
McCain’s plan, which David Roberts at Grist calls "better than expected but behind the curve," is part of an important moment in American politics, as it means that the next president will surely do something about Climate Change. It is important to remember, however, that the something on climate all the candidates offer is not the same.
Update: Today's Washington Post features an excellent article by Julie Eilperin entitled "Environmental Stances Are Balancing Act for McCain." A sample:
But an examination of McCain's voting record shows an inconsistent approach to the environment: He champions some "green" causes while casting sometimes contradictory votes on others.
The senator from Arizona has been resolute in his quest to impose a federal limit on greenhouse gas emissions, even when it means challenging his own party. But he has also cast votes against tightening fuel-efficiency standards and resisted requiring public utilities to offer a specific amount of electricity from renewable sources. He has worked to protect public lands in his home state, winning a 2001 award from the National Parks Conservation Association for helping give the National Park Service some say over air tours around the Grand Canyon, work that prompts former interior secretary and Arizona governor Bruce Babbitt to call him "a great friend of the canyon." But he has also pushed to set aside Endangered Species Act protections when they conflict with other priorities, such as the construction of a University of Arizona observatory on Mount Graham.
The Rasmussen daily track has seen a 15 point shift from Clinton to Obama in the last ten days. The last two nights of their daily track now has Obama up over Clinton by 11 points, the largest margin yet recorded, and him up over McCain by 4, 47-43. Obama appears to be getting a "bounce" from Tuesday night.
Given the generic numbers for President and Congress (Dems up 10-15 points), I fully expect that once Obama secures the nomination, and Clinton ends her campaign, for him to get a significant bump and to be in front of McCain by at least high single digits. This new poll is the first evidence that we may be seeing this scenerio beginning to be playing out already. It will be interesting to see what other polls show in the coming days, and how the media coverage of Clinton's likely victory in WV affects this possible new dynamic.
Given her already weakened financial state, if a national swing like this is actually happening and shows up in other polls over the next few days, it is going to make it very hard for Senator Clinton to go on past next week.
We will see.
Sat 4pm Update - Gallup now also shows significant movement to Obama. Again still early to say this is a definitive across the board bounce, but these 2 major tracks have both now shown real movement to Obama these last few days.
No doubt the Obama campaign is aware of their candidate's impressive oration. So it is no surprise that they are making his greatest speeches available on iTunes in both video and podcasts. Read more from Kate Albright-Hanna at the Obama HQ Blog.
For more on how new tools are reaching new audiences (like millennials), be sure to check out our forum tomorrow at the Phoenix Park Hotel in DC. More information.
Over the past two days, NDN has been quoted widely (both nationally and internationally) about the state of the presidential election.
- Starting it off, Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times offers a preview of Tuesday's primaries in IN and NC noting, Even if Hillary wins today, math in Obama's favor. If both candidates win one state, which is what happened, Simon explains that "is inconclusive and that benefits Obama." (5/6/08)
- Susan Milligan from the Boston Globe takes a deeper look at Tuesday's primaries, showing that Votes cast along racial fault lines, exit polls show. Simon adds his analysis to the piece, particularly on Obama's perceived elitism, which he believes was put to rest after NC and IN. He also said the campaign made the struggle of everyday people - a topic which he's written about on our blog - a priority in those states more than they have in any other preceding state. (5/7/08)
- Edward Luce of the Financial Times cites Simon, who explains how Resurgent Obama regains his voice by returning to the core message of his campaign, despite the heavy focus on Reverend Wright and the gas tax.
- The San Francisco Chronicle's Carla Marinucci reports as Obama wins North Carolina - Indiana nail-biter. Simon again says that the dynamic of the race is unchanged; however, he argues that Senator Obama has to go from winning the race to actually having won it, and that's the drama. He hasn't done it - in part Senator Clinton has run a ferocious and remarkable campaign.
- Simon's money argument surfaced again in an article by Liz Sidoti, Beth Fouhy, and Jim Kuhnhenn from the AP in their piece, Clinton pushes ahead with White House bid. (5/8/08)
- Looking on as Obama will need to unite divided party, USA Today's Susan Page quotes Simon as to whether or not reuniting the Democratic party once a nominee is chosen will be difficult. (5/9/08)
- Taking a different note as we look ahead is Adam Nagourney from the New York Times. His piece, For the Democrats, Signs of a Possible Changing of the Guard, shows how an Obama administration would be different and cites Simon first, saying, "There is going to be a new set of people running the show. The Clintons and their allies have been running the show for 16 years. You’re going to see a new generation of political leaders coming to the fore. It’s going to create an upheaval." (5/8/08)
- Nagourney's piece also was picked up by the IHT and Australia's The Age.
