Mapping the Political Landscape 2005
Information in the public interest
Copyright Š 2005 Pew Research Center 1615 L Street, NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036-5610 Phone: 202.419.4300 www.pewresearch.org
Mapping the Political Landscape 2005 Foreword This book uses a variety of data bases, research methods and analytical tools to examine trends in partisanship and voting in the United States. It has three sections. They each stand alone but they also complement one another to create what we believe is a richly textured portrait of the American electorate. The first section presents a political typology that sorts voters into nine groups based on their values, political beliefs, self-reported ideology and party affiliation. This is the fourth such typology that the Pew Research Center has produced since 1987,1 when it pioneered this method of clustering respondents to public opinion surveys into like-minded groups. The second section analyzes 2004 election returns at the national, regional, state, county and congressional district levels. It finds that there is more congruence now than at any time in modern history between where people live and which political party gets their votes. The third section looks at the voting behavior and demographic traits of Hispanics, the nation’s largest and fastest-growing minority. Analyzing Census Bureau data, it finds that because so many Hispanics are either non-citizens or too young to vote, their representation in the electorate lags far behind their population growth. This section also examines a lingering question about how the Hispanic vote split in 2004 between President George W. Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry. Here is a summary of key findings: •
The popular red vs. blue labels so often used to describe the current political landscape are broadly accurate but incomplete. Yes, the electorate is closely divided and increasingly polarized, but there are now large fissures within each major party as well as differences between the two parties.
•
The groups making up the Republican coalition are mainly divided over their views about the appropriate role of government; the groups making up the Democratic coalition are mainly divided by their religious and cultural values.
1 The first two typology studies, in 1987 and 1994, were done by Andrew Kohut when he ran what was then the Times Mirror Center for the People & the Press. It became the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in 1996.
i
•
In the post 9/11 world, different attitudes about foreign policy assertiveness, more than any other factor, separate these two big and sometimes fractious coalitions from one another. This had been a relatively minor factor in earlier typologies.
•
Geography now also plays a growing role in separating Republicans from Democrats. It’s not just a matter of red and blue states. Increasingly, there are now red and blue regions, counties and congressional districts as well. One by-product has been a decline in electoral competition in races for all levels of federal office except the presidency.
•
In 2004 one Hispanic voted for every five Hispanics who live in this country (including adults and children, citizens and non-citizens). For whites, the ratio was one of two. This disparity has been widening for decades and, given current demographic and immigration trends, will continue to limit Latino political power for years to come.
This book is the work of the Pew Research Center, an independent, nonpartisan “fact tank” whose mission is to provide information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. The center houses six projects that focus on different topic areas (see inside back cover for more details). Section I was written by the staff of the oldest of these projects, the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, which conducts public opinion survey research. Section II was written by Rhodes Cook, who publishes a newsletter on voting trends and is co-author of America Votes, a biennial compilation of American election statistics published by Congressional Quarterly. Section III was written by the staff of the Pew Hispanic Center, which studies the nation’s Latino population. Paul Taylor and Peter Meredith edited the volume.
Andrew Kohut, President, Pew Research Center
Paul Taylor Vice President, Pew Research Center
ii
Mapping the Political Landscape 2005 Table of Contents 1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue I. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Republicans Divided by Role of Government, Democrats by Social and Personal Values II. The Political Typology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 An Evolving Landscape Making the Typology III. Demographics, Lifestyle and News Consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Education, Wealth and Economic Outlook Marriage and Children Religion and Matters of Faith Where People Turn for News IV. Beyond Red vs. Blue: Value Divides Within Party Coalitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Foreign Policy Values Cultural and Social Issues Other Splits Within the Parties V. Politics and the Typology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 The 2004 Election Favorability Ratings of National Leaders Looking Ahead to 2008 Views of the Parties and Party Leaders Partisan Loyalty VI. Issues and Shifting Coalitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Part One: Social Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Gay Marriage, Abortion, Stem Cell Research, Teaching Creationism in Schools, Displaying the Ten Commandments, The Supreme Court, Views of the Christian Conservative Movement Part Two: Economic and Domestic Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Universal Health Care, Raising the Minimum Wage, Tax Cuts, The Budget Deficit, Bankruptcy Law, Tort Reform, Outsourcing, Trade Policy, Immigration Reform, Drilling in ANWR, Social Security Private Accounts Part Three: Military and Foreign Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Using Preemptive Force, The Iraq War, The Use of Torture, The Patriot Act, Views of Muslims and the United Nations Profiles of the Typology Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
iii
Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Demographic and Political Profiles of the Typology Groups Typology Groups, the Issues, and Media Use Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live Is How You Vote I. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 II. Are We in an Age of Republican Dominance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 The Case For The Case Against III. A Sharply Divided Map: The Battle of the Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Democratic Cities vs. Republican Countryside What Is Changing: Blue-Collar Bastions, White-Collar Suburbs IV. Fewer Split Tickets, Less Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 The Decline of the Split Ticket The Decline in Competition V. Sky-High Turnout in 2004: A Closer Look . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Turnout Up Everywhere Wind at the GOP’s Back More Than Population Growth VI. Tensions in the Political Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 Appendix I: How the Counties Vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 A National Sampler of Democratic Strongholds A National Sampler of Republican Strongholds A National Sampler of Miscellaneous Counties Appendix II: State-by-State Presidential Winners Since 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth I. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 II. Demographic Characteristics of the Hispanic Population and Electorate . . . . . 167 III. How Latinos Voted in 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 IV. President Bush’s Gains Among Hispanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
iv
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue The 2005 Political Typology was prepared by The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, which studies public attitudes toward the press, politics and public policy issues. The Center charts trends in values and fundamental political and social attitudes; it also does regular national surveys that measure public attentiveness to major news stories. All survey results are available at www.people-press.org Phone: 202.419.4350 Fax: 202.419.4399 www.people-press.org Director: Andrew Kohut Associate Directors: Carroll Doherty Michael Dimock Senior Editor: Jodie Allen Director of Survey Research: Scott Keeter Senior Project Director: Carolyn Funk Project Directors: Nilanthi Samaranayake Peyton Craighill Nicole Speulda Research Assistant: Jason Owens Staff Assistants: Kate DeLuca Courtney Kennedy
1. I.
The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
OVERVIEW: Republicans divided about role of government, Democrats by social and personal values
Coming out of the 2004 election, the American political landscape decidedly favored the Republican Party. The GOP had extensive appeal among a disparate group of voters in the middle of the electorate, drew extraordinary loyalty from its own varied constituencies, and made some inroads among conservative Democrats. These advantages outweighed continued nationwide parity in party affiliation. Looking forward, however, there is no assurance that Republicans will be able to consolidate and build upon these advantages. Republicans have neither gained nor lost in party identification in 2005. Moreover, divisions within the Republican coalition over economic and domestic issues may loom larger in the future, given the increasing salience of these matters. The Democratic party faces its own formidable challenges, despite the fact that the public sides with them on many key values and policy questions. Their constituencies are more diverse and, while united in opposition to President Bush, the Democrats are fractured by differences over social and personal values. How Values Divide the Nation
These are among the conclusions of Pew’s political typology study, which sorts voters into homogeneous groups based on values, political beliefs, and party affiliation. The current study is based on two public opinion surveys – a nationwide poll of 2,000 interviews conducted Dec. 1-16, 2004, and a subsequent re-interview of 1,090 respondents conducted March 17-27 of this year. This is the fourth such typology created by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press since 1987. Many of the groups identified in the current surveys are similar to those in past typologies, reflecting the continuing importance of a number of key beliefs and values. These themes endure despite the consequential events of the past four years – especially the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the war in Iraq.
Divisions Between Parties: Large gaps between Republicans and Democrats: • National security • Assertive foreign policy Divisions Within Parties: Minor partisan gap, but major fissures within one or both parties: • Environmentalism • Government regulation • Isolationism vs. global activism • Immigration Divisions Between and Within Parties: Partisan divides, but also intra-party gaps: • Religious & moral values • Welfare • Cooperation with allies • Business & the free market • Cynicism about politics • Individualism vs. fatalism
But clearly, those events – and the overall importance of national security issues – have a major impact on the typology. Foreign affairs assertiveness now almost completely distinguishes Republican-oriented voters from Democratic-oriented voters; this was a relatively minor factor in
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
past typologies. In contrast, attitudes relating to religion and social issues are not nearly as important in determining party affiliation. Still, these issues do underscore differences within parties, especially among the Democrats. While Republican-inclined voters range from the religious to the very religious, the Democratic Party is much more divided in terms of religious and cultural values. Its core constituents include both seculars and the highly religious. The value gaps for the GOP are, perhaps surprisingly, greatest with respect to the role of government. The Republicans’ bigger tent now includes more lower-income voters than it once did, and many of these voters favor an activist government to help working class people. Government regulation to protect the environment is an issue with particular potential to divide Republicans. On this issue, wide divisions exist both within the GOP and among right-of-center voters more generally. Yet Republicans also have much in common beyond their overwhelming support for a muscular foreign policy and broad agreement on social issues. Voters inclined toward the Republican Party are distinguished from Democrats by their personal optimism and belief in the power of the individual. While some voting blocs on the right are as financially stressed as poorer Democrats, Republicans in this situation tend to be more hopeful and positive in their outlook than their more fatalistic counterparts in the Democratic Party. National security attitudes also generally unite the Democrats. Beyond their staunch opposition to the war in Iraq, Democrats overwhelmingly believe that effective diplomacy, rather than military strength, should serve as the basis for U.S. security policy. At home, Democrats remain committed to a strong social safety net and are joined in opposition to most domestic policy proposals from the Bush administration, from tougher bankruptcy laws to private accounts in Social Security. The typology study’s finding of significant cleavages within parties not only runs counter to the widespread impression of a nation increasingly divided into two unified camps, but also raises questions about political alignments in the future. In particular, the study suggests that if the political agenda turns away from issues of defense and security, prospects for party unity could weaken significantly. As the following chapters detail, numerous opportunities exist for building coalitions across party lines on many issues currently facing the nation – coalitions that, in many cases, include some strange political bedfellows. Overall, there are many more shades to the American political landscape than just the red and blue dividing the Electoral College maps last Nov. 2.
2
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
The Political Middle In some ways, the biggest difference between the latest Pew Research Center typology and those in the Clinton era concerns the groups in the middle of the political spectrum. During the 1990s, the typology groups in the center were not particularly partisan, but today they lean decidedly to the GOP. The middle groups include Upbeats, relatively moderate voters who have positive views of their financial situation, government performance, business, and the state of the nation in general. They are generally well-educated and fairly engaged in political news. While most Upbeats do not formally identify with either political party, they voted for Bush by more than four-to-one last November.
The 2005 Political Typology: The Middle Groups
Upbeats Positive outlook & moderate Disaffecteds Working class & discouraged Bystanders Democracy’s dropouts
General Regist. Public Voters % % 11 13 9
10
10
0
A second, very different group of centrist voters, the Disaffecteds, is much less affluent and educated than the Upbeats. Consequently, they have a distinctly different outlook on life and political matters. They are deeply cynical about government and unsatisfied with their financial situation. Even so, Disaffecteds lean toward the Republican Party and, though many did not vote in the presidential election, most of those who did supported Bush’s reelection. In effect, Republicans have succeeded in attracting two types of swing voters who could not be more different. The common threads are a highly favorable opinion of President Bush personally and support for an aggressive military stance against potential enemies of the U.S. A third group in the center, Bystanders, largely consign themselves to the political sidelines. This category of mostly young people, few of whom voted in 2004, has been included in all four of the Center’s political typologies. The Right The Republican Party’s current advantage with the center makes up for the fact that the GOP-oriented groups, when taken together, account for only 29% of the public. By contrast, the three Democratic groups constitute 41% of the public. But the imbalance shifts to the GOP’s favor when the inclinations of the two major groups in the center are taken into account – many of whom lean Republican and most of whom voted for George W. Bush. 3
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
The three GOP groups are highly diverse, and this is reflected in their values. The staunchly conservative Enterprisers have perhaps the most consistent ideological profile of any group in the typology. They are highly patriotic and strongly pro-business, oppose social welfare and overwhelmingly support an assertive foreign policy. This group is largely white, well-educated, affluent and male – more than three-quarters are men. While Enterprisers are a bit less religious The 2005 Political Typology: than the other GOP groups, they are socially The Republican Groups conservative in most respects. Two other groups General Regist. on the right are both highly religious and very Public Voters conservative on moral issues. Social % % Enterprisers 9 11 Conservatives agree with Enterprisers on most Staunch conservatives issues, but they tend to be critical of business Social Conservatives 11 13 Religious, critical of business and supportive of government regulation to Pro-Government Conservatives 9 10 protect the public good and the environment. Struggling social conservatives They also express deep concerns about the growing number of immigrants in America. This largely female group includes many white evangelical Christians, and nearly half of Social Conservatives live in the South. Pro-Government Conservatives also are broadly religious and socially conservative, but they deviate from the party line in their backing for government involvement in a wide range of policy areas, such as government regulation and more generous assistance to the poor. This relatively young, predominantly female group is under substantial financial pressure, but most feel it is within their power to get ahead. This group also is highly concentrated in the South, and, of the three core Republican groups, had the lowest turnout in the 2004 election. Clearly, there is more than one kind of conservative. The Republican groups find common ground on cultural values, but opinions on the role of government, a defining feature of conservative philosophy for decades, are now among the most divisive for the GOP. The Left At the other end of the political spectrum, Liberals have swelled to become the largest voting bloc in the typology. Liberals are opponents of an assertive foreign policy, strong supporters of environmental protection, and solid backers of government assistance to the poor. This affluent, well-educated, highly secular group is consistently liberal on social issues, 4
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ranging from freedom of expression to abortion. In contrast, Conservative Democrats are quite religious, socially conservative and take more moderate positions on several key foreign policy questions. The group is older, and includes many blacks and Hispanics; of all the core Democratic groups, it has strongest sense of personal empowerment. Disadvantaged Democrats also include many minority voters, and they are the least financially secure voting bloc. Members of this heavily female, poorly educated group are highly pessimistic about their opportunities in life, and also very mistrustful of both business and The 2005 Political Typology: government. Nonetheless, they support The Democratic Groups government programs to help the needy. While the Republican Party is divided over government’s role, the Democrats are divided by social and personal values. Most Liberals live in a world apart from Disadvantaged Democrats and Conservative Democrats.
Liberals Secular and anti-war Disadvantaged Democrats Social welfare loyalists Conservative Democrats Latter-day New Dealers
General Regist. Public Voters % % 17 19 10
10
14
15
Other Major Findings !
For the most part, opinions about the use of force are what divides Democratic-oriented groups from the Republican groups. On other foreign policy issues, even contentious questions about working with allies, the partisan pattern is not as clear.
!
Environmental protection now stands out as a major divide within the GOP’s coalition. While a narrow majority of Enterprisers believe the country has gone too far in its efforts to protect the environment, most others on the GOP side disagree.
!
Poorer Republicans and Democrats have strikingly different outlooks on their lives and possibilities. Pro-Government Conservatives are optimistic and positive; Disadvantaged Democrats are pessimistic and cynical.
!
Immigration divides both parties. Liberals overwhelmingly believe immigrants strengthen American society, and most Enterprisers agree. Majorities of other groups in both parties say immigrants threaten traditional American customs and values.
5
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
!
The Republican Party is doing a better job of standing up for its core issues than is the Democratic Party, according to their respective constituents. Liberals are particularly negative about the performance of the Democratic Party.
!
A plurality of the public wants Bush to select a nominee who will keep the Supreme Court about the same as it is now. Only among Enterprisers and Social Conservatives is there substantial support for a more conservative course.
!
Stem cell research deeply divides the GOP. Majorities in all three Democratic groups, and the three independent groups, favor such research. Republican groups, to varying degrees, are divided.
!
Enterprisers take conservative positions on most religious and cultural issues but are less intense in their beliefs than are other GOP groups. They are more libertarian than other Republican-oriented groups.
!
George W. Bush has the broadest personal appeal of any national political figure among the main independent groups, the Upbeats and Disaffecteds.
!
Rudy Giuliani is widely popular with Republican groups but also has a favorable rating among majorities in both independent groups, and is viewed positively by roughly half of Conservative Democrats and Liberals.
!
Bill and Hillary Clinton’s favorable ratings have risen among the public, and both earn relatively high ratings from the GOP’s Pro-Government Conservatives.
!
Liberals stand far apart from the rest of the electorate in their strong support for gay marriage, and in opposing the public display of the Ten Commandments in government buildings.
!
Enterprisers stand alone on key economic issues. Majorities in every other group – except Enterprisers – support a government guarantee of universal health insurance. Enterprisers also are the only group in which less than a majority supports increasing the minimum wage.
!
Private investment accounts in Social Security draw mixed reviews. Support for Bush’s plan has faded not just among Democrats, but also independents. Disaffecteds are now evenly split over the proposal; in December, they favored it by almost a two-to-one margin.
!
Enterprisers are the only voters to overwhelmingly believe that the Patriot Act is a necessary tool in the war on terrorism. Liberals are the strongest opponents of the legislation.
6
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
II: The Political Typology The 2005 Political Typology is the fourth of its kind, following on previous studies in 1987, 1994 and 1999. While the mood of the American electorate has changed markedly over this period, underlying patterns persist. Many characteristics of the groups identified by the current survey, in particular the ideological positions of Enterprisers, Liberals, and Disadvantaged Democrats, have remained virtually unchanged over the 18 years of typology studies. This consistency reflects the continuing importance of a number of key beliefs and values among some segments of the electorate. Still, the emergence of national security issues, as well as a fundamental reevaluation of government by both Democrats and Republicans in an era of unified GOP control in Washington, have produced new alignments within each of the two parties, and caused some once relevant groups to disappear. Moreover, religious and social issues continue to divide both within and across party lines, creating challenges to party leaders as they seek to build or maintain their majorities. Each of the typologies developed by the Pew Research Center has been designed to provide a more complete and detailed description of the political landscape, classifying people on the basis of a broad range of value orientations rather than simply on the basis of party identification or selfreported ideology. Like past surveys, the new typology reveals substantial political and social differences within as well as across the two political parties. It also provides insights into the political attitudes of independents, who make up more than one-third of the American electorate but are far from unified in terms of their values and ideological beliefs. An Evolving Landscape There are some notable shifts in this Key Changes in the 2005 Typology year’s political typology from past studies. The ! Democrats: Liberals grow in size; New Liberal group has nearly doubled in size over Democrats no longer distinct the past six years. The “New Democrats” – a ! Republicans: Pro-Government Conservatives key element of the Democratic coalition in key to GOP victories, but cross-pressured typology studies in the 1990s – no longer arise ! The middle: Republican Party winning support as a distinct ideological grouping. This suggests from centrist Upbeats and Disaffecteds that some of the growth among Liberals comes from former New Democrats, whose views on national security and government regulation have become more polarized after more than four years of GOP control. The 2005 study also buttresses the finding in 1999 that the Republican Party’s base is now 7
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
divided into three core subgroups. In both 1987 and 1994 the predominant divisions on the right were between two ideological clusters, Enterprisers and Moralists, defined by the relative emphasis each placed on conservative economic and social values. The 1999 study found, and the 2005 analysis confirms, the development of a critical third element of the Republican base – a group we refer to as Pro-Government Conservatives. While this group agrees fully with the religious values of Social Conservatives, and the assertive foreign stance of both of the other Republican groups, its members are predominantly lower income and struggling financially. Perhaps as a result, they favor greater government action in assisting the poor and in regulating business to improve the environment, as well as to protect morality. As in the past, there are two very different groups in the center, aside from the generally apathetic Bystanders. The Upbeats are affluent and optimistic; the Disaffecteds are struggling financially and much more pessimistic. The Republican Party’s advantage in the ideological center is substantial. Far more Upbeats and Disaffecteds identify with the GOP than with the Democratic Party; when the leaning of those who view themselves as independent is taken into account, the GOP advantage is even more apparent. In large part, this is reflective of Bush’s strong personal appeal among these groups. Among Disaffecteds, Bush is by far the Partisanship and the Political Typology most popular political figure Independents who tested and he rates near the top Party Identification* “lean” included** of the list among Upbeats. Repub- Dem- IndeRep./ Dem./ In all, the new typology features three Republicanoriented groups, two predominantly independent groups, and three Democraticoriented groups, plus the politically uninvolved Bystanders. Because a person’s typology assignment is mostly determined by his or her particular beliefs and values, the degree of partisan affiliation varies within each group. On the right, while Enterprisers and Social
lican % 31
Total
ocrat pendent % % 34 35=100
lean R. % 45
lean D. % 46
Republican Groups Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
81 82 58
1 0 2
18=100 18=100 40=100
98 97 86
1 1 3
Middle Groups Upbeats Disaffecteds Bystanders
39 30 22
5 2 22
56=100 68=100 56=100
73 60 39
14 10 38
0 0
89 84
11=100 16=100
0 0
98 99
1
59
40=100
2
92
Democratic Groups Conservative Democrats Disadvantaged Democrats Liberals
* Independents include respondents who say they have no preference. ** Respondents who do not initially choose a party identification are asked “as of today do you lean more to the Republican Party or more to the Democratic Party?” These columns include these leaners with those who choose a party initially.
8
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Conservatives are overwhelmingly Republican, there are many Pro-Government Conservatives who think of themselves as independents (though most say they “lean toward” the Republican party in a follow-up question). Similarly, while the left has two groups of Democratic loyalists (Conservative and Disadvantaged Democrats), many Liberals think of themselves politically as independents (virtually all of these independent Liberals lean Democratic). Making the Typology The 2005 Typology divides the public into eight politically engaged groups, in addition to the Bystanders. These groups are defined by their attitudes toward government and politics and a range of other social, economic and religious beliefs. In addition to partisan leanings and selfreported ideology, the typology is based on eight value orientations, each of which is reflected by a scale derived from two or more questions in the survey. They are as follows: •
Foreign Policy Assertiveness. Opinions on the efficacy of military strength vs. diplomacy, use of force to defeat terrorism, and Americans’ duty to serve in the military.
•
Religion and Morality. Attitudes concerning the importance of religion in people's lives, the government’s role in protecting morality, and social issues such as homosexuality.
•
Environmentalism and Regulation. Beliefs about the costs and benefits of government regulation of business to protect the environment or the public interest.
•
Social Welfare. Beliefs about the role of government in providing for the poor and needy.
•
Immigration. Views concerning the impact of immigrants on American culture and the U.S. economy.
•
Business Sentiment. Attitudes about the influence of business in American society.
•
Financial Security. Level of satisfaction with current economic status and feelings of financial security.
9
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
•
•
Anti-Government Sentiment. Beliefs about the responsiveness of elected officials, and views about government performance.
Creating the Typology The value dimensions used to create the typology are each based on the combined responses to two or more survey questions. The questions used to create each scale were those shown statistically to be most strongly related to the underlying dimension. Each of the individual survey questions uses a "balanced alternative" format that presents respondents with two statements and asks them to choose the one that most closely reflects their own views. To measure intensity, each question is followed by a probe to determine whether or not respondents feel strongly about the choice they selected.
Individualism. Beliefs about whether all individuals have it within their power to succeed, or whether success is beyond a person’s control.
As in past typologies, a measure of political attentiveness and voting participation was used to extract the "Bystander" group, people who are largely unengaged and uninvolved in politics. A statistical cluster analysis was used to sort the remaining respondents into relatively homogeneous groups based on the nine value scales, party identification, and self reported ideology. Several different cluster solutions were evaluated for their effectiveness in producing cohesive groups that are distinct from one another, large enough in size to be analytically practical, and substantively meaningful. The final solution selected to produce the new political typology was judged to be strongest on a statistical basis and to be most persuasive from a substantive point of view. (A more complete description of the cluster analysis appears in the Methodology.)
These measures of an individual’s overall value orientation on each of these dimensions do not take into account that person’s position on current political issues, such as the war in Iraq or whether gay marriage should be allowed or banned. Instead, they are based on more broadly oriented values questions designed to measure a person’s underlying beliefs about what’s right and wrong, acceptable or unacceptable, or what government should or should not be involved in.
You can take the typology survey and find out where you would be assigned by the methodology at our website: www.people-press.org.
10
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
III: Demographics, Lifestyle and News Consumption The nine groups in the political typology are defined by their beliefs and values, not by their demographic characteristics. Yet each group has a distinctly different demographic profile, which in some cases bears little resemblance to those of their ideological and political allies. For example, Enterprisers have by far the highest percentage of men of any group (76%), while the other two GOP groups are majority female (62% Pro-Government Conservatives, 58% Social Conservatives). (For more on the demographics of the typology, see pg. 64.) On the other hand, Enterprisers and Liberals – whose political opinions mix no better than oil and water – have a surprising amount of common ground both economically and educationally. These groups are the wealthiest and best educated in the typology. Roughly four-in-ten Enterprisers and Liberals (41% each) have annual household incomes of at least $75,000; only the Upbeats (39%) have about as many people in that income category.
Wealthiest Typology Groups Total
24
Enterprisers
41 30
Social Conservatives Pro-Gov't Conservatives
10
Upbeats
39 13
Disaffecteds Bystanders
8
Conservative Dems
15
Liberals have the highest education 41 Liberals level of any typology group – 49% are college Household Income of $75,000 or more graduates and 26% have some postgraduate education. But the Enterprisers also include a relatively high percentage of college graduates (46%), although fewer Enterprisers than Liberals have attended graduate school (14%). Disadvantaged Dems
8
Pro-Government Conservatives stand out among Republican groups for their modest incomes. About half (49%) have annual household incomes of less than $30,000; just 13% of Enterprisers and 26% of Social Conservatives have incomes in that range. Pro-Government Conservatives’ annual household incomes are comparable to those of Disadvantaged Democrats and Bystanders, and much lower than those of other GOP groups. Huge disparities in education also divide both Democratic and Republican typology groups. Just 13% of Disdvantaged Democrats have completed college (9% college grads, 4% postgraduate), compared with nearly half of Liberals. Educational differences between Liberals and Conservative Democrats are nearly as large (49% vs. 16%). 11
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Among Republicans, just 15% of ProGovernment Conservatives have completed college, compared with 45% of Enterprisers. There also are wide disparities in education among the three independent groups, with Upbeats (37%) far more likely to have completed college than Bystanders (13%) or Disaffecteds (11%).
College Graduation Rates by Typology Groups 16
Total
11 31
Enterprisers 19
Social Conservatives 10
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
14 9
5 24
Upbeats Disaffecteds
9
2
Bystanders
7
6
13
Marriage and Children 11 5 Conservative Dems The exit poll from the 2004 election Disadvantaged Dems 9 4 showed that married people – especially 23 26 Liberals parents with children at home – strongly College Grad Post-Grad favored the president. Overall, Bush led by 57%-42% among all married Americans, and 59%-40% among married people with children, according to the National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll. This pattern is reflected in the typology. Majorities in all three GOP groups are married: 77% of Enterprisers; 66% of Social Conservatives; and 55% of Pro-Government Conservatives. That also is the case for the two GOP-leaning independent groups – 59% of Upbeats and 57% of Disaffecteds. Married with Children By contrast, about half of Conservative Democrats 27 Total (49%) and smaller numbers of Liberals (44%) and Disadvantaged Democrats (42%) are married. Enterprisers 40 Social Conservatives
28
Pro-Gov't Conservatives 34 The Republican groups also have higher proportions of married people with children living 28 Upbeats at home. Four-in-ten Enterprisers are married and 22 Disaffecteds have children under age 18 living at home, as do Bystanders 28 34% of Pro-Government Conservatives and 28% of 23 Conservative Dems Social Conservatives. Among Democratic groups, Disadvantaged Dems 28 28% of Disadvantaged Democrats, 23% of Liberals 20 Conservative Democrats, and just 20% of Liberals are married and have children living at home. Conservative and Disadvantaged Democrats are just as likely as Republican groups to have children living at home, but larger percentages are single parents (14% and 19%, respectively).
12
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Economic Perceptions Disadvantaged Democrats are largely defined by their feelings of financial stress. More than three-quarters of this group (77%) say they often do not have enough money to make ends meet; just 19% say paying the bills is generally not a problem. Yet financial unease is nearly as extensive among Pro-Government Conservatives; roughly two-thirds (68%) report that they have problems making ends meet. For the most part, paying the bills is not a problem for those in the financially well-off groups – Enterprisers, Liberals and Upbeats. But most Social Conservatives, whose annual incomes are significantly less than in these other groups, also report few problems making ends meet. Nearly nine-in-ten Social Conservatives (88%) say that paying the bills is generally not a problem. Among Disadvantaged Democrats, many more have also had personal experience with unemployment than in other groups. More than half of Disadvantaged Democrats (58%) say they, or someone in their household, have been out of work in the past year. Still, large minorities in most other groups – including 39% of Pro-Government Conservatives – say they or someone in their household have been jobless in the past year. Even about a quarter of the Enterprisers (28%) have been without work in the past 12 months. Financially Stressed: Disadvantaged Dems, Pro-Government Conservatives Enter- Social Pro-Govt Up- Disaf- ByConserv Disadv beats fecteds standers Dems Dems Which comes prisers Cons Cons closer to your views... % % % % % % % % Paying the bills is not generally a problem 88 88 29 90 38 48 63 19 I often can’t make ends meet 9 10 68 7 54 49 33 77 2 3 3 8 3 4 4 Other/DK/Refused 3 100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Liberals % 75 24 1 100
Personal Optimism a Dividing Line Pro-Government Conservatives and Disadvantaged Democrats have similar socioeconomic backgrounds and confront many of the same financial struggles. Both groups are predominantly female, both are relatively poor, and large majorities in both groups express dissatisfaction with their financial circumstances. But these groups have strikingly different outlooks on their lives and possibilities that go a long way toward explaining the differences in their political attitudes. Feelings about the power of 13
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
the individual are a major factor in this division. Pro-Government Conservatives are defined, at least in part, by their optimism in this area. About three-quarters (76%) believe that most people can get ahead if they are willing to work hard – and two-thirds (66%) strongly express that view. An even higher percentage of ProGovernment Conservatives (81%) say that everyone has it in his or her own power to succeed. Disadvantaged Democrats have a gloomier outlook. Just 14% think that people can get ahead by working hard; 79% say that hard work is no guarantee of success, and 76% express that view strongly. Only 44% of Disadvantaged Democrats say that everyone has the power to succeed, while slightly more (47%) take the fatalistic view that success in life is determined by forces outside one’s own control.
Struggling Groups: Similar Fortunes, Different Outlooks
Gender Men Women
Pro-Gov Disadv Cons Dems % % 38 40 62 60 100 100
Household income Under $50,000 $50,000 and over
79 21
78 22
Education College Graduate Some College High School or less
15 26 59
13 20 67
Financial Perceptions I often can’t make ends meet Not very satisfied financially
68 74
77 79
Personal Optimism People can get ahead w/ hard work 76 Everyone has the power to succeed 81
14 44
More broadly, opinions on personal empowerment deeply divide both the Democratic groups and independents. More than eight-in-ten Conservative Democrats (83%) think that most people who work hard can get ahead, while Liberals are somewhat less likely to subscribe to this view and Disadvantaged Democrats strongly disagree. Among center groups, Upbeats, by definition, are very optimistic on this point, and Disaffecteds much less so. Conservatives Have Strong Belief in Personal Empowerment Enter- Social Pro-Govt Up- Disaf- Conserv Disadv Libbeats fecteds Dems Dems erals Which comes prisers Cons Cons closer to your views... % % % % % % % % Most people can get ahead w/ hard work 95 87 76 84 48 83 14 56 Hard work is no guarantee of success 4 10 24 13 48 12 79 39 3 * 3 4 5 7 5 Other/DK/Refused 1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
14
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Matters of Faith The groups in the typology vary considerably in their religious traditions and in how they express their religious faith. All of the groups include sizable numbers of people with a strong religious commitment, but there are significant differences in how that commitment is manifested. The U.S. remains a majority-Protestant nation (56% overall say they belong to the Protestant tradition), and this includes a majority among all groups except the younger, more secular Bystanders (49%) and Liberals (36%). Among other groups, Protestants range from 55% among the Upbeats up to 68% among the Social Conservatives. White evangelical Protestants, a core constituency for President Bush, are a significant plurality group among Social Conservatives (43%), ProGovernment Conservatives (37%), and Enterprisers (34%). White evangelicals constitute no more than 22% of any other group in the typology, and include only 5% of the Liberals.
Attend Bible Study or Prayer Group Meetings Total
36
Enterprisers
36 51
Social Conservatives Pro-Gov't Conservatives
52 35
Upbeats Disaffecteds
38
Bystanders
30
Conservative Democrats
44 41
Disadvantaged Dems Liberals
13
In contrast with the great variability of evangelical representation across groups, Catholics are not concentrated in any specific group or cluster of groups. Catholics are one-quarter of the population (25%), but their proportions among groups vary only from 20% among Enterprisers to 30% among Upbeats. Catholics are 23% of the three Republican groups and 26% of the three Democratic groups. Jews make up approximately 3% of the public overall, but 8% of the Liberals. People who identify with a religion outside of the Judeo-Christian tradition comprise about 5% of the population but include 8% of Liberals and 8% of Bystanders. Secular individuals – those who say they are agnostic, atheist, or say they have no religious affiliation – are a significant portion only of Liberals: 22%. They include 12% of Bystanders and 9% of Disaffecteds, but otherwise constitute no more than 6% of the other groups.
15
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Religion and the Typology Catholic
White Evangelical
Secular
Total
25
21
8
Enterprisers
20
34
6
Social Conservatives
24
43
3
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
25
37
4
Upbeats
30
22
5
Disaffecteds
22
20
9
Bystanders
26
17
12
Conservative Dems
29
16
1
Disadvantaged Dems
25
11
5
Liberals
23
5
22
Most Americans say that they attend religious services on at least an occasional basis, and 40% say they attend at least once per week. About half of the Republican groups report weekly (or greater) attendance, with Social Conservatives highest at 53%. Among Democratic groups, more than four-in-ten Conservative Democrats (46%) and Disadvantaged Democrats (43%) attend at least weekly, but less than half as many Liberals do so (18%). Church Attendance
Attendance at religious services may also take the form of participation in Bible study or prayer meetings. More than a third of Americans (36%) say they engage in this type of activity. Over half of Pro-Government Conservatives and Social Conservatives (52% and 51%, respectively) participate, compared with 36% among the other Republican group, Enterprisers. Over four-in-ten Conservative and Disadvantaged Democrats (44%, 41%) say they take part in Bible study or prayer meetings, but just 13% of Liberals do so.
Total
At least Some- Seldom/ DK/ weekly times** Never Refused % % % 40 34 25 1=100
Republican Groups Enterprisers 48 Social Conservatives 53 Pro-Gov’t Conservatives 52
26 31 35
25 15 11
1=100 1=100 2=100
Middle Groups Upbeats Disaffecteds Bystanders
46 39 26
32 34 39
22 25 34
*=100 2=100 1=100
Democratic Groups Conservative Democrats 46 Disadvantaged Democrats 43 Liberals 18
34 39 38
19 17 43
1=100 1=100 1=100
** Includes “once or twice a month” and “a few times a year”
16
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Financial Activity: Who Trades Stock Enterprisers and Liberals have the same proportion of high-income individuals. But Enterprisers are much more likely than Liberals – or any other group – to invest in the stock market or own a small business. More than half of Enterprisers (53%) say they trade stocks and bonds in the market. That is the highest percentage among typology groups; about four-in-ten Upbeats (42%) and Liberals (38%) say they are active in the market. Trading stocks and bonds is far less common in the lower-income groups: Just 11% of Bystanders and 14% of Pro-Government Conservatives say they trade stocks and bonds.
Taking Financial Risks Do you... Trade Own a stocks small bus. % % 28 16
Total
Republican Groups Enterprisers 53 Social Conservatives 35 Pro-Gov’t Conservatives. 14
30 14 11
Middle Groups Upbeats Disaffecteds Bystanders
42 17 11
15 21 10
Democratic Groups Conservative Democrats 20 Disadvantaged Democrats 18 Liberals 38
14 8 17
Three-in-ten Enterprisers own small businesses, more than any other group in the typology. Disaffecteds also include a relatively large proportion of small business owners (21%), despite their relatively low incomes; in fact, there are more small business owners among the Disaffecteds than among the wealthier Upbeats (15%). Lifestyle Notes: Showing the Flag Nearly two-thirds of Americans (64%) say they display the American flag at home, at work, or on their car. Three-quarters or more of the GOP groups say they show the flag. Democratic groups show more variation: 72% of Conservative Democrats say they display the flag, compared with 53% of Disadvantaged Democrats and just 41% of Liberals. Among independent groups, only about half of Bystanders (47%) say they display the flag. Bystanders are the youngest of the nine typology groups – 39% are under 30. Generally, young people are far less likely than older Americans to show the flag – only about half (47%) say they do 17
Display the Flag?
Total
Yes % 64
No % 36
DK/Ref % *=100
Republican Groups Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Gov’t Conserv.
76 84 82
24 16 18
0=100 0=100 0=100
Middle Groups Upbeats Disaffecteds Bystanders
68 72 47
32 28 53
0=100 0=100 0=100
Democratic Groups Conservative Democrats 72 Disadvantaged Democrats 53 Liberals 41
27 47 59
1=100 0=100 0=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
so, compared with about two-thirds of those in older age categories. Gun Ownership Gun ownership is much more prevalent among GOP groups – especially Enterprisers and Social Conservatives – than among Democrats. Solid majorities in both of those groups say they have guns in their home (59% of Enterprisers, 56% of Social Conservatives). Disaffecteds have the next highest percentage of gun owners (45%). There has long been a gender gap in gun ownership, but Social Conservatives, while mostly female (58%), have a relatively high percentage of gun ownership. By contrast, Pro-Government Conservatives, a group that also is disproportionately female (62%), are far less likely to have guns in their homes; slightly more than a third in this group (36%) say they have a gun. There are smaller differences in gun ownership among Democrats, with about a third of Conservative Democrats (34%) – and smaller percentages of the other groups – reporting that they have guns in the home. Gun Ownership and Views of the NRA
Have a gun, rifle at home? Yes No DK/Refused Opinion of the NRA Favorable Unfavorable DK/Can’t Rate
Enter- Social Pro-Govt Up- Disaf- By- Conserv Disadv Libprisers Cons Cons beats fecteds standers Dems Dems erals % % % % % % % % % 59 56 36 40 45 30 34 27 23 34 39 62 59 51 67 65 70 76 7 5 2 1 4 3 1 3 1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 80 12 8 100
60 20 20 100
64 22 14 100
53 34 13 100
64 31 5 100
52 29 19 100
46 38 16 100
37 51 12 100
20 73 7 100
Democrats are deeply divided in their opinions of the National Rifle Association (NRA). A plurality of Conservative Democrats (46%) express a positive opinion of the NRA; fewer than half as many Liberals (20%) have a favorable view of the pro-gun rights group. Among GOP groups, 80% of Enterprisers have a positive opinion of the NRA. Nearly two-thirds of Pro-Government Conservatives (64%) have a favorable view of the NRA, despite their relatively low level of gun ownership. News Consumption: Cable Wars Continue The public continues to get most of its news from television. Television is the dominant news source for all of the typology groups, although Liberals (57%), Upbeats (67%) and Enterprisers 18
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
(68%) cite TV as their main news source less frequently than do members of other groups. There are wide differences, however, in the specific TV news outlets the typology groups rely upon, particularly cable news outlets. This partisan gap in cable news audiences has been documented in previous Pew studies on news consumption (see “News Audiences Increasingly Politicized” June 8, 2004).
TV News and the Typology Main news source Network* CNN Fox % % % 29 20 19
Total Republican Groups Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Gov’t Conserv.
17 30 31
8 23 21
46 34 23
Middle Groups Upbeats Disaffecteds Bystanders
29 30 24
20 15 19
17 16 19
The typology also reveals significant intraDemocratic Groups party differences in news consumption. While many Conservative Democrats 42 27 11 Disadvantaged Democrats 32 31 12 more Republicans than Democrats rely on Fox News, Liberals 22 18 6 a much higher percentage of Enterprisers (46%) get * Net of those who cited ABC, NBC or CBS most of their news from Fox than do either Social Conservatives (34%) or Pro-Government Conservatives (23%). Moreover, the last two groups are much more likely than Enterprisers to cite CNN or the networks as main sources of news. Among Democrats, nearly twice as many Conservative Democrats as Liberals cite one of the three network outlets as their main source of news (42% vs. 22%). Age accounts for much of this gap: The network news audience is older – a third of those age 65 and older get most of their news from the networks, compared with 20% of those below age 30. And Conservative Democrats are, as a group, much older than Liberals.
Who Goes Online for News 24
Total
26
Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Gov't Conservatives
16 19 34
Upbeats Disaffecteds
19
Bystanders
19
Conservative Dems
16
To a surprising degree, Liberals (and Disadvantaged Dems 18 Liberals 37 young, well-educated people generally) are turning away from TV news in favor of the internet. Fully 37% of Liberals and 34% of Upbeats say they get most of their news from the internet, far more than any other group. For both groups, the number relying on the internet far exceeds any individual TV news source (network, cable or local) and approaches newspaper usage. 19
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
IV: Beyond Red vs. Blue: Value Divides Within Party Coalitions In an era when virtually all political issues are seen through partisan lenses, the political typology still finds numerous value cleavages in American society, many of which cut across party lines. In fact, public values about security and the use of military force are among the only value dimensions in which Republican and Democratic groups clearly align on opposite sides, and, even here, the intensity of opinion differs significantly within each coalition. Overall, the analysis finds that the intense partisan divide over security and military assertiveness is the exception, and not the rule. In most cases, there are fissures within the party coalitions that are at least as important as the divide between the parties overall.
Partisan Divides on Use of Force The Best Way to Ensure Peace Is Through... Good diplomacy
Military strength
Total
55 30
Enterprisers
13 70
Social Conservatives
25 55
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
38 49
Upbeats
54 30
Disaffecteds
46 32
Conservative Democrats
67 20
Disadvantaged Dems Liberals
78 10 88 6
In the War on Terrorism... Relying too much on force creates hatred and more terrorism Military force is the best way to defeat terrorism
Foreign Policy Values Total 51 39 The extreme partisan polarization over Enterprisers 9 84 the war in Iraq in recent years is interwoven Social Conservatives 20 72 with sharply divided judgments about national Pro-Gov't Conservatives 30 61 security and foreign assertiveness. Asked Upbeats 45 44 whether the best way to ensure peace is through Disaffecteds 47 38 military strength or through good diplomacy, the vast majority in all three Democratic-leaning Conservative Democrats 52 37 groups choose diplomacy, while those in Disadvantaged Dems 80 10 90 7 Liberals Republican-leaning groups express more confidence in military strength. While the degree of intensity within partisan groups may differ, there is a significantly greater difference of opinion between parties than there is within either party coalition. This partisan divide is even broader when it comes to peoples’ views on the war on terrorism. Across all Republican groups most believe that using overwhelming military force is the best way to defeat terrorism around the world, while a clear majority in all Democratic groups believe relying too much on military force to defeat terrorism creates hatred that leads to more terrorism. These 20
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
partisan cleavages underlie the fundamental divide over the war in Iraq and George W. Bush’s emphasis on the preemptive use of force, key aspects of American politics in recent years. However, most issues, even within the realm of foreign policy more generally, do not display such a clear partisan pattern. In fact, in many cases the differences of opinion within the partisan coalitions are far greater than any partisan gap overall. Public opinions with respect to how active a role America should play in world affairs highlight this distinction. Each party coalition includes typology groups that express activist or isolationist sentiments. By a margin of 73% to 20%, Enterprisers believe it is best for the future of the country to be active in world affairs. By contrast, ProGovernment Conservatives, by a 53% to 39% margin, think we should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate instead on problems here at home. Similarly among the predominantly Democratic groups, the majority of Liberals favor an active role in world affairs, while most Conservative and Disadvantaged Democrats believe in focusing on problems here at home.
Intra-Party Fissures on Foreign Involvement Best for the Future of Our Country to... Focus on problems at home
Be active in world affairs
Total
49 44
Enterprisers
20 73
Social Conservatives
36 54
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
53 39
Upbeats
29 64
Disaffecteds
65 26
Conservative Democrats
64 29
Disadvantaged Dems
72 22
Liberals
40 55
U.S. Foreign Policy Should... Account for allies' interests, even if it means compromises Follow national interests even when allies disagree Total
53 37
Enterprisers
24 73
Social Conservatives
43 49
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
50 40
Upbeats
59 30
In other areas, only the most Disaffecteds 41 42 ideologically driven groups express views that Conservative Democrats 53 37 are significantly different from the national Disadvantaged Dems 56 31 average. In making foreign policy decisions, 82 14 Liberals the Enterprisers overwhelmingly say America should follow its own national interests even when the allies strongly disagree, while the consensus among Liberals is that U.S. foreign policy should take into account the interests and views of allies, even if it means making compromises with them. Most other typology groups, whether on the right or the left, are internally divided on this question, and have more in common with each other than they do with either of the extremes.
21
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Cultural Issues Divide Democrats Despite differing degrees of religious intensity among core Republican groups, there is little evidence that the current slate of moral and values-oriented issues threatens to divide the Republican electoral base in any significant way. While Enterprisers are defined mostly by their pro-business, anti-government and antiregulatory beliefs rather than their religious or moral conservatism, they nevertheless agree fully with Social Conservatives and ProGovernment Conservatives when it comes to issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and stem cell research. (For more on social issues, see pg. 35).
Republicans Agree on Social Issues Enter- Social Pro-Gov prisers Cons Cons Homosexuality is a way of % % % life that should be discouraged 64 65 59 Feel strongly 50 59 55 It is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values Feel strongly
42 33
61 57
68 66
The gov’t should do more to protect morality in society Feel strongly
52 35
56 44
69 60
While agreeing with the conservative position on most key issues, Enterprisers are distinguished from other Republican-leaning groups by their relative lack of intensity with respect to individual or social moral beliefs. Though Enterprisers attend church at about the same rate as members of other Republican-leaning groups, just 42% say a person must believe in God in order to be moral and have good values, compared with sizable majorities of Pro-Government and Social Conservatives. And just 33% of Enterprisers feel strongly about the importance of faith, compared with 57% and 66% of Social and Pro-Government Conservatives, respectively. In addition, Enterprisers express less enthusiasm for government involvement in moral issues – a position that is consistent with their generally anti-government ideology overall. Just 35% of Enterprisers strongly support more government action to protect morality in society. By comparison, 60% of Pro-Government Conservatives, and 44% of Social Conservatives, strongly support more government action in this regard. Overall, divisions over social and religious issues continue to be far more intense on the left than on the right. Conservative Democrats – who represent 14% of the general public and a quarter of John Kerry’s voting base in 2004 – tend to agree with Republican groups more than other Democratic groups when it comes to key social issues such as gay marriage and abortion. Of equal importance, Liberals, who represent 17% of the general public and 39% of John Kerry’s voting base in 2004 – are distinct from all other typology groups for their secular values. Fully 84% of Liberals say a person need not believe in God in order to be moral and have good 22
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
values, while the majority of Conservative and Disadvantaged Democrats disagree. This secular/religious divide is connected to very different views of the role of government. A majority of Conservative Democrats would like to see the government do more to protect morality in society, while just 8% of Liberals agree. Most strikingly, more than nine-inten Liberals (92%) say that homosexuality should be accepted by society as a way of life, whereas only half of Disadvantaged Democrats (51%) and only a third of Conservative Democrats (34%) agree.
The Democrats’ Cultural Divide
Homosexuality is a way of life that... Should be accepted by society Should be discouraged by society Neither/Both/Don’t know To be moral and have good values... It is necessary to believe in God It is NOT necessary to believe in God Neither/Both/Don’t know The government should do more to protect morality in society I worry the government is getting too involved in the issue of morality Neither/Both/Don’t know
Lib- Disadv. Cons. erals Dems Dems % % % 92 51 34 5 41 58 8 8 3 100 100 100 15 84 1 100
54 43 3 100
74 24 4 100
8
32
54
88 4 100
59 9 100
38 8 100
Democrats Divide over Regulation, Environment, Immigration While religious and moral beliefs form a clear area of contention within the Democratic electoral coalition, this is not the only arena in which there is substantial disagreement. In particular, the economic insecurity faced by most Disadvantaged Democrats is linked with a number of attitudes toward regulation, the environment, and immigration that are not typically associated with liberalism. At root, most Disadvantaged Democrats, who make up 10% of the general public and 22% of Kerry’s voting base in 2004, are struggling financially and are pessimistic about their opportunities to improve their situation. This gap is most notable with respect to feelings of individual empowerment. By a 79% to 14% margin, Disadvantaged Democrats believe that hard work and determination provide no guarantee of success for most people. By comparison, the majority of Liberals and Conservative Democrats believe that most people who want to get ahead can make it if they are willing to work hard. While the Democratic Party is generally viewed as more favorable toward the environment and government, this basic difference with respect to wealth and opportunity creates significant divisions within the party in these areas. While most Liberals and Conservative Democrats believe government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest, the majority of Disadvantaged Democrats believe government regulations usually do more harm than good. And Liberals and Conservative Democrats believe that stricter environmental regulations are worth the 23
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
costs, a view shared by majorities in two of the three Republican groups as well. But fewer than half of Disadvantaged Democrats agree, while 44% say that stricter environmental regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy. The various groups in the Democratic coalition also have different values with respect to the impact of newcomers to America. By an 87% to 9% margin, most Liberals believe the growing number of immigrants strengthens American society, but only about a third of both Disadvantaged and Conservative Democrats agree. Instead, most in these groups say the influx of newcomers to this country poses a threat to traditional American values and customs.
Other Fissures in the Democratic Coalition Lib- Disadv. Cons. erals Dems Dems Government regulation of business... % % % Usually does more harm than good 21 66 34 Is necessary to protect the public interest 72 21 51 13 15 Neither/Both/Don’t know 7 100 100 100 Stricter environmental regulations... Are worth the costs 89 Cost too many jobs and hurt the economy 7 Neither/Both/Don’t know 4 100
48 44 8 100
60 29 11 100
The growing number of newcomers from other countries... Threatens traditional American customs and values 9 53 53 Strengthens American society 87 34 35 Neither/Both/Don’t know 4 13 12 100 100 100 Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they’re willing to work hard Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people Neither/Both/Don’t know
56
14
83
39 5 100
79 7 100
12 5 100
These internal divisions even carry over into beliefs directly related to the role of government. Disadvantaged Democrats express far more cynicism about persistent government waste and inefficiency, as well as government officials losing touch with the people, than do other Democratic typology groups. Conservative Democrats are much more likely to believe that poor people have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything in return, while Liberals and Disadvantaged Democrats strongly believe that poor people lead difficult lives because benefits don’t go far enough. Divided GOP Values on Government, Business, Poverty The Republican Party is often characterized as being pro-business, anti-regulation, and opposed to broad government programs to assist the poor. However, not all segments of the GOP’s electoral coalition share these values. Most notably, Pro-Government Conservatives, who make up 9% of the general public and 15% of Bush’s 2004 voting base, tend to favor government action across the board, whether the topic is public morality, anti-poverty assistance, or regulation. And while both Social and Pro-Government Conservatives are strong advocates of traditional moral 24
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
values, there is a huge economic divide between the two, which leads to starkly differing views on other social, economic, and governmental issues. This combination contributes to dramatic differences on such core values as the government’s responsibility to the poor. While 80% of Pro-Government Conservatives say the government should do more to help the needy, even if it means going deeper into debt, the majority of Social Conservatives and two-thirds of Enterprisers take the opposing view – that the government can’t afford to do much more to help the needy.
Fissures in the Republican Coalition
The gov’t should do more to help needy Americans even if it means going deeper into debt The gov’t today can’t afford to do much more to help the needy Neither/Both/Don’t know Too much power is concentrated in the hands of a few large companies The largest companies do NOT have too much power Neither/Both/Don’t know
Enter- Social Pro-gov prisers Cons Cons % % % 19
32
80
67 14 100
58 10 100
13 7 100
26
88
83
58 16 100
5 7 100
11 6 100
While Social Conservatives Government regulation of business... Is necessary to protect the public interest 16 58 66 largely side with Enterprisers on Usually does more harm than good 78 32 27 welfare, they side with the less Neither/Both/Don’t know 6 10 7 100 100 100 affluent Pro-Government Stricter environmental regulations... Conservatives when it comes to Are worth the costs 16 67 61 business and regulatory issues. By Cost too many jobs and hurt the economy 74 25 32 Neither/Both/Don’t know 10 8 7 overwhelming margins, both Social 100 100 100 Conservatives and Pro-Government The growing number of newcomers Conservatives hold negative views of from other countries... business, while Enterprisers stand Threatens traditional American customs and values 38 68 31 apart from the rest of the country with Strengthens American society 53 21 62 their consistently favorable views of Neither/Both/Don’t know 9 11 7 100 100 100 business and the marketplace. This divide is reflected in other values about regulation and the environment as well. While 78% of Enterprisers believe government regulation usually does more harm than good, sizeable majorities of the other Republican typology groups believe regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest. Environmental protection also stands out as a major divide within the GOP’s coalition. Most Enterprisers believe the country has gone too far in its efforts to protect the environment, while roughly eight-in-ten Social and Pro-Government Conservatives take the opposing view that we should do whatever it takes to protect the environment. Similarly, while three-quarters of 25
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Enterprisers see environmental regulation as mostly hurting the economy and jobs, more than six-inten in the other GOP groups say stricter environmental protections are worth the costs.
26
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
V: POLITICS AND THE TYPOLOGY The political polarization evident in last fall’s presidential election is clearly reflected in the Pew typology. The two most heavily Republican groups – Enterprisers and Social Conservatives, who together account for 23% of registered voters – supported Bush by margins of 20-1 or more. The strongest Democratic groups – Liberals and Disadvantaged Democrats, who together make up 29% of registered voters – backed Kerry just as convincingly. Bush drew strong, but less overwhelming, support from the other largely Republican group, Pro-Government Conservatives. This group, comprising 10% of registered voters, favored the president by fiveto-one (61%-12%). On the Democratic side, Conservative Democrats (15% of registered voters) favored Kerry by about the same margin 65%-14%.
The 2004 Presidential Election Voted for Kerry
Voted for Bush
Enterprisers
1 92
Social Conservatives
4 86
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
12 61
Upbeats
14 63
Disaffecteds
21 42
Conservative Democrats
65 14
Disadvantaged Dems 82 2 Taken together, the three Democratic groups make up a larger share of registered Liberals 81 2 voters than do the three Republican groups (44% vs. 33%). But Bush countered this advantage by drawing strong support from the GOP-leaning groups in the middle of the political spectrum. A majority of Upbeats do not identify themselves with either party, but most lean to the GOP. The Upbeats backed Bush nearly five-to-one (63%-14%). And though many Disaffecteds did not turn out to vote, those who did were also an important part of Bush’s winning coalition (favoring the incumbent by a 42%-21% margin). This group, too, is mostly independent, but 60% either identify themselves as Republican or lean toward the GOP.
Moreover, Bush’s core supporters – Enterprisers and Social Conservatives – report higher rates of voter turnout than do other groups in the typology. Just 4% of Enterprisers and 6% of Social Conservatives say they did not vote last November. By contrast, 13% in each of the three Democratic groups say they did not vote in the presidential election.
27
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Views of Political Figures Most Americans (69%) say they would not want Bush to run for a third term, even if that were permissible under the Constitution. Just 27% would like to see Bush serve as president for a third term. A majority also opposes a hypothetical third term for Bill Clinton (55%), but significantly more would like to see a third term for Clinton (43%) than for Bush. Nearly two-thirds of Americans (64%) have a favorable opinion of Bill Clinton, the highest positive rating of 11 political figures tested. Six-in-ten have a favorable opinion of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and about the same number have a positive view of Sen. John McCain (59%). Ratings for both Bill and Hillary Clinton had declined sharply in 2001 and 2002, following the controversy over the pardons Bill Clinton had issued before leaving office. But their ratings have rebounded strongly – favorable opinions of Bill Clinton have risen from 46% in December 2002 to 64% currently. Hillary Clinton’s favorable marks have also risen, though not quite as dramatically (from 47% in December 2002 to 57% in the current survey).
Comeback Kids
Hillary Clinton December 2002 July 2001 January 2001 Bill Clinton December 2002 July 2001 January 2001
Favor- Unfavor- Can’t able able Rate % % % 57 36 7=100 47 44 8=100 53 42 4=100 60 35 5=100 64 46 50 64
32 49 46 34
4=100 5=100 4=100 2=100
The Typology and Leading Republicans While partisanship also colors the favorability ratings, several political figures have broad appeal across the typology groups. Rudy Giuliani is widely popular with Republican groups, especially Enterprisers (90% positive), but also has a favorable rating among majorities in both independent groups, and roughly half of Conservative Democrats (53%) and Liberals (47%). Sen. John McCain is extraordinarily popular among Liberals, drawing a positive rating among this group that is actually a bit higher than among Republicans generally (66% vs. 61%). However, his favorability ratings among GOP typology groups are significantly lower than Giuliani’s or those of the president and other administration officials. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is very popular with Republicans – her 97% favorable rating among Enterprisers rivals Bush’s (96%) and Cheney’s (94%). But Rice also has robust ratings
28
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
among both independent groups and among Conservative Democrats. Rice and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger draw the highest positive ratings among Upbeats of all 11 political figures tested (76% each). Favorability of Republican Political Figures Total Favorable view of... % Rudy Giuliani 60 John McCain 59
Enter- Social Pro-Gov prisers Cons Cons % % % 90 75 69 74 68 53
Up- Disafbeats fecteds % % 69 53 65 45
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals % % % 53 37 47 53 45 66
A. Schwarzenegger Condoleezza Rice
57 57
79 97
71 83
67 80
76 76
47 53
52 50
39 28
37 33
George Bush Dick Cheney Donald Rumsfeld
53 48 39
96 94 85
91 86 73
89 70 52
71 55 46
72 57 34
41 35 36
9 19 12
9 13 8
Other major administration figures elicit more partisan reactions. Bush has extensive appeal among the GOP groups, as well as among Disaffecteds and Upbeats (72% and 71% favorable, respectively); Bush also earns a 41% favorable mark among Conservative Democrats. But only about one-in-ten Disadvantaged Democrats (9%) and Liberals (9%) express a positive opinion of Bush. Vice President Dick Cheney’s ratings are generally lower than the president’s, especially among the two independent groups. Donald Rumsfeld has the lowest overall positive rating of the Republicans tested. Fewer than half of those in the independent groups – and 52% of ProGovernment Conservatives – express a favorable opinion of the defense secretary. Clintons’ Crossover Appeal Bill and Hillary Clinton draw positive ratings ranging from 80% to 90% in the three Democratic groups. More surprising is their popularity in the center, and even the center-right, of the political spectrum. Roughly half of Pro-Government Conservatives, whose views stray from GOP orthodoxy more than other Republican groups, express positive opinions of both Clintons (53% Bill Clinton, 51% Hillary Clinton). Both Clintons are very unpopular with Enterprisers, although about a third of Social Conservatives express a favorable opinion of the former president (32%). However, Hillary Clinton
29
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
has lower favorability ratings among the two independent groups than Bill Clinton and most leading GOP figures. Favorability of Democratic Political Figures Total Favorable view of... % Bill Clinton 64 Hillary Clinton 57 John Kerry 49 Howard Dean 32
Enter- Social Pro-Gov prisers Cons Cons % % % 21 32 53 10 24 51 11 18 23 8 21 13
Up- Disafbeats fecteds % % 50 49 44 34 38 23 27 19
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals % % % 89 85 88 88 77 83 74 86 78 43 32 60
John Kerry’s positive appeal is largely limited to the three main Democratic groups. Howard Dean is less well-known, and less popular, than other figures tested. Liberals are the only group in which a majority (60%) expresses a favorable opinion of Dean. Looking to ’08 John McCain’s extensive popularity among Liberals is evident in early opinions about the 2008 presidential race. Overall, about a third of the public (32%) say they would like to see McCain nominated as the GOP candidate, slightly more than the number who favor Giuliani (27%). But much of McCain’s strength comes from the Liberal group. Fully 55% of Liberals say they most want to see McCain win the GOP nomination; that is more than double the percentage in any GOP group that wants McCain to capture the nomination. The Republicans and 2008 Most like to see GOP nominate... John McCain Rudy Giuliani Condoleezza Rice Jeb Bush Bill Frist
Total % 32 27 17 7 4
Enter- Social Pro-Gov prisers Cons Cons % % % 20 24 27 30 30 33 23 17 24 13 14 6 12 5 2
Up- Disafbeats fecteds % % 27 23 29 30 21 17 4 11 4 2
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals % % % 32 30 55 30 19 20 14 16 14 4 3 2 5 8 2
Giuliani’s support, by contrast, is distributed far more evenly across the typology groups. Giuliani is the top choice among the three GOP groups, but also is rated highly by Upbeats, Disaffecteds and Conservative Democrats. Condoleezza Rice also has fairly broad support; among the Republican groups, Rice’s backing is on par with McCain’s. And about one-in-five Upbeats (21%) and Disaffecteds (17%) want Rice to win the GOP nod in 2008. 30
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
The Democrats and 2008 Most like to see Total Democrats nominate...% Hillary Clinton 34 John Kerry 16 John Edwards 16 Howard Dean 9 Bill Richardson 9
Enter- Social Pro-Gov prisers Cons Cons % % % 14 13 41 6 8 11 16 22 18 15 10 7 29 18 8
Up- Disafbeats fecteds % % 26 20 16 11 20 16 11 11 8 9
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals % % % 43 49 45 21 31 14 19 6 14 7 4 11 3 5 5
Among Democrats, Hillary Clinton has the early advantage. Clinton is the top choice of all three Democratic groups; overall, about a third (34%) would like to see her win the Democratic nomination. In addition, on the Republican side, 41% of Pro-Government Conservatives want Clinton to win the Democratic nomination. John Kerry and John Edwards both trail Clinton among Democrats, although Kerry attracts sizable backing among Disadvantaged Democrats (31%). Views of the Parties As expected, the groups constituting the electoral base for each political party view that party in mostly favorable terms while holding largely Opinions of the Parties unfavorable opinions of the opposing party. When it Republican Party Democratic Party comes to party performance DK Fav Unfav DK Fav Unfav % % % % % % in standing up for its All 52 42 6=100 53 41 6=100 traditional positions, Enterprisers 96 4 0=100 7 92 1=100 however, Democratic groups Social Conservatives 89 8 3=100 25 70 5=100 are more critical of their Pro-Gov’t Conservatives 78 17 5=100 38 57 5=100 own party’s leadership than Upbeats 76 17 7=100 42 50 8=100 Disaffecteds 59 27 14=100 39 49 12=100 Republicans are of GOP Conservative Democrats 33 60 7=100 82 12 6=100 leaders. And among the Disadvantaged Democrats 16 79 5=100 83 12 5=100 Democrats, Liberals are the Liberals 14 83 3=100 77 20 3=100 most critical of their own party’s leadership. More than nine-in-ten Enterprisers (96%) have a favorable view of the GOP, and almost as many express a negative view of the Democrats (92%). Social Conservatives are nearly as partisan. However, Pro-Government Conservatives are far less critical of the Democratic party than are the other groups making up the Republican base – 38% have a positive opinion of the Democratic Party. 31
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Roughly eight-in-ten members of all three core Democratic groups give their party a favorable assessment. Liberals are the least enthusiastic (77% favorable to 20% unfavorable). Both Disadvantaged Democrats and Conservative Democrats hold similar views of their party, but Conservative Democrats are less negative in their feelings toward the Republican party. Upbeats and Disaffecteds are less polarized in their views of the two parties. Large majorities in both groups hold favorable views of the GOP but about four-in-ten in each group also hold a favorable view of the Democratic Party (42% of Upbeats, 39% of Disaffecteds). Party Performance: Liberals Are Critical While both parties receive favorable ratings from their base, Republicans are much more positive about the performance of GOP leaders than Democrats are about their party leadership. About half of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (51%) say GOP leaders are doing an excellent or good job of standing up for traditional party positions, such as reducing the size of government and promoting conservative social values. By contrast, just a third of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents give party leaders high marks in standing up for traditional Democratic positions, such as helping the needy, representing working people, and protecting the interests of minorities.
GOP Stands Up for Core Issues Republicans rate their party's job standing up for its traditional positions on key issues
Only fair/Poor
Excellent/Good
All Rep/Rep leaners
45 51
Enterprisers
39 60
Social Conservatives
34 63
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
52 41
Democratic Party Failing the Base Democrats rate their party's job standing up for its traditional positions on key issues
Only fair/Poor
Excellent/Good
All Dem/Dem leaners
65 33
Conservative Dems
53 44
Disadvantaged Dems
66 34
76 23 Liberals Liberals are particularly negative in their assessment of the Democratic Party leadership. Just 23% of Liberals say the leaders are doing an excellent or good job in standing up for key party stances, while 76% rate their performance as only fair (55%) or poor (21%). Among Democrats, Conservative Democrats are the least critical of the leaders’ performance, with 44% saying they are doing an excellent or good job and a narrow majority (53%) rating their performance as only fair or poor.
32
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Strength of Partisanship While Liberals are a core part of the Democratic electoral base, and now constitute the largest group in the typology, their identification with the party is the weakest among Democratic groups.
Liberals Have Weaker Party Ties Cons. Dems
% 51 37 10 2 100
Party Identification Strong Democrat Not Strong Democrat Ind.-Lean Democrat Other
Disadv. Dems Liberal
% 55 29 14 2 100
% 35 24 32 9 100
Just 35% of Liberals consider themselves strong Democrats. About a quarter (24%) identify themselves as Democrats but not strongly, and about three-in-ten (32%) are Democratic-leaning independents. This contrasts with both Conservative Democrats and Disadvantaged Democrats, where a majority are strong Democrats (51% and 55%, respectively) and only about one-in-ten are Democratic-leaning independents. Among Republican groups, 62% of Enterprisers and 51% of Social Conservatives consider themselves strong Republicans. By contrast, only a third of Pro-Government Conservatives are strong Republicans while 28% in this group are Republican-leaning Fewer Democrats Change Party Over Lifetime independents. More GOP Converts Throughout the 1970s and early 1980s, Demo crats outnumbered Republicans in the adult population. The two parties are now at parity with roughly equal proportions identifying with each party. While part of this aggregate shift stems from generational replacement as New Deal-era Democrats have aged and been replaced with younger, more Republican-leaning generations, at least some of the change has resulted from individual changes in party affiliation.
Republican/lean Repub.
Ever thought of yourself as a Democrat? No Yes DK (N) % % % 38 61 1=100 (525)
Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Govt. Conservatives
37 36 32
63 64 68
0=100 (134) 0=100 (125) 0=100 (67)
Ever though of yourself as a Republican? Yes DK No
Democrat/lean Democrat
% 22
% 78
% *=100 (481)
Conservative Democrats Disadvantaged Democrats Liberals
12 14 26
88 86 74
*=100 (99) 0=100 (72) 0=100 (219)
*Asked of those who identify with or lean towards the party. It is not surprising, then, that a sizable minority of Republicans (38%) say that, at some point in the past, they thought of themselves as Democrats. Comparable percentages in the three GOP typology groups say they had a prior allegiance to the Democrats. More generally,
33
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
older Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (age 50 and older) are more likely to have shifted partisan allegiances than have younger Republicans. Overall, only about one-in-five Democrats (22%) say they have thought of themselves as Republicans in the past. Liberals are the most likely to have changed party over their lifetime. Only a small portion of Conservative Democrats and Disadvantaged Democrats have thought of themselves as anything but a Democrat (12% and 14%, respectively). Party Loyalty in the Voting Booth Majorities in parties have voted across party lines at some point, but more Republicans say they have voted for Democratic candidates than vice versa. Among Republicans, 22% remain loyal while 71% say they vote across party lines. By comparison, 38% of Democrats say they are loyal in their vote, while 56% sometimes cross party lines. A similar pattern was found in 1987 when 66% of Democrats said they “usually prefer Democratic candidates but I sometimes support Republicans” compared with 77% of Republicans who said they sometimes crossed over to vote for Democratic candidates.
Cross-Party Voting Sometimes Always vote for vote other party party line
DK
(N)
Republicans/lean Rep.
% 71
% 22
% 7=100 (955)
Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
74 73 67
25 23 27
1=100 (215) 4=100 (230) 6=100 (143)
Among typology groups with Democrats/Lean Dem. 56 38 6=100 (872) strong partisan attachments, nearly half Conservative Democrats 60 37 3=100 (256) of Disadvantaged Democrats (48%) say Disadvantaged Dems. 51 48 1=100 (165) they always support their party’s Liberals 59 37 4=100 (327) candidates, the highest percentage *Questions asked of partisans and leaning independents. among any group. Somewhat fewer Conservative Democrats and Liberals (37% each) say they always vote Democratic. On the GOP side, only about a quarter of Social Conservatives (23%), Enterprisers (25%), and Pro-Government Conservatives (27%) say they are always loyal to the party in the voting booth.
34
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
VI: ISSUES AND SHIFTING COALITIONS The extensive divisions within the two parties over fundamental political values are mirrored in disagreements over contemporary issues. Economic issues tend to divide Republican typology groups, while social issues split the Democrats. On many national security issues, especially the war in Iraq, internal partisan fissures are overshadowed by the vast gulf dividing Republicans and Democrats. However, tensions are evident among Democrats on some of these issues, especially in attitudes toward preemptive military action and the use of torture against suspected terrorists.
Part One: Social Policy The public is divided over whether homosexuality should be accepted or discouraged, but Americans continue to decisively reject gay marriage. Americans oppose gay marriage by nearly two-to-one (61%-32%), a margin that has remained stable since the middle of 2003. Fully 90% of Enterprisers are opposed to gay marriage. Social Conservatives are close behind at 84% opposition (with 65% strongly opposed, the highest of any group). Majorities in all of the other groups – except Liberals – also oppose gay marriage by wide margins. Conservative Democrats oppose gay marriage by roughly four-to-one (74%-19%), and Disadvantaged Democrats oppose it by (55%-37%). But 80% of Liberals favor gay marriage, more than twice the percentage in each of the other two Democratic groups.
Opinion on Gay Marriage Oppose Total
Favor
61 32
Enterprisers
90
Social Conservatives
84
8
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
76 17
Upbeats
64 28
Disaffecteds
67 26
Conservative Democrats
74 19
Disadvantaged Dems
55 37
Liberals
15 80
12
Nearly half of Americans (46%) say they have a friend, colleague, or family member who is gay, with Republicans (at 40%) a little less likely than Democrats (51%) to say this. Liberals are much more apt than those in other typology groups to say they have a gay associate or family member (73% vs. less than 50% in any other group).
35
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Abortion Divides Most Groups Abortion remains a contentious issue, with nearly all groups in the typology divided to some extent. Overall, 55% oppose making it more difficult for a woman to obtain an abortion, while 36% disagree. By roughly a five-to-four margin, each of the three GOPleaning groups favors greater restrictions on abortion. Pluralities or majorities of all other groups oppose making abortions more difficult to obtain. But sizable minorities of Conservative Democrats, Upbeats, and Disaffecteds (37% each) support tougher restrictions on abortion. Stem Cell Splits the GOP Public sentiment in favor of conducting stem cell research appears to be growing. Most Americans (56%) say it is more important to conduct stem cell research that may result in medical cures, while only about a third (32%) believe it is more important to avoid destroying the potential life of human embryos involved in such research. In 2002, 43% felt it was more important to conduct stem cell research.
Making it more DIFFICULT for a woman to get an abortion Oppose
Favor
Total
55 36
Enterprisers
38 54
Social Conservatives
40 54
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
41 53
Upbeats
54 37
Disaffecteds
47 37
Conservative Democrats
51 37
Disadvantaged Dems
67 22 88
Liberals
10
Priority in Stem Cell Research Not destroying potential life of human embryos Conducting research that may result in new cures Total
32 56
Enterprisers
49 38
Social Conservatives
45 40
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
46 47
Upbeats
36 53
Disaffecteds
31 53
Solid majorities of the DemocraticConservative Democrats 30 57 leaning groups support stem cell research, with Disadvantaged Dems 26 60 Liberals 11 84 Liberals expressing the greatest support (84%). Republican-leaning groups, by contrast, are much more divided. By small margins, Enterprisers and Social Conservatives say it is more important to avoid destroying the potential life of human embryos than to conduct research that may lead to medical advances; ProGovernment Conservatives are about evenly split.
36
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Significantly, the middle groups in the typology fall closer to the Democratic side than to the Republican side, with 53% each of Upbeats and Disaffecteds believing it is more important to conduct stem cell research than to avoid destroying embryos. In December 2004, nearly half of the public (47%) reported having heard “a lot” about the issue of stem cell research, up five points from August. Awareness of the stem cell issue was much higher among Liberals (71% had heard a lot) and the Enterprisers (63%) than among other typology groups. Creationism and the Ten Commandments Two religious issues recently in the news are the teaching of creationism in public schools and the propriety of displaying the Ten Commandments publicly in government buildings. Majorities of Americans support both of these ideas, with nearly three-quarters (74%) saying the public display of the commandments is proper, and 57% in favor of teaching creationism, along with evolution, in public schools. One-third of the public (33%) favors the teaching of creationism instead of evolution. On both issues, there is relatively little variation in support across the typology, with two important exceptions. Liberals stand out for their strong belief that the display of the Ten Commandments in government buildings is improper – 61% of Liberals say that, compared with no more than 16% in any other group. The other Democratic groups are in line with Republican-leaning groups expressing the view that the public display of the commandments is proper.
Opinion on Displaying Ten Commandments in Gov't Bldgs. Improper
Proper
Total
22 74
Enterprisers
10 89
Social Conservatives
5 92
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
8 92
Upbeats
15 81
Disaffecteds
10 80
Conservative Democrats
16 82
Disadvantaged Dems
11 84
Liberals
61 35
Teaching Creationism ALONG with Evolution in Public Schools Oppose
Favor
Total
33 57
Enterprisers
12 83
Social Conservatives
28 62
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
22 64
Upbeats
34 61
Disaffecteds
22 60
Conservative Democrats
33 46
Disadvantaged Dems
36 50
Liberals
49 49
On the teaching of evolution, it is the Enterprisers who stand out. While between 46% and 64% of every other group favors the 37
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
teaching of creationism, fully 83% of Enterprisers do so. But on the question of whether creationism should be taught instead of evolution, Social Conservatives are most supportive – about half (51%) would remove evolution from the schools and replace it with creationism. The Supreme Court With respect to President Bush’s next appointment to the Supreme Court, a plurality of Americans (41%) believe Bush should choose someone who will keep the court about the same as it is now, while roughly equal numbers support a more conservative nominee (28%) or a more liberal one (24%).
Next Supreme Court Appointment Should be... More liberal
41
24
Total
Enterprisers 5
Social Conservatives
Only two groups, Enterprisers (64%) and Social Conservatives (50%), clearly favor a choice that would make the court more conservative. In five of the other groups, pluralities – or, in the case of Upbeats and Disaffecteds, majorities – feel that the president should choose someone who would keep the Court’s ideological balance about the same as it is now. Most Liberals (52%) would prefer a nominee who will make the court more liberal.
More conservative
About the same
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
9
28
4 26
64
40
50
41
36
Upbeats
13
53
30
Disaffecteds
10
53
30
27
Conservative Democrats Disadvantaged Dems Liberals
33 52
40
26
43
15
39
5
Next Supreme Court Appointment is "Very Important" Total
Nearly six-in-ten Enterprisers (59%) say the choice is very important personally, as do roughly half of Liberals (49%) and Social Conservatives (47%). Fewer than four-in-ten in the other typology groups attach great personal importance to the choice of the next Supreme Court justice.
38
Enterprisers
59 47
Social Conservatives Pro-Gov't Conservatives
33
Upbeats Disaffecteds Conservative Democrats Disadvantaged Dems Liberals
38
37 30 28 31 49
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Views of ‘Christian Conservative’ Movement Majorities of all of the typology groups consider the United States to be “a Christian nation,” with 71% overall saying that it is. Liberals and Disadvantaged Democrats are least likely to agree, but even among these groups, 57% say the U.S. is a Christian nation. Yet despite this view and the predominance of the Christian tradition among personal religious choices, public opinion is divided regarding the Christian conservative movement. About four-in-ten (41%) have a favorable view of the movement, while 34% have an unfavorable Views of the Christian view. Republicans are strongly favorable (61% Conservative Movement vs. 16% unfavorable), while opinion among Unfavorable Favorable Democrats tilts negative (35% vs. 45%). Total 34 41 The Democratic groups are divided in their views of the Christian conservative movement, with Conservative Democrats favorably disposed (53% positive, 18% negative), and Liberals sharply negative (78% unfavorable – of those, 46% very unfavorable).
Enterprisers
21 63
Social Conservatives
10 59
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
12 60
Upbeats
35 38
Disaffecteds
28 41
Conservative Democrats
18 53
Disadvantaged Dems
45 32
Liberals
39
78
10
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Part Two: Economic and Domestic Policy Republicans are less cohesive on matters involving economic policies than on cultural and foreign affairs issues. These differences are most obvious with respect to such issues as the desirability of government-guaranteed health insurance, stricter bankruptcy laws, and in attitudes toward tax reduction. Democrats, by contrast, are much more unified on these issues. Among GOP groups, Pro-Government Conservatives are generally supportive of an activist government, particularly in helping the poor. Enterprisers, by contrast, stand out for their broad support for tax cuts and opposition to expanding government programs. Health Insurance, Minimum Wage Solid majorities of every group, with the sole exception of Enterprisers, favor a government guarantee of health insurance for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes. Across the electorate, support for guaranteed health insurance ranges from 55% among Upbeats and 59% among Social Conservatives to 90% among Liberals. By contrast, Enterprisers strongly oppose guaranteed health insurance for all, if it means higher taxes (76% oppose, 23% favor).
Gov't Health Insurance for All, Even if Taxes Increase Oppose
Favor
Total
30 65
Enterprisers
76 23
Social Conservatives
37 59
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
33 63
Upbeats
38 55
Disaffecteds
26 64
Conservative Democrats
23 73
Disadvantaged Dems
29 65
Liberals
8 90
Raising the Minimum Wage Oppose
Favor
Total
12 86
Enterprisers
49 46
Social Conservatives
18 79
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
5 94
Similarly, overwhelming support for an increase in the minimum wage extends across Upbeats 11 86 Disaffecteds 13 84 all groups, again with the exception of Enterprisers. Overall 86% of the public favors Conservative Democrats 6 92 a hike in the minimum wage from its current Disadvantaged Dems 3 95 level of $5.15 to $6.45 per hour. More than Liberals 5 94 90% of Pro-Government Conservatives, Conservative Democrats, Disadvantaged Democrats and Liberals support such an increase. Among Enterprisers, however, a plurality (49%) opposes the move, although nearly as many (46%) favor it. 40
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Taxes and Budget On tax policy, Enterprisers stand alone in their view – shared by 82% in this group – that all of the tax cuts from President Bush’s first term be made permanent. By contrast, only about half as many Social Conservatives (42%) and even fewer Pro-Government Conservatives (27%) support making all of the tax cuts permanent.
Opinion on Bush's Tax Cuts All recent tax cuts should be repealed
Tax cuts for wealthy should be repealed, while others stay All of the recent tax cuts should be made permanent
Total
25
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
28
85
Enterprisers Social Conservatives
35
17 25
30 33
82 42 27
By about a two-to-one margin, most of the electorate would give higher priority to Upbeats 23 35 27 reducing the federal budget deficit than to 27 Disaffecteds 24 33 cutting taxes. That margin holds roughly true 43 Conservative Democrats 31 14 across all groups with a few exceptions: Disadvantaged Dems 30 13 47 Liberals, who choose deficit cutting over tax 49 Liberals 34 8 cutting by an overwhelming margin (83% to 14%); Disaffecteds, who opt for deficit cutting by a relatively small margin (47%-42%); and Enterprisers who, alone among typology groups, give tax cuts priority over deficit reduction, by a margin of 50% to 43%. However, majorities in all the groups, except Liberals, agree that while reducing the federal budget deficit is an important priority, it should not be the top priority for the president and Congress to deal with this year. Even among Liberals, just half (50%) rate deficit reduction a top priority. Enterprisers are least likely to deem red ink curtailment a top priority--23% of the group does so, compared with 59% who call it an important but lower priority. Across the other groups, the percentages rating deficit reduction a top priority range from slightly less than a third among Social Conservatives and Upbeats, to about four-in-ten (41% to 45%) among Disadvantaged Democrats, Conservative Democrats, Disaffecteds, and Pro-Government Conservatives.
Higher Priority -- Cutting Taxes or Reducing the Deficit? Reducing budget deficit
Cutting taxes
Total
61 32
Enterprisers
43 50
Social Conservatives
61 31
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
57 37
Upbeats
64 29
Disaffecteds
47 42
Conservative Democrats
62 31
Disadvantaged Dems
61 32
Liberals
83 14
41
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
A similar pattern is seen with regard to opinions about ways to reduce the budget deficit. A majority of the public (54%) supports cutting domestic spending to reduce the deficit; about a third each favor cuts in military spending (35%) or raising taxes (31%). At one extreme, 81% of Enterprisers favor cutting spending on domestic programs to reduce the deficit. They are joined in that view by 60% or more among Social Conservatives and Upbeats. Disadvantaged Democrats are the most reluctant to cut domestic spending, with only 29% in favor. Still, nearly half (48%) of Liberals, as well as the same proportion of Conservative Democrats, also support cuts in domestic spending to reduce the deficit. Where the Liberals differ most from other groups on budget issues is in their willingness to cut defense and military spending to reduce the deficit (65% favor such cuts). By contrast, among all other groups, support for military and defense cuts ranges from a low of 16% among Enterprisers and Social Conservatives to 41% among Disadvantaged Democrats.