- Toby Harnden from the Telegraph titled his piece bluntly: Clinton refuses to quit, but battle 'is over'. Simon's commentary on the financial outlook of Senator Clinton's campaign is perhaps not as blunt as Harnden's title, but offers a reality check nonetheless. He said, "What usually drives candidates out of an election in the United States is not a sense that they're losing but when the money runs out." (5/8/08)
- In his article, Gas tax battle was a political gift to Obama, Reuters' John Whitesides quoted Simon as saying, "The game changer in the last week was when Clinton went after him on the gas tax...Obama pivoted very well to the economy and figured out how to talk about the struggles of everyday people." (05/08/08)
- Simon was asked by Newsday's Craig Gordon what he thought about an Obama-Clinton ticket. In the article, 'Clinton, Obama hesitate to build 'Dream Team,' Simon offers his thoughts: "If Senator Obama is the nominee, it will be a very serious option that he has to give serious consideration to...She's won a lot of delegates, she's raised a lot of money, she would bring a lot to the ticket." (5/08/08)
John McCain appeared on last night’s Daily Show with Jon Stewart. As far as politicians go, McCain has been a Daily Show favorite, and this interview is well worth watching. Stewart takes him to task on a couple lines he has delivered in the past - like his claim that Hamas endorsed Barack Obama.
Part 1:
Part 2 – Stewart takes McCain into the octagon:
John McCain’s fake walk off when Stewart says Bush instead of Hagee is pretty funny, but he was probably relieved that he didn't have to get into the Hagee issue. He will certainly have to account for the endorsement that he actively pursued from Reverend Hagee in the fall, but McCain’s cozying up to President Bush will obviously be a huge problem as well. How far we’ve come from 2004, when John McCain was considered a potential VP choice for John Kerry.
Given the fact that the Democratic Primary race for President is just more exciting than the Republican Primary race for President, I can understand that people/pundits/media would normally just pay more attention to the Democratic race over the Republican race. However, over the past few weeks many in the media have focused their commentary on the possibility that the prolonged Democratic Primary may hurt the eventual Democratic nominee in the General election this November. I think that, as with any primary battle, there will be some residual loss of support for the eventual nominee, but none greater than normal.
One of the main reasons for the excitement in the Democratic race that has generated record turnout is that Democrats are tired of this Republican administration and their failed policies and mismanagement of our nation's affairs. In the end, I believe that the Democrats desire for change will overcome any animosity from a primary battle. In addition, both Democratic candidates and their surrogates will make sure that they encourage their supporters to support the nominee. This is likely to happen because both candidates will remain a powerful force in American politics regardless of the outcome in the Presidential primary, and they will need to work together after the election.
However, this has not been the case on the Republican side. Although McCain assumed frontrunner status for the Republican Party after Tsunami Tuesday in February, he has not been able to unite the Party's base around his candidacy. Yesterday, I posed the question in my post about McCain's inability to unite the Republican's base around his candidacy, and the problems this may pose his candidacy in the General election. The NY Times published an article today by Michael Cooper, For the Republicans, It's McCain (and Others) that highlights the fact that a significant portion of Republicans voters refuse to support McCain. I am glad that the media is paying attention to this dynamic because I think that it will definitely alter the strategy for the General election.
Amid the chatter about whether the Democrats would be able to unite around one of their candidates was an interesting nugget. Incomplete returns on Tuesday night showed that more than 20 percent of those who voted in the Republican primary in Indiana voted for someone other than Senator John McCain, the party's presumptive nominee.
With 74 percent of the state reporting, Mr. McCain was winning Indiana with 77.3 percent of the vote, according to The Associated Press. That would be considered a robust margin on most election nights. But consider the competition.
If you look at the contests that have occurred since March 5th, McCain has faced consistent resistance from many Republican voters.
What does it say that more than 1 in 5 Republican voters have refused to vote for him since he secured the Republican nomination? The only plausible explanation is that Conservatives are not confident/comfortable with McCain. In my post yesterday, I also claimed that McCain has probably learned that Conservatives would rather stay home or vote down ballot than support his candidacy. McCain has spent the past several months convincing Conservatives that he deserves their support, and he is failing at convincing them. The Washington Post published an article by Juliet Eilperin, McCain Says He Would Put Conservatives on Supreme Court that focuses on McCain's continued efforts to persuade Conservatives to support his candidacy.
The presumptive Republican presidential nominee said that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. "would serve as the model for my own nominees, if that responsibility falls to me," highlighting the gap between Republicans and Democrats on the question of who should sit on the Supreme Court. Both justices have established strong conservative records since Bush appointed them, and the appointment of one more conservative to the nation's highest court could tip the balance on issues such as abortion, discrimination, civil liberties and private property.
If 20% of the Republican base chooses to walk out on McCain, he will have to pick up those votes elsewhere. Maybe he could reach out to Hispanics, oh wait he has already betrayed them, and sold them down a river. This strategy may have been a bad bet for McCain, but then again McCain has never been a good gambler.
Subscribe to our RSS Feed