Support for Proposals to Reduce the Deficit
Total
Cut Cut military/ Raise domestic defense taxes spending spending % % % 54 35 31
Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
81 63 53
16 16 19
12 27 32
Upbeats Disaffecteds
61 44
31 33
34 19
Conservative Democrats 48 29 25 In addition, a far higher percentage Disadvantaged Democrats 29 41 23 of Liberals than those in other groups Liberals 48 65 56 would raise taxes to reduce the deficit. Percent within each group that would favor each as a means of reducing the federal budget deficit. More than half of Liberals (56%) support raising taxes to meet the goal of deficit reduction – no more than about a third in any other group agree (Upbeats 34%). At the low end, just 12% of Enterprisers favor raising taxes for this purpose.
Bankruptcy, Malpractice Awards On issues affecting the courts, the surveys also find divisions cutting across partisan lines. For example, bankruptcy laws allowing individuals deeply in debt to seek protection from their creditors realign several normally Republican or Republican-leaning groups with predominantly Democratic groups.
42
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
At a time when Congress had under consideration legislation making it more difficult for individuals to file for bankruptcy protection – legislation that was signed into law by the president a month later (April 20, 2005) – the March survey found that 39% of the general public favors stricter rules. Overall, a 47% plurality of the public feels that no change is needed in bankruptcy protections for debtors, while 8% say that access to bankruptcy should be made easier, rather than more difficult, for individuals.
Make Declaring Bankruptcy... Easier
Same
5
Upbeats
Conservative Democrats Disadvantaged Dems Liberals
53
13
8
22 7
61 33
33 58
8
55
31
1
Social Conservatives
39
33
2
Enterprisers
Disaffecteds
47
8
Total
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
More difficult
58 32
53 49 57
35 16 30
Both ideological and economic factors are evident in opinions toward bankruptcy. Majorities of the relatively affluent Enterprisers and Upbeats (55% and 58%, respectively) think that the laws should make it more difficult for individuals to claim bankruptcy. However, a third in both groups favor leaving bankruptcy law as it was at the time of the survey in March. Social Conservatives, although somewhat less financially secure as a group than the Enterprisers or Upbeats, are at least as supportive of making bankruptcy more difficult to declare, with 61% favoring stricter laws. Pro-Government Conservatives, however, part company with their more affluent fellow Republicans on the bankruptcy issue. Only a third (33%) would make personal bankruptcy more difficult, while 53% would leave the law unchanged, and 13% would make bankruptcy easier. In this, their views are not dissimilar from those of other financially strained groups in the center and Democratic portions of the political spectrum. The economically pressured and GOP-leaning Disaffecteds also oppose tightening the bankruptcy laws. While only 8% favor making it easier to declare bankruptcy, 58% would retain current provisions. On the Democratic side, about 50%-60% of the three groups favor maintaining the status quo. However, a relatively large minority of Disadvantaged Democrats (22%) believe it should be easier for people to declare bankruptcy.
43
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
On the question of limiting awards in medical malpractice lawsuits, typology groups are in rare unanimity. Majorities in every group favor such limitations. Enterprisers provide the strongest support for limiting malpractice awards (81% favor) followed by Social Conservatives (76% favor) and Upbeats (72%). However, support remains strong across the political spectrum with Liberals favoring malpractice award limits by a margin of 58% in favor to 37% opposed. The least enthusiastic, but still net favorable groups, are Disaffecteds (54% favor, 37% opposed) and Disadvantaged Democrats (53% vs. 41%).
Limit Amount of Awards in Malpractice Lawsuits Oppose
Favor
Total
30 63
Enterprisers
16 81
Social Conservatives
18 76
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
30 61
Upbeats
23 72
Disaffecteds
37 54
Conservative Democrats
35 57
Disadvantaged Dems
41 53
Liberals
37 58
Jobs and Trade The public generally takes a negative view of the hiring by U.S. businesses of lower-cost workers in other countries to produce goods and services. About seven-in-ten Americans (69%) believe “outsourcing� is a bad thing because it sends good jobs overseas; just 22% feel it is good because it keeps costs down. Among the typology groups, only the steadfastly pro-business Enterprisers are torn on this issue, with 44% viewing outsourcing positively, and 43% negatively. Opposition is especially strong among less affluent typology groups. Nearly nine-inten Disadvantaged Democrats (87%) think outsourcing is bad for the economy because it sends jobs overseas; 81% of Conservative Democrats,78% of Disaffecteds, and 71% of Pro-Government Conservatives agree. However, even the upwardly mobile Upbeats take a generally dim view of outsourcing with a 55% majority calling it a bad thing and just
Outsourcing's Impact on the Economy Bad
Good
Total
69 22
Enterprisers
43 44
Social Conservatives
67 18
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
71 22
Upbeats
55 37
Disaffecteds
78 13
Conservative Democrats Disadvantaged Dems Liberals
44
81 87 8 72 19
10
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
37% offering a positive opinion of this trend. There is little consensus, however, on the economic impact of regional and multilateral trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). In no group does a majority describe such agreements as bad for the United States. Moreover, only among Social Conservatives and Disaffecteds do pluralities express disapproval (44% of Social Conservatives, 43% of Disaffecteds). Even Disadvantaged Democrats are evenly split (41%-41%) between the good and bad appellations.
Impact of Trade Agreements Bad for the US
Good for the US
Total
34 47
Enterprisers
40 47
Social Conservatives
44 36
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
27 47
Upbeats
24 59
Disaffecteds
43 40
Conservative Democrats
34 43
Disadvantaged Dems
41 41
Liberals
34 50
Yet there also is little apparent enthusiasm for such trade deals, aside from the pro-business Upbeats (59% good thing). Enterprisers and Liberals, the other two groups with high annual incomes, on balance believe such agreements are good for the U.S., but only about half in each group views them positively. Enterprisers strongly favor allowing immigrants to enter and work in the United States legally for limited periods of time (by 71% to 26%). This issue produces an unusual alliance between Enterprisers and Liberals, who, reflecting their generally pro-immigrant stance, register high levels of support for such temporary visas (58%-36%), as do the probusiness Upbeats (57%-38%).
Policy Allowing Immigrants to Work in the US Temporarily? Oppose
Favor
Total
44 50
Enterprisers
26 71
Social Conservatives
50 44
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
47 47
Upbeats
38 57
Disaffecteds
51 46
On this question, opposition falls along economic rather than party lines. While Conservative Democrats 50 43 Disadvantaged Democrats are the group most Disadvantaged Dems 63 30 Liberals 36 58 reluctant to ease entry for immigrant workers, with 63% opposed and only 30% in favor, they are joined by majorities among Disaffecteds (51%), Social Conservatives and Conservative Democrats (50% in each group). 45
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Protecting the Environment Support for laws and regulations to protect the environment runs strongly among the public. As noted earlier, more than threequarters (77%) believe the country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment and 63% subscribe to that view strongly.
Allow Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Oppose Total
Favor
49 46
Enterprisers
5 92
Social Conservatives
23 71
50 46 Pro-Gov't Conservatives But the public, and the party coalitions, are divided over a proposal, currently before Upbeats 47 49 Congress, to permit oil and gas drilling in the Disaffecteds 32 60 Alaskan Arctic Wildlife Refuge. Among 46 46 Conservative Democrats Republicans, Enterprisers overwhelmingly Disadvantaged Dems 57 30 favor drilling (92%-5%), as does a solid 85 14 Liberals majority of Social Conservatives (71%). But Pro-Government Conservatives are split, with 46% supporting the proposal and 50% opposed. And while Liberals strongly oppose oil and gas drilling in the Alaska refuge (by 85%-14%), Conservative Democrats are evenly divided (46%46%). Support for Private Accounts Slips Opinions on the Allowing Private Accounts in Social Security president’s proposal to allow younger workers to invest December March Change Favor Oppose Favor Oppose in Fav some of their Social Security % % % % taxes in private retirement 54 30 46 44 -8 Total accounts track more Enterprisers 89 6 88 7 -1 predictably along partisan Social Conservatives 61 20 56 30 -5 Pro-Gov’t Conservatives 63 19 59 26 -4 lines. As general support for the plan has weakened since it Upbeats 64 20 59 28 -5 Disaffecteds 53 28 44 44 -9 was first announced, the March survey finds the overall Conservative Democrats 48 38 36 58 -12 Disadvantaged Democrats 33 50 17 76 -16 public nearly evenly divided, Liberals 38 47 28 65 -10 with 46% favoring the idea and 44% opposed.
A comparison of the December and March surveys shows that support declined most sharply among Democratic groups. But there also has been significant erosion of support among the independent groups, especially the Disaffecteds. This group backed private accounts by nearly two46
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
to-one in December; currently, Disaffecteds are evenly split over the idea. The proposal, however, still garners the support of nearly nine-in-ten Enterprisers (88%), and majorities in the other GOP groups, as well as 59% of Upbeats. However, no more than about a third in any of the Democratic groups support private accounts (36% of Conservative Democrats).
47
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Part Three: Military and Foreign Policy The partisan lines dividing the electorate come into sharpest focus on issues involving current foreign and military policies. Support for the use of military force is strongest among groups that are reliably Republican, somewhat less so among centrist groups, and weakest among Democratic groups. Public opinion is cautiously in favor of at least the occasional use of U.S. military force against countries that have not attacked the U.S., but may seriously threaten America. At the extremes, only 14% think preemption is often justified, while the same number think preemption is never justified. The plurality (46%) takes the view that it is sometimes justified, and 21% think it is justified at least on rare occasions.
Preemptive Military Force Can be Justified... Rarely/Never
Total
Often/Sometimes
35
60
10
Enterprisers Social Conservatives Pro-Gov't Conservatives
Upbeats Disaffecteds
15 27
23 27
89 82 67
71 63
Conservative Democrats 32 58 Across groups in the electorate, these Disadvantaged Dems 54 38 proportions vary substantially. Enterprisers are 33 Liberals 67 the most likely to support preemption, with about nine-in-ten (89%) saying it is sometimes (57%) or often (32%) justified. Nearly as many Social Conservatives say preemptive military action is at least sometimes justified (82%), but there is less support for this idea among Pro-Government Conservatives (67%).
Moving leftward across the political spectrum, reservations about the use of preemptive military force increase. Only about four-in-ten Disadvantaged Democrats (38%) and fewer Liberals (33%) believe preemptive military action is often or sometimes justified. Iraq Attitudes Polarized The same pattern is displayed even more clearly with respect to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. The consistently wide partisan divisions over the war are seen in the opinions of the typology groups. In the December survey, Enterprisers (94%), Social Conservatives (88%) and Pro-
48
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Government Conservatives (72%) endorsed the war by overwhelming majorities. So t o o d i d t w o thirds of Upbeats (66%) and half of Disaffecteds.
Opinions on the War in Iraq War in Iraq was the... Right Wrong decision decision % % 49 44
Total
What to do now? Keep Bring troops in troops home Iraq soon % % 56 40
Enterprisers 94 5 Among Democratic Social Conservatives 88 8 groups, opposition to the Pro-Gov’t Conservatives 72 18 Iraq war is equally strong. Upbeats 66 24 Liberals judge the war a Disaffecteds 50 40 mistake by a lopsided 87%Conservative Democrats 28 61 11% margin. Conservative Disadvantaged Democrats 15 76 Liberals 11 87 Democrats oppose it by twoto-one (61% wrong decision versus 28% right decision), while support is even lower among Disadvantaged Democrats (76% to 15%).
88 81 68
10 18 29
72 45
24 49
33 26 52
64 68 44
However, opinions shift with respect to the question of whether the government should keep U.S. troops in Iraq until the situation there stabilizes, or bring them home as quickly as possible. Enterprisers, Social Conservatives and Pro-Government Conservatives maintain nearly as high levels of support (88%, 81% and 68%, respectively) for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq as they did for their initial deployment. Conservative Democrats and Disadvantaged Democrats, who opposed the decision to go to war by substantial margins, want U.S. troops withdrawn quickly. But Liberals – the group most inclined to view the Iraq intervention as a mistake – are divided on this point. A majority of Liberals (52%) say they would keep troops in Iraq, compared with 44% who would now bring them home. Can Torture Be Justified? Overall, the public is divided over using torture against suspected terrorists when such tactics may yield important information. Roughly half (51%) say it is never or rarely justified, but 45% believe it is at least sometimes justified. Liberals are most strongly opposed to resorting to torture; 77% say it is rarely or never justified. But that number falls to 57% among Disadvantaged Democrats, and Conservative Democrats are evenly split over whether torturing terrorist suspects can be justified. Majorities of
49
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Disaffecteds – and of the three GOP groups – believe the torture of suspected terrorists can at least sometimes be justified.
Torture Against Suspected Terrorists Can Be Justified... Rarely/Never Total
Often/Sometimes
51
45
Patriot Act: Ideological Divisions 32 63 Enterprisers The Patriot Act almost perfectly 44 53 Social Conservatives encapsulates the black-and-white differences 41 54 Pro-Gov't Conservatives in the national security attitudes of Enterprisers and Liberals. Fully 73% of 52 45 Upbeats 37 Disaffecteds Enterprisers see the Patriot Act as a necessary 54 tool in the war on terror; a virtually identical 48 49 Conservative Democrats percentage of Liberals (71%) say the Patriot Disadvantaged Dems 57 37 Act goes too far and threatens civil liberties. 21 Liberals 77 And while many Americans are only dimly aware of the act – from half to two-thirds of most groups in the electorate say they know little or nothing about it – awareness is greatest among the Enterprisers and Liberals. Other typology groups fall somewhere between these extremes, although Disadvantaged Democrats also register strong objections to the Patriot Act. Significantly, while Pro-Government Conservatives are more supportive of an activist government than are other GOP groups, many have reservations about the Patriot Act. A small plurality of ProGovernment Conservatives (38%) deem it a necessary tool, compared with 28% saying it goes too far and threatens civil liberties.
Views of the Patriot Act Goes too far and threatens civil liberties Necessary tool to help find terrorists
Total
39 33
Enterprisers
12 73
Social Conservatives
13 53
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
28 38
Upbeats
27 46
Disaffecteds
44 28
Conservative Democrats
40 29
Disadvantaged Dems
60 8 The Republican-leaning Disaffecteds, 71 15 Liberals however, by a margin of 44% to 28% side with Democratic groups in thinking that the Patriot Act’s costs to civil liberties outweigh its benefits in fighting terrorism. Upbeats, the other independent group, support the act by a similar margin (46%-27%).
50
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Favorability Ratings: Muslims, the U.N. Regardless of their opinion on Islamic terrorism and their view of U.S. military action in Iraq, most Americans do not harbor negative feelings toward members of the Muslim faith in general. A plurality (45%) expresses a favorable opinion of Muslims, while only 28% have an unfavorable assessment. A significant minority (27%) say they are not familiar enough with Muslims to offer an opinion. Favorable views are highest among the relatively well-educated Liberals (63%) and Upbeats (55%). Among Social Conservatives, negative views of Muslims outweigh positive ones by 38%-27%, and two other groups are about evenly divided: the Disaffecteds (32% unfavorable/29% favorable) and Conservative Democrats (34%/35%). Attitudes toward the United Nations divide in a more predictably partisan pattern. The public, by a margin of 59% to 32%, has a favorable view of the world body. Among Enterprisers, however, just 15% have a favorable opinion of the U.N., compared with 82% who express a negative opinion. A majority in only one other group, Social Conservatives, express a negative opinion of the U.N. (54% unfavorable).
Favorability Ratings: Muslims Unfavorable
Favorable
Total
28 45
Enterpriser
32 46
Soc. Conservative
38 27
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
27 40
Upbeats
31 55
Disaffecteds
32 29
Conservative Democrats
34 35
Disadvantaged Dem.
30 41
Liberals
16 63
Favorability Ratings: United Nations Unfavorable
Favorable
Total
32 59
Enterpriser
82 15
Soc. Conservative
54 36
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
23 66
Upbeats
31 64
Disaffecteds
37 48
Conservative Democrats
24 65
Disadvantaged Dem.
21 70
Liberals
18 77
By contrast, two-thirds (66%) of Pro-Government Conservatives join with other groups in the center and left of the political spectrum in expressing positive views of the U.N. Liberals are the most likely to view the U.N. favorably (77% do so), but they are also joined in this view by 64% of Upbeats, 65% of Conservative Democrats and 70% of Disadvantaged Democrats.
51
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PROFILES OF THE TYPOLOGY GROUPS
52
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ENTERPRISERS PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Staunch Conservatives, Enterprisers 9% OF ADULT POPULATION 10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 81% Republican, 18% Independent/No Preference, 1% Democrat (98% Rep/Lean Rep) BASIC DESCRIPTION: As in 1994 and 1999, this extremely partisan Republican group’s politics are driven by a belief in the free enterprise system and social values that reflect a conservative agenda. Enterprisers are also the strongest backers of an assertive foreign policy, which includes nearly unanimous support for the war in Iraq and strong support for such anti-terrorism efforts as the Patriot Act. DEFINING VALUES: Assertive on foreign policy and patriotic; anti-regulation and pro-business; very little support for government help to the poor; strong belief that individuals are responsible for their own well being. Conservative on social issues such as gay marriage, but not much more religious than the nation as a whole. Very satisfied with personal financial situation. General Population
Enterprisers
Most corporations make a fair and reasonable amount of profit
39%
88%
Stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy
31%
74%
Using overwhelming military force is the best way to defeat terrorism around the world
39%
84%
Poor people today have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything in return
34%
73%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Predominantly white (91%), male (76%) and financially well-off (62% have household incomes of at least $50,000, compared with 40% nationwide). Nearly half (46%) have a college degree, and 77% are married. Nearly a quarter (23%) are themselves military veterans. Only 10% are under age 30. LIFESTYLE NOTES: 59% have a gun in the home; 53% trade stocks and bonds, and 30% are small business owners – all of which are the highest percentages among typology groups. 48% attend church weekly; 36% attend bible study or prayer group meetings. 2004 ELECTION: Bush 92%, Kerry 1%. Bush’s most reliable supporters (just 4% of Enterprisers did not vote). MEDIA USE: Enterprisers follow news about government and politics more closely than any other group, and exhibit the most knowledge about world affairs. The Fox News Channel is their primary source of news (46% cite it as a main source) followed by newspapers (42%) radio (31%) and the internet (26%).
53
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Moralists, Moderate Republicans 11% OF ADULT POPULATION 13% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 82% Republican, 18% Independent/No Preference, 0% Democrat (97% Rep/Lean Rep) BASIC DESCRIPTION: While supportive of an assertive foreign policy, this group is somewhat more religious than are Enterprisers. In policy terms, they break from the Enterprisers in their cynical views of business, modest support for environmental and other regulation, and strong anti-immigrant sentiment. DEFINING VALUES: Conservative on social issues ranging from gay marriage to abortion. Support an assertive foreign policy and oppose government aid for the needy, believing people need to make it on their own. Strongly worried about impact of immigrants on American society. More middle-of-the-road on economic and domestic policies, expressing some skepticism about business power and profits, and some support for government regulation to protect the environment. While not significantly better-off than the rest of the nation, most express strong feelings of financial satisfaction and security. General Population
Social Conservatives
Homosexuality is a way of life that should be discouraged by society
44%
65%
The growing number of newcomers from other countries threatens traditional American customs and values
40%
68%
Poor people today have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything in return
34%
68%
Business corporations make too much profit
54%
66%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Predominantly white (91%), female (58%) and the oldest of all groups (average age is 52; 47% are 50 or older); nearly half live in the South. Most (53%) attend church weekly; 43% are white evangelical Protestants (double the national average of 21%). LIFESTYLE NOTES: 56% have a gun in their home, and 51% attend Bible study groups. 2004 ELECTION: Bush 86%, Kerry 4%. MEDIA USE: Half of Social Conservatives cite newspapers as a main source of news; the Fox News Channel (34%) and network evening news (30%) are their major TV news sources.
54
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PRO-GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVES PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Populist Republicans 9% OF ADULT POPULATION 10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 58% Republican, 40% Independent/No Preference, 2% Democrat (86% Rep/Lean Rep) BASIC DESCRIPTION: Pro-Government Conservatives stand out for their strong religious faith and conservative views on many moral issues. They also express broad support for a social safety net, which sets them apart from other GOP groups. Pro-Government Conservatives are skeptical about the effectiveness of the marketplace, favoring government regulation to protect the public interest and government assistance for the needy. They supported George W. Bush by roughly five-to-one. DEFINING VALUES: Religious, financially insecure, and favorable toward government programs. Support the Iraq war and an assertive foreign policy, but less uniformly so than Enterprisers or Social Conservatives. Back government involvement in a wide range of policy areas, from poverty assistance to protecting morality and regulating industry. General Population
Pro-gov’t Conservatives
Books that contain dangerous ideas should be banned from public school libraries
44%
62%
Religion is a very important part of my life
74%
91%
The government should do more to help needy Americans, even if it means going deeper into debt
57%
80%
Government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest
49%
66%
We should all be willing to fight for our country, whether it is right or wrong
46%
67%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Predominantly female (62%) and relatively young; highest percentage of minority members of any Republican-leaning group (10% black, 12% Hispanic). Most (59%) have no more than a high school diploma. Poorer than other Republican groups; nearly half (49%) have household incomes of less than $30,000 (about on par with Disadvantaged Democrats). Nearly half (47%) are parents of children living at home; 42% live in the South. LIFESTYLE NOTES: Most (52%) attend religious services at least weekly; nearly all describe religion as “very important” in their lives. Gun ownership is lower (36%) than in other GOP groups. Just 14% trade stocks and bonds in the market; 39% say someone in their home has faced unemployment in the past year. 2004 ELECTION: Bush 61%, Kerry 12%. Fully 21% said they didn’t vote in November. MEDIA USE: Most Pro-Government Conservatives consult traditional news sources, including newspapers (48%) and network TV (31%). No more or less engaged in politics than the national average.
55
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
UPBEATS PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: New Prosperity Independents, Upbeats 11% OF ADULT POPULATION 13% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 56% Independent/No Preference, 39% Republican, 5% Democrat (73% Rep/Lean Rep) BASIC DESCRIPTION: Upbeats express positive views about the economy, government and society. Satisfied with their own financial situation and the direction the nation is heading, these voters support George W. Bush’s leadership in economic matters more than on moral or foreign policy issues. Combining highly favorable views of government with equally positive views of business and the marketplace, Upbeats believe that success is in people’s own hands, and that businesses make a positive contribution to society. This group also has a very favorable view of immigrants. DEFINING VALUES: Very favorable views of government performance and responsiveness defines the group, along with similarly positive outlook on the role of business in society. While most support the war in Iraq, Upbeats have mixed views on foreign policy – but most favor preemptive military action against countries that threaten the U.S. Religious, but decidedly moderate in views about morality. General Population
Upbeats
Government often does a better job than people give it credit for
45%
68%
Most elected officials care what people like me think
32%
64%
Most corporations make a fair and reasonable profit
39%
78%
Immigrants strengthen our country
45%
72%
As Americans, we can always find ways to solve our problems and get what we want
59%
74%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Relatively young (26% are under 30) and well-educated, Upbeats are among the wealthiest typology groups (39% have household incomes of $75,000 or more). The highest proportion of Catholics (30%) and white mainline Protestants (28%) of all groups, although fewer than half (46%) attend church weekly. Mostly white (87%), suburban, and married, they are evenly split between men and women. LIFESTYLE NOTES: High rate of stock ownership (42%, 2nd after Enterprisers). 2004 ELECTION: Bush 63%, Kerry 14%. MEDIA USE: Upbeats are second only to Liberals in citing the internet as their main news source (34% compared with 23% nationwide); 46% also cite newspapers. No more or less engaged in politics than the national average.
56
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DISAFFECTEDS PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Embittered, Disaffecteds 9% OF ADULT POPULATION 10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 68% Independent/No Preference, 30% Republican, 2% Democrat (60% Rep/Lean Rep) BASIC DESCRIPTION: Disaffecteds are deeply cynical about government and unsatisfied with both their own economic situation and the overall state of the nation. Under heavy financial pressure personally, this group is deeply concerned about immigration and environmental policies, particularly to the extent that they affect jobs. Alienated from politics, Disaffecteds have little interest in keeping up with news about politics and government, and few participated in the last election. DEFINING VALUES: Despite personal financial strain – and belief that success is mostly beyond a person’s control – Disaffecteds are only moderate supporters of government welfare and assistance to the poor. Strongly oppose immigration as well as regulatory and environmental policies on the grounds that government is ineffective and such measures cost jobs. General Population
Disaffecteds
Immigrants today are a burden on our country because they take our jobs, housing and health care
44%
80%
Government is always wasteful and inefficient
47%
70%
Most elected officials don’t care what people like me think
63%
84%
Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people
28%
48%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Less educated (70% have attended no college, compared with 49% nationwide) and predominantly male (57%). While a majority (60%) leans Republican, three-in-ten are strict independents, triple the national rate. Disaffecteds live in all parts of the country, though somewhat more are from rural and suburban areas than urban. LIFESTYLE NOTES: Somewhat higher percentages than the national average have a gun in the home, and report that someone in their house has been unemployed in the past year. 2004 ELECTION: Bush 42%, Kerry 21%. Nearly a quarter (23%) said they didn’t vote in the last election. MEDIA USE: Disaffecteds have little interest in current events and pay little attention to the news. No single medium or network stands out as a main source.
57
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
LIBERALS PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Liberal Democrats/Seculars/60's Democrats 17% OF GENERAL POPULATION 19% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 59% Democrat; 40% Independent/No Preference, 1% Republican (92% Dem/Lean Dem) BASIC DESCRIPTION: This group has nearly doubled in proportion since 1999. Liberal Democrats now comprise the largest share of Democrats. They are the most opposed to an assertive foreign policy, the most secular, and take the most liberal views on social issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and censorship. They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration. DEFINING VALUES: Strongest preference for diplomacy over use of military force. Pro-choice, supportive of gay marriage and strongly favor environmental protection. Low participation in religious activities. Most sympathetic of any group to immigrants as well as labor unions, and most opposed to the anti-terrorism Patriot Act. General Population
Liberals
Relying too much on military force to defeat terrorism creates hatred that leads to more terrorism
51%
90%
I worry the government is getting too involved in the issue of morality
51%
88%
Stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost
60%
89%
Poor people have hard lives because government benefits don’t go far enough to help them live decently
52%
80%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Most (62%) identify themselves as liberal. Predominantly white (83%), most highly educated group (49% have a college degree or more), and youngest group after Bystanders. Least religious group in typology: 43% report they seldom or never attend religious services; nearly a quarter (22%) are seculars. More than one-third never married (36%). Largest group residing in urban areas (42%) and in the western half the country (34%). Wealthiest Democratic group (41% earn at least $75,000). LIFESTYLE NOTES: Largest group to have been born (or whose parents were born) outside of the U.S. or Canada (20%). Least likely to have a gun in the home (23%) or attend bible study or prayer group meetings (13%). 2004 ELECTION: Bush 2%, Kerry 81% MEDIA USE: Liberals are second only to Enterprisers in following news about government and public affairs most of the time (60%). Liberals’ use of the internet to get news is the highest among all groups (37%).
58
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Socially Conservative Democrats / New Dealers 14% OF ADULT POPULATION 15% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 89% Democrat, 11% Independent/No Preference, 0% Republican,(98% Dem/Lean Dem) BASIC DESCRIPTION: Religious orientation and conservative views set this group apart from other Democratic-leaning groups on many social and political issues. Conservative Democrats’ views are moderate with respect to key policy issues such as foreign policy, regulation of the environment and the role of government in providing a social safety net. Their neutrality on assistance to the poor is linked, at least in part, to their belief in personal responsibility. DEFINING VALUES: Less extreme on moral beliefs than core Republican groups, but most oppose gay marriage and the acceptance of homosexuality, and support a more active role for government in protecting morality. No more conservative than the national average on other social issues such as abortion and stemcell research. Most oppose the war in Iraq, but views of America’s overall foreign policy are mixed and they are less opposed to Bush’s assertive stance than are other Democratic groups. General Population
Conservative Democrats
It is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values
50%
72%
Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they’re willing to work hard
68%
82%
We should all be willing to fight for our country, whether it is right or wrong
46%
49%**
The government should do more to help needy Americans, even if it means going deeper into debt
57%
59%**
Key Beliefs:
** Figures are notable for being so different from other Democratic groups.
WHO THEY ARE: Older women and blacks make up a sizeable proportion of this group (27% and 30%, respectively). Somewhat less educated and poorer than the nation overall. Allegiance to the Democratic party is quite strong (51% describe themselves as “strong” Democrats) but fully 85% describe themselves as either conservative or moderate ideologically. LIFESTYLE NOTES: 46% attend church at least once a week, 44% attend Bible study or prayer group meetings, a third (34%) have a gun in their house. 2004 ELECTION: Bush 14%, Kerry 65%. MEDIA USE: Emphasis on traditional providers as main news sources: newspapers (50%) and network TV news (42%).
59
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DISADVANTAGED DEMOCRATS PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Partisan Poor 10% OF GENERAL POPULATION 10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 84% Democrat; 16% Independent/No Preference, 0% Republican (99% Dem/Lean Dem) BASIC DESCRIPTION: Least financially secure of all the groups, these voters are very anti-business, and strong supporters of government efforts to help the needy. Minorities account for a significant proportion of this group; nearly a third (32%) are black, roughly the same proportion as among Conservative Democrats. Levels of disapproval of George W. Bush job performance (91%) and candidate choice in 2004 (82% for Kerry) are comparable to those among Liberals. DEFINING VALUES: Most likely to be skeptical of an individual’s ability to succeed without impediments and most anti-business. Strong belief that government should do more to help the poor, yet most are disenchanted with government. Strongly supportive of organized labor (71% have a favorable view of labor unions). General Population
Disadvantaged Democrats
Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people
28%
79%
Poor people have hard lives because government benefits don’t go far enough to help them live decently
52%
80%
Most elected officials don’t care what people like me think
63%
87%
Business corporations make too much profit
54%
76%
We should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems here at home
49%
72%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Low average incomes (32% below $20,000 in household income); most (77%) often can’t make ends meet. Six-in-ten are female. Three-in-ten (32%) are black and 14% are Hispanic. Not very well educated, 67% have at most a high-school degree. Nearly half (47%) are parents of children living at home. LIFESTYLE NOTES: Nearly a quarter (23%) report someone in their household is a member of a labor union, and 58% report that they or someone in the home has been unemployed in the past year– both far larger proportions than in any other group. Only 27% have a gun in the home. 2004 ELECTION: 2% Bush, 82% Kerry MEDIA USE: Largest viewership of CNN as main news source among all groups (31%). Only group in which a majority (53%) reads newspapers.
60
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
BYSTANDERS PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Bystanders 10% OF ADULT POPULATION 0% OF REGISTERED VOTERS PARTY ID: 56% Independent/No Preference, 22% Republican, 22% Democrat BASIC DESCRIPTION: These Americans choose not to participate in or pay attention to politics, or are not eligible to do so (non-citizens). DEFINING VALUES: Cynical about government and the political system. Uninterested in political news. General Population
Bystander s
Follow what’s going on in government and public affairs most/some of the time
80%
45%
Voted in 2004 Presidential election
74%
3%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Young (39% are under age 30, average age is 37). Lowest education (24% have not finished high school). Less religious than any group other than Liberals (26% attend church weekly). Largely concentrated in the South and West, relatively few in the East and Midwest. One-in-five are Hispanic. LIFESTYLE NOTES: About half (49%) say they often can’t make ends meet, fewer than among ProGovernment Conservatives, Disadvantaged Democrats or Disaffecteds; 30% attend bible groups or prayer meetings; 30% own a gun. 2004 ELECTION: 96% did not vote in presidential election. MEDIA USE: Television is the main news source for Bystanders (79%) as for all other typology groups, with network news (24%) the most frequently cited TV source; 34% read newspapers and 23% get their news from the radio.
61
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ABOUT THE SURVEYS Results for the main Political Typology Survey are based on telephone interviews conducted under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International among a nationwide sample of 2,000 adults, 18 years of age or older, during the period Dec. 1-16, 2004. For results based on the total sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. For results based on Form 1 (N=993) or Form 2 (N=1007) only, the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. For results based on abbreviated field periods, with sample sizes ranging from 419 to 523, the margin of error is plus or minus 5.5 percentage points. The Typology Callback Survey obtained callback telephone interviews with 1,090 respondents from the December 2004 Typology survey from March 17 to March 27, 2005. Statistical results are weighted to correct known demographic discrepancies. The margin of sampling error for the recontacted respondents is plus or minus 3.5% percentage points. In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls. SURVEY METHODOLOGY IN DETAIL The sample for this survey is a random digit sample of telephone numbers selected from telephone exchanges in the continental United States. The random digit aspect of the sample is used to avoid "listing" bias and provides representation of both listed and unlisted numbers (including not-yet-listed). The design of the sample ensures this representation by random generation of the last two digits of telephone numbers selected on the basis of their area code, telephone exchange, and bank number. The telephone exchanges were selected with probabilities proportional to their size. The first eight digits of the sampled telephone numbers (area code, telephone exchange, bank number) were selected to be proportionally stratified by county and by telephone exchange within county. That is, the number of telephone numbers randomly sampled from within a given county is proportional to that county's share of telephone numbers in the U.S. Only working banks of telephone numbers are selected. A working bank is defined as 100 contiguous telephone numbers containing three or more residential listings. The sample was released for interviewing in replicates. Using replicates to control the release of sample to the field ensures that the complete call procedures are followed for the entire sample. At least 10 attempts were made to complete an interview at every sampled telephone number. The calls were staggered over times of day and days of the week to maximize the chances of making a contact with a potential respondent. All interview breakoffs and refusals were re-contacted at least once in order to attempt to convert them to completed interviews. In each contacted household, interviewers asked to speak with the "youngest male 18 or older who is at home." If there was no eligible man at home, interviewers asked to speak with "the oldest woman 18 or older who is at home." This systematic respondent selection technique has been shown empirically to produce samples that closely mirror the population in terms of age and gender. Non-response in telephone interview surveys produces some known biases in survey-derived estimates because participation tends to vary for different subgroups of the population, and these subgroups are likely to vary also on questions of substantive interest. In order to compensate for these known biases,
62
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
the sample data are weighted in analysis. The demographic weighting parameters are derived from a special analysis of the most recently available Annual Social & Economic Supplement data from the Census Bureau (March 2003). This analysis produced population parameters for the demographic characteristics of households with adults 18 or older, which are then compared with the sample characteristics to construct sample weights. The analysis only included households in the continental United States that contain a telephone. The weights are derived using an iterative technique that simultaneously balances the distributions of all weighting parameters. For the typology callback survey, as many as 10 attempts were made to contact each original survey respondent. Calls were staggered over times of day and days of the week to maximize the chance of making contact with potential respondents. Each household received at least one daytime call in an attempt to complete and interview. The 1,090 interviews represent a recontact rate of 55%. METHODOLOGY FOR CREATING THE TYPOLOGY The value dimensions used to create the typology are each based on the combined responses to two or more survey questions. The questions used to create each scale were those shown statistically to be most strongly related to the underlying dimension. Each of the individual survey questions use a "balanced alternative" format that presents respondents with two statements and asks them to choose the one that most closely reflects their own views. To measure intensity, each question is followed by a probe to determine whether or not respondents feel strongly about the choice they selected. As in past typologies, a measure of political attentiveness and voting participation was used to extract the "Bystander" group, people who are largely unengaged and uninvolved in politics. A statistical cluster analysis was used to sort the remaining respondents into relatively homogeneous groups based on the nine value scales, party identification, and self reported ideology. Several different cluster solutions were evaluated for their effectiveness in producing cohesive groups that are distinct from one another, large enough in size to be analytically practical, and substantively meaningful. The final solution selected to produce the new political typology was judged to be strongest on a statistical basis and to be most persuasive from a substantive point of view.
63
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS Total % Sex Male Female
Social Pro-Government Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats % % % %
Disaffecteds %
Conservative Disadvantaged Democrats Democrats Liberals % % %
Bystanders %
48 52 100
76 24 100
42 58 100
38 62 100
50 50 100
57 43 100
44 56 100
40 60 100
46 54 100
48 52 100
Age Under 30 30-49 50-64 65 and older
21 39 22 16
10 46 24 18
13 37 21 26
24 39 22 14
26 36 21 16
12 44 27 15
17 37 23 23
17 37 30 13
28 40 21 10
39 40 12 8
Sex and Age Men 18-29 Men 30-49 Men 50+
11 19 18
9 34 31
6 14 21
10 12 16
12 18 19
7 26 22
8 17 18
10 13 17
14 18 12
21 18 8
Women 18-29 Women 30-49 Women 50+
10 20 20
1 12 11
7 24 26
14 27 20
14 18 18
4 18 20
8 20 27
8 24 26
14 21 18
18 22 12
Race White Black Hispanic* Other
80 12 10 7
91 1 5 6
91 4 7 4
85 10 12 3
87 7 7 6
81 7 8 9
64 30 11 5
58 32 14 9
83 6 9 9
80 7 20 11
Education College Grad. Some College High School Grad. <H.S. Grad.
27 24 37 12
46 25 26 3
28 26 39 7
15 26 43 16
37 33 25 4
11 18 52 18
16 26 44 14
13 20 44 23
49 26 23 2
13 14 49 24
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
Sample size - December 2004
* The designation Hispanic is unrelated to the white-black categorization.
Continued ...
64
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS (continued) Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats Liberals % % % % % % %
Total %
Enterprisers %
Region East Midwest South West
19 24 35 22
17 22 34 27
14 22 47 17
18 23 42 17
21 28 33 18
21 27 30 22
21 23 41 15
19 32 35 14
24 20 22 34
16 19 35 30
Family Income (based on those that answered) $75,000+ $50,000-$74,999 $30,000-$49,999 $20,000-$29,999 <$20,000
24 16 25 16 19
41 21 25 6 7
30 17 27 15 11
10 11 30 17 32
39 20 23 8 10
13 16 27 17 27
15 14 29 22 20
8 14 26 20 32
41 15 20 12 12
8 15 24 26 27
Religious Affiliation Protestant Catholic Other Christian Jewish Secular
56 25 3 3 8
61 20 6 3 6
68 24 2 0 3
64 25 2 1 4
55 30 4 1 5
58 22 4 2 9
62 29 1 2 1
59 25 1 2 5
36 23 2 8 22
49 26 2 0 12
White Protestant Evangelical White Prot. Non-Evangelical White Catholic Black Protestant
21 23 17 9
34 23 12 0
43 21 18 2
37 19 17 7
22 28 26 4
20 27 18 5
16 20 17 24
11 17 15 26
5 24 17 3
17 25 11 6
Attend Religious Services At least once a week At least a few times a year Seldom or never
40 34 25
48 26 25
53 31 15
52 35 11
46 32 22
39 34 25
46 34 19
43 39 17
18 38 43
26 39 34
Labor Union member Yes, someone in household Yes, respondent a member
14 9
10 7
14 7
10 6
8 7
13 9
18 14
23 13
14 10
10 4
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
Sample size - December 2004
Bystanders %
Continued ...
65
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS (continued) Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats Liberals % % % % % % %
Total %
Enterprisers %
Military Veteran Yes, someone in household Yes, respondent a veteran
21 13
27 23
28 17
23 12
24 16
23 13
23 14
23 10
12 7
9 7
Marital Status Married Never Married Divorced/Separated Widowed
54 23 14 8
77 10 8 5
66 11 13 10
55 19 15 11
59 22 11 7
57 15 19 7
49 22 16 13
42 29 18 11
44 36 15 5
49 34 12 5
Parental Status Parent, child living at home
37
43
32
47
33
31
37
47
27
46
Have any guns in your home Yes No
37 60
59 34
56 39
36 62
40 59
45 51
34 65
27 70
23 76
30 66
Own a small business Yes No
16 84
30 69
14 85
11 88
15 85
21 78
14 86
8 92
17 83
10 90
Trade stocks or bonds in the market Yes No
28 71
53 46
35 64
14 85
42 57
17 80
20 80
18 82
38 61
11 89
Someone in household unemployed within last 12 months Yes No
37 63
28 72
18 82
39 60
28 72
42 57
37 63
58 42
40 60
45 54
You or your parents born in country other than U.S. or Canada Yes No
16 84
12 88
12 88
11 89
18 82
14 86
13 87
9 91
20 80
28 72
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
Sample size - December 2004
66
Bystanders %
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
POLITICAL PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats % % % % % %
Total %
Enterprisers %
2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry Didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t vote
36 36 22
92 1 4
86 4 6
61 12 21
63 14 14
42 21 23
14 65 13
Party Identification Republican Democrat Independent Other No preference/DK
30 34 30 * 6
81 1 15 0 3
82 0 15 0 3
58 2 33 0 7
39 5 45 * 11
30 2 53 2 13
Republican/lean Republican Democrat/lean Democrat Independent, no leaning
45 46 9
98 1 1
97 1 2
86 3 11
73 14 13
Strong Republican Strong Democrat
17 19
62 0
51 0
33 0
Ideology Conservative Moderate Liberal
39 37 19
85 14 1
66 29 3
Conservative Republican Moderate/Liberal Repub. Conserv./Moderate Dem. Liberal Democrat
20 10 22 10
70 11 1 0
Bush Job Approval* Approve Disapprove
49 46
Overall opinion of George W. Bush* Favorable Unfavorable Sample size - December 2004
Liberals %
Bystanders %
2 82 13
2 81 13
2 1 96
0 89 11 0 *
0 84 14 0 2
1 59 38 0 2
22 22 43 0 13
60 10 30
0 98 2
0 99 1
2 92 6
39 38 23
16 1
14 0
0 51
0 55
0 35
8 6
58 38 2
47 43 6
29 46 16
41 44 9
27 48 16
1 35 62
32 33 24
56 24 0 0
36 21 2 0
22 17 5 0
10 18 2 0
0 0 76 8
0 0 62 14
0 1 17 42
11 10 13 8
95 5
88 6
77 16
67 25
62 30
33 59
4 95
11 86
45 45
53 45
96 3
91 7
89 10
71 28
72 22
41 56
9 91
9 89
58 37
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
67
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES Total % With next Supreme Court appointment, Bush should make the court... More liberal 24 More conservative 28 About the same as it is now 41
Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats % % % % % % %
Liberals %
Bystanders %
4 64 26
5 50 40
9 36 41
13 30 53
10 30 53
27 26 40
33 15 43
52 5 39
26 17 38
38 36 23
59 29 12
47 36 14
33 51 15
37 37 24
30 28 34
28 39 29
31 41 23
49 31 19
19 38 37
46 44
88 7
56 30
59 26
59 28
44 44
36 58
17 76
28 65
48 32
View of Pres. Bushâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tax cuts All should be made permanent 28 Tax cuts for wealthy should be repealed 35 All tax cuts should be repealed 25
82 5 8
42 30 17
27 33 25
35 27 23
33 27 24
14 43 31
13 47 30
8 49 34
18 35 28
Increase in minimum wage from $5.15 per hour to $6.45 per hour Favor Oppose
86 12
46 49
79 18
94 5
86 11
84 13
92 6
95 3
94 5
92 7
Govâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t guaranteeing health insurance for all citizens Favor Oppose
65 30
23 76
59 37
63 33
55 38
64 26
73 23
65 29
90 8
67 25
(2000) (1090)
(219) (139)
(236) (135)
(163) (86)
(248) (133)
(179) (90)
(261) (120)
(167) (78)
(359) (240)
(168) (69)
Importance of next Sup. Court justice Very important Somewhat important Not too/ at all important
Economic Issues Social Security private accounts* Favor Oppose
Sample size - December 2004 *Sample size - March 2005
Continued ...
68
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued) Total %
Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats % % % % % % %
Liberals %
Bystanders %
Limiting the amount patients can be awarded in medical malpractice lawsuits Favor 63 Oppose 30
81 16
76 18
61 30
72 23
54 37
57 35
53 41
58 37
61 29
“Outsourcing” is... Bad for the economy Good for the economy
69 22
43 44
67 18
71 22
55 37
78 13
81 10
87 8
72 19
65 26
Allowing immigrants to enter the U.S. legally and work here for a limited amount of time* Favor Oppose
50 44
71 26
44 50
47 47
57 38
46 51
43 50
30 63
58 36
40 54
Priority of reducing budget deficit* Top priority Important but lower priority Not too important Doesn’t need to be addressed
39 46 6 5
23 59 10 8
33 50 7 6
41 45 6 5
32 55 8 2
43 37 8 5
44 35 8 7
45 43 1 3
50 42 4 3
30 52 3 11
Raising taxes in order to reduce deficit* Favor 31 Oppose 66
12 87
27 73
32 67
34 63
19 78
25 71
23 66
56 41
18 76
Lowering defense/military spending in order to reduce deficit* Favor Oppose
35 60
16 84
16 78
19 77
31 65
33 60
29 63
41 50
65 33
35 57
Lowering domestic spending in order to reduce deficit* Favor Oppose
54 35
81 13
63 23
53 36
61 30
44 38
48 40
29 45
48 47
60 26
Sample size - December 2004 *Sample size - March 2005
(2000) (1090)
(219) (139)
(236) (135)
(163) (86)
(248) (133)
(179) (90)
(261) (120)
(167) (78)
(359) (240)
69
(168) (69) Continued ...
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued) Total %
Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats % % % % % % %
Liberals %
Bystanders %
Programs designed to help blacks, women and other minorities get better jobs and education* Favor Oppose
67 28
31 63
49 45
71 24
70 27
60 31
74 22
68 25
82 14
79 16
Drilling in the ANWR* Favor Oppose
46 49
92 5
71 23
46 51
49 47
60 32
46 46
30 57
14 85
36 59
Free trade agreements like NAFTA and WTO for U.S. Good thing for the U.S. Bad thing for the U.S.
47 34
47 40
36 44
47 27
59 24
40 43
43 34
41 41
50 34
58 23
Higher priority right now Cutting taxes Reducing the Federal deficit Neither
32 61 2
50 43 3
31 61 1
37 57 2
29 64 *
42 47 3
31 62 2
32 61 1
14 83 1
36 50 2
Stem cell research priorities Research that might result in new cures 56 Not destroying potential life of embryos 32
38 49
40 45
47 46
53 36
53 31
57 30
60 26
84 11
55 32
Making it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion Favor Oppose
36 55
54 38
54 40
53 41
37 54
35 47
37 51
22 67
10 88
43 49
Allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally Favor Oppose
32 61
8 90
12 84
17 76
28 64
26 67
19 74
37 55
80 15
32 59
(2000) (1090)
(219) (139)
(236) (135)
(163) (86)
(248) (133)
(179) (90)
(261) (120)
(167) (78)
(359) (240)
(168) (69)
Social Issues
Sample size - December 2004 *Sample size - March 2005
Continued ...
70
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued) Total %
Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats % % % % % % %
Liberals %
Bystanders %
Teaching creationism ALONG WITH evolution in public schools* Favor Oppose
57 33
83 12
62 28
64 22
61 34
60 22
46 33
50 36
49 48
48 39
Teaching creationism INSTEAD OF evolution in public schools* Favor Oppose
33 54
41 49
51 33
40 44
34 59
40 44
41 36
24 60
11 85
44 39
Displaying the Ten Commandments in government buildings* Proper Improper
74 22
89 10
92 5
92 8
81 15
80 10
82 16
84 11
35 61
77 17
Attend Bible study or prayer group Yes No
36 64
36 63
51 48
52 48
35 65
38 61
44 56
41 59
13 87
30 70
Have a friend, colleague, or family member who is gay* Yes No
46 54
37 60
37 61
41 59
43 55
33 67
34 66
48 52
73 27
36 64
20 54 19
41 54 1
30 61 4
24 59 13
21 62 10
26 48 21
18 55 18
13 42 38
10 47 37
11 57 23
Use of torture against suspected terrorist in order to gain important information Often justified 15 Sometimes justified 30 Rarely justified 24 Never justified 27
24 39 22 10
17 36 30 14
11 43 19 22
9 36 26 26
24 30 18 19
20 29 16 32
8 29 16 41
6 15 39 38
20 31 18 28
Foreign Policy Issues Spending on national defense Increase Keep same Cut back
71
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued) Total Using military force against countries % that may seriously threaten our country but have not attacked us Often justified 14 Sometimes justified 46 Rarely justified 21 Never justified 14
Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats % % % % % % %
Liberals %
Bystanders %
32 57 7 3
24 58 11 4
13 54 16 11
14 57 18 5
17 46 15 12
15 43 18 14
5 33 26 28
1 32 44 23
12 41 18 20
Using military force in Iraq Right decision Wrong decision
49 44
94 5
88 8
72 18
66 24
50 40
28 61
15 76
11 87
57 35
How well is the U.S. military effort in Iraq going Very well Fairly well Not too well Not at all well
10 40 28 18
24 64 8 2
21 62 14 1
14 58 18 7
11 52 23 8
10 38 23 22
7 29 41 20
4 21 39 32
2 14 41 42
4 43 28 14
What to do in Iraq... Keep troops in Iraq until stabilized Bring troops home as soon as possible
56 40
88 10
81 18
68 29
72 24
45 49
33 64
26 68
52 44
46 48
Patriot Act Necessary tool Goes too far
33 39
73 12
53 13
38 28
46 27
28 44
29 40
8 60
15 71
22 36
Have a friend, colleague, or family member who has served in Iraq* Yes No
49 51
49 51
54 46
51 49
41 59
48 52
48 52
57 43
45 54
48 52
(2000) (1090)
(219) (139)
(236) (135)
(163) (86)
(248) (133)
(179) (90)
(261) (120)
(167) (78)
(359) (240)
(168) (69)
Sample size - December 2004 *Sample size - March 2005
Continued ...
72
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND MEDIA USE Total
Social Pro-Government Conservative Disadvantaged Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats Democrats
Liberals
Bystanders
Main News Source* Television Local Network (NET) CNN Fox News Channel Newspapers Radio Magazines Internet Sample size - December 2004
74
68
83
82
67
76
85
78
57
79
15 29 20 19
10 17 8 46
13 30 23 34
19 31 21 23
16 29 20 17
22 30 15 16
14 42 27 11
14 32 31 12
9 22 18 6
23 24 19 19
45 21 4 23
42 31 5 26
50 16 4 16
48 18 3 19
46 21 6 34
38 20 3 19
50 14 3 16
53 16 2 18
46 28 7 37
34 23 2 19
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
* Note: Figures add to more than 100% because respondents could list more than one main news source.
Party ID Within Center Groups* Upbeats Disaffected % % 1994 Republican/lean Rep 39 34 Democrat/lean Dem 48 51 Independent/no lean 13 15 100 100
73
1999 Republican/lean Rep Democrat/lean Dem Independent/no lean
54 21 25 100
33 31 36 100
2005 Republican/lean Rep Democrat/lean Dem Independent/no lean
73 14 13 100
60 10 30 100
* The names of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;middleâ&#x20AC;? groups have changed over the years. Columns show most comparable previous Typology groups to the current Upbeats and Disaffecteds.
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS DECEMBER 2004 POLITICAL TYPOLOGY SURVEY FINAL TOPLINE December 1 - 16, 2004 N=2000 ON FORM ONE Q.1/1a PRECEDES Q.2 --- ON FORM TWO, Q.2 PRECEDES Q.1/1a Q.1 Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? [IF DK ENTER AS DK. IF DEPENDS PROBE ONCE WITH: Overall do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? IF STILL DEPENDS ENTER AS DK]
December, 2004 Mid-October, 2004 August, 2004 July, 2004 June, 2004 May, 2004 Late April, 2004 Early April, 2004 Late March, 2004 Mid-March, 2004 February, 2004 Mid-January, 2004 Early January, 2004 2003 December, 2003 November, 2003 October, 2003 September, 2003 Mid-August, 2003 Early August, 2003 Mid-July, 2003 Early July, 2003 June, 2003 May, 2003 April 10-16, 2003 April 9, 2003 April 2-7, 2003 March 28-April 1, 2003 March 25-27, 2003 March 20-24, 2003 March 13-16, 2003 February, 2003 January, 2003 2002 December, 2002 Late October, 2002 Early October, 2002 Mid-September, 2002 Early September, 2002 Late August, 2002
DisApprove approve 48 44 44 48 46 45 46 46 48 43 44 48 48 43 43 47 47 44 46 47 48 44 56 34 58 35
Don’t know 8=100 8=100 9=100 8=100 9=100 8=100 9=100 10=100 9=100 7=100 8=100 10=100 7=100
57 50 50 55 56 53 58 60 62 65 72 74 69 71 70 67 55 54 58
34 40 42 36 32 37 32 29 27 27 22 20 25 23 24 26 34 36 32
9=100 10=100 8=100 9=100 12=100 10=100 10=100 11=100 11=100 8=100 6=100 6=100 6=100 6=100 6=100 7=100 11=100 10=100 10=100
61 59 61 67 63 60
28 29 30 22 26 27
11=100 12=100 9=100 11=100 11=100 13=100
August, 2002 Late July, 2002 July, 2002 June, 2002 April, 2002 Early April, 2002 February, 2002 January, 2002 2001 Mid-November, 2001 Early October, 2001 Late September, 2001 Mid-September, 2001 Early September, 2001 August, 2001 July, 2001 June, 2001 May, 2001 April, 2001 March, 2001 February, 2001
74
DisApprove approve 67 21 65 25 67 21 70 20 69 18 74 16 78 13 80 11 84 84 86 80 51 50 51 50 53 56 55 53
9 8 7 9 34 32 32 33 32 27 25 21
Don’t know 12=100 10=100 12=100 10=100 13=100 10=100 9=100 9=100 7=100 8=100 7=100 11=100 15=100 18=100 17=100 17=100 15=100 17=100 20=100 26=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue IF APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE (1,2 IN Q.1) ASK: Q.1a Do you (approve/disapprove) very strongly, or not so strongly? 48 Approve 34 Very strongly 12 Not so strongly 2 Don’t know (VOL) 44 Disapprove 35 Very strongly 8 Not so strongly 1 Don’t know (VOL) 8 Don't know/Refused 100
Nov 2003 50 34 14 2 40 30 9 1 10 100
Sept 2003 55 35 18 2 36 27 9 * 9 100
June 2002 70 46 21 3 20 8 12 0 10 100
April 2001 56 34 20 2 27 18 9 * 17 100
ASK ALL: Q.2 All in all, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in this country today? SatDisisfied satisfied December, 2004 39 54 Mid-October, 2004 36 58 July, 2004 38 55 May, 2004 33 61 Late February, 2004 39 55 Early January, 2004 45 48 December, 2003 44 47 October, 2003 38 56 August, 2003 40 53 April, 20031 50 41 January, 2003 44 50 November, 2002 41 48 September, 20022 41 55 Late August, 2002 47 44 May, 2002 44 44 March, 2002 50 40 Late September, 2001 57 34 Early September, 2001 41 53 June, 2001 43 52 March, 2001 47 45 February, 2001 46 43 January, 2001 55 41 October, 2000 (RV’s) 54 39 September, 2000 51 41 June, 2000 47 45 April, 2000 48 43 August, 1999 56 39
SatDisisfied satisfied January, 1999 53 41 November, 1998 46 44 Early September, 1998 54 42 Late August, 1998 55 41 Early August, 1998 50 44 February, 1998 59 37 January, 1998 46 50 September, 1997 45 49 August, 1997 49 46 January, 1997 38 58 July, 1996 29 67 March, 1996 28 70 October, 1995 23 73 June, 1995 25 73 April, 1995 23 74 July, 1994 24 73 March, 1994 24 71 October, 1993 22 73 September, 1993 20 75 May, 1993 22 71 January, 1993 39 50 January, 1992 28 68 November, 1991 34 61 Late Feb, 1991 (Gallup) 66 31 August, 1990 47 48 May, 1990 41 54 January, 1989 45 50 September, 1988 (RVs) 50 45 May, 1988 41 54 January, 1988 39 55
No Opinion 7=100 6=100 7=100 6=100 6=100 7=100 9=100 6=100 7=100 9=100 6=100 11=100 4=100 9=100 12=100 10=100 9=100 6=100 5=100 8=100 11=100 4=100 7=100 8=100 8=100 9=100 5=100
1
Asked April 8, 2003 only; N=395.
2
The September 2002 trend is from a Pew Global Attitudes Project survey, fielded August 19 to September 8, 2002 and released December 4, 2002.
75
No Opinion 6=100 10=100 4=100 4=100 6=100 4=100 4=100 6=100 5=100 4=100 4=100 2=100 4=100 2=100 3=100 3=100 5=100 5=100 4=100 7=100 11=100 4=100 5=100 3=100 5=100 5=100 5=100 5=100 5=100 6=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue ASK FORM 1 ONLY [N=993]: Q.3F1 What’s your view… Do you think the country is more politically divided these days than in the past, or not? 66 26 8 100
More politically divided Not more divided Don’t know/Refused
ASK FORM 2 ONLY [N=1007]: Q.4F2 Thinking about the people you know, are they more divided over politics these days than in the past, or not? 53 40 7 100
More divided Not more divided Don’t know/Refused
ASK IF ‘MORE DIVIDED’ IN EITHER (1 IN Q.3F1 OR 1 IN Q.4F2) [N=1178]: Q.5 Why do you think people are more divided these days? What are they more divided about? [OPEN END; ENTER MULTIPLE RESPONSES BUT DO NOT PROBE FOR ADDITIONAL; IF RESPONDENT VOLUNTEERS “BUSH” ENTER BUSH, BUT ALSO PROBE “What is it about George W. Bush that divides people?”] 36 32 3 2 19 13 3 2 1 4 14 5 3 3 2 1 1 3 12 6 1 1 4 4 3 2 * 1 3 3 3 2
FOREIGN POLICY (NET) War/Iraq Terrorism/ 9/11 Other foreign policy issues DOMESTIC ISSUES (NET) Economy/jobs Healthcare Taxes Social Security Other domestic issues RELIGION AND MORALITY (NET) Religion Values/morals Gay marriage/gay rights Abortion Church-State divide Christian Right Other religious/moral issues LEADERSHIP/ELECTED OFFICIALS (NET) President Bush Democrats/liberals Republicans/conservatives Other leaders/the way the country is run People are ignorant/selfish/scared/stubborn CAMPAIGN/ELECTION (NET) Election/Close election Negative Campaign Other campaign/election Rich-poor gap Politics Political parties/Both Republicans and Democrats Everything is more divided 76
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.5 CONTINUED... 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 6 9
Money People have different views Ideology/political philosophy Media Race The way things are going Immigrants Other Don’t know
ASK ALL: Q.6 All in all, how do you feel about George W. Bush being reelected President? Are you [READ] 15 34 29 15 7 100 Q.7
a.
Excited Happy Unhappy Or depressed (VOL. DO NOT READ) Don’t know/Refused
Here are some stories covered by news organizations this past month. For each, please tell me if you happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely. [INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE WITH ITEMS a FIRST, FOLLOWED BY RANDOMIZED ITEMS b THRU e; OBSERVE FORM SPLITS AND DATES] Very Fairly Not too Not at all Closely Closely Closely Closely DK/Ref News about the current situation in Iraq 34 44 15 6 1=100 Mid-October, 2004 42 38 11 8 1=100 Early September, 2004 47 37 9 6 1=100 August, 2004 39 42 12 6 1=100 July, 2004 43 40 11 6 *=100 June, 2004 39 42 12 6 1=100 April, 2004 54 33 8 5 *=100 Mid-March, 2004 47 36 12 4 1=100 Early February, 2004 47 38 10 4 1=100 Mid-January, 2004 48 39 9 4 *=100 December, 2003 44 38 11 6 1=100 November, 2003 52 33 9 5 1=100 October, 2003 38 40 14 7 1=100 September, 2003 50 33 10 6 1=100 Mid-August, 2003 45 39 10 5 1=100 Early July, 2003 37 41 13 8 1=100 June, 2003 46 35 13 6 *=100 May, 2003 63 29 6 2 *=100 April 11-16, 20033 47 40 10 2 1=100 April 2-7, 2003 54 34 9 2 1=100 March 20-24, 2003 57 33 7 2 1=100
3
From March 20 to April 16, 2003 the story was listed as “News about the war in Iraq.”
77
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.7 CONTINUED...
Very Closely 62 62 55 51 53 60 48
March 13-16, 20034 February, 2003 January, 2003 December, 2002 Late October, 2002 Early October, 2002 Early September, 2002
Fairly Not too Not at all Closely Closely Closely DK/Ref 27 6 4 1=100 25 8 4 1=100 29 10 4 2=100 32 10 6 1=100 33 8 5 1=100 28 6 5 1=100 29 15 6 2=100
ASK FORM 1 ONLY, DECEMBER 1-7, 2004 ONLY [N=523]: b1.F1 A fistfight between players and fans at an NBA game
24
25
25
26
*=100
ASK FORM 1 ONLY, DECEMBER 8-15, 2004 ONLY [N=419]: b2.F2 Recent reports of steroid use by some Major League Baseball players
22
28
23
27
0=100
ASK FORM 1 ONLY [N=993]: c.F1 Controversy over the results of the recent election in Ukraine
10
22
29
38
1=100
ASK FORM 2 ONLY, DECEMBER 1-7, 2004 ONLY [N=523]: d1.F2 The conviction of Scott Peterson for the murder of his wife, Laci Peterson April, 20045 July, 2003 May, 2003
21 20 22 31
27 37 34 31
27 24 26 21
24 17 17 16
1=100 2=100 1=100 1=100
ASK FORM 2 ONLY, DECEMBER 8-15, 2004 ONLY [N=436]: d2.F2 The debate in Washington over reorganizing the nation’s intelligence system
16
31
29
22
2=100
ASK FORM 2 ONLY [N=1007]: e.F2 The death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat
18
38
25
17
2=100
NO QUESTION 8
4
From October 2002 to March 13-16, 2003 the story was listed as “Debate over the possibility that the U.S. will take military action in Iraq.” In Early September 2002 the story was listed as “Debate over the possibility that the U.S. will invade Iraq.”
5
In April, 2004 the story was listed as “The murder of Laci Peterson.” In 2003 the story was listed as “The murder of Laci Peterson, the pregnant California woman whose husband has been charged in her death.”
78
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue ASK ALL: Q.9 Can you tell me the name of the person George W. Bush has nominated to replace Colin Powell as Secretary of State? 43 5 52 100 Q.10
Yes, Correct, Condoleezza Rice / Condi / Rice Yes, Incorrect, any other person No, Don't know/Refused
Do you happen to know when Iraq is scheduled to hold its first national elections? Will it be this winter, sometime in the spring, or later in the summer? 57 10 5 28 100
This winter Sometime in the spring Later in the summer Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know/Refused
ASK ALL: Q.11 I'm going to read you some pairs of statements that will help us understand how you feel about a number of things. As I read each pair, tell me whether the FIRST statement or the SECOND statement comes closer to your own views â&#x20AC;&#x201D; even if neither is exactly right. The first pair is... (READ AND RANDOMIZE) (AFTER CHOICE IS MADE, PROBE: Do you feel STRONGLY about that, or not?) Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 a. 47 38 9 45 28 17 8 100
Government is almost always wasteful and inefficient Strongly Not Strongly Government often does a better job than people give it credit for Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
48 -38 -10 --
-- 52 51 -- 59 56 -- 63 63 64 66 -- 43 41 -- 49 48 -- 53 51 54 54 -- 9 10 -- 10 8 -- 10 12 10 12
46 28 18 6 100
-- 40 43 --- 27 28 --- 13 15 --- 8 6 -100 100
-----
36 23 13 5 100
39 25 14 5 100
-- 34 34 32 -- 20 19 19 -- 14 15 13 -- 3 3 4 100 100 100
31 17 14 3 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 b. 49 32 17 41 30 11 10 100
Government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest Strongly Not Strongly Government regulation of business usually does more harm than good Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
79
-- 54 50 -- 48 --- 39 35 -- 32 --- 15 15 -- 16 --
-- 45 -- 45 43 38 41 -- 29 -- 28 25 24 24 -- 16 -- 17 18 14 17
-- 36 41 --- 27 31 --- 9 10 --- 10 9 -100 100
-- 46 -- 50 -- 33 -- 37 -- 13 -- 13 -- 9 -- 5 100 100
44 32 12 8 100
-----
51 38 13 6 100
55 41 14 7 100
54 39 15 5 100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.11 CONTINUED... c. 34 23 11 52 40 12 14 100 d. 57 46 11 33 22 11 10 100
Poor people today have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything in return Strongly Not Strongly Poor people have hard lives because government benefits don't go far enough to help them live decently Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
The government should do more to help needy Americans, even if it means going deeper into debt Strongly Not Strongly The government today can't afford to do much more to help the needy Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 34 -24 -10 --
----
-- 45 -- 45 46 -- 54 52 48 53 -- 30 -- 33 35 -- 36 37 35 37 -- 15 -- 12 11 -- 18 15 13 16
55 42 13 11 100
-----
-----
-----
42 31 11 13 100
-----
42 31 11 13 100
40 28 12 14 100
-----
36 25 11 10 100
39 28 11 9 100
41 31 10 11 100
39 27 12 8 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 ----
----
----
-- 57 --- 44 --- 13 --
-- 46 49 47 46 50 48 -- 36 42 35 33 39 35 -- 10 7 12 13 11 13
-----
-----
-----
-- 35 --- 23 --- 12 --- 8 -100
-----
44 31 13 10 100
44 34 10 7 100
47 31 16 6 100
47 34 13 7 100
43 31 12 7 100
47 32 15 5 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 e. 73 59 14 20 14 6 7 100 f. 27 18 9 60 44 16 13 100
The position of blacks in American society has improved in recent years Strongly Not Strongly There hasn't been much real progress for blacks in recent years Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
Racial discrimination is the main reason why many black people can't get ahead these days Strongly Not Strongly Blacks who can't get ahead in this country are mostly responsible for their own condition Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
----
-- 78 -- 73 73 -- 69 70 67 72 -- 63 -- 55 57 -- 52 52 50 52 -- 15 -- 18 16 -- 17 18 17 20
-----
-----
-----
-- 18 -- 22 21 -- 27 -- 13 -- 16 16 -- 20 -- 5 -- 6 5 -- 7 -- 4 -- 5 6 -- 4 100 100 100 100
26 19 7 4 100
27 20 7 6 100
25 18 7 3 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 24 -16 -8 --
-- 31 28 25 33 28 -- 37 34 34 32 -- 22 19 -- 22 19 -- 25 21 24 20 -- 9 9 -- 11 9 -- 12 13 10 12
64 50 14 12 100
-----
80
-----
54 43 11 15 100
59 46 13 13 100
61 --14 100
54 41 13 13 100
58 45 13 14 100
-----
53 38 15 10 100
56 40 16 10 100
54 40 14 12 100
59 43 16 9 100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.11 CONTINUED... g. 45 32 13 44 34 10 11 100
Immigrants today strengthen our country because of their hard work and talents Strongly Not Strongly Immigrants today are a burden on our country because they take our jobs, housing and health care Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Apr Jun Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 97 96 95 95 94 94 46 -30 -16 --
-- 50 46 41 41 38 37 --- 36 30 -- 26 19 -- --- 14 16 -- 15 19 -- --
----
-- 31 -- 17 -- 14
44 35 9 10 100
-- 38 44 48 48 -- 29 34 -- 37 -- 9 10 -- 11 -- 12 10 11 11 100 100 100 100
-----
-- 63 -- 49 -- 14 -- 6 100
-----
52 38 14 10 100
54 --9 100
-----
NO ITEM H. Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 i. 30 25 5 55 46 9 15 100
The best way to ensure peace is through military strength Strongly Not Strongly Good diplomacy is the best way to ensure peace Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
----
-- 33 --- 26 --- 7 --
-- 36 -- 36 35 40 36 -- 30 -- 28 27 32 28 -- 6 -- 8 8 8 8
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 53 -- 59 -- 44 -- 49 -- 9 -- 10 -- 11 -- 5 100 100
55 45 10 12 100
-----
58 46 12 7 100
52 43 9 8 100
58 46 12 6 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 j. 46 39 7 46 38 8 8 100
We should all be willing to fight for our country, whether it is right or wrong Strongly Not Strongly It's acceptable to refuse to fight in a war you believe is morally wrong Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 48 47 --- 41 39 --- 7 8 --
-- 48 -- 49 49 47 52 -- 39 -- 38 39 39 43 -- 7 -- 11 10 8 9
-----
-----
-- 45 47 -- -- 47 -- 48 -- 37 38 -- -- 39 -- 38 -- 8 9 -- -- 8 -- 10 -- 7 6 -- -- 7 -- 3 100 100 100 100
47 38 9 4 100
47 37 10 6 100
45 35 10 3 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 k. 68 62 6 28 22 6 4 100
Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they're willing to work hard Strongly Not strongly Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
81
----
----
-- 73 74 --- 66 66 --- 7 8 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 68 -- 59 -- 9
-----
-----
-- 24 23 --- 20 18 --- 4 5 --- 3 3 -100 100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 30 -- 22 -- 8 -- 2 100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.11 CONTINUED... Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 l. 16 11 5 78 68 10 6 100
Success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside of our control -Strongly -Not strongly -Everyone has it in their own power to succeed Strongly -Not strongly -Neither/Don't know --
--------
--------
--------
15 10 5 80 72 8 5 100
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------
18 12 6 79 67 12 3 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 m. 77 64 13 16 9 7 7 100
Too much power is concentrated in the hands of a few large companies Strongly Not Strongly The largest companies do NOT have too much power Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
-- 80 77 -- 77 --- 67 62 -- 62 --- 13 15 -- 15 --
-- 75 -- 77 75 73 76 -- 61 -- 62 59 58 59 -- 14 -- 15 16 15 17
-- 12 -- 7 -- 5 -- 8 100
-- 18 -- 10 -- 8 -- 7 100
17 9 8 6 100
-- 17 --- 10 --- 7 --- 6 -100
-- 18 20 20 -- 9 10 10 -- 9 10 10 -- 5 5 7 100 100 100
19 9 10 5 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 n. 53 46 7 39 25 14 8 100
Business corporations make too much profit Strongly Not Strongly Most corporations make a fair and reasonable amount of profit Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
51 58 54 54 52 -- 51 51 -- 53 51 50 52 43 51 44 46 42 -- 43 43 -- 44 42 40 43 8 7 10 8 10 -- 8 8 -- 9 9 10 9 42 27 15 7 100
33 22 11 9 100
39 24 15 7 100
38 28 10 8 100
42 29 13 6 100
-- 43 42 --- 28 27 --- 15 15 --- 6 7 -100 100
43 27 16 4 100
44 26 18 5 100
44 28 16 6 100
43 27 16 5 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 o. 66 54 12 26 15 11 8 100
Elected officials in Washington lose touch with the people pretty quickly Strongly Not Strongly Elected officials in Washington try hard to stay in touch with voters back home Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
82
----
----
-- 66 68 --- 53 55 --- 13 13 --
-- 69 72 73 76 74 71 -- 58 59 60 64 61 58 -- 11 13 13 12 13 13
-----
-----
-- 27 26 --- 18 16 --- 9 10 --- 7 6 -100 100
-- 25 23 24 -- 15 14 14 -- 10 9 10 -- 6 5 3 100 100 100
21 12 9 3 100
22 13 9 4 100
25 14 11 4 100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 p. 32 19 13 63 52 11 5 100 Q.12
a.
b.
Most elected officials care what people like me think Strongly Not Strongly Most elected officials don't care what people like me think Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
33 -18 -15 --
-- 39 35 -- 28 38 -- 33 32 29 34 -- 26 21 -- 17 23 -- 18 18 17 18 -- 13 14 -- 11 15 -- 15 14 12 16
62 51 11 5 100
-- 55 60 --- 44 49 --- 11 11 --- 6 5 -100 100
-----
67 55 12 5 100
58 48 10 4 100
-- 64 64 68 -- 53 53 56 -- 11 11 12 -- 3 4 3 100 100 100
64 51 13 2 100
Would you say your overall opinion of… [INSERT ITEM; ROTATE ITEMS a. AND b. WITH c. ALWAYS LAST] is very favorable, mostly favorable, mostly UNfavorable, or very unfavorable? [INTERVIEWERS: PROBE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN “NEVER HEARD OF” AND “CAN’T RATE.”] How about [NEXT ITEM]? -------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly The Republican Party 52 15 37 June, 2004 51 12 39 Early February, 2004 52 14 38 June, 2003 58 14 44 April, 2003 63 14 49 December, 2002 59 18 41 July, 2001 48 11 37 January, 2001 56 13 43 September, 2000 (RVs) 53 11 42 August, 1999 53 8 45 February, 1999 44 7 37 January, 1999 44 10 34 Early December, 1998 46 11 35 Early October, 1998 (RVs) 52 9 43 Early September, 1998 56 9 47 March, 1998 50 10 40 August, 1997 47 9 38 June, 1997 51 8 43 January, 1997 52 8 44 October, 1995 52 10 42 December, 1994 67 21 46 July, 1994 63 12 51 May, 1993 54 12 42 July, 1992 46 9 37 The Democratic Party June, 2004 Early February, 2004 June, 2003 April, 2003 December, 2002 July, 2001 January, 2001
53 54 58 54 57 54 58 60
13 12 14 11 13 15 18 18
40 42 44 43 44 39 40 42 83
-----Unfavorable----Total Very Mostly 42 17 25 40 14 26 42 16 26 33 10 23 31 10 21 33 11 22 42 15 27 35 13 22 40 12 28 43 12 31 51 15 36 50 23 27 47 20 27 42 14 28 37 11 26 43 12 31 47 11 36 42 11 31 43 10 33 44 16 28 27 8 19 33 8 25 35 10 25 48 17 31 41 36 37 38 36 37 34 30
14 11 9 10 11 10 10 9
27 25 28 28 25 27 24 21
Never Heard of 0 0 * 0 * * * * 0 * 0 0 * 0 * * * 1 * * * * 0 *
Can’t Rate 6=100 9=100 6=100 9=100 6=100 8=100 10=100 9=100 7=100 4=100 5=100 6=100 7=100 6=100 7=100 7=100 6=100 6=100 5=100 4=100 6=100 4=100 11=100 6=100
* 0 * 0 * * * 1
6=100 10=100 5=100 8=100 7=100 9=100 8=100 9=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.12 CONTINUED...
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly September, 2000 (RVs) 60 16 44 August, 1999 59 14 45 February, 1999 58 11 47 January, 1999 55 14 41 Early December, 1998 59 18 41 Early October, 1998 (RVs) 56 11 45 Early September, 1998 60 13 47 March, 1998 58 15 43 August, 1997 52 11 41 June, 1997 61 10 51 January, 1997 60 13 47 October, 1995 49 9 40 December, 1994 50 13 37 July, 1994 62 13 49 May, 1993 57 14 43 July, 1992 61 17 44
c.
The news media Late October, 2000 (RVs) February, 1999 (RVs) March, 1998 (RVs) October, 1997 (RVs)
43 50 48 45 50
8 7 6 7 6
35 43 42 38 44
-----Unfavorable----Total Very Mostly 35 12 23 37 9 28 37 11 26 38 12 26 34 10 24 38 9 29 33 8 25 36 10 26 42 10 32 33 8 25 35 7 28 48 11 37 44 13 31 34 7 27 34 9 25 33 9 24 51 45 49 53 48
18 14 14 17 14
33 31 35 36 34
Never Heard of * * 0 0 0 * * * 0 * * 0 * * 0 *
Can’t Rate 5=100 4=100 5=100 7=100 7=100 6=100 7=100 6=100 6=100 6=100 5=100 3=100 6=100 4=100 9=100 6=100
* 0 0 * *
6=100 5=100 3=100 2=100 2=100
NO QUESTION 13-14 Q.15
How would you rate economic conditions in this country today… as excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
December, 2004 Early November, 2004 (RVs) Mid-September, 2004 August, 2004 Late April, 2004 Late February, 2004 February 9-12, 2004 (Gallup) January 12-15, 2004 (Gallup) January 2-5, 2004 (Gallup) December 11-14, 2003 (Gallup) November 3-5, 2003 (Gallup) October 24-26, 2003 (Gallup) October 6-8, 2003 (Gallup) September 8-10, 2003 (Gallup) August 4-6, 2003 (Gallup) August 5-8, 2002 (Gallup) August 16-19, 2001 (Gallup) August 18-19, 2000 (Gallup) August 24-26, 1999 (Gallup) September 1, 1998 (Gallup) August 22-25, 1997 (Gallup) October 26-29, 1996 (Gallup) November 6-8, 1995 (Gallup)
Excellent 3 5 4 3 4 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 25 14 11 8 5 2
Good 33 31 34 30 34 29 31 34 40 34 28 24 20 20 24 27 34 49 50 54 41 42 28 84
Only Fair Poor 43 20 37 26 40 20 45 21 38 22 42 26 46 21 42 21 41 16 44 19 49 21 44 30 50 27 49 30 52 23 52 19 49 14 21 4 28 7 25 9 38 13 39 13 47 22
Don’t know/ Refused 1=100 1=100 2=100 1=100 2=100 1=100 0=100 0=100 *=100 *=100 *=100 *=100 1=100 *=100 *=100 1=100 1=100 1=100 1=100 1=100 *=100 1=100 1=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.15 CONTINUED... Excellent July 15-17, 1994 (Gallup) 1 June 29-30, 1993 (Gallup) 1 Aug. 31-Sept., 1992 (Gallup) (RVs) 1
Good 26 14 9
Only Fair Poor 52 21 52 32 37 53
Don’t know/ Refused *=100 1=100 *=100
NO QUESTION 16 On another subject... Q.17 How have you been getting most of your news about national and international issues? From television, from newspapers, from radio, from magazines, or from the Internet? [ACCEPT TWO ANSWERS: IF ONLY ONE RESPONSE IS GIVEN, PROBE FOR ADDITIONAL RESPONSE] Other Don’t Know/ Television Newspapers Radio Magazines Internet (VOL) Refused December, 2004 74 46 21 4 24 2 3 October, 2003 80 50 18 4 20 2 1 August, 2003 79 46 15 3 18 2 1 Early July, 2003 79 45 16 5 19 1 * March, 20036 89 24 19 * 11 2 * February, 2003 83 42 19 4 15 3 * January, 2003 81 44 22 4 17 2 1 January, 2002 82 42 21 3 14 2 * Mid-September, 2001 90 11 14 * 5 1 1 Early September, 2001 74 45 18 6 13 1 * February, 2001 76 40 16 4 10 2 1 October, 1999 80 48 19 5 11 2 * January, 1999 82 42 18 4 6 2 * January, 1996 88 61 25 8 -2 * September, 1995 82 63 20 10 -1 1 January, 1994 83 51 15 10 -5 1 September, 1993 83 60 17 9 -3 * January, 1993 83 52 17 5 -1 1 Early January, 1991 82 40 15 4 -1 *
6
In March 2003, the question was worded “news about the war in Iraq.” In Mid-September 2001, the question was worded “news about the terrorist attacks.” In September 1995, question wording did not include “international.” In Early January 1991 the question asked about “the latest developments in the Persian Gulf.”
85
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue IF RESPONDENT ANSWERED '1' TELEVISION AS EITHER 1ST OR 2ND RESPONSE IN Q.17 ASK Q.18. IF NOT, SKIP TO Q.19 Q.18 Do you get most of your news about national and international issues from [READ, RANDOMIZE ITEMS 2 THRU 4 AND 5 THRU 8 SEPARATELY, AND RANDOMIZE SETS OF ITEMS (LOCAL; NETWORK; CABLE). ACCEPT MULTIPLE ANSWERS BUT DO NOT PROBE FOR ADDITIONAL] Early BASED ON TOTAL: Oct Aug July Jan 2003 2003 2003 2002 15 Local news programming 17 17 17 16 11 ABC Network news 12 12 12 11 9 CBS Network news 8 10 11 11 14 NBC Network news 13 15 14 15 20 CNN Cable news 20 26 27 28 6 MSNBC Cable news 6 7 9 8 19 The Fox News Cable Channel 17 18 22 16 3 CNBC Cable news7 -3 3 4 3 (DO NOT READ) Don't know/Refused 4 4 3 2 ASK ALL: Q.19 Some people seem to follow what’s going on in government and public affairs most of the time, whether there’s an election or not. Other’s aren’t that interested. Would you say you follow what’s going on in government and public affairs most of the time, some of the time, only now and then, or hardly at all?
December, 2004 November, 2004 (RVs) Mid-October, 2004 (RVs) June, 2004 August, 2003 November, 2002 August, 2002 March, 2001 Early November, 2000 (RVs) September, 2000 (RVs) June, 2000 Late September, 1999 August, 1999 November, 1998 Late October, 1998 (RVs) Early October, 1998 (RVs) Early September, 1998 June, 1998 November, 1997 November, 1996 (RVs) October, 1996 (RVs) June, 1996 October, 1995 April, 1995 November, 1994
7
Most of the time 45 61 63 44 48 49 54 49 51 51 38 39 40 46 57 51 45 36 41 52 43 41 46 43 49
Some of Only now Hardly the time and then at all DK/Ref 35 14 5 1=100 27 9 3 *=100 26 8 3 *=100 34 15 7 *=100 33 12 6 1=100 27 14 9 1=100 30 11 5 *=100 27 13 10 1=100 32 12 5 *=100 34 10 4 1=100 32 19 11 *=100 32 20 9 *=100 35 17 8 *=100 27 14 13 *=100 29 10 4 *=100 33 11 5 *=100 34 15 6 *=100 34 21 9 *=100 36 16 7 *=100 32 12 4 *=100 37 13 6 1=100 34 17 8 *=100 35 14 5 *=100 35 16 6 *=100 30 13 7 1=100
In October 2003, CNBC Cable news item was not asked due to programming error.
86
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.19 CONTINUED... October, 1994 July, 1994 May, 1990 February, 1989 October, 1988 September, 1988 May, 1988 January, 1988 November, 1987 May, 1987 July, 1985 Q.20
Most of the time 45 46 39 47 52 58 37 37 49 41 36
Some of Only now Hardly (VOL.) the time and then at all DK/Ref 35 14 6 *=100 33 15 6 *=100 34 18 9 *=100 34 14 4 1=100 33 11 4 *=100 32 8 2 *=100 37 17 6 3=100 35 18 8 2=100 32 14 4 1=100 35 15 7 2=100 33 18 12 1=100
Now I'm going to read a few more pairs of statements. Again, just tell me whether the FIRST statement or the SECOND statement comes closer to your own views â&#x20AC;&#x201D; even if neither is exactly right. The first pair is... (READ AND RANDOMIZE ITEMS Q THRU Z FOLLOWED BY RANDOMIZED ITEMS AA THRU HH) (AFTER CHOICE IS MADE, PROBE: Do you feel STRONGLY about that, or not?) Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
q. 77 63 14 18 12 6 5 100
This country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment Strongly Not Strongly This country has gone too far in its efforts to protect the environment Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 78 80 --- 67 67 --- 11 13 --
-- 77 -- 77 74 77 78 -- 66 -- 65 63 65 62 -- 11 -- 12 11 12 16
-----
-----
-- 17 15 --- 12 10 --- 5 5 --- 5 5 -100 100
-- 18 -- 20 22 19 -- 13 -- 13 15 13 -- 5 -- 7 7 6 -- 5 -- 3 4 4 100 100 100 100
19 12 7 3 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 r. 31 21 10 60 48 12 9 100
Stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy Strongly Not Strongly Stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
87
----
----
-- 31 28 --- 22 19 --- 9 9 --
-- 30 -- 35 39 32 33 -- 22 -- 23 28 23 21 -- 8 -- 12 11 9 12
-----
-----
-- 61 65 --- 50 50 --- 11 15 --- 8 7 -100 100
-- 63 -- 61 -- 51 -- 47 -- 12 -- 14 -- 7 -- 4 100 100
57 44 13 4 100
62 49 13 6 100
62 45 17 5 100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.20 CONTINUED... s. 51 36 15 41 30 11 8 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
There are no real limits to growth in this country today Strongly Not strongly People in this country should learn to live with less Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
----
-- 54 --- 38 --- 16 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 51 -- 33 -- 18
-----
-----
-----
-- 40 --- 30 --- 9 --- 6 -100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 45 -- 30 -- 15 -- 4 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 t. 59 45 14 36 27 9 5 100
As Americans, we can always find ways to solve our problems and get what we want Strongly Not strongly This country can't solve many of its important problems Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 59 63 --- 46 47 --- 13 16 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 52 -- 35 -- 17
-----
-----
-- 36 32 --- 29 24 --- 7 8 --- 5 5 -100 100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 45 -- 30 -- 15 -- 3 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 u. 49 35 14 44 38 6 7 100
Homosexuality is a way of life that should be accepted by society Strongly Not Strongly Homosexuality is a way of life that should be discouraged by society Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know
47 -33 -14 --
-- 50 49 46 45 44 44 45 47 46 46 -- 35 33 -- 32 32 29 29 30 33 26 -- 15 16 -- 13 12 15 16 17 13 20
45 38 7 8 100
-- 41 44 48 -- 35 37 --- 6 7 --- 9 7 6 100 100 100
-----
50 43 7 5 100
49 42 7 7 100
49 42 7 7 100
50 41 9 5 100
48 40 8 5 100
48 41 7 6 100
49 41 8 5 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Oct Jun Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 95 95 95 94 94 v. 44 38 6 51 41 10 5 100
Books that contain dangerous ideas should be banned from public school libraries Strongly Not Strongly Public school libraries should be allowed to carry any books they want Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
45 -39 -6 --
-- 48 52 -- 46 44 46 42 45 42 46 -- 41 43 -- 39 39 37 -- 40 36 37 -- 7 9 -- 7 5 9 -- 5 6 9
52 43 9 3 100
-- 48 45 --- 40 36 --- 8 9 --- 4 3 -100 100
88
-----
50 40 10 4 100
51 43 9 4 100
52 41 11 2 100
53 --5 100
52 44 9 2 100
53 47 8 3 100
55 39 12 3 100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.20 CONTINUED... w.
74 66 8 24 15 9 2 100
Religion is a very important part of my life Strongly Not Strongly Religion is not that important to me Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't Know
Jun 03 --------
Jul 02 --------
Feb 02 --------
Sep Aug Oct 00 99 97 75 75 -69 67 -6 8 -23 22 -15 12 -8 10 -2 2 -100 100
Jun 97 --------
Oct 96 --------
Apr 96 --------
Oct 95 --------
Apr 95 --------
Oct 94 --------
Jul 94 --------
NO ITEM X. Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 y. 59 44 15 39 33 6 2 100
I'm generally satisfied with the way things are going for me financially Strongly Not Strongly I'm not very satisfied with my financial situation Strongly Not Strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 59 64 --- 46 48 --- 13 16 --
-- 57 57 --- 43 44 --- 14 13 --
----
-- 56 -- 36 -- 20
-----
-----
-- 39 34 --- 33 28 --- 6 6 --- 2 2 -100 100
-- 41 42 --- 36 37 --- 5 5 --- 2 1 -100 100
-----
-- 43 -- 33 -- 10 -- 1 100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul 03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94 z. 35 29 6 62 48 14 3 100
I often don't have enough money to make ends meet Strongly Not strongly Paying the bills is generally not a problem for me Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 37 29 --- 30 22 --- 7 7 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 36 -- 27 -- 9
-----
-----
-- 59 68 --- 48 54 --- 11 14 --- 4 3 -100 100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 63 -- 43 -- 20 -- 1 100
March 2002 aa. 46 36 10 51 46 5 3 100
It IS NOT necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values Strongly Not strongly It IS necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
50 --47 --3 100
89
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.20 CONTINUED... bb. 39 30 9 51 42 9 10 100 cc. 53 38 15 37 27 10 10 100 dd. 40 29 11 50 34 16 10 100 ee.
44 33 11 49 41 8 7 100
Using overwhelming military force is the best way to defeat terrorism around the world Strongly Not strongly Relying too much on military force to defeat terrorism creates hatred that leads to more terrorism Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
In foreign policy, the U.S. should take into account the interests of its allies even if it means making compromises with them Strongly Not strongly In foreign policy, the U.S. should follow its OWN national interests even when its allies strongly disagree Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
The growing number of newcomers from other countries threaten traditional American customs and values Strongly Not strongly The growing number of newcomers from other countries strengthens American society Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s best for the future of our country to be active in world affairs Strongly Not strongly We should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems here at home Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
90
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.20 CONTINUED... ff. 35 24 11 60 51 9 5 100 gg.
41 31 10 51 40 11 8 100
Americans need to be willing to give up more privacy and freedom in order to be safe from terrorism Strongly Not strongly Americans shouldn’t have to give up more privacy and freedom in order to be safe from terrorism Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
The government should do more to protect morality in society Strongly Not strongly I worry the government is getting too involved in the issue of morality Strongly Not strongly Neither/Don't know
NO QUESTIONS 21 THROUGH 30 On another subject... Q.31 How much, if anything, have you heard about a proposal which would allow younger workers to invest a portion of their Social Security taxes in private retirement accounts, which might include stocks or mutual funds — a lot, a little or nothing at all? RV’s Early Sept Sept 20048 2000 23 A lot 19 26 43 A little 41 43 33 Nothing at all 39 30 1 Don't know/Refused 1 1 100 100 100 Q.32
Generally, do you favor or oppose this proposal?
Heard about Total Proposal9 54 30 16 100
54 Favor 35 Oppose 11 Don't know/Refused 100 (N=1420)
-- Early Sept 2004 -Heard about Total Proposal 58 61 26 28 16 11 100 100
---- Sept 2000 ---Heard about RV's Proposal 70 71 21 23 9 6 100 100
8
In Early September 2004 and 2000 the question was worded “... portion of their payroll taxes in private retirement accounts, which might include stocks or mutual funds, rather than having all of it go toward Social Security.”
9
Based on the percent who heard "A lot" or "A little" in Q.31.
91
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.33
As you may know, the federal government has debated whether to fund certain kinds of medical research known as ‘stem cell research’ … How much have you heard about this? [READ, IN ORDER]
47 41 11 1 100 Q.34
A lot A little [OR] Nothing at all Don’t know/Refused (VOL.)
Aug 2004 42 43 15 * 100
March 2002 27 52 20 1 100
All in all, which is more important… [READ, IN ORDER]
56 32 12 100 Q.35
28 35 25 12 100 Q.36
Conducting stem cell research that might result in new medical cures [OR] Not destroying the potential life of human embryos involved in this research Don’t know/Refused [VOL, DO NOT READ]
March 2002
52
43
34 14 100
38 19 100
Which comes closer to your view about the tax cuts passed under President Bush over the past few years?[READ IN ORDER] Early Sept 2004 All of the tax cuts should be made permanent 27 Tax cuts for the wealthy should be repealed, while others stay in place, OR 31 All of the tax cuts should be repealed 28 Don’t know/Refused (VOL. DO NOT READ) 14 100 Do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose [INSERT ITEM, RANDOMIZE]? How about… [NEXT ITEM]? ------- FAVOR ------Strongly Net Favor Favor
a.
Aug 2004
Making it more DIFFICULT for a woman to get an abortion Early February, 2004 November, 2003 August, 200310 May, 1993 May, 1992 May, 1990 May, 1987 May, 1985
10
36 36 35 36 32 30 38 41 47
19 17 19 17 15 -21 18 --
17 19 16 19 17 -17 23 --
----- OPPOSE ------Strongly Net Oppose Oppose 55 58 57 57 60 62 55 51 49
29 30 29 30 35 -29 33 --
26 28 28 27 25 -26 18 --
Don’t know 9=100 6=100 8=100 7=100 8=100 8=100 7=100 8=100 4=100
In August 2003 and earlier the question was worded: “Changing the laws to make it more difficult for a woman to get an abortion.”
92
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.36 CONTINUED...
------- FAVOR ------Strongly Net Favor Favor 32 14 18 29 8 21 32 10 22 32 10 22 30 9 21 30 10 20 31 9 21 38 10 28 35 8 27 27 6 21
----- OPPOSE ------Strongly Net Oppose Oppose 61 38 23 60 35 25 56 33 23 59 35 24 63 42 21 62 41 21 58 33 25 53 30 23 57 34 23 65 41 24
Don’t know 7=100 11=100 12=100 9=100 7=100 8=100 12=100 9=100 8=100 8=100
b.
Allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally August, 2004 July, 2004 March, 2004 Early February, 2004 November, 2003 October, 2003 Mid-July, 2003 March, 2001 June, 1996
c.
An increase in the minimum wage, from $5.15 an hour to $6.45 an hour June, 2001 October, 1999 February, 199811
86 87 82 80
53 49 48 48
33 38 34 32
12 12 16 19
4 4 4 5
8 8 12 14
2=100 1=100 2=100 1=100
The U.S. government guaranteeing health insurance for all citizens, even if it means raising taxes Early September, 2004 August, 2003
65 66 67
31 30 23
34 36 44
30 26 29
10 11 10
20 15 19
5=100 8=100 4=100
Limiting the amount that patients can be awarded in medical malpractice lawsuits
63
31
32
30
14
16
7=100
d.
e.
Q.37
20 54 19 7 100
Do you think that we should increase our spending on national defense, keep it about the same, or cut it back? Mid- Early (RVs) Oct- Oct- OctJuly Oct Sept Sept Aug June Sept Feb Oct Sept Nov Nov Nov Nov Dec 2004 2001 2001 2000 1999 1999 1997 199512 94+ 1993 90+ 86+ 82+ 78+ 74+ Increase 25 50 32 34 27 31 17 19 18 10 12 21 22 32 13 Keep same 53 41 44 48 54 47 57 56 53 52 53 55 52 45 47 Cut back 18 7 20 14 16 19 24 24 26 36 32 23 24 16 33 DK/Ref. 4 2 4 4 3 3 2 1 3 2 3 3 3 7 8 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
+ Chicago Council on Foreign Relations
11
In February 1998, the question was worded: "An increase in the minimum wage, from $5.15 an hour to $6.15 an hour."
12
In 1995 and previous years, the question was worded: “Do you think that we should expand our spending on national defense, keep it about the same or cut it back?”
93
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.38
Do you think that using military force against countries that may seriously threaten our country, but have not attacked us, can often be justified, sometimes be justified, rarely be justified, or never be justified?
14 46 21 14 5 100
Often justified Sometimes justified Rarely justified Never justified Don't know/Refused (VOL.)
July Aug May 2004 2003 2003 20 20 22 40 43 45 22 19 17 14 13 13 4 5 3 100 100 100
NO QUESTIONS 39-40 Thinking about trade for a moment… Q.41 In general, do you think that free trade agreements like NAFTA, and the World Trade Organization, have been a good thing or a bad thing for the United States? [INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT ASKS WHAT NAFTA IS, “The North American Free Trade Agreement”]
47 34 19 100
Good thing Bad thing Don’t know/Refused (VOL.)
July 2004 47 34 19 100
March 2004 44 37 19 100
Dec13 2003 34 33 33 100
Early Sept 2001 49 29 22 100
Nov 1997 45 34 21 100
Sept 1997 47 30 23 100
NO QUESTIONS 42- 43 Q.44
All in all, which do you think should be the higher priority right now – cutting taxes or reducing the federal budget deficit? CBS/NY Times Nov 2004 32 Cutting taxes 28 61 Reducing the federal budget deficit 67 1 Neither (VOL.) 1 Don’t know/Refused 4 6 100 100
13
In December 2003 the question’s wording and interviewer instructions were: “...free trade agreements like NAFTA, (the North American Free Trade Agreement) and the WTO (World Trade Organization)... [INTERVIEWER: READ OUT FULL NAMES ONLY IF RESPONDENT IS UNCERTAIN]. In Early September 2001 and earlier the question was worded: “So far, do you think that NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, has been a good thing or a bad thing from a U.S. point of view?”
94
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.45
Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force against Iraq?
December, 2004 November, 2004 (RVs) Mid-October, 2004 Early October, 2004 Early September, 2004 August, 2004 July, 2004 June, 2004 May, 2004 Early April, 2004 Mid-March, 2004 Late February, 2004 Early February, 2004 Mid-January, 2004 Early January, 2004 December, 2003 October, 2003 September, 2003 August, 2003 Early July, 2003 May, 2003 Q.46
Right decision 49 48 46 50 53 53 52 55 51 57 55 60 56 65 62 67 60 63 63 67 74
Wrong decision 44 41 42 39 39 41 43 38 42 35 39 32 39 30 28 26 33 31 30 30 20
Don't know/ Refused 7=100 11=100 12=100 11=100 8=100 6=100 5=100 7=100 7=100 8=100 6=100 8=100 5=100 5=100 10=100 7=100 7=100 6=100 7=100 7=100 6=100
How well is the U.S. military effort in Iraq going? [READ IN ORDER] Very well December, 2004 10 Mid-October, 2004 13 Early September, 2004 12 August, 2004 12 July, 2004 13 June, 2004 16 May, 2004 10 Late April, 2004 12 Early April, 2004 14 Mid-March, 2004 16 Early February, 2004 17 Mid-January, 2004 22 Early January, 2004 23 December, 2003 28 October, 2003 16 September, 2003 15 August, 2003 19 Early July, 2003 23 April 10-16, 2003 61 April 8-9, 2003 60 April 2-7, 2003 55 March 25-April 1, 2003 39 March 23-24, 2003 45 March 20-22, 2003 65
Fairly Not too Not at all Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know/ well well well Refused 40 28 18 4=100 38 26 17 6=100 40 26 18 4=100 41 28 16 3=100 42 26 16 3=100 41 25 14 4=100 36 32 19 3=100 43 26 15 4=100 43 26 13 4=100 45 26 11 2=100 46 23 11 3=100 51 18 6 3=100 47 18 7 5=100 47 16 6 3=100 44 25 11 4=100 47 26 9 3=100 43 24 11 3=100 52 16 5 4=100 32 3 1 3=100 32 3 3 2=100 37 3 2 3=100 46 8 2 5=100 41 6 2 6=100 25 2 1 7=100 95
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.47
Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?
56 40 4 100 Q.48
Keep troops in Iraq Bring troops home Don’t know/Refused
MidOct 2004 57 36 7 100
Early Sept Aug July June14 2004 2004 2004 2004 54 54 53 51 40 42 43 44 6 4 4 5 100 100 100 100
Late Early May April April 2004 2004 2004 53 53 50 42 40 44 5 7 6 100 100 100
Early Jan Oct Sept 2004 2003 2003 63 58 64 32 39 32 5 3 4 100 100 100
How much have you heard or read about the Patriot Act, adopted in 2001, which is now up for renewal in Congress – a lot, some, not much, or nothing at all?
15 29 27 26 3 100
A lot Some Not much Nothing at all Don’t know/Refused
CBS/NY Times April 2004 12 27 28 30 2 100
ASKED DECEMBER 2-15, 2004 ONLY [N=1700]: Q.49 Which comes closer to your view… Is the Patriot Act a necessary tool that helps the government find terrorists or does it go too far and pose a threat to civil liberties? Based on those who had heard of it Total A lot/Some 33 46 39 48 28 6 100 100 (N=804)
CBS/NY Times April 200415 Necessary tool Goes too far Don’t know/Refused
52 42 6 100
Now thinking about your personal life... Q.50 For each description I read, please tell me if it applies to you or not. (First,)... (INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE ITEMS) Yes No Don’t Know a. Do you happen to have any guns, rifles or pistols in your home? 37 60 3=100 Mid-October, 2004 39 59 2=100 34 63 3=100 Mid-July, 200316 August, 2002 35 62 3=100 April, 2000 35 62 3=100
14
In June 2004 and earlier, the question was worded: “Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until a stable government is established there, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?”
15
The CBS/NY Times question was preceded with: “Some people say the Patriot Act is a necessary tool that helps the government find terrorists, while others say it goes too far and is a threat to civil liberites.”
16
From 1997 to 2003, the question asked about “guns or revolvers in your home.” In 1993, the question asked about “guns in this household.”
96
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.50 CONTINUED... June, 1997 December, 1993
Yes 40 45
No 57 53
Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know 3=100 2=100
b.
Are you the owner of a small business? Mid-October, 2004 August, 1999
16 15 14
84 85 86
*=100 *=100 *=100
c.
Do you trade stocks or bonds in the stock market? Mid-October, 2004 Mid-July, 2003 August, 2002 August, 1999
28 31 29 34 25
71 68 69 65 75
1=100 1=100 2=100 1=100 *=100
d.
Over the past 12 months, has there been a time when you or someone in your household has been without a job and looking for work, or not? Mid-October, 2004
37 36
63 63
*=100 1=100
Were you or either of your parents born in a country other than the United States or Canada? August, 2002 August, 1999
16 14 15
84 86 84
*=100 *=100 1=100
Do you attend Bible study or prayer group meetings? August, 2002 August, 1999
36 41 34
64 58 66
*=100 1=100 *=100
e.
f.
ASK ALL: INT1 Do you use a computer at your workplace, at school, at home, or anywhere else on at least an occasional basis? INT2 Do you ever go online to access the Internet or World Wide Web or to send and receive email? BASED ON GENERAL PUBLIC [N=2000]: Computer User Yes No DK/Ref December, 2004 80 20 *=100 Mid-October, 2004 79 21 *=100 Early September, 2004 78 22 *=100 August, 2004 75 25 *=100 April, 2004 73 27 0=100 March, 200417 75 25 *=100 August, 2003 77 23 *=100 Mid-July, 2003 75 25 *=100 January, 2003 76 24 0=100 December, 2002 76 24 *=100 Early October, 2002 75 25 *=100 August, 2002 78 22 *=100 INT1/INT2 CONTINUED... 17
Based on Total Respondents: Goes Online Yes No DK/Ref 72 28 *=100 72 28 *=100 72 28 *=100 68 32 0=100 66 34 *=100 68 32 *=100 67 33 *=100 65 35 *=100 67 33 *=100 67 33 *=100 63 37 *=100 69 31 *=100 Based on Total Respondents:
Beginning in 2004, the online use question is asked of all respondents (in previous years it was asked only of those who identified themselves as computer users). This modification was made to adjust to changes in technology and means of access to the Internet, and increases the percent who are classified as Internet users by 1-2 percentage points.
97
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
June, 2002 May, 2002 April, 2002 February, 2002 January, 2002 Mid-November, 2001 Mid-September, 2001 June, 2001 May, 2001 April, 2001 February, 2001 January, 2001 July, 2000 June, 2000 April, 2000 March, 200018 February, 2000 January, 2000 December, 1999 October, 1999 Late September, 1999 September, 1999 August, 1999 July, 1999 June, 1999 May, 1999 April, 1999 March, 1999 February, 1999 January, 1999 Early December, 1998 November, 1998 Early September, 1998 Late August, 1998 Early August, 1998 April, 1998 January, 1998 November, 1997 June, 1997 Early September, 1996 July, 1996 April, 1996 March, 1996 February, 1996 January, 1996 June, 199519
Yes 74 75 71 71 73 73 72 72 75 72 72 71 68 68 68 72 67 68 67 67 68 70 67 68 64 66 71 68 68 69 64 -64 66 66 61 65 66 60 56 56 58 61 60 59 --
Computer User No DK/Ref 26 *=100 25 *=100 29 *=100 29 *=100 27 0=100 27 0=100 28 *=100 28 *=100 25 *=100 28 *=100 28 0=100 29 *=100 31 1=100 31 1=100 32 *=100 28 0=100 33 *=100 32 *=100 33 *=100 33 *=100 32 *=100 30 *=100 33 *=100 32 *=100 35 1=100 33 1=100 29 *=100 32 *=100 32 *=100 31 *=100 36 *=100 --36 *=100 34 0=100 34 *=100 39 *=100 35 *=100 34 *=100 40 0=100 44 *=100 44 *=100 42 *=100 39 *=100 40 0=100 41 0=100 ---
Yes 66 66 62 62 62 62 62 62 64 62 60 61 55 56 54 61 52 52 53 50 52 53 52 49 50 48 51 49 49 47 42 37 42 43 41 36 37 36 29 22 23 21 22 21 21 14
Goes Online No DK/Ref 34 *=100 34 *=100 38 0=100 38 0=100 38 0=100 38 0=100 38 *=100 38 0=100 36 0=100 38 0=100 40 *=100 39 0=100 45 *=100 44 *=100 46 *=100 39 0=100 48 0=100 48 *=100 47 0=100 50 0=100 48 *=100 47 0=100 48 0=100 51 0=100 50 *=100 52 0=100 49 *=100 51 *=100 51 *=100 53 *=100 58 0=100 63 *=100 58 *=100 57 *=100 59 *=100 64 0=100 63 0=100 63 1=100 71 0=100 78 0=100 77 0=100 79 *=100 78 0=100 79 *=100 79 0=100 86 *=100
18
In March 2000, "or anywhere else" was added to the question wording.
19
The 1995 figure combines responses from two separate questions: (1) Do you or anyone in your household ever use a modem to connect to any computer bulletin boards, information services such as CompuServe or Prodigy, or other computers at other locations? (IF YES, PROBE: Is that you, someone else or both?) (2) Do you, yourself, ever use a computer at (work) (school) (work or school) to connect with computer bulletin boards, information services such as America Online or Prodigy, or other computers over the Internet?
98
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue ASK ALL: PARTY In politics TODAY, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or Independent?
2004 Trend December, 2004 Mid-October, 2004 Late September, 2004 Mid-September, 2004 Early September, 2004 August, 2004 July, 2004 June, 2004 May, 2004 Early May, 2004 Late April, 2004 Early April, 2004 Late March, 2004 March, 2004 Mid-February, 2004 Early February, 2004 Mid-January, 2004 Early January, 2004 Yearly Totals 2004 2003 2002 2001 2001 Post-Sept 11 2001 Pre-Sept 11 2000 1999 1998 1997
Republican 31 30 29 29 30 31 29 30 29 27 30 31 30 27 30 31 31 29
(VOL) (VOL) No Other Democrat Independent Preference Party Don't know 34 30 3 * 2=100 33 30 4 * 3=100 30 31 6 * 4=100 31 30 5 * 5=100 33 31 3 * 3=100 35 27 4 * 3=100 33 32 3 * 3=100 34 31 3 * 2=100 35 26 5 1 4=100 34 31 4 1 3=100 31 31 5 * 3=100 32 28 4 1 4=100 34 28 4 * 4=100 35 32 4 * 2=100 33 30 4 * 3=100 33 31 3 * 2=100 31 31 4 1 2=100 34 31 4 * 2=100
30 30 30 29 31 28 28 27 28 28
33 31 31 34 32 35 33 33 33 33
1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990
29 32 30 27 28 31 31
33 30 32 34 33 32 33
1989 1987
33 26
33 35
30 31 30 29 28 30 29 34 32 32
4 5 5 5 5 5 6 4 5 4 No Preference/ Other/DK 33 5=100 34 4=100 34 4=100 34 5=100 35 4=100 33 4=100 30 6=100 Independent/ No Pref/Oth/DK 34=100 39=100
99
* * 1 * 1 * * * * 1
3=100 3=100 3=100 3=100 3=100 2=100 4=100 2=100 2=100 2=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue IF ANSWERED 1 IN PARTY, ASK [N=662]: PARTYSTR Do you consider yourself a STRONG Republican, or NOT a strong Republican?
18 Strong 13 Not strong 31%
Late July Aug Sept Sept Aug Nov Oct April Oct July June May Feb May Jan May 2004 2003 2000 1999 1999 1997 1995 1995 1994 1994 1992 1990 1989 1988 1988 1987 17 14 14 10 11 11 11 15 16 13 11 13 15 13 12 11 12 13 13 14 14 14 19 15 15 16 17 15 16 15 15 14 29 27 27 24 25 25 30 30 31 29 28 28 31 28 27 25
IF ANSWERED 2 IN PARTY, ASK [N=641]: PARTYSTR Do you consider yourself a STRONG Democrat, or NOT a strong Democrat?
19 Strong 15 Not strong 34%
July 204 20 13 33
Late Aug Sept Sept Aug Nov Oct April Oct July June May Feb May Jan May 2003 2000 1999 1999 1997 1995 1995 1994 1994 1992 1990 1989 1988 1988 1987 15 19 15 15 14 14 14 18 15 14 16 17 19 19 18 16 15 16 18 18 16 15 14 18 18 17 21 19 20 19 31 34 31 33 32 30 29 32 33 32 33 38 38 39 37
IF ANSWERED 3,4,5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK [N=697]: PARTYLN As of TODAY, do you LEAN more to the Republican Party or the Democratic Party? (VOL.) Republican Democrat Other/DK/Ref. December, 2004 41 33 26=100 August, 2003 29 39 32=100 August, 2002 32 34 34=100 September, 2000 28 33 39=100 Late September, 1999 31 34 35=100 August, 1999 34 36 30=100 IF REPUBLICAN OR LEAN REPUBLICAN (1 IN PARTY OR 1 IN PARTYLN) ASK [N=955]: Q.24 Do you ever vote for Democratic candidates, or do you always vote Republican? 71 22 7 100
Sometimes vote for Democratic candidates Always vote Republican Don’t know/Refused
IF DEMOCRAT OR LEAN DEMOCRAT (2 IN PARTY OR 2 IN PARTYLN) ASK [N=872]: Q.25 Do you ever vote for Republican candidates, or do you always vote Democratic? 56 38 6 100
Sometimes vote for Republican candidates Always vote Democratic Don’t know/Refused
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS LATE MARCH 2005 POLITICAL TYPOLOGY CALLBACK SURVEY FINAL TOPLINE March 17-27, 2005 N=1,090 Q.1
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? [IF DK ENTER AS DK. IF DEPENDS PROBE ONCE WITH: Overall do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? IF STILL DEPENDS ENTER AS DK]
Late March, 2005 Mid-March, 2005 February, 2005 January, 2005 2004 December, 2004 Mid-October, 2004 August, 2004 July, 2004 June, 2004 May, 2004 Late April, 2004 Early April, 2004 Late March, 2004 Mid-March, 2004 February, 2004 Mid-January, 2004 Early January, 2004 2003 December, 2003 November, 2003 October, 2003 September, 2003 Mid-August, 2003 Early August, 2003 Mid-July, 2003 Early July, 2003 June, 2003 May, 2003 April 10-16, 2003 April 9, 2003 April 2-7, 2003 March 28-April 1, 2003 March 25-27, 2003 March 20-24, 2003 March 13-16, 2003 February, 2003 January, 2003 2002 December, 2002 Late October, 2002 Early October, 2002
DisApprove approve 49 46 45 46 46 47 50 43
Don’t know 5=100 9=100 7=100 7=100
48 44 46 46 48 44 48 43 47 46 48 56 58
44 48 45 46 43 48 43 47 44 47 44 34 35
8=100 8=100 9=100 8=100 9=100 8=100 9=100 10=100 9=100 7=100 8=100 10=100 7=100
57 50 50 55 56 53 58 60 62 65 72 74 69 71 70 67 55 54 58
34 40 42 36 32 37 32 29 27 27 22 20 25 23 24 26 34 36 32
9=100 10=100 8=100 9=100 12=100 10=100 10=100 11=100 11=100 8=100 6=100 6=100 6=100 6=100 6=100 7=100 11=100 10=100 10=100
61 59 61
28 29 30
11=100 12=100 9=100
Mid-September, 2002 Early September, 2002 Late August, 2002 August, 2002 Late July, 2002 July, 2002 June, 2002 April, 2002 Early April, 2002 February, 2002 January, 2002 2001 Mid-November, 2001 Early October, 2001 Late September, 2001 Mid-September, 2001 Early September, 2001 August, 2001 July, 2001 June, 2001 May, 2001 April, 2001 March, 2001 February, 2001
101
DisApprove approve 67 22 63 26 60 27 67 21 65 25 67 21 70 20 69 18 74 16 78 13 80 11 84 84 86 80 51 50 51 50 53 56 55 53
9 8 7 9 34 32 32 33 32 27 25 21
Don’t know 11=100 11=100 13=100 12=100 10=100 12=100 10=100 13=100 10=100 9=100 9=100 7=100 8=100 7=100 11=100 15=100 18=100 17=100 17=100 15=100 17=100 20=100 26=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue IF APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE (1,2 IN Q.1) ASK: Q.1a Do you (approve/disapprove) very strongly, or not so strongly? Dec 2004 48 34 12 2 44 35 8 1 8 100
49 Approve 32 Very strongly 16 Not so strongly 1 Don’t know (VOL) 46 Disapprove 36 Very strongly 10 Not so strongly * Don’t know (VOL) 5 Don't know/Refused 100
Nov 2003 50 34 14 2 40 30 9 1 10 100
Sept 2003 55 35 18 2 36 27 9 * 9 100
June 2002 70 46 21 3 20 8 12 0 10 100
April 2001 56 34 20 2 27 18 9 * 17 100
ASK ALL: Q.2 Now I’d like your views on some people and organizations. (First,) would you say your overall opinion of… [INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE ITEMS a THRU k, FOLLOWED BY RANDOMIZED ITEMS l THRU p WITH ITEM q ALWAYS LAST] is very favorable, mostly favorable, mostly UNfavorable, or very unfavorable? [INTERVIEWERS: PROBE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN “NEVER HEARD OF” AND “CAN’T RATE.”] -------Favorable------ -----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t Total Very Mostly Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate a. George W. Bush 53 23 30 45 27 18 0 2=100 Mid-October, 2004 (RVs) 56 26 30 42 23 19 * 2=100 Early October, 2004 (RVs) 57 27 30 40 20 20 0 3=100 Early September, 2004 52 25 27 43 24 19 * 5=100 September 11-14 49 24 25 46 27 19 0 5=100 September 8-10 55 28 27 40 21 19 * 5=100 August, 2004 58 27 31 39 22 17 0 3=100 June, 2004 52 19 33 45 22 23 * 3=100 Early February, 2004 53 21 32 44 25 19 0 3=100 Gallup: January 29 - February 1, 2004 52 --47 ---1=100 Gallup: January 2-5, 2004 65 --35 ---*=100 Gallup: October 6-8, 2003 60 --39 ---1=100 Gallup: June 9-10, 2003 66 --33 ---1=100 April, 2003 72 37 35 25 11 14 0 3=100 December, 2002 68 35 33 27 11 16 0 5=100 July, 2001 61 22 39 35 14 21 * 4=100 January, 2001 60 24 36 33 12 21 0 7=100 May, 2000 58 18 40 31 12 19 1 10=100 March, 199920 61 21 40 21 7 14 4 14=100 November, 1997 54 13 41 18 6 12 9 19=100 b.
Dick Cheney Mid-October, 2004 (RVs) Early October, 2004 (RVs) Early September, 2004 September 11-14 September 8-10
20
48 48 48 43 41 48
15 17 14 13 13 14
33 31 34 30 28 34
42 46 41 42 44 40
20 25 20 23 24 23
22 21 21 19 20 17
In March 1999 and November 1997 the category was listed: “Texas Governor George W. Bush.”
102
2 * * 2 1 2
8=100 6=100 11=100 13=100 14=100 10=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.2 CONTINUED... August, 2004 April, 2003 December, 2002 July, 2001 January, 2001 December, 1994 March, 199121 May, 1990
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly 47 13 34 60 21 39 59 20 39 58 19 39 62 20 42 42 10 32 68 33 35 20 3 17
-----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate 41 20 21 2 10=100 27 12 15 3 10=100 26 10 16 5 10=100 26 6 20 6 10=100 18 5 13 2 18=100 19 5 14 21 18=100 6 2 4 10 16=100 11 3 8 44 25=100
c.
Donald Rumsfeld April, 2003
39 61
10 24
29 37
41 19
18 6
23 13
7 9
13=100 11=100
d.
Condoleezza Rice
57
22
35
28
11
17
5
10=100
e.
Hillary Clinton December 2002 July, 2001 January, 2001 May, 2000 Early December, 1998 Early October, 1998 (RVs) Early September, 1998 Late August, 1998 March, 1998 January, 1997 June, 1996 April, 1996 February, 1996 January, 1996 October, 1995 August, 1995 December, 1994 July, 1994 May, 1993
57 47 53 60 49 66 58 64 63 65 57 53 49 42 42 58 49 50 57 60
22 15 20 25 15 32 24 24 25 26 17 13 12 14 10 14 16 17 19 19
35 32 33 35 34 34 34 40 38 39 40 40 37 28 32 44 33 33 38 41
36 44 42 35 42 31 36 31 34 31 40 43 46 54 54 38 47 45 40 29
17 23 23 16 22 15 18 13 13 14 17 17 19 27 26 14 22 20 18 11
19 21 19 19 20 16 18 18 21 17 23 26 27 27 28 24 25 25 22 18
* 1 1 * 1 * * 0 * * * * 0 0 0 -* 1 1 1
7=100 8=100 4=100 5=100 8=100 3=100 6=100 5=100 3=100 4=100 3=100 4=100 5=100 4=100 4=100 4=100 4=100 4=100 2=100 10=100
f.
Bill Clinton December, 2002 July, 2001 January, 2001 May, 2000 March, 1999 December, 1998 Early October, 1998 (RVs) Early September, 1998 Late August, 1998 March, 1998 November, 1997 October, 1997 September, 1997
64 46 50 64 48 55 55 52 57 54 62 63 62 62
24 17 20 23 17 21 23 15 18 18 22 19 15 18
40 29 30 41 31 34 32 37 39 36 40 44 47 44
32 49 46 34 47 42 43 44 41 44 35 35 36 35
13 27 27 17 28 23 24 24 23 24 16 14 16 14
19 22 19 17 19 19 19 20 18 20 19 21 20 21
0 * 0 0 * * 0 0 0 0 * 0 * 0
4=100 5=100 4=100 2=100 5=100 3=100 2=100 4=100 2=100 2=100 3=100 2=100 2=100 3=100
21
In March 1991 and May 1990 the category was listed: “Richard Cheney.”
103
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.2 CONTINUED... August, 1997 April, 1997 January, 1997 October, 1996 (RVs) June, 1996 April, 1996 February, 1996 January, 1996 August, 1995 February, 1995 December, 1994 July, 1994 May, 1993 July, 1992 June, 1992 May, 1992 March, 1992 February, 1992 January, 1992 November, 1991
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly 61 16 45 61 17 44 66 17 49 57 12 45 61 16 45 57 16 41 55 20 35 56 13 43 49 13 36 55 14 41 51 17 34 58 15 43 60 18 42 59 17 42 46 10 36 53 11 42 53 10 43 59 15 44 37 9 28 30 5 25
-----Unfavorable----- Never Canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate 38 17 21 0 1=100 37 16 21 * 2=100 32 14 18 * 2=100 41 19 22 0 2=100 37 14 23 * 2=100 40 16 24 0 3=100 43 21 22 0 2=100 42 15 27 0 2=100 49 20 29 0 2=100 42 17 25 0 3=100 46 22 24 0 3=100 41 16 25 * 1=100 35 12 23 0 5=100 34 9 25 0 7=100 47 14 33 1 6=100 42 10 32 * 5=100 40 11 29 1 6=100 31 7 24 2 8=100 15 4 11 27 21=100 10 2 8 39 21=100
g.
John Kerry Mid-October, 2004 (RVs) Early October, 2004 (RVs) Early September, 2004 September 11-14 September 8-10 August, 2004 June, 2004 Early February, 2004 January, 2003
49 56 53 49 51 50 56 50 58 30
13 21 16 17 17 18 23 11 14 6
36 35 37 32 34 32 33 39 44 24
41 40 41 43 40 44 36 41 28 16
17 16 16 19 19 18 14 16 8 4
24 24 25 24 21 26 22 25 20 12
2 0 * * * 0 1 0 1 36
8=100 3=100 6=100 8=100 9=100 6=100 7=100 9=100 13=100 18=100
h.
Howard Dean January, 2003
32 13
6 2
26 11
31 12
11 3
20 9
12 57
25=100 18=100
i.
Rudy Giuliani May, 2000
60 37
20 9
40 28
17 18
5 6
12 12
7 26
16=100 19=100
John McCain July, 2001 January, 2001 May, 2000 ABC/WP: February, 2000 CNN/USA Today/Gallup: December, 199922
59 51 59 54 60 57
15 14 18 14 ---
44 37 41 40 ---
17 22 15 20 21 11
4 5 3 5 ---
13 17 12 15 ---
8 13 9 11 -14
16=100 14=100 17=100 15=100 19=100 18=100
k.
57
13
44
28
10
18
1
14=100
j.
Arnold Schwarzenegger
22
For the CNN/USAToday/Gallup Poll in December 1999, the category was listed: "Arizona Senator John McCain."
104
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.2 CONTINUED... l.
The United Nations Late February, 2004 Early September, 2001 August, 1999 June, 1999 Early September, 1998 September, 1997 February, 1996 June, 1995 February, 1995 July, 1994 May, 1993 May, 1990
m.
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly 59 14 45 55 14 41 77 23 54 76 19 57 70 19 51 69 14 55 64 11 53 65 19 46 67 14 53 62 13 49 76 21 55 73 21 52 70 15 55
-----Unfavorable----- Never Canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate 32 11 21 * 9=100 35 15 20 -- 10=100 18 6 12 1 4=100 19 5 14 * 5=100 23 7 16 0 7=100 23 7 16 * 8=100 28 9 19 * 8=100 29 9 20 1 5=100 28 8 20 * 5=100 26 8 18 * 12=100 19 5 14 1 4=100 17 4 13 0 10=100 19 6 13 1 10=100
The military June, 2004 Newsweek: May 16-17, 2002 Newsweek: September 13-14, 2001 July, 2001 January, 2001 August, 1999 June, 1999 Early September, 1998 October, 1997 May, 1997 February, 1996 July, 1994 May, 1993 March, 1991 May, 1990 January, 1988 April, 1987 January, 1987 July, 1986 June, 1985
87 85 93 94 81 82 89 83 86 78 80 82 87 85 94 73 77 80 73 85 77
49 48 59 58 29 32 30 36 29 22 23 33 30 32 60 18 20 17 19 32 24
38 37 34 36 52 50 59 47 57 56 57 49 57 53 34 55 57 63 54 53 53
9 10 5 4 11 12 10 13 10 18 16 16 11 10 4 21 17 16 16 10 18
3 3 2 2 4 3 2 2 3 5 5 4 3 2 2 6 3 4 5 3 5
6 7 3 2 7 9 8 11 7 13 11 12 8 8 2 15 14 12 11 7 13
* * --* 0 * 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 * * 0 * 0 *
4=100 5=100 2=100 2=100 8=100 6=100 1=100 4=100 4=100 4=100 4=100 2=100 2=100 5=100 2=100 6=100 6=100 4=100 11=100 5=100 5=100
n.
56 59 51 63 59 52 58 49 47 54 57 52 46
17 15 12 16 12 12 15 15 10 17 14 10 9
39 44 39 47 47 40 43 34 37 37 43 42 37
33 32 36 28 36 38 35 39 45 41 38 39 47
9 9 10 7 9 13 10 13 17 14 10 10 17
24 23 26 21 27 25 25 26 28 27 28 29 30
1 1 1 1 * * * * * * * * *
10=100 8=100 12=100 8=100 5=100 10=100 7=100 12=100 8=100 5=100 5=100 9=100 7=100
Labor unions March, 2002 July, 2001 March, 2001 August, 1999 Early September, 1998 June, 1997 May, 1997 April, 1996 February, 1996 July, 1994 January, 1988 July, 1985
105
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.2 CONTINUED... o.
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly The Christian conservative movement 41 15 26 March, 2002 45 10 35 March, 2001 42 9 33
-----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate 34 15 19 9 16=100 29 11 18 12 15=100 31 11 20 11 16=100
p.
The National Rifle Association June, 1999 September, 1998 August, 1995 June, 1995 July, 1994
49 46 48 44 44 55
18 17 16 16 16 19
31 29 32 28 28 36
39 45 40 45 48 37
17 21 18 21 24 16
22 24 22 24 24 21
2 1 2 1 2 1
10=100 8=100 10=100 10=100 6=100 7=100
q.
Muslims Late February, 2004 Mid-July, 2003 June, 2003 March, 2002
45 48 47 50 47
7 13 9 12 7
38 35 38 38 40
28 32 31 30 29
9 14 12 10 11
19 18 19 20 18
1 -1 1 1
26=100 20=100 21=100 19=100 23=100
ROTATE Q.3 AND Q.4 Q.3 If George W. Bush could run for president again in 2008, would you like to see him serve as president for a third term, or not? 27 69 4 100 Q.4
Yes No Don’t know/Refused
If Bill Clinton could run for president again in 2008, would you like to see him serve as president again, or not? 43 55 2 100
Yes No Don’t know/Refused
ROTATE Q.5 AND Q.6 Q.5 Now I am going to read you the names of some possible candidates for the REPUBLICAN nomination for president in 2008. AFTER I READ ALL THE NAMES, please tell me which one you would most like to see nominated as the Republican party’s candidate for president? (PROBE IF NECESSARY: Well as of today, to whom do you most lean?) (READ AND RANDOMIZE) 7 4 27 32 17 * 7 6 100
Jeb Bush Bill Frist Rudy Giuliani John McCain Condoleezza Rice Other (VOL. DO NOT READ) None (VOL. DO NOT READ) Don’t know/Refused (VOL. DO NOT READ)
106
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.6
Now I am going to read you the names of some possible candidates for the DEMOCRATIC nomination for president in 2008. AFTER I READ ALL THE NAMES, please tell me which one you would most like to see nominated as the Democratic party’s candidate for president? (PROBE IF NECESSARY: Well as of today, to whom do you most lean?) (READ AND RANDOMIZE) 34 9 16 16 9 1 10 5 100
Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John Kerry Bill Richardson Other (VOL. DO NOT READ) None (VOL. DO NOT READ) Don’t know/Refused (VOL. DO NOT READ)
On a different subject… Q.7 How much, if anything, have you heard about a proposal which would allow younger workers to invest a portion of their Social Security taxes in private retirement accounts, which might include stocks or mutual funds — have you heard a lot, a little or nothing at all?
48 41 11 * 100 Q.8
A lot A little Nothing at all Don't know/Refused
MidMarch 2005 46 32 22 * 100
Feb 2005 43 35 21 1 100
Dec 2004 23 43 33 1 100
Early23 Sept 2004 19 41 39 1 100
(RVs) Sept 2000 26 43 30 1 100
Dec 2004 54 30 16 100
Early Sept 2004 58 26 16 100
(RVs) Sept 2000 70 21 9 100
Generally, do you favor or oppose this proposal? MidMarch 2005 44 40 16 100
Feb 2005 46 38 16 100
46 44 10 100
Favor Oppose Don't know/Refused
23
In Early September 2004 and 2000 the question was worded “... portion of their payroll taxes in private retirement accounts, which might include stocks or mutual funds, rather than having all of it go toward Social Security.”
107
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.9
In general, do you think that personal bankruptcy should be made easier for people to claim, more difficult for people to claim, or should it remain as it is?
8 39 47 6 100 Q.10
Easier More difficult Remain as it is Don’t know/Refused
Gallup May 1997 7 39 48 6 100
Would you favor or oppose allowing oil and gas drilling in the Alaskan Arctic National Wildlife Refuge?
46 49 5 100
Favor Oppose Don’t know/Refused
Mid-March 2005 42 46 12 100
ROTATE QUESTIONS 11 AND 12 Q.11 Would you generally favor or oppose teaching creationism ALONG WITH evolution in public schools?
57 33 10 100 Q.12
Would you generally favor or oppose teaching creationism INSTEAD OF evolution in public schools?
33 54 13 100 Q.13
Favor Oppose Don’t know/Refused
CBS/NY Times Nov 200424 65 29 6 100
Favor Oppose Don’t know/Refused
CBS/NY Times Nov 2004 37 51 12 100
Do you favor or oppose affirmative action programs designed to help blacks, women and other minorities get better jobs and education? Aug25 May Aug 2003 1995 2003 67 Favor 64 63 58 28 Oppose 31 29 36 5 Don’t know/Refused 5 8 3 100 100 100 100
24
CBS/New York Times question asked about “creation” instead of “creationism” in Q.11 only.
25
In August 2003 the question was part of a list of items. In May 2003 and August 1995 the question opened with: “In order to overcome past discrimination...”
108
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.14
Do you think the use of torture against suspected terrorists in order to gain important information can often be justified, sometimes be justified, rarely be justified, or never be justified? 15 30 24 27 4 100
Q.15
Often justified Sometimes justified Rarely justified Never justified Don’t know/Refused
July 2004 15 28 21 32 4 100
There’s been some discussion recently about “outsourcing” – meaning when American businesses hire workers in other parts of the world in order to save money. Which comes closer to your view on this issue? [READ AND ROTATE] 69 22 2 2 5 100
Outsourcing is bad for the American economy because it sends good jobs overseas OR Outsourcing is good for the American economy because it keeps the cost of goods and services down Both [VOL.] Neither [VOL.] Don’t know/Refused
Q.16
Do you believe that it is proper or improper for the Ten Commandments to be displayed in a government building? Aug 2004 74 Proper 72 22 Improper 23 4 Don’t know/Refused 5 100 100
Q.17
Considering what the president and Congress need to deal with this year, do you think reducing the budget deficit should be a top priority, important but lower priority, not too important or does it not need to be addressed this year? 39 46 6 5 4 100
Top priority Important but lower priority Not too important Does not need to be addressed this year Don’t know/Refused
109
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.18
Q.19
Would you favor or oppose [INSERT ITEM, RANDOMIZE] as a way to reduce the budget deficit? Favor 31
Oppose 66
DK/Ref 3=100
Lowering defense and military spending
35
60
5=100
Lowering domestic spending
54
35
11=100
a.
Raising taxes
b. c.
Would you favor or oppose a policy allowing immigrants to enter the U.S. legally and work here for a limited period of time, but then they would have to go home? 50 44 6 100
Favor Oppose Don’t know/Refused
Q.20
In making his next appointment to the Supreme Court, should President Bush choose someone who will make the court more liberal, someone who will make it more conservative, or someone who will keep the court about the same as it is now? Clinton Gallup March 1993 24 More liberal 29 28 More conservative 29 41 About the same as it is now 38 7 Don’t know/Refused 4 100 100
Q.21
How important is the president’s choice of the next Supreme Court justice to you personally? [READ] 38 36 15 8 3 100
Q.22
Very important Somewhat important Not too important Not at all important Don’t know/Refused (VOL.)
Some people think of American society as divided into two groups, the “haves” and the “have-nots,” while others think it’s incorrect to think of America that way. Do you, yourself, think of America as divided into “haves” and “have-nots,” or don’t you think of America that way? --- Gallup --Late Feb June Oct Aug CBS/NY Times 2004 2001 1999 1988 Aug 1984 38 Yes, divided into “haves” and “have-nots” 38 44 39 26 31 59 No 59 53 59 71 61 3 Don’t know/Refused 3 3 2 3 8 100 100 100 100 100 100
110
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue Q.23
If you had to choose, which of these groups are you in, the haves or the have-nots?
48 34 8 10 100
--- Gallup --Oct Aug 1999 1988 67 59 24 17 6 15 3 9 100 100
Late Feb June 2004 2001 59 52 27 32 7 10 7 6 100 100
Haves Have-nots Neither (VOL) Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know/Refused
ASK ALL: PARTY In politics TODAY, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or Independent?
Trend Late March, 2005 Mid-March, 2005 February, 2005 January, 2005 December, 2004 Mid-October, 2004 Late September, 2004 Mid-September, 2004 Early September, 2004 August, 2004 July, 2004 June, 2004 May, 2004 Early May, 2004 Late April, 2004 Early April, 2004 Late March, 2004 March, 2004 Mid-February, 2004 Early February, 2004 Mid-January, 2004 Early January, 2004 Yearly Totals 2004 2003 2002 2001 2001 Post-Sept 11 2001 Pre-Sept 11 2000 1999 1998 1997
Republican 29 30 31 32 31 30 29 29 30 31 29 30 29 27 30 31 30 27 30 31 31 29 30 30 30 29 31 28 28 27 28 28
(VOL) (VOL) No Other Democrat Independent Preference Party Don't know 32 36 2 * 1=100 34 29 4 * 3=100 32 30 4 1 2=100 33 30 4 * 1=100 34 30 3 * 2=100 33 30 4 * 3=100 30 31 6 * 4=100 31 30 5 * 5=100 33 31 3 * 3=100 35 27 4 * 3=100 33 32 3 * 3=100 34 31 3 * 2=100 35 26 5 1 4=100 34 31 4 1 3=100 31 31 5 * 3=100 32 28 4 1 4=100 34 28 4 * 4=100 35 32 4 * 2=100 33 30 4 * 3=100 33 31 3 * 2=100 31 31 4 1 2=100 34 31 4 * 2=100 33 31 31 34 32 35 33 33 33 33
30 31 30 29 28 30 29 34 32 32
111
4 5 5 5 5 5 6 4 5 4
* * 1 * 1 * * * * 1
3=100 3=100 3=100 3=100 3=100 2=100 4=100 2=100 2=100 2=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue PARTY CONTINUED... 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990
Republican 29 32 30 27 28 31 31
1989 1987
33 26
No Preference/ Democrat Independent Other/DK 33 33 5=100 30 34 4=100 32 34 4=100 34 34 5=100 33 35 4=100 32 33 4=100 33 30 6=100 Independent/ No Pref/Oth/DK 33 34=100 35 39=100
(All party identification trends based on general public.) IF ANSWERED 1 IN PARTY, ASK: PARTYSTR Do you consider yourself a STRONG Republican, or NOT a strong Republican? Late March, 2005 December, 2004 July, 2004 August, 2003 September, 2000 Late September, 1999 August, 1999 November, 1997 October, 1995 April, 1995 October, 1994 July, 1994 June, 1992 May, 1990 February, 1989 May, 1988 January, 1988 May, 1987
Strong 16 18 17 14 14 10 11 11 11 15 16 13 11 13 15 13 12 11
Not strong 13=29% 13=31% 12=29% 13=27% 13=27% 14=24% 14=25% 14=25% 19=30% 15=30% 15=31% 16=29% 17=28% 15=28% 16=31% 15=28% 15=27% 14=25%
IF ANSWERED 2 IN PARTY, ASK: PARTYSTR Do you consider yourself a STRONG Democrat, or NOT a strong Democrat? Late March, 2005 December, 2004 July, 2004 August, 2003 September, 2000 Late September, 1999 August, 1999 November, 1997 October, 1995 April, 1995 October, 1994
Strong 18 19 20 15 19 15 15 14 14 14 18
Not strong 14=32% 15=34% 13=33% 16=31% 15=34% 16=31% 18=33% 18=32% 16=30% 15=29% 14=32% 112
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue PARTYSTR CONTINUED... July, 1994 June, 1992 May, 1990 February, 1989 May, 1988 January, 1988 May, 1987
Strong 15 14 16 17 19 19 18
Not strong 18=33% 18=32% 17=33% 21=38% 19=38% 20=39% 19=37%
IF ANSWERED 3, 4, 5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK: PARTYLN As of today do you lean more to the Republican Party or more to the Democratic Party?
Late March, 2005 December, 2004 August, 2003 August, 2002 September, 2000 Late September, 1999 August, 1999
Republican 13 14 12 12 11 14 15
Democrat 17 12 16 13 13 15 15
Refused to lean 9=39% 9=35% 14=42% 13=38% 15=39% 16=45% 12=42%
ASK REPUBLICANS AND REPUBLICAN LEANERS ONLY (PARTY=1 OR PARTYLN=1): Q.24R How good a job is the Republican Party doing these days in standing up for its traditional positions on such things as reducing the size of government, cutting taxes and promoting conservative social values — would you say the Party is doing an excellent job, a good job, only a fair job or a poor job? BASED ON REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS [N=525]: 8 43 36 9 4 100
Excellent Good Only fair Poor Don’t know/Refused
July 2004 12 49 33 4 2 100
Aug 2003 6 51 37 5 1 100
May 2002 6 49 38 5 2 100
May 2001 10 50 32 5 3 100
(RVs) Sept 2000 6 43 44 5 2 100
ASK DEMOCRATS AND DEMOCRATIC LEANERS ONLY (PARTY=2 OR PARTYLN=2): Q.24D How good a job is the Democratic Party doing these days in standing up for its traditional positions on such things as protecting the interests of minorities, helping the poor and needy, and representing working people — would you say the Party is doing an excellent job, a good job, only a fair job or a poor job? BASED ON DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS [N=481]: 3 30 51 14 2 100
Excellent Good Only fair Poor Don’t know/Refused
July 2004 6 43 40 8 3 100
Aug 2003 5 33 51 9 2 100
113
May 2002 5 39 43 10 3 100
May 2001 8 39 40 7 6 100
(RVs) Sept 2000 11 52 32 4 1 100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue IF ANSWERED 1,2 IN PARTY, ASK [N=674]: Q.25 Has there ever been a time when you have thought of yourself as an INDEPENDENT? 50 49 1 100
Yes No Don’t know/Refused
ROTATE Q.26 AND Q.27 IF ANSWERED 1, 3, 4, 5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK [N=784]: Q.26 Has there ever been a time when you have thought of yourself as a DEMOCRAT? 46 52 2 100
Yes No Don’t know/Refused
IF ANSWERED 2, 3, 4, 5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK [N=722]: Q.27 Has there ever been a time when you have thought of yourself as a REPUBLICAN? 31 67 2 100
Yes No Don’t know/Refused
ASK ALL: Q.28 And one last short list… [INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE WITH ITEM d ALWAYS LAST] a.
Do you display the flag at your home, in your office, or on your car? Mid-July, 2003 August, 2002
Yes 64 69 75
No 36 29 25
DK/Ref *=100 2=100 *=100
b.
Do you smoke cigarettes on a regular basis? August, 2002 August, 1999
18 23 24
82 77 76
*=100 *=100 *=100
c.
Do you have a friend, colleague or family member who has served in the military effort in Iraq over the past two years?
49
51
*=100
d.
Do you have a friend, colleague, or family member who is gay? Mid-October, 2004 Mid-July, 2003 August, 2002 August, 1999
46 46 45 45 39
54 52 52 53 60
*=100 2=100 3=100 2=100 1=100
Q.29
Do you consider the United States a Christian nation, or not? 71 26 3 100
March 2002 67 25 8 100
Yes No Don't know/Refused
114
June 1996 60 34 6 100
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live Is How You Vote This 2005 survey of voting trends was prepared for the Pew Research Center by Rhodes Cook, who publishes a newsletter on voting trends and is co-author of America Votes, a biennial compilation of American election statistics published by Congressional Quarterly.
Section Two Errata: P. 117 — Text, last line — should be 3,153 counties (rather than 3,155). P. 120 — Table, “GOP Territorial Advantage by States, Districts, Counties” • Counties Won, 1960 line — should be Reps. 1,856, Dems. 1,202, Others 71 (rather than Reps. 1,867, Dems. 1,208, Others 54). • Counties Won, 2004 line — should be Reps. 2,569, Dems. 584 (rather than Reps. 2,571, Dems. 584). • Note: There should be 3,153 counties in 2004 (rather than 3,155).
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote I. Overview More so now than at any time in modern history, partisan voting patterns in this country line up by where people live. Electoral politics, like real estate, has increasingly become a game of location, location and location. Some have dubbed this phenomenon the “big sort.”1 It is most apparent in those famous redvs.-blue Electoral College maps from the 2000 and 2004 elections that divide the nation into crisply delineated Republican and Democratic sectors. But this growing link between geography and partisanship is not limited to states and regions. Increasingly, it now extends all the way down to the county and congressional district levels. In 2004, a presidential race that was very close nationally (just 2.4 percentage points separated the winner from the loser) was not especially competitive in most of the nation’s states and counties. In 40 of the 50 states, the winner had a margin of at least 5 percentage points, and in 31 states the winning margin was at least 10 percentage points. At the county level, the partisan sorting was even more dramatic. Nearly 60% of the nation’s 3,155
2004 Presidential Candidates’ Victory Margins, by State ■ Kerry Utah Wyoming Idaho Nebraska Oklahoma North Dakota Alabama Alaska Kansas Texas South Dakota Indiana Montana Kentucky Mississippi South Carolina Georgia Louisiana Tennessee West Virginia North Carolina Arizona Arkansas Virginia Missouri Florida Colorado Nevada Ohio New Mexico Iowa Wisconsin New Hampshire Pennsylvania Michigan Minnesota Oregon New Jersey Washington Delaware Hawaii Maine Connecticut California Illinois Maryland New York Vermont Rhode Island Massachusetts
25
30%
18 20 21
7 7 8 9 9 10 10 10 13
20%
10%
■ Bush
0.4 1 3 3 3 4
3 2 0.8 0.7
0%
5 5
8 7
27 26 26 25 23 21 21 21 20 20 17 17 15 14 13 12 10 10
10%
20%
33 31
30%
40 38
40%
46
50%
Note: Kerry won the District of Columbia by an 80% margin. Source: Unless otherwise noted, the primary sources for charts and tables in this chapter are America at the Polls, 1920-1956 and 1960-2000, America Votes 24 (the 2000 edition), and Congressional Quarterly’s Guide to U.S. Elections, Fourth Edition, Volume I. All were published by CQ Press. Election data for 2004 are based on official returns obtained from state election boards.
1 Bill Bishop and Richard Florida coined this phrase in an article in the Austin American-Statesman in 2003.
117
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
counties went either to President Bush or to Senator Kerry by at least 60% of the vote. There were many more of these “landslide counties” last year than in any other close election in modern history. The 2004 election also saw a sharp decline in the number of congressional districts that voted for a presidential candidate of one party and a congressional candidate of the opposite party. Last year there were just 59 such ticket-splitting districts out of 435, down from 86 in 2000 and 148 when Bush’s father was elected president in 1988. In both 2000 and 2004, Republicans dominated in the large, L-shaped portion of the country that includes the South, the Plains states and the Mountain West (plus Alaska). Democrats, meantime, controlled the two coasts (the Northeast and the Pacific West), leaving only the industrial Midwest from Ohio west to Iowa as a prime regional battleground.
2004 Presidential Vote by Region
Industrial Midwest
Democratic Coast
Democratic Coast
Republican L
Percentage of Electoral Popular Vote Vote Bush (R) Kerry (D) Bush (R) Kerry (D) Republican L 58% 42% 232 0 Democratic Coasts 44% 55% 5 194 Up for Grabs: Industrial Midwest 50% 50% 49 57 NATIONAL TOTAL 51% 48% 286 251* * One Democratic elector in Minnesota cast his ballot for John Edwards rather than Kerry.
Last year, as in 2000, Republicans ruled in rural America and Democrats dominated in the cities, leaving only the suburbs to be hotly contested. But even there, a geographic pattern was evident: Democrats posted a clear advantage in older, inner suburbs adjoining central cities, while Republicans prevailed in fast-growing outlying areas, commonly known as exurbs. Not only are these red and blue boundary lines sharp, they have proved to be durable. It is rare in American electoral history for voting results in successive elections to be as similar as those of 2000 and 2004. Just three states switched their presidential votes between the two elections, the smallest number for any back-to-back pair of presidential contests since 1904/1908. The switchers—New Hampshire to the Democrats, Iowa and New Mexico to the Republicans—had all been decided by fewer than 10,000 votes in 2000 and all three were extremely close once again in 2004.
118
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Despite this continuity in voting patterns between 2000 and 2004, however, there was one very big difference between those two elections: the turnout level.
2004 Turnout Rate Highest Since 1968 70%
63.4
60%
61.2
64.9
62.8 61.9
53.3
50%
56.6 55.1 54.7 56.0
53.1
58.1 51.5
54.2
60.7
40% 30% 20%
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1968
1964
1960
1956
1952
0%
1972*
10%
1948
Percentage of Eligible Voters who Voted
Voter interest in politics was unusually high last year, as passions evoked by the Sept. 11 attacks, the war in Iraq, and the lingering vote-count controversy from the photo-finish election of 2000 sent record numbers of people to the polls. The 122.3 million ballots cast in 2004 dwarfed the previous high set four years earlier by nearly 17 million. The turnout rate, measured as a percentage of the eligible voting age population, surpassed 60% for the first time since 1968, the last presidential election before the national voting age was lowered from 21 to 18.
* Voting age lowered to 18 in 1971 Note: Turnout is expressed as a percentage of the estimated number of eligible citizens of voting age, a number that has risen steadily from 91.5 million in 1948 to 201.5 million in 2004. There are different ways to calculate the turnout rate; scholars increasingly prefer to factor out the millions of noncitizens from the estimated voting age population (VAP). That is the method used in this chart. Sources: Congressional Quarterlyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide to U.S. Elections, Vol. I, for the presidential vote; the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate for the estimated voting age population of eligible citizens
A Turnout Record: 17 Million New Votes Presidential elections with the greatest increases in turnout from four years earlier
Election
Increase from Previous Election
Election Outcome
Winner
2004 1992 1952 2000 1920 1928 1960 1984 1936
16,898,696 12,830,205 12,757,092 9,118,755 8,233,168 7,710,928 6,811,311 6,137,621 5,896,004
Status quo Change Change Change Change Status quo Change Status quo Status quo
G.W. BUSH (R)* over Kerry (D) CLINTON (D) over Bush (R)* EISENHOWER (R) over Stevenson (D) G.W. BUSH (R) over Gore (D) HARDING (R) over Cox (D) HOOVER (R) over Smith (D) KENNEDY (D) over Nixon (R) REAGAN (R)* over Mondale (D) F.D. ROOSEVELT (D)* over Landon (R)
* Incumbent
119
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Yet unlike many of the high-turnout elections of the past, 2004 did not produce a vote for change. Both parties succeeded in significantly expanding their totals from 2000, but a big new vote for change was ultimately trumped by an even bigger new vote for the status quo. The Democratic presidential vote increased by 8 million while the Republican vote increased by more than 11 million. Republicans once again covered the national electoral map in a sea of red. Bush carried 62% of the states (31) and more than 80% of the nation’s counties. Fully nine out of every 10 of the “landslide” counties voted for President Bush. But Kerry nearly offset the GOP’s huge territorial advantage by rolling up landslide margins of his own in many of the nation’s vote-rich urban counties. He won New York City by more than 1.2 million votes, Cook County (which includes Chicago) by more than 840,000, Los Angeles County by more than 830,000, and Philadelphia by more than 410,000 votes. GOP Territorial Advantage by States, Districts, Counties Democrats have won five of the 12 presidential elections since 1960, yet their presidential candidate has won the most congressional districts in just four of those contests, the most states in just three of them, and the most counties in only two. Nominees
States Won Reps. Dems. Others
Districts Won Reps. Dems. Others
Counties Won Reps. Dems. Others
Election Democrat
Republican
1960 1964 1968 1972 1976
John Kennedy Lyndon Johnson* Hubert Humphrey George McGovern Jimmy Carter
Richard Nixon Barry Goldwater Richard Nixon Richard Nixon* Gerald Ford*
26 6 32 49 27
23 44 13 1 23
1 — 5 — —
228 60 226 378 215
206 375 161 57 220
3 — 48 — —
1,867 1,208 828 2,291 1,859 692 2,997 133 1,422 1,711
54 6 578 — —
1980 1984 1988 1992 1996
Jimmy Carter* Walter Mondale Michael Dukakis Bill Clinton Bill Clinton*
Ronald Reagan Ronald Reagan* George Bush George Bush* Bob Dole
44 49 40 18 19
6 1 10 32 31
— — — — —
309 371 297 179 155
126 64 138 256 280
— — — — —
2,229 904 2,807 332 2,319 820 1,609 1,525 1,619 1,533
— — — 17 —
2000 2004
Al Gore John Kerry
George W. Bush George W. Bush*
30 31
20 19
— —
228 255
207 180
— —
2,478 2,571
— —
674 584
Notes: * indicates incumbent. Winners in bold type. Columns marked “Others” are for an unpledged Democratic elector slate in Mississippi in 1960 and in Alabama in 1964, American Independent Party candidate George Wallace in 1968, and independent Ross Perot in 1992. Counties where the presidential vote was a tie are not included in the aggregate totals. The District of Columbia is not included in any of the categories. Since 1960, the number of congressional districts has stayed constant at 435 (after a brief increase to 437 in 1960). The number of counties has varied slightly from a low of 3,125 in 1964 to a high of 3,155 in 2004. The total number of counties includes independent cities in Virginia, election districts in Alaska, parishes in Louisiana, and cities such as Baltimore, Md., and St. Louis, Mo, which are separate jurisdictions within their states.
120
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Basically, both parties mined their bases in 2004, winning by larger margins in those areas where they were already strong—a pattern that has been playing out for decades. In the closely fought 1960 election between Democrat John F. Kennedy and Republican Richard Nixon, there were just 1,382 “landslide” counties (those in which the winner received at least 60% of the vote). In 1976, when Democrat Jimmy Carter of Georgia edged Republican Gerald Ford of Michigan, the number dropped to 1,042, as Carter cut into the GOP’s normal advantage in the South and in rural counties elsewhere. In 2000, when George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore battled to a virtual tie in both the nationwide popular and electoral votes, there were 1,421 counties won with at least 60% of the total vote. Last year, the number rose to 1,832.
The Rising Percentage of Landslide Counties in Close Elections ■ Dems.
■ Reps.
58. 1
60% 44. 2 16. 4
40%
27. 8
20%
5. 2 52. 9
45. 1 4. 7 40. 4
33. 2 23. 3
9. 9
0%
1960
1976
2000
2004
Note: Landslide counties are those carried by the presidential candidate of one party or the other with at least 60% of the total vote. See previous table for explanation of numbers and definitions of counties.
This “sortedness,” as noted above, is also evident in the sharp increase in congruency in presidential and congressional voting. No longer does the South vote Republican for president and Democratic for members of Congress, nor does the Northeast vote Democratic for president while electing a large complement of moderate Republicans to seats on The Decline In Competition For U.S. House Seats Capitol Hill. One byproduct is a growing partisan and ideological edge to the way Congress does business. A national legislative body that no longer houses a significant number of conservative Southern Democrats or liberal Northeastern Republicans has fewer moderating influences, a weaker center and greater difficulty coming to bipartisan compromise.
Percent of Competitive House Races
30%
25.5
25%
22.5 21.6
20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
13.1 13.1
10.8
10.8 7.4
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004
Note: Competitive races are defined as those won with less than 55% of the total vote.
121
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Another byproduct is a decline in electoral competition. It is particularly noticeable in the U.S. House of Representatives, where the rise in safe, one-party districts comes not just from a geographic sorting of voters but also from sophisticated computer programs that enable lawmakers to bring more precision to the task of drawing congressional district boundaries that favor one party or the other. In 2004, only 32 House candidates were elected with less than 55% of the total vote, barely one third the number of marginal districts that existed as recently as 1996. At the federal level, few incumbents of any kind have been seriously threatened in recent years—only one sitting senator and just seven House members were defeated in the 2004 general election. And with the reelection of President Bush, the nation is set to have its first back-to-back, two-term presidents since the early 19th century. House, Senate Incumbent Reelection Rates Since 1960 House
Percentage Reelected
100% 80%
96.6
96.8
86.6
92.6
Senate 95.8 93.6
84.8
74.1
71.4
60%
98.3
95.4
89.6
90.7 64.0
94.0
88.3
85.2
97.8
90.5
82.1
97.8 96.2
79.3
55.2*
40% 20%
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
1960
0%
* In 1980, Republicans won control of the Senate for the first time in more than a quarter-century. Source: Vital Statistics on Congress, 2001-2002 (AEI Press). CQ Weekly, Nov. 6, 2004, was basis for 2004.
For those looking for political competition, the nation’s governorships are about all that is left. Governors—who deliver services such as schools, roads and health care—often find themselves on the front lines of American politics in a way their counterparts in Congress are not. Term limits in many state legislatures produce a constant turnover among the cadre of officeholders, so there’s never a shortage of gubernatorial hopefuls. And like the president, many governors can only serve two terms, which produces a high number of competitive open-seat races. The fact that incumbency has become so powerful and competition so weak at the federal level does not mean this will be the case indefinitely. To the contrary, the United States is a mobile and fast-growing nation, with an ever-changing racial and demographic mix and a heavy stream of new immigrants.
122
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Moreover, it’s not clear whether the infusion of new voters in 2004 represents the dawn of a new age of political engagement or a one-time exception to the modern norm of low turnouts. History offers little guidance; in the past, elections that have followed elections with big turnout spikes sometimes continue the pattern and sometimes do not.
What Happens After Banner Turnouts? Since women won the right to vote in national elections in 1920, there have been seven presidential contests in which the number of votes cast has increased by at least 10% from the previous election.
Elections
First Election
Next Election
1920–1924 1928–1932 1936–1940 1952–1956 1960–1964 1992–1996 2004–2008
Up 44.4% Up 26.5% Up 14.8% Up 26.1% Up 11.0% Up 14.0% Up 16.0%
Up 8.7% Up 8.0% Up 9.3% Up 0.8% Up 2.6% Down 7.8% ?
Comments
First and second elections in which women could vote Democrats begin consolidating the large urban vote War in Europe, FDR third-term bid keep turnout growing in ’40 Ike-Adlai rematch in ’56 fails to excite LBJ landslide in ’64 never in doubt Little drama in ’96 Clinton-Dole contest; Perot factor recedes
A similar caveat should be applied to the other “verities” of our current political alignment—the locked-in Electoral College map, the crisp regional divide and the stark urban/rural split. These are all as compelling now as they have been at any time in living memory. But, politics being politics, that doesn’t mean they’ll stay that way.
123
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
II. Are We in an Age of Republican Dominance? The Republicans won an impressively broad but not especially deep victory in 2004. They retained the White House, expanded their narrow majorities in the Senate and House, and kept control of most of the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s governorships. But the election was no landslide, whether at the presidential, congressional or statehouse level, and it did not move the nation beyond the closely divided, highly partisan environment that marks the current era of American politics.
Election 2004: Where The Parties Stand President George W. Bush (R) John Kerry (D)
Popular Vote
Electoral Vote*
62,040,610 59,028,439
286 251
Popular Vote Winner: Bush by 3,012,171 Electoral Vote Winner: Bush by 35 Before Election
After Election
Net Change in Seats
51 48 1
55 44 1
Republicans Gain 4
House of Representatives Republicans 227 Democrats 205 Independent 1 Vacancies 2
232 202 1 â&#x20AC;&#x201D;
Republicans Gain 3**
28 22
No Change
Senate Republicans Democrats Independent
Governors Republicans Democrats
28 22
Note: Figures based on official results for all 50 states and the District of Columbia * One Democratic elector in Minnesota cast a vote for John Edwards rather than Kerry. ** Although the Republican House total increased to 232 from 227 as a result of the election, the GOP is credited with a net gain of three because two of the seats it won were vacancies it had previously held.
124
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In short, both the magnitude and the significance of the GOP victory last year are, at least to some degree, in the eye of the beholder. Viewed from one angle, Republicans scored a decisive triumph that gave President Bush the mandate he so quickly claimed after the Nov. 2 balloting. Viewed from a different perspective, the president’s victory over Democrat John Kerry was tepid by historic standards. The Case For Looking at the results from the GOP vantage point, partisans have good cause to lay claim to an impressive victory. Their party fashioned a clear message that focused on the president’s decisive leadership on national security and raised doubts about whether Kerry was a suitable alternative in a dangerous time. The GOP buttressed this message with a quietly effective voter targeting operation that the Democrats did not match. The result: Republicans strengthened their grip on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue in an election that produced the nation’s highest voter turnout ever.
Incumbents and Reelection Campaigns: How Bush’s Victory Measures Up Since the popular vote for president was first recorded nationwide in 1824, roughly two out of three incumbents who ran for another term have won.
Election
Share of Popular Vote
Won with at least 55% Lyndon Johnson (D)* Franklin Roosevelt (D) Richard Nixon (R) Ronald Reagan (R) Dwight Eisenhower (R) Theodore Roosevelt (R)* Ulysses Grant (R) Abraham Lincoln (R)
1964 1936 1972 1984 1956 1904 1872 1864
61.1% 60.8% 60.7% 58.8% 57.4% 56.4% 55.6% 55.1%
+11.4% + 3.4% +17.3% + 8.1% + 2.3% + 4.7% + 2.9% +15.2%
Won with less than 55% Franklin Roosevelt (D) Andrew Jackson (D) Calvin Coolidge (R)* Franklin Roosevelt (D) William McKinley (R) George W. Bush (R) Harry Truman (D)* Bill Clinton (D) Woodrow Wilson (D)
1940 1832 1924 1944 1900 2004 1948 1996 1916
54.7% 54.2% 54.0% 53.4% 51.7% 50.7% 49.6% 49.2% 49.2%
-6.1% -1.8% -6.3% -1.3% + 0.6% + 2.8% -3.8% + 6.2% + 7.4%
Defeated Grover Cleveland (D) Gerald Ford (R)* Martin Van Buren (D) John Quincy Adams (NR) Benjamin Harrison (R) Jimmy Carter (D) Herbert Hoover (R) George Bush (R) William Howard Taft (R)
1888 1976 1840 1828 1892 1980 1932 1992 1912
48.6% 48.0% 46.8% 43.6% 43.0% 41.0% 39.6% 37.4% 23.2%
-0.3% -12.7% -4.0% +12.7% -4.8% -9.1% -18.6% -16.0% -28.4%
President
Change from Previous Election
* Incumbents who were not elected to initial term. NR = National Republican
For the first time since 1988, a presidential candidate of either party captured a majority of the popular vote; Bush took 51%. For the first time since 1924, the GOP reelected a president and won control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
125
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
For the first time ever, a presidential candidate won more than 60 million votes, as Bush easily surpassed the previous record of nearly 54.5 million set by Ronald Reagan in 1984.
Was it a Mandate? The 50-Million Vote Club Bush won more popular votes last year than any previous presidential candidate in history. But so did Kerry.
And the incumbent prevailed in the face of a record high turnout in terms of the number of ballots cast. Throughout the 2004 campaign, there had been a widespread belief that a big turnout would benefit the challenger. But in the end, it was Bush who benefited most from the additional ballots.
Candidate
George W. Bush (R)* John Kerry (D) Ronald Reagan (R)* Al Gore (D) George W. Bush (R)
Election
Vote
Outcome
2004 2004 1984 2000 2000
62,040,610 59,028,439 54,455,075 50,992,335 50,455,156
Won Lost Won Lost Won
* Incumbent
While Kerry won 59 million votes, fully 8 million more than Democratic nominee Al Gore received in 2000, Bush hiked his own total by nearly 11.6 million votes from four years earlier—the largest jump in a president’s tally since Richard Nixon increased his total by more than 15 million votes from 1968 to 1972. In every state, Bush received more votes in 2004 than in 2000. So did Kerry when compared with Gore in 2000, but in the vast majority of states (38) there were more additional ballots for Bush than for the Democrat. The increase in Bush’s vote from four years earlier was not a regional phenomenon. It was broad based, as his share of the vote went up from 2000 in all but three states—North Carolina, South Dakota and Vermont. In a majority of states (29), Bush captured at least 50% of the vote. There were some specific state or regional issues that may have had a bearing on the presidential vote, though not necessarily in the way it was generally reported last year. For example, many pundits argued during the campaign that the fact that 11 states were
Gay Marriage Bans and the Bush Vote: A Nonfactor? Measures to ban same-sex marriage were on the ballot in 11 states in 2004. The measure passed handily in all 11. Bush carried nine of them, as he had in 2000. The aggregate increase in his share of the vote in these 11 states from 2000 to 2004 was 1 percentage point below his increase nationally.
Mississippi Georgia Oklahoma Kentucky Arkansas North Dakota Montana Utah Ohio Michigan Oregon
Vote to Ban Gay Marriage
Bush Vote
Change in Bush Percentage 2000-2004
86% 76% 76% 75% 74% 73% 67% 66% 61% 59% 57%
60% 58% 66% 60% 54% 63% 59% 72% 51% 48% (lost) 47% (lost)
+2% +3% +5% +3% +3% +2% +1% +5% +1% +2% +1%
54%
+2%
51%
+3%
11-State Total NATIONAL
126
N/A
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
holding votes on constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage would prove to be a boon to Bush because it would disproportionately drive up turnout among religious conservatives in those states. In fact, the overall turnout increase in those 11 states from 2000 to 2004 was only slightly greater than the turnout increase nationally, and the increase in Bush’s vote percentage in those states from 2000 to 2004 was 1 percentage point below his increase nationwide (2 points rather than 3). On the other hand, the trauma of 9/11 appears to have had a particular resonance in three states within a close radius of ground zero—New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Bush drew about 1 million more votes last year in those three states than he had received in 2000. The increase was not enough for the president to come close to carrying any of the three; they are all stalwart “blue states.” But Bush’s improved performance in the three states was much greater, proportionately, than his improved performance nationally.
From 2000 To 2004: States Where Each Candidate Gained Most Bush posted the largest increases in his vote percentage over 2000 in a disparate array of states from Hawaii, with its large military presence, to the Democratic-oriented Northeast, including the three states most intimately touched by the terrorist attacks of 9/11—New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Kerry pushed up the Democratic vote share from 2000 in several states in New England, as well as a number of Western states, many in the Republican-oriented Mountain West. Bush’s Biggest Gains Over His 2000 Tallies Increase (% points)
Rank State
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Kerry’s Biggest Gains Over Gore’s 2000 Tallies
Hawaii Rhode Island Alabama New Jersey Tennessee Connecticut Oklahoma* New York Utah* Massachusetts
7.8% 6.8% 6.0% 5.9% 5.7% 5.5% 5.3% 4.9% 4.7% 4.3%
Increase (% points)
Rank
State
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Vermont Alaska Montana* Colorado Maine Oregon* New Hampshire Minnesota Idaho Washington
8.3% 7.8% 5.2% 4.6% 4.5% 4.3% 3.4% 3.2% 2.7% 2.6%
* Gay marriage ban also on general election ballot Note: The Democratic share of the presidential vote went up 4.0 percentage points from 2000 in the District of Columbia, which would rank seventh highest on the Kerry list if the District were treated as a state.
The Republican showing in the 2004 election becomes more impressive when one looks beyond the presidential race to the congressional balloting. Since the election of 2000, GOP numbers in the Senate have swelled to 55 seats from 50, and in the House to 232 seats from 221. The Republican Senate total after the election tied the party’s highest number since the eve of the New Deal; the number of Republican House members was the highest post-election total for the party since 1946. The margins are not yet of a magnitude to support a case that there has been a Republican realignment. But there is little doubt that the election of 2004 provided new evidence for those who believe that the pendulum of American politics continues to swing steadily in the Republicans’ direction since the “perfect tie” of 2000.
127
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
The Case Against Yet the 2004 election can also be viewed in a way that points to a more hopeful scenario for the Democrats. Reelected Presidents and Their Electoral Vote Margins
Bush’s margin of victory in the popular vote—barely 3 million—was the smallest for any reelected president since Harry Truman scored a close, come-from-behind victory in 1948. And back then, fewer than half as many votes were cast as in 2004.
President
Franklin Roosevelt (D) Ronald Reagan (R) Richard Nixon (R) Lyndon Johnson (D)* Dwight Eisenhower (R) Franklin Roosevelt (D) Franklin Roosevelt (D) Calvin Coolidge (R)* Bill Clinton (D) Theodore Roosevelt (R)* William McKinley (R) Harry Truman (D)* George W. Bush (R) Woodrow Wilson (D)
Bush’s margin of victory in the electoral vote—35—was the smallest for any reelected president since Woodrow Wilson won by 23 in 1916. And other than Wilson’s, there has been no other successful presidential reelection in the Electoral College as narrow as Bush’s since the founding of the Republic.
Election
1936 1984 1972 1964 1956 1940 1944 1924 1996 1904 1900 1948 2004 1916
Victory Margin (in electoral votes)
515 512 503 434 384 367 333 246 220 196 137 114 35 23
* Incumbent was not elected to initial term.
Moreover, Bush’s popular vote margin of victory in percentage terms—2.4%—was the smallest for a reelected president in history.
Reelected Presidents and Their Popular Vote Margins
The scope of Bush’s victory last year may look impressive when compared with his father’s 1992 reelection defeat or “W’s” own win on a split decision in 2000, when he won the election by just five electoral votes while losing the popular vote by more than a half million. But it looks a lot less robust when compared with the performance of recent incumbents such as Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, who parlayed their popularity (and their opponents’ weaknesses) into reelection landslides that exceeded 15 million votes. For that matter, Bush’s predecessor, Bill Clinton, won a second term in 1996 by a margin of more than 8 million votes.
128
President
Calvin Coolidge (R)* Franklin Roosevelt (D) Richard Nixon (R) Lyndon Johnson (D)* Theodore Roosevelt (R)* Ronald Reagan (R) Andrew Jackson (D) Dwight Eisenhower (R) Ulysses Grant (R) Abraham Lincoln (R) Franklin Roosevelt (D) Bill Clinton (D) Franklin Roosevelt (D) William McKinley (R) Harry Truman (D)* Woodrow Wilson (D) George W. Bush (R)
Election
Victory Margin (in popular votes)
1924 1936 1972 1964 1904 1984 1832 1956 1872 1864 1940 1996 1944 1900 1948 1916 2004
25.2% 24.3% 23.2% 22.6% 18.8% 18.2% 16.8% 15.4% 11.8% 10.2% 9.9% 8.5% 7.5% 6.2% 4.5% 3.1% 2.4%
* Incumbent was not elected to initial term.
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Indeed, it could be argued that Bush’s triumph in 2004 was less a rousing nationwide vote of approval than a more limited triumph based largely in one region, the South.
It was the same story at the congressional level. Republicans came out of the 2004 election with a 22-to-4 edge in Southern Senate seats, and a 91-to-51 advantage in Southern House seats. Without the South, not only would Kerry be in the White House but Democrats would control both chambers of Congress. Put another way, if Democrats have deep problems in rural America and in the South, Republicans have concerns almost as troublesome in the large metropolitan areas of the Northeast, Midwest and the West.
The Republican Base Shifts to the South…
Average GOP Electoral Votes per Election
The president swept the 13 states of the South (the 11 states of the old Confederacy plus Kentucky and Oklahoma) by nearly 6 million votes, but was beaten by Kerry in the rest of the country by nearly 3 million. In electoral votes, it was 168-to-0 for Bush inside the South, 251-to-118 for Kerry outside the South.
■ South*
350 300 250 150 100
50 0
10
318
230
203
200
■ Non-South
64
122
138
83
1856-1948 1952-1968 1972-1988 1992-2004
* 11 states of the old Confederacy plus Kentucky and Oklahoma
…Which Now Anchors GOP Control of White House and Congress South
Rest of Country
2004 Presidential Vote Popular Vote Bush by 5,851,698 Electoral Vote Bush, 168-0
Kerry by 2,839,527 Kerry, 251-118-1*
2005 Congressional makeup Senate R, 22-4 House R, 91-51
D, 40-33-1 Ind. D, 151-141-1 Ind.
* One Democratic elector in Minnesota voted for John Edwards.
Clearly, the Democrats are not the woebegone force they were at the presidential level in the 1970s and 1980s. In those two decades they not only lost four of five presidential elections, but in three of them fell below 50 electoral votes and barely reached 100 in another. By contrast, the Democrats have won at least 250 electoral votes of the 270 needed to take the White House in each of the last four elections. In the process, they have won with regularity big electoral vote prizes such as California, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Michigan. And in many of these megastates, the vote has not even been close. In every presidential election since 1992, the Democrats have carried California by at least 1.2 million votes, New York by at least 1 million, and Illinois by at least 500,000 votes. A part of the vast Republican presidential terrain in the eras of Nixon and Reagan, these vote-rich states have now become cornerstones of the Democratic presidential coalition.
129
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Presidential Elections Since 1960
Election 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000
Candidates KENNEDY (D) - Nixon (R) JOHNSON (D)* - Goldwater (R) NIXON (R) - Humphrey (D) - Wallace (AI) NIXON (R)* - McGovern (D) CARTER (D) - Ford (R)* REAGAN (R) - Carter (D)* - Anderson (I) REAGAN (R)* - Mondale (D) BUSH (R) - Dukakis (D) CLINTON (D) - Bush (R)* - Perot (I) CLINTON (D)* - Dole (R) - Perot (Ref.) G.W. BUSH (R) - Gore (D)
2004
G.W. BUSH (R)* - Kerry (D)
Turnout 68,838,219 70,644,592 73,211,875 77,718,554 81,555,889 86,515,221 92,652,842 91,594,809 104,425,014 96,277,872 105,396,627
POPULAR VOTE % of Total Vote Reps. Dems. Others 50% 50% 1% 39% 61% 0% 43% 43% 14% 61% 38% 2% 48% 50% 2% 51% 41% 8% 59% 41% 1% 53% 46% 1% 37% 43% 20% 41% 49% 10% 48% 48% 4%
122,295,323 51% 48%
1%
ELECTORAL VOTE Plurality (in votes) 118,574 D 15,951,378 D 510,314 R 17,999,528 R 1,682,970 D 8,420,270 R 16,877,890 R 7,077,023 R 5,805,444 D 8,203,602 D 537,179 D
Reps. Dems. Others 219 303 15 52 486 — 301 191 46 520 17 1 240 297 1 489 49 — 525 13 — 426 111 1 168 370 — 159 379 — 271 266 1
3,012,171 R
286
251
1
Note: Winners are listed first and in capital letters. An incumbent is indicated with an asterisk (*). Independent or third-party candidates who received at least 5% of the popular vote are included, and designations are as follows: “AI”, American Independent; “I”, Independent; “Ref.”, Reform. Because of rounding, percentages do not always add to 100.
And in all three states, Republicans have problems at the congressional level as well. Democrats came out of the 2004 election holding all six Senate seats and 25 more House seats in these states than the Republicans. Indeed, in the 2004 Senate races, the GOP barely managed a blip on the radar screen in any of the three states. Democrats Barbara Boxer in California, Barack Obama in Illinois and Charles Schumer in New York all won by more than 2 million votes—in each case, rolling up a record margin of victory for a contested Senate race in their state. There is no disputing that the election of 2004 was a Republican triumph. But by historical standards, it was a tenuous one, notable less for the depth of the victory than for the deeplyetched lines that separated the Democratic and Republican parts of the country.
130
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
III. A Sharply Divided Map: The Battle of the Bases One way to look at the national political map is as a tale of two sectors, much different in geographic size but roughly equal in electoral muscle. One is a Republican-oriented L-shaped sector that includes the South, the Plains states and the Mountain West (plus Alaska). Expansive in land mass, it includes the heart of rural America and the bulk of the fast-growing Sun Belt. The L takes in 26 states with 232 electoral votes (up nine from 2000). The Democratic-oriented sector is bicoastal, combining the Northeast and the Pacific West (including Hawaii). More urban than the L, it encompasses 16 states with 199 electoral votes (down four from 2000). The only part of the country that doesn’t fit into either sector is the industrial Midwest. With eight states and 107 electoral votes (down five from 2000), it is the one region that is competitive these days in presidential voting. This geographic alignment has been in the making for several decades. From 1968 through 1988, Republicans won the White House five of six times—scoring landslide victories (at least 40 states and 400 electoral votes) with Nixon in 1972, Reagan in 1980 and 1984, and George Bush in 1988. Republicans not only dominated the L during this period but also picked up many states in the Democrats’ domain. The magnitude of GOP presidential victories in the 1970s and 1980s spawned talk of a Republican “lock” on the Electoral College. Four Eras in Presidential Voting, 1932-2004 From the eve of the Civil War until the start of the Depression, Republicans dominated presidential voting and the Democrats elected only two presidents, Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson. Since then, there have been four different eras. One was strongly Democratic, another strongly Republican. The other two have been transitional, with neither party dominant. That includes the present, in which the nation is divided into two nearly equal parts: the Republican L and the Democratic strongholds on both coasts.
Electoral Eras
Democratic New Deal (1932-48) Postwar Transitional (1952-64) Republican Lock (1968-88) Era of the L (1992-2004)
Elections Won Reps. Dems.
0 2 5 2
5 2 1 2
Popular Vote for Era Reps. Dems. Others
43% 50% 53% 45%
Note: Because of rounding, percentages do not always add to 100.
131
55% 50% 43% 47%
2% 1% 4% 8%
Average Electoral Vote Per Election Reps. Dems. Others
87 293 417 221
436 238 113 317
8 4 8 1
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
But in the 1990s, Democrat Bill Clinton reversed the equation, just as Jimmy Carter had in 1976. Both Southerners, they had enough crossover appeal to make inroads into the Republican L, with Carter winning throughout the South and Clinton carrying much of the border South and parts of the Mountain West. For many years, the disparity in voting patterns between the two sectors had been limited to presidential elections, since Democrats dominated congressional voting all across the country. That changed, however, in 1994, when a Republican tidal wave that swept the GOP into control on Capitol Hill came rolling out of the L. Now the regions vote roughly the same way for Congress as for president. Democratic Cities vs. Republican Countryside When historians look back at this period, it is likely they will view the elections of 2000 and 2004 as a matched set. If anything, both parties last fall dug deeper into their bases of support than ever before and tied up some of the loose ends from four years earlier. In 2000, Bush won all but one state (New Mexico) in the Republican L. In 2004, he captured New Mexico and swept all 232 electoral votes at stake within the GOP sector. In 2000, Al Gore won all but two states (New Hampshire and West Virginia) in the Democrats’ bicoastal base. In 2004, Kerry picked off New Hampshire, producing a nearly unanimous 194-to-5 electoral vote advantage in the Democratic part of the map. That left the race to be settled in the array of Midwestern battleground states, where, after all the effort and all the money that was spent, only Iowa switched parties. Although the final outcome produced an electoral map that was little changed from 2000, Republicans beefed up their totals in rural America and the fast-growing exurbs. Democrats responded by pumping up already hefty majorities in a number of large urban centers and by tightening their grip on many once-Republican suburban counties across the Frost Belt. Bush’s dominance in rural America is evident in the nationwide tally of counties won. He carried more than 2,500 counties, a larger number than any presidential candidate had won since 1960 with the exception of two landslide Republican winners—Nixon in 1972, and Reagan in 1984. In 42 states, Bush won more counties than Kerry—usually many, many more. Typical was Ohio, the prime battleground of the 2004 presidential campaign. Bush won the state by a narrow 51%-to-49% margin, almost an exact reflection of the nationwide result. But he carried 72 of Ohio’s 88 counties, most of them with more than 60% of the vote.
132
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Two of Bush’s “landslide” counties in Ohio were Delaware and Warren, exurban counties outside Columbus and Cincinnati, respectively, that were among the fastest-growing counties in the country between 2000 and 2004 (Delaware County ranked No. 11, with 30% population growth; Warren grew 19%). The inflated Republican numbers in these and other exurban counties around the state, combined with the GOP’s rural strength, was enough to offset the Democrats’ strong showing in most of Ohio’s leading urban centers. The 25 Fastest-Growing Counties: A Republican Building Block Most of the 25 counties that grew fastest between 2000 and 2004 are in the Sun Belt, and most are exurbs— bustling new bedroom communities that lie beyond a dense inner ring of suburbs. All could be found in the GOP column in 2004 (and all but two in 2000). While these fast-growing counties offer comparatively small numbers of votes in comparison with the nation’s most populous counties, they are a growing counterweight in many states to Democratic urban majorities. Estimated Pop. Gain, 2000-04
2004 Population Estimate
Victory Margins in Presidential Elections 2004 2000
Rank
County (Nearby City)
1 2 3 4 5
Loudoun Co., Va. (Washington, D.C.) Flagler Co., Fla. (Jacksonville) Douglas Co., Colo. (Denver) Rockwall Co., Texas (Dallas) Forsyth Co., Ga. (Atlanta)
41.0% 38.5% 35.4% 35.2% 34.0%
239,156 69,005 237,963 58,260 131,865
13,111 1,055 40,990 14,800 38,066
R R R R R
11,515 1,284 28,931 10,024 21,075
R D R R R
6 7 8 9 10
Henry Co., Ga. (Atlanta) Kendall Co., Ill. (Chicago) Newton Co., Ga. (Atlanta) Lincoln Co., S.D. (Sioux Falls) Paulding Co., Ga. (Atlanta)
33.6% 33.0% 31.5% 30.2% 29.7%
159,506 72,548 81,524 31,437 105,936
21,663 7,279 7,156 5,458 21,423
R R R R R
13,844 5,244 4,424 2,702 10,138
R R R R R
11 12 13 14 15
Delaware Co., Ohio (Columbus) Scott Co., Minn. (Minneapolis) Collin Co., Texas (Dallas) Osceola Co., Fla. (Orlando) Williamson Co., Texas (Austin)
29.6% 28.3% 27.7% 27.3% 27.2%
142,503 114,794 627,938 219,544 317,938
26,095 12,097 105,500 4,484 40,167
R R R R R
19,505 6,451 85,295 1,969 38,450
R R R D R
16 17 18 19 20
Hamilton Co., Ind. (Indianapolis) Spencer Co., Ky. (Louisville) Lyon Co., Nev. (Reno) Fort Bend Co., Texas (Houston) Stafford Co., Va. (Washington, D.C.)
26.8% 26.0% 25.3% 24.9% 24.2%
231,760 14,822 43,230 442,620 114,781
51,499 2,846 5,499 24,903 11,292
R R R R R
38,370 1,596 3,315 25,998 8,135
R R R R R
21 22 23 24 25
Union Co., N.C. (Charlotte) Lake Co., Fla. (Orlando) St. Johns Co., Fla. (Jacksonville) Spotsylvania Co., Va. (Washington, D.C.) Placer Co., Calif. (Sacramento)
24.1% 23.9% 23.8% 23.7% 23.6%
153,652 260,788 152,473 111,850 307,004
24,846 26,168 32,797 11,904 40,396
R R R R R
16,986 13,439 20,044 7,284 27,386
R R R R R
Aggregate Total
4,442,897
Note: Republican victory margins are noted in bold. Source: U.S. Census Bureau for estimates of 2004 population and population growth from April 2000 to July 2004
133
591,494 R
416,898 R
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
The Democratic advantage in cities was substantial not just in Ohio but across the country. Of the 25 most populous counties in the country, Kerry took 16, and his aggregate margin in all 25 was 4 million votes. In vote-rich Los Angeles County alone, the Democratic margin exceeded 830,000 votes, larger than the Kerry or Bush margin of victory in all but three states. The 25 Most Populous Counties: A Democratic Building Block In both 2000 and 2004, Democrats carried 16 of the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 25 most populous counties, winning the group by about 4 million votes each year. Populous GOP strongholds are concentrated in the Sun Belt, primarily in Southern California and Bushâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s home state of Texas. The major Democratic population centers are more widely dispersed, ranging from the populous boroughs of New York City on the Atlantic coast to Los Angeles County on the Pacific. 2004 Population Estimate (in millions)
Victory Margins in Presidential Elections 2004 2000
Rank
County (City)
1 2 3 4 5
Los Angeles Co., Calif. Cook Co. (Chicago), Ill. Harris Co. (Houston), Texas Maricopa Co. (Phoenix), Ariz. Orange Co., Calif.
9.94 5.33 3.64 3.50 2.99
831,511 842,319 108,858 174,606 222,593
D D R R R
838,575 746,005 110,892 93,284 149,480
D D R R R
6 7 8 9 10
San Diego Co., Calif. Kings Co. (Brooklyn), N.Y. Miami-Dade Co., Fla. Dallas Co., Texas Queens Co., N.Y.
2.93 2.48 2.36 2.29 2.24
69,596 347,824 48,637 9,605 267,881
R D D R D
38,070 400,863 39,275 47,037 294,915
R D D R D
11 12 13 14 15
Wayne Co. (Detroit), Mich. San Bernardino Co., Calif. Riverside Co., Calif. King Co. (Seattle), Wash. Broward Co., Fla.
2.02 1.92 1.87 1.78 1.75
342,297 61,517 93,667 279,335 209,199
D R R D D
307,393 7,008 29,379 203,529 209,801
D R R D D
16 17 18 19 20
Santa Clara Co. (San Jose), Calif. Clark Co. (Las Vegas), Nev. Tarrant Co. (Fort Worth), Texas New York Co. (Manhattan), N.Y. Bexar Co. (San Antonio), Texas
1.69 1.65 1.59 1.56 1.49
177,006 26,430 142,176 419,360 49,722
D D R D R
143,740 25,168 113,163 369,379 30,455
D D R D R
21 22 23 24 25
Suffolk Co., N.Y. Philadelphia Co., Pa. Middlesex Co., Mass. Alameda Co. (Oakland), Calif. Bronx Co., N.Y.
1.48 1.47 1.46 1.46 1.37
5,960 412,106 203,047 291,674 227,293
D D D D D
65,314 348,223 205,129 223,610 229,556
D D D D D
Aggregate Total
62.26
Note: Republican victory margins are in bold. Source: U.S. Census Bureau for 2004 population estimates
134
3,999,539 D
4,031,707 D
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In a number of states, the Democrats were successful in making their urban margins pay big dividends. Kerry won only 15 of 102 counties in Illinois, but with a 655,000-vote lead in Chicago, he easily carried the state. Kerry won only 15 of 83 counties in Michigan, but with an edge of nearly 300,000 votes in Detroit, he was able to put Michigan into the Democratic column. And Kerry won only 13 of 67 counties in Pennsylvania, but with an advantage of more than 410,000 votes in Philadelphia, he was able to carry this Northeastern battleground state as well.
For Democrats, Sometimes The Cities Are Enough Kerry won seven key states on the strength of the votes he drew in each state’s biggest city or most populous urban-oriented county.
State (City/County)
Dem. Margin in Major City (or County)
ILL. – Chicago MICH. – Detroit MINN. – Hennepin Co. (Minneapolis) ORE. – Multnomah Co. (Portland) PA. – Philadelphia WASH. – King Co. (Seattle) WIS. – Milwaukee Co.
655,258 285,915 128,708 161,146 412,106 279,335 117,366
135
Dem. Deficit in Rest of State
Dem. Statewide Margin
-109,654 -120,478 -30,389 -84,814 -267,858 -74,028 -105,982
545,604 165,437 98,319 76,332 144,248 205,307 11,384
Statewide Presidential Vote
5,274,322 4,839,252 2,828,387 1,836,782 5,769,590 2,859,084 2,997,007
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Yet it was not the cities alone that enabled the Democrats to carry big electoral vote prizes such as these. Another factor was the party’s ability in recent years to cut its losses in suburban counties and in some places even turn them into an asset.
When Suburbs Come in Different Shades: The Northern Virginia Example The red/blue divide is not merely a regional phenomenon. It can sometimes hit closer to home, within suburbs. The populous suburbs of Northern Virginia outside Washington, D.C., are a good example.
Nowhere was that more evident than in closely contested Pennsylvania. When Republicans last carried the Keystone State in 1988, George Bush swept the three populous suburban counties adjacent to Philadelphia (Bucks, Delaware and Montgomery) by a combined margin of more than 150,000 votes. In 2004, Kerry swept those three suburban counties by nearly 100,000 votes and won the state by slightly less than 150,000.
The inner suburbs, Arlington County and Alexandria, are the most urban in nature, with large minority populations and increasingly Democratic voting habits. In the middle is Fairfax County. It straddles the Washington Beltway and with about 1 million residents is the most populous jurisdiction in Virginia. As its population has expanded and grown more racially diverse, Fairfax County has gradually come loose from its Republican moorings. In 2004, it voted Democratic for the first time in a presidential election since 1964.
In the end, Democrats needed the vote in the Philadelphia suburbs, plus an expanded margin in Philadelphia itself—more than 60,000 votes greater than four years earlier—to compensate for the party’s declining fortunes in more blue-collar western Pennsylvania.
Beyond Fairfax County are the outer suburbs. The neighborhoods are newer, the population is mushrooming, and the political terrain is more Republican. The two most populous of these counties—Loudoun and Prince William—are among the fastest-growing in the nation.
There, in the old coal and steel country, where ethnic lodges, union halls, and loyalty to the Democratic Party once went hand in hand, the party of FDR and JFK no longer commands the allegiance it once did. In 2004, Cambria County (Johnstown) went to the Republican Party for the first time since Nixon’s landslide victory over George McGovern in 1972. So did Greene and Lawrence counties along Pennsylvania’s western border. And in Allegheny County (Pittsburgh), the heart of the region, the Kerry margin last November was down roughly 10,000 votes from Kennedy’s victory margin in the county almost a half-century earlier.2
The first wave of growth in the outer suburbs tended to swell the Republican advantage; George H.W. Bush swept both Loudoun and Prince William counties in 1988 with two thirds of the vote. But GOP presidential candidates have drawn nowhere near that large a share of the vote since then. With continued growth and increased diversity over the years since, Democrats have been able to chip into the Republican advantage in the outer suburbs.
2004 Presidential Vote in Northern Virginia Turnout
Bush
Kerry
94,650 61,515
31% 32%
68% 67%
Middle Suburbs Fairfax Co.
461,379
46%
53%
Outer Suburbs Prince William Co. Loudoun Co.
132,063 108,430
53% 56%
46% 44%
Inner Suburbs Arlington Co. Alexandria
2 Appendix I offers a sample of voting trends in counties across the country.
136
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
What Is Changing: Blue-Collar Bastions, White-Collar Suburbs The hemorrhaging of the Democratic blue-collar vote is not limited to Pennsylvania. Once reliably Democratic West Virginia, with its historic ties to coal mining, has voted Republican in the last two presidential elections. Bush carried it in 2004 by the decisive margin of 13 percentage points even though its governor, both of its senators and two of its three representatives in the U.S. House are Democrats. Meanwhile, St. Joseph County, Ind., which includes the industrial city of South Bend (and is home to the nation’s most prominent Catholic university, Notre Dame), switched to the Republicans in 2004. So did Macomb County outside Detroit. This was the quintessential home of blue-collar Reagan Democrats in the 1980s, but had returned to the Democratic fold more recently. Last November, however, it voted Republican in a presidential election for the first time since 1992. Even Genesee County, Mich., which includes anti-Bush filmmaker Michael Moore’s economically beleaguered home town of Flint, saw an increase in Bush’s vote share from 35% in 2000 to 39% last fall. Losing in rural America and winning big in the cities is not a new phenomenon for the Democrats. In 1960, Kennedy carried only nine counties in Illinois, 13 in Michigan, and 15 in Pennsylvania. Yet like Kerry, he swept all three states. But Kennedy also drew strong support from blue-collar towns such as Johnstown and South Bend. It remains to be seen whether the recent Democratic upswing in established white-collar suburbs can offset the party’s continued decline in blue-collar factory towns and its lagging fortunes in fast-growing exurbs. More broadly, the Democrats will face a long-term electoral challenge if the shift in the population toward the Sun Belt continues at its current pace. One leading demographer, William Frey of the Brookings Institution, has estimated that if present trends continue, a Republican running for president after the reapportionment of 2030 would win 17 additional Electoral College votes just by carrying the same states that Bush carried in 2004. Needless to say, however, such projections are highly speculative. Not only are the politics subject to change over time, so too are the demographics.
137
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
IV. Fewer Split Tickets, Less Competition The 2004 balloting solidified two recent trends in American politics: the transformation of the once-solid Democratic South into the anchor of the modern Republican Party, and the decline in highly competitive congressional races to a comparative handful. Yet in another important respect, the election was a throwback to the presidential contests of 100 years ago, when there was little talk of divided government and there was a high degree of correlation in partisan voting for president and Congress. In the first part of the 20th century, only a handful of districts did not vote for the same party for president and the House of Representatives, whether that was Democratic or Republican. But by mid-century, as the electorate became more mobile, more independent, and less wedded to one party or the other, there was a growing tendency of voters to split their tickets. In the election of 1952—the last one before 2000 in which Republicans won both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue—nearly 20% of the districts (84 of 435) voted for one party for president and the other for the House. Over the last half of the 20th century, split-ticket voting became even more entrenched. In each of the presidential elections from 1956 through 1996, at least 23% of the nation’s congressional districts (or at least 100 per election) voted for a presidential candidate of one party and a House candidate of the other. Occasionally, the number of split-ticket districts surpassed 40%. The result, more often than not, was divided government, with a Republican president and a Democratic Congress through much of the 1950s, ’70s and ’80s, and a Democratic president and a Republican The Rise and Fall of the Split Ticket Congress in the mid and late 1990s. 35%
29.9
30% 25% 20%
21.3
19.3
15%
33.3
26.1
32.0
28.5
32.8
34.0
23.0
25.5
19.8 13.6
10% 11.2 5%
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972
1968
1964
1960
1956
1952
0%
1948
Put another way, the two parties came out of the 2004 election with the national political map of presidential and congressional voting in greater alignment than at any point in a generation.
40%
1944
But in 2000, the number of splitticket districts fell back to 20%, and in 2004 it plummeted to 14%, with just 59 such districts.
Percentage of Districts with Split Results1
The Decline of the Split Ticket
45.0
44.1
45%
1 A split congressional district is one that supported one party for president and the other party for the House. Percentages take into account that the number of districts varied, totaling 435 for all years except 1944 (367), 1948 (422) and 1960 (437), when the size of the House was temporarily expanded in the wake of Alaska and Hawaii statehood. Sources: Vital Statistics on American Politics, 2003-2004 (CQ Press), for elections from 1944 through 2000; Polidata for 2004 election
138
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
The 2004 election also produced an unusual congruency in the nationwide vote tally for president and the House of Representatives, with the size of the GOP majorities almost identical. Through much of the latter half of the 20th century, Republicans had dominated the balloting for president, while Democrats won big for Congress. In 2000, the popular vote for president leaned slightly Democratic, while the aggregate House vote leaned slightly Republican—each by roughly a half million votes. But in 2004, Republicans enjoyed a similar advantage in both the presidential and congressional balloting. Bush defeated Kerry in the presidential vote by 2.4 percentage points— 50.7% to 48.3%—and took 53% of the electoral vote. Republicans outpolled the Democrats in the nationwide House vote by 2.6 percentage points—50.1% to 47.5%—and took 53% of all House seats. The Decline in Competition With the increase in straight-ticket voting has come a decline in competition for congressional seats. In 2004, 78% of incumbent House members coasted to reelection, drawing an opponent from the other party but winning with at least 55% of the vote. Another 15% were elected without any major-party opposition at all. Just 7% won with less than 55% of the total vote—generally regarded as the benchmark for a competitive race. All told, only seven House members were beaten in the 2004 general election—four of them in Texas, the site of a controversial Republican-orchestrated redistricting plan that was put in place before the election. The two congressional casualties in the 2004 primaries were also in Texas. The lack of change in the House in 2004 was no anomaly. It marked the fifth straight election in which at least 94% of House incumbents seeking another term were able to win reelection, the longest stretch at least since World War II. Meanwhile, 2004 was also a banner year for Senate incumbents. As recently as 2000, a half dozen sitting senators were defeated for reelection. But in 2004, the number of casualties was down to one, Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. For those who prefer elections to be more competitive, the place to look in recent years has been the nation’s governorships. Of the 36 governorships up in 2002, 20 switched party hands. So did all four at stake in 2003, and four of the 11 contested in 2004.
139
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
V. Sky-High Turnout in 2004: A Closer Look If nothing else, the election of 2004 resoundingly proved one thing: People vote when they feel they have something to vote for—or against. Roughly one out of every six voters last fall was either a new one or a past voter who had skipped the opportunity to cast a ballot in the Bush-Gore contest four years earlier. In short, the number of ballots cast and counted for president in 2004 was 16% greater than in 2000. To be sure, there have been other elections over the last century that produced an even greater percentage increase in turnout. In 1920, the first election held after the passage of a constitutional amendment that gave women the right to vote, turnout was 44% higher than it had been four years earlier. Turnout in 1928, when Democrat Al Smith became the first Roman Catholic to win a major party nomination, was more than 25% larger than it had been in the previous election. So too was the turnout in 1952, when Republican Dwight Eisenhower brought down the curtain on the Democrats’ 20-year control of the White House. Largest Percentage Increases in Election Turnouts
Election
Increase from Previous Type of Election Election
1920 1928
Up 44.4% Up 26.5%
Change Status quo
1952
Up 26.1%
Change
1916 2004 1896 1936 1992 1960 1908
Up 23.2% Up 16.0% Up 15.2% Up 14.8% Up 14.0% Up 11.0% Up 10.1%
Status quo Status quo Change Status quo Change Change Status quo
Factors in Increase
Flood of new voters as franchise is extended to women for first time Strong religious overtones as Democrat Al Smith becomes first Roman Catholic to win major party nomination Time for a change: Ike’s victory ends 20 years of Democratic White House control Wilson narrowly reelected as nation debates entry into World War I Bush leadership in age of terrorists spurs high-stakes battle First McKinley-Bryan contest puts stamp on a new Republican era FDR landslide affirms New Deal and new Democratic majority Perot’s independent candidacy produces lively three-way race Kennedy-Nixon contest features first televised debates Taft ratified as Teddy Roosevelt’s choice as successor
Note: Table goes back to the McKinley-Bryan election of 1896. Before then, the number of states in the union was growing rapidly, skewing the percentage increases.
140
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
But in two significant ways, the large turnout increase in 2004 was different from the increases in previous high-turnout elections. First, both parties in 2004 benefited from the expanded turnout. The increase was not one-sided, as has been the case in many other elections with big turnout increases. President Bush picked up nearly 11.6 million votes from his first run in 2000, but Kerry drew 8 million more than Gore. Second, the election of 2004 did not produce a vote for change. The elections of 1920 and 1952 resulted in a switch in party control of the White House, as did those in 1960 and 1992— the other two elections in the last half century in which the number of ballots cast was 10% higher than it had been four years earlier. As a result, the 2004 election gets lumped into a class with 1928 and 1936 as one of three elections since the end of World War I in which the president’s party maintained control of the White House in the face of a huge increase in voters. Last year’s campaign was similar to that of 1928 in its strong religious overtones—triggered in 1928 by Smith’s Catholicism and in 2004 by an array of moral issues such as gay marriage and stem cell research. It was also similar to the election of 1936 in that voters were called upon to make a judgment about assertive presidential leadership in a time of national trauma—in 1936, Franklin Roosevelt’s response to the Depression; in 2004, Bush’s response to 9/11. Turnout Up Everywhere In every state, the number of Democratic and Republican presidential votes cast last November was greater than it had been in 2000. In more than two thirds of the states, Bush picked up more additional votes than Kerry. In roughly one third of the states, Bush gained at least twice as many additional votes. Most of the states where the turnout increase was heavily Republican were in GOP territory, with seven in the South alone. But Bush also won twice as many additional votes as Kerry in five states in the Democratic Northeast, a region where the GOP was once quite competitive but had been losing ground for decades. There were also a dozen states where the Democrats did the better job of finding new voters—a disparate array clustered in upper New England, the upper Midwest, the Mountain West and the Pacific Northwest. Kerry was able to expand Gore’s margin of victory from 2000 in six states scattered across the nation’s northern tier: Maine, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin (plus the District of Columbia). In five other states, Kerry lost but reduced the Democratic deficit from 2000. Four of the states were in the Mountain West (Alaska, Colorado, Montana and Nevada); the other was Ohio. And in one state, New Hampshire, Kerry was able to gain enough additional votes to shift the electoral votes from the Republican to the Democratic column.
141
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In no small part, Kerry’s inroads in these states reflected the Democrats’ success at attracting voters who had supported the third-party candidacy of Ralph Nader in 2000. As the Green Party nominee that year, Nader had drawn at least 5% of the vote in most of those states. Nationally, Democrats succeeded in making Nader a non-factor in 2004, as his vote collapsed from nearly 3 million in 2000 to less than 500,000 last November. The five states that posted the highest rates of voter participation last November— Minnesota, Maine, Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Oregon—all voted for Kerry. These states all have a long tradition of high turnouts. On the other hand, 15 of the 16 states with the lowest turnout rates among eligible citizens in 2004 voted for Bush. Most of those states are in the South and Southwest. The number of votes cast jumped 24% in the Mountain West, nearly 20% in the Plains states, and 19% in the South—three regions that together comprise the Republican L. By contrast, the turnout increase was more modest in the Democratic strongholds of the Pacific West and Northeast, where it was up 14% and 12%, respectively, from 2000. In the nation’s prime battleground, the industrial Midwest, the number of voters grew 15%, roughly the national rate. Wind at the GOP’s Back Republican turnout gains were due in no small part to an effective mobilization effort that in the end drew kudos even from the Democrats. But the Republicans also had the wind at their back in terms of lively ballot contests, increased ease of voting, and high population growth—all skewed to states on the GOP side of the map. In the eight states with highly competitive Senate contests, the number of votes cast was up nearly 22% from 2000. All eight states were carried by Bush in 2004. In the 11 states that set up polling locations to accommodate early voting, the number of ballots cast jumped 21.5% from 2000. Ten of the states went for Bush last fall. In the 15 states where there was an estimated population growth of at least 5% from April 2000 to July 2004, turnout grew 19%. Bush won 10 of these high-growth states. In the 11 states with measures to ban gay marriage on the ballot, turnout was up 18%. Nine of the states voted for Bush, although as noted earlier this issue was less of a factor than it was first believed to be. In the 24 states permitting no-excuse absentee voting, turnout was up 17.5%. Eighteen of the states backed Bush.
142
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Dissecting the 2004 Increase in Turnout % Increase in Vote 2000-04
Increase in Vote by Party 2000-04 Republicans Democrats
States Won Bush Kerry
Ratio of Additional Republican Votes to Additional Democratic Votes
NATIONAL
16.0%
31
19
11,585,454
8,036,104
1.44
Red and Blue America Red America (Bush states) Blue America (Kerry states)
18.9% 13.2%
31 0
0 19
6,899,716 4,685,738
4,054,206 3,981,898
1.70 1.18
Parts of Country Mountain West Plains States South Industrial Midwest Pacific West Northeast
23.9% 19.5% 19.1% 15.0% 14.3% 12.3%
9 4 13 4 0 1
0 0 0 4 4 11
1,037,779 256,759 4,391,495 2,291,389 1,348,027 2,260,005
832,566 104,473 2,210,139 2,010,538 1,396,074 1,482,314
1.25 2.46 1.99 1.14 0.97 1.52
Miscellaneous Factors Key Senate Races1 Battlegrounds2 High Population Growth3 Gay Marriage Ban4 Gubernatorial Races5 None of the Above6
21.6% 19.8% 19.3% 18.4% 15.9% 11.4%
8 6 10 9 7 5
0 5 5 2 4 9
2,206,407 3,512,738 5,144,955 2,338,627 1,402,512 2,719,803
1,419,197 3,155,408 3,959,183 1,633,732 996,604 2,016,046
1.55 1.11 1.30 1.43 1.41 1.35
Ease of Voting Early Voting7 Mail-only Balloting (Oregon) No-excuse Absentees8 Election-day Registration9 None of the Above10
21.5% 19.7% 17.5% 15.9% 14.4%
10 0 18 2 11
1 1 6 4 10
3,376,637 153,254 4,318,081 671,120 5,423,568
2,228,046 222,821 3,329,015 727,075 4,132,049
1.52 0.69 1.30 0.92 1.31
For an identification of the Bush and Kerry states, as well as those that comprise the Mountain West, Plains States, South, Industrial Midwest, Pacific West and Northeast, see the state-by-state presidential election tables on Pages 158-9. 1 Key Senate races: Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota 2 Battlegrounds: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin 3 High population growth: Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington 4 Gay marriage bans: Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Utah 5 Gubernatorial races: Delaware, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia 6 States with none of the above factors spurring turnout: Alabama, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Wyoming (also D.C.) 7 States with early voting: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas 8 No-excuse absentees: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming 9 Election-day registration: Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Wyoming 10 States where no ease-of-voting factors apply: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia (also D.C.)
143
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In the 11 states with gubernatorial races, turnout was up 16%. Seven of the states were won by Bush. More than Population Growth Not surprisingly, there was a correlation between population growth and turnout increase. Seven of the top 10 states in population growth from 2000 to 2004 were also among the top 10 in the rate of increase in the number of ballots cast. But the correlation was hardly perfect. In South Dakota, there was a 23% jump in voter turnout, triggered in large part by the high-profile challenge to Daschle. Even though South Dakota was in the bottom third of the states in population growth from 2000 to 2004, it had the sixth-largest turnout increase in the country last November. In the prime battleground state of Ohio, nearly 20% more votes were cast in 2004 than four years earlier, placing the Buckeye state 11th nationally in turnout increase although it ranked 48th in population growth from 2000 to 2004. The attention lavished on battleground states such as Ohio tended to lift turnout in them. All of the battlegrounds posted a turnout increase from 2000 above the national rate of 16% except for a quartet in the Midwestâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin. But it is worth noting that in all 50 states, the rate of increase in the number of voters who turned out to cast ballots in 2004 exceeded the rate of population growth. Put in national terms, while the country grew by 4.3% from 2000 to 2004, the number of voters who turned out to cast ballots increased by nearly four times that number.
144
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
VI. Tensions in the Political Landscape Two competing trends are at play in modern American politics. On the one hand, voters have been showing increased partisanship. Democratic margins have gone up in the cities, Republican margins in the countryside; and both parties have strengthened their regional bases. In addition, straight-ticket voting in recent years has produced a more congruent presidential-congressional map than at any time since World War II. Party Registration Trends: The Rise of the Independents ■ Dems. 60% Percentage of Registered Voters
On the other hand, voters have not been shy about showing their disgruntlement with the two major parties. In terms of voter registration, there has been a steady growth in the number of voters who do not identify with either party, with the number increasing from 16% in 1987 to 25% in 2004 in the 27 states where voters registered by party throughout this period.
50% 40% 30% 20% 10%
51
■ Reps.
48
44
34
33 16
■ Others
33 17
42 23
33
25
0%
Fall 1987 Summer 1992 Fall 2000 Fall 2004 There has also been, in the past Note: Not all states register voters by party. The 27 that did throughout the period decade, a tension between change and 1987 to 2004 were Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, continuity. In the 1990s, voters found Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, West Virginia and all sorts of ways to shake up the status Wyoming. D.C. also has party registration but is not included in the totals. quo. Democrats won back-to-back presidential elections for the first time in 30 years; Republicans won both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years. And independent and third-party candidates made a significant impact. Led by Ross Perot, they drew 20% of the vote in 1992 and 10% in 1996—the first back-to-back elections since the eve of the Civil War in which the percentage of third-party presidential votes reached double digits. Independent and third-party candidates did even better in some states, capturing governorships in the 1990s in Alaska, Connecticut, Maine and Minnesota.
But since the turn of the new century, electoral politics have settled into a more stable pattern. With the political environment growing more partisan and more polarized, both parties have dug in and nurtured their bases. Both Democrats and Republicans viewed the 2004 election as a highstakes battle in a sober, post-9/11 world, a judgment with which most voters seemed to concur. They saw little need for third parties or independent candidates; the two major parties sufficed.
145
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
What does the future hold? Will voters continue to opt for the static landscape of the present, with gains and losses measured incrementally as in trench warfare? Or will they opt for change, as they did in the 1990s, making the present stability the real aberration? As always, the answers are just one election away.
146
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
How The Counties Vote: A National Sampler of Democratic Strongholds MAJOR URBAN CENTERS Cities are the cornerstone of the Democratic coalition, and in 2004 many trended more Democratic than ever. Across the Frost Belt and on the Pacific Coast, large urban counties provided Democrats with several statewide margins of victory. In the South and Mountain West, Republicans managed to win some of the urban counties. The list that follows is a geographically diverse sampling of urban centers across the country listed according to the Democratic share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
Frost Belt Urban Centers Detroit, Mich.1 Washington, D.C.1 Baltimore, Md.1 Chicago, Ill. Philadelphia, Pa. St. Louis, Mo.1 Boston, Mass. New York City, N.Y. Cuyahoga Co. (Cleveland), Ohio Milwaukee Co., Wis. Hennepin Co. (Minneapolis), Minn. Allegheny Co. (Pittsburgh), Pa. Erie Co. (Buffalo), N.Y. Franklin Co. (Columbus), Ohio Marion Co. (Indianapolis), Ind.
6% 9% 17% 18% 19% 19% 21% 24% 33% 37% 39% 42% 41% 45% 49%
94% 89% 82% 81% 80% 80% 77% 75% 67% 62% 59% 57% 56% 54% 51%
+1% 0% +3% +1% +1% -1% +2% +6% -1% 0% 0% +2% +4% -3% -1%
0% +4% -1% +1% 0% +3% +6% -3% +4% +4% +6% +1% 0% +6% +3%
Detroit 82% African American–more D than D.C. Highest Dem. presidential vote share ever in D.C. 64% African American Dems. win here by more than 650,000 votes Dem. margin exceeds 410,000 in ’04 51% African American Dem. share up in Kerry’s home town Reps. gain a bit in prime site of 9/11 attacks Dem. margin grows by 60,000 from ’00 Critical to narrow Dem. wins in Wis. in ’00 and ’04 Dem. margin up nearly 50,000 from ’00 Dems. losing some ground in western Pa. Reps. gain some ground in western N.Y. Once Rep., trending Dem. of late Switched to Dems. in ’04
Southern Urban Centers Orleans Parish (New Orleans), La.1 Fulton Co. (Atlanta), Ga. Hinds Co. (Jackson), Miss.1 Shelby Co. (Memphis), Tenn. Pulaski Co. (Little Rock), Ark. Davidson Co. (Nashville), Tenn. Miami-Dade Co. (Miami), Fla.2 Mecklenburg Co (Charlotte), N.C. Jefferson Co. (Louisville), Ky. Orange Co. (Orlando), Fla. Dallas Co., Texas Jefferson Co. (Birmingham), Ala. Harris Co (Houston), Texas Bexar County (San Antonio), Texas2 Oklahoma Co. (Oklahoma City), Okla.
22% 40% 40% 42% 44% 45% 47% 48% 49% 50% 50% 54% 55% 55% 64%
77% 59% 59% 58% 55% 55% 53% 52% 50% 50% 49% 45% 45% 44% 36%
0% 0% -3% 0% 0% +4% 0% -3% +1% +2% -2% +4% +1% +3% +2%
+2% +2% +6% +1% +1% -3% 0% +3% +1% 0% +4% -2% +2% -1% -1%
67% African American–highest urban county Atlanta not enough to help Dems. in Ga. Trending Dem. as black population grows Memphis, Nashville give a Tenn. beachhead Clinton’s home base stays in Dem. column Dems. lose some ground without Gore on ballot 57% Hispanic–tipped Dem. in recent years Switched to Dems. in ’04 In Dem. column since ’92 A former Rep. stronghold, now even Dems. gained some ground here in ’04 Last voted Dem. in 1952 Biggest city in W.’s home state 54% Hispanic–backed Clinton twice Growing more Rep.
1 County or city with a black majority 2 County with a Hispanic majority Note: This table and those that follow take an expansive view of counties to include election districts in Alaska, parishes in Louisiana, independent cities in Virginia, and cities such as Baltimore, Md., and St. Louis, Mo., which are separate jurisdictions within their states.
147
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Western Urban Centers San Francisco, Calif. Alameda Co. (Oakland), Calif. Multnomah Co. (Portland), Ore. Denver, Colo. King Co. (Seattle), Wash. Los Angeles Co., Calif. Pima Co. (Tucson), Ariz. Clark Co. (Las Vegas), Nev. Bernalillo Co. (Albuquerque), N.M. Honolulu Co, Hawaii San Diego Co., Calif. Maricopa Co. (Phoenix), Ariz. Salt Lake Co. (Salt Lake City), Utah
15% 23% 27% 29% 34% 36% 47% 47% 47% 48% 53% 57% 60%
83% 75% 72% 70% 65% 63% 53% 52% 52% 51% 46% 42% 38%
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
-1% -1% -1% -2% -1% +3% +3% +2% +1% +9% +3% +4% +4%
+8% +6% +8% +8% +5% 0% +1% 0% +3% -3% +1% -1% +3%
148
Comments
Have Reps. reached bottom? Dem. trend in Bay Area continues Dems. win by more than 160,000 votes in ’04 Dem. margin approaches 100,000 votes Dem. margin almost 280,000 votes Dem. margin exceeds 800,000 votes Has voted Dem. since ’92 Cast nearly two thirds of all Nev. ballots in ’04 Casts one third of all N.M. ballots Rep. upsurge here one reason Hawaii tighter in ’04 Reps. mounting a comeback in much of S. Calif. Reps. gaining in fast-growing corner of Sun Belt No Dem. trend here
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
COUNTIES WHERE MINORITIES PREDOMINATE Minority groups—African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans—remain critical parts of the Democratic coalition. President Bush, though, made modest inroads among all three groups in 2004, posting his most consistent gains among Hispanics. No county is comprised totally of one racial or ethnic group, but the sampling below paints a general picture of the voting proclivities of these three groups, with the counties listed according to the Democratic share of the total vote in the 2004 election. Minority population figures are based on the 2000 Census, which showed that no county in the country yet had an Asian majority. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
African-American Majority Macon Co. (Tuskegee), Ala. Jefferson Co., Miss. Petersburg, Va. Hancock Co., Ga. Allendale Co., S.C. Gadsden Co., Fla. Phillips Co., Ark. Bertie Co., N.C. Washington Co. (Greenville), Miss. East Carroll, La.
17% 18% 19% 23% 27% 30% 36% 38% 39% 40%
83% 81% 81% 77% 71% 70% 64% 62% 59% 58%
+4% +1% 0% +2% -2% -3% +2% +3% -1% +1%
-4% 0% +2% -2% +1% +4% -1% -3% +2% +1%
Hispanic Majority Starr Co., Texas Costilla Co., Colo. Mora Co., N.M. Rio Arriba Co., N.M. Santa Cruz, Ariz. Webb Co. (Laredo), Texas* El Paso Co., Texas* Imperial Co., Calif. Doña Ana Co. (Las Cruces), N.M.*
26% 32% 33% 34% 40% 43% 43% 46% 48%
74% 67% 66% 65% 59% 57% 56% 52% 51%
+4% -3% +2% +3% +2% 0% +5% -3% +2% 0% +1% -1% +4% -2% +3% -1% +2% 0%
98% Hispanic–highest percentage in nation 68% Hispanic–highest in Colo. 82% Hispanic–highest outside Texas 73% Hispanic 81% Hispanic–highest in Ariz. 94% Hispanic–along Mexican border 78% Hispanic–highest for urban center its size 72% Hispanic–highest in Calif. 63% Hispanic–2nd most populous county in N.M.
Native American Majority Shannon Co., S.D. Menominee Co., Wis. Sioux Co., N.D. Apache Co., Ariz. McKinley Co., N.M. Big Horn Co., Mont. Thurston Co., Neb. San Juan Co., Utah
13% 17% 28% 35% 36% 47% 48% 60%
85% 83% 71% 65% 63% 51% 51% 39%
0% -1% -1% +6% +2% +1% +4% -2% +4% -1% +7% -5% -2% +6% +3% 0%
94% Native American–highest percentage in nation 87% Native American–highest in Wis. 85% Native American–highest in N.D. 77% Native American–highest in Ariz. 75% Native American–highest in N.M. 60% Native American–site of legendary battle 52% Native American–highest in Neb. 56% Native American–highest in Utah
* Hispanic-majority county with significant urban centers
149
85% African American–2nd highest share in nation 87% African American–highest in nation 79% African American–highest in Va. 78% African American–highest in Ga. 71% African American–highest in S.C. 57% African American–highest in Fla. 59% African American–highest in Ark. 62% African American–highest in N.C. 65% African American–in heart of Delta 67% African American–ties for highest in La.
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
ACADEMIC INFLUENCE Over the last generation, academic communities have anchored the most liberal part of the Democratic coalition, particularly in places with a prestigious private college or a public university with a strong liberal arts emphasis. Democrats scored double-digit percentage gains in 2004 in some of these communities as they effectively consolidated the 2000 Nader vote that had exceeded 10% in many of them. Republicans tend to run better in counties with state universities, many of which originated with an agricultural emphasis. The sampling of counties below is arranged according to the Democratic share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
Private Colleges Cambridge, Mass. (Harvard, M.I.T.) Northampton, Mass. (Smith) Hanover, N.H. (Dartmouth) Tompkins Co., N.Y. (Cornell) Rice Co., Minn. (Carleton, St. Olaf)
13% 18% 22% 33% 45%
85% 80% 77% 64% 53%
0% -1% -8% 0% +3%
+13% +18% +13% +10% +3%
Nader drew 14% in ’00–not a factor in ’04 Nader 19% last time Most liberal town in N.H. Not always Dem.–opposed FDR all 4 times he ran Paul Wellstone taught at Carleton
Public Universities Amherst, Mass. (U. of Massachusetts)1 Mansfield, Conn. (U. of Connecticut) Charlottesville, Va. (U. of Virginia) Durham, N.H. (U. of New Hampshire) Boulder Co., Colo. (U. of Colorado) Dane Co., Wis. (U. of Wisconsin) Johnson Co., Iowa (U. of Iowa) Washtenaw Co., Mich. (U. of Michigan) Clarke Co., Ga. (U. of Georgia) Lane Co., Ore. (U. of Oregon) Douglas Co., Kan. (U. of Kansas) Travis Co., Texas (U. of Texas) Alachua Co., Fla. (U. of Florida) Ulster Co., N.Y. (SUNY-New Paltz) Monroe Co., Ind. (Indiana U.) Missoula Co., Mont. (U. of Montana) Champaign Co., Ill. (U. of Illinois) Boone Co., Mo. (U. of Missouri) Centre Co., Pa. (Penn State U.) Whitman Co., Wash. (Washington State) Albany Co., Wyo. (U. of Wyoming) Oktibbeha Co., Miss. (Miss. State) Lee Co., Ala. (Auburn) Payne Co., Okla. (Oklahoma State) Brazos Co., Texas (Texas A & M)
13% 25% 27% 29% 32% 33% 35% 36% 40% 40% 41% 42% 43% 43% 45% 46% 48% 50% 52% 52% 54% 56% 63% 66% 69%
84% 72% 72% 70% 66% 66% 64% 64% 58% 58% 57% 56% 56% 54% 53% 51% 50% 50% 48% 46% 43% 43% 36% 34% 30%
-1% +1% -4% 0% -4% 0% +1% -1% -1% 0% -2% -5% +3% 0% -2% 0% +2% +2% -1% -3% -1% +2% +4% +5% -1%
+24% +9% +13% +8% +16% +5% +5% +4% +6% +6% +11% +14% +1% +6% +10% +14% +3% +1% +5% +6% +7% 0% -2% -3% +3%
Nader drew 25% in ’00, less than 1% in ’04 Votes like other New England college towns Liberal beachhead in the Old Dominion Nearly as Dem. as Ivy League Hanover Voted for Reagan in ’80 and ’84 Ike last Rep. to carry Dane Co. Madison (Wis.) of the Plains? Gerald Ford’s alma mater not very red Trending left as state trends right Last voted Rep. in 1980 One of lone Dem. beachheads in state Bush’s home while governor; went to Dems. in ’04 Reps. not strong in this part of Fla. Mayor performed same-sex marriages in ’04 Switched to Dems. in ’04 Switched to Dems. after giving Nader 15% in ’00 Rural surroundings temper academic vote Switched to Reps. in ’04 Legendary Joe Paterno a friend of Bush family Voted twice for Clinton but often Rep. otherwise Nader drew 7% on write-ins in ’00 University anchors this Rep.-oriented county Last voted Dem. in 1960 GOP loyalty matches Cleveland Co. (U. of Okla.) A&M’s military heritage adds to Rep. proclivities
1 Also home of Amherst College and Hampshire College
150
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
LIBERAL RESORTS AND ARTISTS’ COLONIES Liberal resorts and artists’ colonies vote much like academic communities. They tended to give Nader a disproportionately large share of the vote in 2000, then consolidated behind Kerry in 2004 to produce Democratic margins that were often much bigger than they had been four years earlier. The sampling of counties below is arranged according to the Democratic share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
Provincetown, Mass. San Miguel Co. (Telluride), Colo. Santa Fe Co., N.M. Pitkin Co. (Aspen), Colo. Mendocino Co., Calif. Blaine Co. (Sun Valley), Idaho Hood River Co., Ore. Teton Co. (Jackson), Wyo. Monroe Co. (Key West), Fla.
12% 27% 28% 30% 34% 40% 42% 45% 49%
87% 72% 71% 68% 64% 59% 57% 53% 50%
0% -5% 0% -3% -2% -5% -2% -7% +2%
+7% +23% +6% +15% +15% +12% +9% +14% +1%
151
Comments
Reps. endangered species on tip of Cape Cod Residents vote Dem. between trips down slopes Nader took 7% in ’00 Nader pulled 13% in ’00 Nader drew 15% in ’00 Lone Idaho county Dems. carry these days Windsurfers’ paradise in this part of Oregon Switched in ’04–lone Wyo. county to vote Dem. Last Rep. it backed was Bush Sr. in ’88
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
How The Counties Vote: A National Sampler of Republican Strongholds Just as the cities are the basic building blocks for the Democrats, rural and small-town America are the starting point for Republicans in fashioning presidential election victories. Republicans swept roughly 80% of the nation’s counties in 2004, a total that is not particularly unusual since the GOP has won more counties than the Democrats in every presidential election since 1980—usually many more. But the landslide majorities that Bush posted in 2004 in hundreds of rural counties helped provide him with the votes to win a second term. “Mountain Republican” counties are broken out into a separate category; in many cases they are historically Republican counties in the South that were in the GOP column long before it was fashionable in their states to vote Republican. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of rural counties listed in each category according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Rural Heartland Madison Co., Idaho Arthur Co., Neb. Fulton Co., Pa. Neshoba Co., Miss. Huntington Co., Ind. Cape Girardeau Co., Mo. Winn Parish, La. Green Lake Co., Wis. Davison Co. (Mitchell), S.D. Lee Co. (Dixon), Ill. Marion Co., Ohio Madison Co., Iowa
92% 90% 76% 75% 74% 69% 67% 64% 62% 59% 59% 57%
7% 9% 24% 25% 25% 31% 32% 35% 36% 40% 41% 42%
+ 3% + 4% + 5% + 4% + 5% + 3% + 4% + 4% + 3% + 3% + 4% + 4%
-2% -1% -4% -3% -3% -1% -3% -1% -3% -1% -1% -2%
Mountain Republican (Appalachian and Ozark) Jackson Co., Ky. 84% 15% 81% 19% Grant Co., W.Va. 78% 22% Winston Co., Ala. 74% 25% Rockingham Co., Va. 73% 26% Garrett Co., Md. Mitchell Co., N.C. 73% 27% 72% 28% Johnson Co., Tenn. 71% 28% Fannin Co., Ga. Benton Co., Ark. 68% 31%
0% + 1% + 2% -1% + 9% -7% + 2% + 1% + 2% -1% -3% + 3% + 5% -4% + 6% -4% + 4% -2%
Comments
Becoming more Rep., if that’s possible 4th straight election Dems. fail to draw 10% of vote Part of Pa.’s Republican ‘T’ Even national pols appear at county fair Dan Quayle’s roots here Megadittos–Rush Limbaugh from here Huey Long’s home parish voting increasingly Rep. Near Ripon, one of birthplaces of GOP Home of the Corn Palace and George McGovern Part of Midwest heartland where Reagan was raised Home of Warren Harding Trending back to Reps. after fling with Dems.
Gave Reps. their highest vote share in Ky. in ’04 Historically the top Rep. county in W.Va. Only Ala. county to back Landon over FDR in ’36 Except for ’64, in GOP column since 1940 Posted top Rep. percentage in Md. in ’00 and ’04 Was top county in N.C. for Bush Sr. in ’88 and ’92 Even Gore lost by margin of 2-to-1 here in ’00 Only county in Ga. to vote against FDR all 4 times Voted against Clinton in both ’92 and ’96
Special Places in Small-Town America (associated with recent presidential, vice-presidential nominees) Midland Co., Texas 82% 18% + 2% -1% Rep. stronghold even before W Russell Co., Kan. 76% 23% + 6% -2% Birthplace of Bob Dole 68% 31% + 3% -2% Includes John Edwards’ birthplace of Seneca Oconee Co., S.C. 67% 31% + 2% 0% Cheneys from here Natrona Co. (Casper), Wyo. + 3% -3% Not so Dem. without Clinton on ballot Hempstead Co. (Hope), Ark. 48% 51% Gore family’s home base Smith Co. (Carthage), Tenn. 48% 52% + 15% -15%
152
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
HIGH-GROWTH EXURBS Republicans are the party of choice in the fast-growing exurbs, newer suburbs often separated by at least one county from a central city. However, as these exurbs fill in and become more racially diverse, the initial Republican advantage can be muted. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of exurban counties listed according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Shelby Co., Ala. Rockwall Co., Texas St. Tammany Parish, La. Hamilton Co., Ind. De Soto Co., Miss. Warren Co., Ohio Douglas Co., Colo. Gwinnett Co., Ga. Delaware Co., Ohio Berkeley Co., W.V. Sherburne Co., Minn. McHenry Co., Ill. Frederick Co., Md. St. Charles Co., Mo. Pike Co., Pa. Dallas Co., Iowa Pinal Co., Ariz. Loudoun Co., Va. Osceola Co., Fla.
80% 79% 75% 74% 72% 72% 67% 66% 66% 63% 61% 60% 60% 59% 58% 58% 57% 56% 53%
19% 21% 25% 25% 27% 28% 33% 34% 34% 36% 38% 39% 39% 41% 40% 42% 42% 44% 47%
+ 4% + 1% + 4% 0% + 1% + 2% + 2% + 2% 0% + 4% + 6% + 1% + 2% + 3% + 4% + 4% + 9% 0% + 5%
-2% 0% -3% + 2% 0% 0% + 1% + 1% + 3% -2% -1% + 1% 0% -1% -2% -3% -5% + 3% -4%
153
Comments
One of top Rep. counties in Ala. 35% pop. growth since ’00 (spillover from Dallas) In Rep. column since ’72 Reps. won by more than 50,000 votes in ’04 Across the line from Memphis Bush Sr. took 73% in ’88 35% pop. growth since ’00–3rd highest in nation Pop. growth of nearly 20% since ’00 Reps. expand GOP votes from ’00 by nearly 50% 18% pop. growth since ’00 - highest in Northeast Helped Jesse Ventura’s ’98 gov. run Rep. trend has slowed–Bush Sr. won 70% in ’88 Last Dem. to win county was LBJ Same here 17% pop. growth since ’00 22% pop. growth since ’00 Fastest-growing county in Ariz. since ’00 41% pop. growth since ’00–highest in nation Overflow from Orlando; switched to Reps. in ’04
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
MILITARY/AEROSPACE INFLUENCE Long before 9/11, the Iraq War and President Bush’s patriotic reelection campaign, most of the nation’s counties strongly influenced by a military or aerospace presence were reliable sources of Republican votes. If anything, GOP margins increased in many of these locales in 2004. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of counties strongly influenced by a military/aerospace presence. They are listed according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
El Paso Co. (Colorado Springs), Colo. Pennington Co. (Ellsworth AFB), S.D. Escambia Co. (Pensacola), Fla. Bell Co. (Fort Hood), Texas Madison Co. (Huntsville), Ala. Virginia Beach, Va. Brevard Co. (Cape Canaveral), Fla. Cumberland Co. (Fort Bragg), N.C. Groton, Conn. (Naval Submarine Base)
67% 32% 67% 32% 65% 34% 65% 34% 59% 40% 59% 40% 58% 42% 52% 48% 44% 54%
+ 3% -1% + 3% 0% + 4% + 3% + 5% + 2% + 4%
+ 1% + 1% -1% + 1% -2% -1% -3% -2% + 1%
Comments
Reps. win big in evangelical, military stronghold Anchors strongly Rep. western half of state Borders Ala., votes like Deep South A short drive from Crawford Last voted Dem. in ’76 Dems. last carried in ’64 Hasn’t voted Dem. for president since ’76 Switched to Reps. in ’04 Votes its New England locale
COUNTIES WITH LARGE ELDERLY POPULATIONS Republicans tend to run well in counties with large clusters of elderly voters (age 65 and up), whether living in Sun Belt retirement communities or their homes in the rural heartland. Following is a sampling of counties with an elderly population among the top 40 in the country (according to the 2000 Census), as measured as a percentage of the county population. The counties are arranged according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004. The national percentage of elderly voters is 12.4 percent. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Llano Co., Texas McPherson Co., S.D. McIntosh Co., N.D. La Paz Co., Ariz. Baxter Co., Ark. Indian River Co., Fla. Lancaster Co., Va. Harding Co., N.M. Charlotte Co., Fla. Sarasota Co., Fla.
76% 75% 73% 63% 60% 60% 60% 59% 56% 54%
24% 23% 25% 37% 39% 39% 40% 40% 43% 45%
+ 3% -1% 0% + 6% + 3% + 2% -3% -3% + 3% + 2%
-1% + 3% + 4% -3% -1% -1% + 4% + 4% -1% 0%
154
Comments
31% age 65 and up–one of highest in Sun Belt 30% age 65 and up–in national top 10 34% age 65 and up–highest outside Fla. 26% age 65 and up–highest in Ariz. 27% age 65 and up–highest in Ark. 29% age 65 and up–highest on Atlantic coast On Chesapeake Bay–29% age 65 and up, tops in Va. 28% age 65 and up–highest in N.M. 35% age 65 and up–highest in country Gulf Coast cornerstone of modern Fla. GOP
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
REPUBLICAN RESORTS Many resort communities with a Democratic bias cater to skiers. But in some resorts geared to retirement, leisure activities or both, Republicans tend to congregate. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of such counties listed according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
Taney Co. (Branson), Mo. Moore Co. (Pinehurst), N.C. Beaufort Co. (Hilton Head), S.C. Deschutes Co. (Bend), Ore. Saratoga Co. (Saratoga Springs), N.Y. Kennebunkport, Maine
70% 64% 60% 56% 53% 50%
29% 35% 39% 42% 46% 48%
+ 7% -5% + 1% -1% + 2% -1% + 1% + 4% + 4% 0% -4% + 9%
Comments
0% Las Vegas of the Ozarks Dems. need more than a mulligan here Last voted Dem. in ’76 Has roughly doubled in population since 1980 FDR struck out here in his 4 presidential runs Bush family vacation home less Rep. in ’04
THIRD-PARTY HERITAGE The two major independent or third-party candidacies of the last half century, those of George Wallace in 1968 and Ross Perot in 1992, had almost opposite impacts on the electorate. Wallace’s Southern-based candidacy proved to be a transition stop for many white Democrats on their way to the Republican Party. Perot’s independent candidacy 24 years later, however, does not appear to have had such a dramatic impact. Democrats have made some inroads in Perot strongholds. But many of his strongest counties were Republican before Perot ran and returned to the GOP after Perot left the scene. The following samplings of counties are arranged in two sets. Those in the first list were carried by Perot in 1992; those in the second were dominated by Wallace in 1968. In each case, counties are listed according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
48%
NATIONAL
51%
Perot Pockets Wabaunsee Co., Kan. Grayson Co., Texas Storey Co., Nev. Trinity Co., Calif. Somerset Co., Maine San Juan Co., Colo.
70% 28% 69% 30% 58% 40% 55% 43% 48% 50% 44% 52%
Wallace Country Geneva Co., Ala. George Co., Miss. Holmes Co., Fla. Livingston Parish, La. Echols Co., Ga. Hickman Co., Ky. Cleveland Co., Ark.
79% 78% 77% 77% 76% 60% 58%
20% 22% 22% 22% 23% 40% 42%
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
+ 3%
+ 6% -2% + 5% -4% + 1% + 3% -3% + 9% + 3% + 2% -4% + 18%
+ 10% + 7% + 10% + 9% + 8% + 5% + 5%
155
Comments
0%
-9% -6% -8% -8% -7% -5% -3%
Perot’s ’92 win an interlude in Rep. dominance One of a few Texas counties that Perot won in ’92 Lone Nev. county to vote for Perot in ’92 Only Calif. county to back Perot in ’92 In Dem. column since Perot carried in ’92 40% for Perot in ’92–switched to Dems. in ’04
92% for Wallace in ’68–tops in his home state Wallace 91% in ’68–tops in Miss. Wallace 87% in ’68–tops in Fla. Wallace 81% in ’68–tops in La. Wallace 83% in ’68–tops in Ga. For Wallace in ’68, but for Clinton twice 71% for Wallace in ’68–tops in Ark.
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
How The Counties Vote: A Miscellaneous Sampler MAJOR SUBURBAN COUNTIES When Republicans dominated presidential voting in much of the 1970s and 1980s, their hegemony in the nation’s suburbs was a key factor in their success. Yet while they still have the upper hand in much of Sun Belt suburbia, the balance of power has shifted to the Democrats in many of the vote-rich suburban counties of the Frost Belt. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of suburban counties across the country, listed according to the Democratic share of the total vote in the Frost Belt and according to the Republican share in the Sun Belt. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Frost Belt Suburbs Prince George’s Co., Md. Montgomery Co., Md. Westchester Co., N.Y. Delaware Co., Pa. Middlesex Co., N.J. Montgomery Co., Pa. St. Louis Co., Mo. Baltimore Co., Md. Bergen Co., N.J. Nassau Co., N.Y. Fairfield Co. Conn. Bucks Co., Pa. Suffolk Co., N.Y. Oakland Co., Mich. Macomb Co., Mich. Lake Co., Ill. DuPage Co., Ill
17% 33% 40% 42% 43% 44% 45% 47% 47% 47% 47% 48% 49% 49% 50% 51% 54%
82% 66% 58% 57% 56% 56% 54% 52% 52% 52% 51% 51% 50% 50% 49% 49% 45%
- 1% - 1% + 3% 0% + 7% 0% - 1% + 3% + 6% + 8% + 4% + 2% + 7% + 1% + 3% + 1% - 1%
+ 3% + 4% - 1% + 3% - 4% + 2% + 3% - 1% - 3% - 6% - 1% + 1% - 4% + 1% - 1% + 1% + 3%
With changing racial mix, votes like adjacent D.C. Used to be competitive; last Rep. win was ’84 Rep. suburb that slipped to Dems. during Clinton A major Philly suburb that used to be solidly GOP 9/11 boosted Reps. throughout NYC area Once the cornerstone of the Pa. GOP Dems. gain beachhead in ’burbs Dems. have won since ’92 Once a major component of GOP victories in N.J. Long Island suburbs trending back GOP post-9/11 Was reliably Rep. until Clinton Another Philly ’burb Reps. can no longer rely on Bush Sr. won 61% here in ’88 Swung narrowly to Dems. of late Quintessential home of Reagan Dems.; Rep. pickup Becoming a swing county–Clinton carried in ’96 Still Rep. but tightening
Sun Belt Suburbs Rankin Co., Miss. Lexington Co., S.C. Collin Co., Texas Cobb Co., Ga. Jefferson Parish, La. Orange Co., Calif. Riverside Co., Calif. San Bernardino Co., Calif. Jefferson Co., Colo. Arapahoe Co., Colo. Washington Co., Ore. Fairfax Co., Va. Contra Costa Co., Calif. De Kalb Co., Ga.
79% 72% 71% 62% 62% 60% 58% 55% 52% 51% 46% 46% 37% 27%
20% 27% 28% 37% 38% 39% 41% 44% 47% 48% 52% 53% 62% 73%
- 1% + 2% - 2% + 2% + 3% + 4% + 6% + 7% + 1% 0% 0% - 3% - 1% 0%
+ 1% 0% + 4% 0% - 2% - 1% - 4% - 4% + 4% + 4% + 4% + 6% + 4% + 2%
Just outside Jackson–turned Rep. in the ’60s Just outside Columbia–GOP since ’60 Just outside Dallas–LBJ last Dem. it backed Rep. county was Newt Gingrich’s base Almost as populous now as nearby New Orleans GOP reascendant Voted for Clinton in ’92 Voted for Clinton in both ’92 and ’96 Dems. competitive of late Same here 4th straight election in Dem. column First time with Dems. since ’64 Backed Reagan in ’80s Turning very Dem.; pop. more African American
156
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
THE OLD AND NEW ECONOMIES Places with heavy industry used to be a cornerstone of the Democratic coalition. But those days are fading, in many cases like the industries themselves. Democrats have been losing their grip in blue-collar strongholds. Some have already tipped to the Republicans. Others are poised to do so. Democrats have done well of late, however, in populous high-tech areas, such as California’s Silicon Valley and North Carolina’s Research Triangle. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of counties in both categories, listed according to the Democratic share of the total vote in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Heavy Industry Heritage Fall River, Mass.1 Lowell, Mass.1 Mahoning Co. (Youngstown), Ohio Lewiston, Maine1 Genesee Co. (Flint), Mich. Silver Bow Co. (Butte), Mont. Rock Island Co., Ill. Wapello Co. (Ottumwa), Iowa Pueblo Co., Colo. Beaver Co. (Aliquippa), Pa. Jefferson Co. (Beaumont), Texas Waterbury, Conn.1 St. Joseph Co. (South Bend), Ind. Cambria Co. (Johnstown), Pa. Calcasieu Parish (Lake Charles), La.
23% 36% 37% 37% 39% 40% 42% 44% 46% 48% 48% 49% 51% 51% 58%
76% 63% 63% 62% 60% 58% 57% 55% 53% 51% 51% 49% 49% 49% 41%
+ 4% + 8% + 1% + 3% + 4% + 2% + 4% + 3% + 4% + 4% + 2% + 10% + 2% + 4% + 6%
0% - 2% + 2% + 1% - 3% + 4% - 1% - 1% - 1% - 2% - 1% - 7% 0% - 2% - 5%
Bush makes blue-collar inroads in Kerry’s home state Old New England mill town still in Dem. column Eastern anchor of Ohio’s “Rust Belt” Dems. last under 60% in ’92 Michael Moore country but less anti-Bush in ’04 Reagan couldn’t even win here Reliably Dem. from Mondale on Gave Dukakis 65% in ’88 Dems. steadily losing ground Dems. losing edge in “Deer Hunter” country Minority, union elements barely enough for Dems. JFK made election-eve stop here in ’60 Switched to Reps in ’04–Notre Dame here Switched to Reps. in ’04–Dukakis pulled 60% Once Dem., voted for Reps. in last two elections
High-Tech Areas Orange Co. (Research Triangle), N.C. Santa Clara Co. (Silicon Valley), Calif. Los Alamos Co., N.M. Anderson Co. (Oak Ridge), Tenn.
32% 67% 35% 64% 52% 47% 58% 41%
- 4% 0% - 3% + 7%
+ 4% + 3% + 6% - 6%
Liberal beachhead becoming even more Dem. Hasn’t backed a Rep. since Reagan Not in Dem. column since ’64 Clinton won twice here but Gore lost in ’00
1 New England breaks down votes by city and town as well as county.
TEST MARKETS Election after election, the vote is close in the fabled test markets of America. Stark County, Ohio, is included here because it tends to be a bellwether county in a bellwether state, albeit not in 2004. 2004 Presidential Vote Bush Kerry
48%
NATIONAL
51%
Peoria Co., Ill. Montgomery Co. (Dayton), Ohio Stark Co. (Canton), Ohio
50% 50% 49% 51% 49% 51%
Change, 2000-04 Reps. Dems.
+ 3%
+ 2% - 1% + 2% + 1% 0% + 4%
157
Comments
0% Close, but Dems. carry 4 straight times Same here Lone Ohio county to switch to Dems. in ’04
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix II
State-By-State Presidential Winners Since 1960 Elections Won, 1960-2004 Reps. Dems.
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972
1968
1964
1960
7
5
R
R*
D
D
R
R
R
D
R
R
D
D
REPUBLICAN L South Alabama Arkansas Florida Georgia Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi North Carolina Oklahoma South Carolina Tennessee Texas Virginia
9 6 9 7 8 7 9 9 11 10 8 8 11
2 5 3 4 4 4 1 3 1 2 4 4 1
R R R R R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R R R R R R
R D D R D D R R R R D R R
R D R D D D R R R R D R R
R R R R R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R R R R R R
R R R D R R R R R R R R R
D D D D D D D D R D D D R
R R R R R R R R R R R R R
W W R W R W W R R R R D R
R D D R D R R D D R D D D
D D R D R D U D R D R D R
Mountain West Alaska Arizona Colorado Idaho Montana Nevada New Mexico Utah Wyoming
11 11 10 11 10 8 7 11 11
1 1 2 1 2 4 5 1 1
R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R D R R
R D R R R D D R R
R R D R D D D R R
R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R R
R R R R R R R R R
D R D D D D D D D
R R R R R D D R R
Plains States Kansas Nebraska North Dakota South Dakota
11 11 11 11
1 1 1 1
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
R R R R
D D D D
R R R R
NATIONAL
158
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix II
Elections Won, 1960-2004 Reps. Dems.
DEMOCRATIC COASTS Northeast Connecticut 5 Delaware 5 District of Columbia 0 Maine 6 Maryland 3 Massachusetts 2 New Hampshire 8 New Jersey 6 New York 3 Pennsylvania 4 Rhode Island 2 Vermont 7 West Virginia 4 Pacific West California Hawaii Oregon Washington
7 2 6 5
PRIME BATTLEGROUND Industrial Midwest Illinois 6 Indiana 11 Iowa 7 Michigan 5 Minnesota 1 Missouri 7 Ohio 8 Wisconsin 5
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972
1968
1964
1960
7 7 11 6 9 10 4 6 9 8 10 5 8
D D D D D D D D D D D D R
D D D D D D R D D D D D R
D D D D D D D D D D D D D
D D D D D D D D D D D D D
R R D R R D R R D R D R D
R R D R R R R R R R R R R
R R D R D R R R R R D R D
R D D R D D R R D D D R D
R R D R R D R R R R R R R
D R D D D D R R D D D R D
D D D D D D D D D D D D D
D D â&#x20AC;&#x201D; R D D R D D D D R D
5 10 6 7
D D D D
D D D D
D D D D
D D D D
R D D D
R R R R
R D R R
R D R R
R R R R
R D R D
D D D D
R D R R
6 1 5 7 11 5 4 7
D R R D D R R D
D R D D D R R D
D R D D D D D D
D R D D D D D D
R R D R D R R D
R R R R D R R R
R R R R D R R R
R R R R D D D D
R R R R R R R R
R R R D D R R R
D D D D D D D D
D R R D D D R R
* In 2000 George W. Bush won the electoral vote while Al Gore won the popular vote. Notes: W = George Wallace, who won five states in 1968 as the candidate of the American Independent Party; U = Unpledged Electors, who prevailed in Mississippi in 1960. D.C. was first awarded electoral votes in 1964.
159
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth This section is a condensed version of a report, “Hispanics and the 2004 Election: Population, Electorate and Voters,” by Roberto Suro, Richard Fry and Jeffrey S. Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center. The Center is dedicated to improving understanding of the diverse Hispanic population in the United States and to chronicling Latinos’ growing impact on the nation. It conducts nonpartisan research on Latino trends in demographics, economics, education, immigration and identity, and its polls and nationwide surveys explore Latino attitudes on public policy issues as well as their beliefs, values and experiences. A complete copy of the report and copies of all other publications by the Center are available at www.pewhispanic.org Phone: 202.419.3600 Fax: 202.419.3608 www.pewhispanic.org Director: Roberto Suro Associate Director for Research Rakesh Kochhar Senior Research Associates: Richard Fry Jeffrey S. Passel Research Associate: Sonya Tafoya Project Specialist: Dulce C. Benavides Administrative Manager: Mary Seaborn Administrative Assistant: Angela F. Luben
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth I. Overview Between the elections of 2000 and 2004, Hispanics1 accounted for half of the population growth in the United States but only one tenth of the increase in the total votes cast. This difference between overall growth in population and growth at the ballot box is primarily the result of the two demographic factors that distinguish Latinos from whites and blacks in the electoral arena: A high percentage of Hispanics are too young to vote or are ineligible because they are not citizens. As a result, a population increase of 5.7 million Latinos between 2000 and 2004 yielded only 2.1 million new eligible voters. In addition, Hispanic voter participation rates lag those of whites or blacks, so that the number of Hispanic voters increased by just 1.4 million. The combination of demographic factors and participation rates meant that just 18% of the total Latino population (adults as well as children, citizens and non-citizens) went to the polls in 2004, compared with 51% of all whites and 39% of all blacks. This gap in size between the Latino population and the Latino vote has been developing for decades and has widened considerably in recent years. Despite these factors, however, the Hispanic population has been growing at such a strong rate that it still has led to an increase—albeit a small one—in the Hispanic share of the overall electorate. In November 2004, Hispanics accounted for 6.0% of all votes cast, up from 5.5% four years earlier. During the same period, the Hispanic share of the population rose from 12.8% to 14.3%.
1 The terms “Hispanic” and “Latino” are used interchangeably. The terms “white” and “black” refer to non-Hispanics in those racial categories.
163
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
The Growing Divergence between the Hispanic Population and Hispanic Voters, 1970-2004 Hispanic Voters
Total Hispanic Population
45
41.3
40 35 30 20
7.6
2004
Election
6.2
2000
3.1
4.9
1996
2.6
4.2
1992
2.1
1990
2.1
1988
1970
0
3.7
1984
5
9.1
1980
10
14.6
1976
15
35.3
22.4
25
1972
Millions
This section uses Census Bureau data to analyze the relationship between Hispanic population growth and voting strength. In addition, it addresses a lingering question about the extent of Hispanic support for President George W. Bush last year. An analysis of 2004 exit poll data in conjunction with census data suggests that Bush’s share of the Hispanic vote was probably closer to 40% than to the 44% widely reported last year by news organizations that had relied on national exit poll data.
Source: Hispanic Americans: A Statistical Sourcebook, Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 November Current Population Survey, and decennial censuses for 1970–2000.
The key findings are: •
Between the 2000 and 2004 elections, the Hispanic population grew by 5.7 million, accounting for half of the 11.5 million increase in the U.S. population. This growth was fueled both by immigration and by high birth rates among Latinos already living in this country.
•
Of those 5.7 million Hispanics added to the U.S. population between the last two presidential elections, 1.7 million persons or 30% were younger than 18 and thus not eligible to vote. Another 1.9 million or 33% were adults not eligible to vote because they were not citizens.
•
As a result of these factors, only 39% of the Latino population was eligible to vote, compared with 76% of whites and 65% of the black population (chart, next page).
•
Both the number of Latinos registered to vote (9.3 million) and the number of Latinos who cast ballots (7.6 million) in November 2004 marked increases of political participation over the 2000 election that were larger than those for any other ethnic or racial group in percentage terms.
•
However, both registration and turnout rates for Latinos were lower than for whites or blacks. As a result, only 47% of eligible Hispanics went to the polls compared with 67% of whites and 60% of blacks. Differences in registration rates explain most of the gaps.
164
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
•
•
•
The combination of demographic factors and participation rates meant that only 18% of the Latino population voted in 2004, compared with 51% of whites and 39% of blacks. In November 2004, Hispanics accounted for 14.3% of the total population but only 6.0% of the votes cast. In the previous election, Hispanics accounted for 12.8% of the population and 5.5% of the votes cast.
Eligible Voters as a Share of Total Population for Major Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2004 ■ Adult non-citizens 100% 80% 60% 40%
■ Under 18
27
22 76
34
■ Voting eligible 2
31
4
65
39
20% 0%
Hispanics
White
Black
The large number of Hispanic young Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 November Current people will eventually add to the Population Survey Latino electorate as they reach voting age. But, if immigration flows continue adding to the number of Latino females of child-bearing years and Hispanic fertility rates and immigration flows persist at current levels, even larger numbers of youths will be added each year to the population not eligible to vote. And, if participation rates remain unchanged, the young people added to the electorate will register and vote at relatively low levels.
Table 1. Political Participation by Hispanics and Total U.S. Population, 2004 Hispanic
All Persons
Total Population, regardless of age or citizenship status
41,300,000
289,362,000
Not Eligible to Vote–Total Youths under 18 Adults without U.S. citizenship
25,212,000 14,171,000 11,041,000
92,357,000 73,668,000 18,689,000
Eligible Voters–U.S. citizens age 18 and above
16,088,000
197,005,000
Registered Voters–Adult U.S. citizens registered to vote
9,308,000
142,070,000
Reported Voters–Adult U.S. citizens who reported voting
7,587,000
125,736,000
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 November Current Population Survey. All figures rounded independently
165
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
•
There are significant demographic differences between the total Hispanic population and the Hispanic electorate. The foreign-born account for 56% of the Latino adult population but only 28% of 2004 Latino voters. As a result, 27% of Latino adults live in households where only Spanish is spoken, compared with only 9% of Latino voters.
•
An analysis of census and exit poll data suggests that President Bush took 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004 rather than the 44% as originally reported from the major news media exit poll.
•
Religion appears to be linked to President Bush’s improved showing among Hispanics in 2004 over 2000, when he took 34% of Latino votes. Hispanic Protestants made up a larger share of the Latino vote last year (32% in 2004 compared with 25% in 2000), and 56% of these voters supported the president in 2004, compared with 44% in 2000. The president’s share of the Hispanic Catholic vote remained essentially unchanged between 2000 and 2004.
A Note on the Current Population Survey This section relies primarily on a supplement of the Current Population Survey (CPS) that is conducted every November of an election year by the U.S. Census Bureau. The November supplements ask people whether they were registered to vote and whether they actually voted. All surveys are subject to discrepancies due to margins of error and other factors. This is true of the CPS, even though it is a very large survey regularly conducted of the American public with an average monthly sample of about 140,000 individuals. Historically, the November election year supplements of the CPS show a larger number of persons voting than the actual count. This was the case again last year: The November 2004 CPS showed that 125.74 million persons reported voting in the 2004 national election while the official count of votes in the Federal Register for the 2004 presidential contest was 122.28 million. The discrepancy is 3.5 million votes—about 3 percent of the official count. The CPS supplement is taken after Election Day and relies on individuals’ self-reporting of their voting behavior. According to the Census Bureau, the difference between the CPS numbers and the official count results primarily from two factors: Some people report having voted when they did not, and some ballots do not get counted for various reasons, such as being marked improperly by a voter or being misread by a voting machine. The CPS covers the civilian, non-institutional population resident in the country. It excludes almost all active-duty military in the United States and abroad, as well as persons in institutions, including nursing homes and correctional facilities.
166
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
II. Demographic Characteristics of the Hispanic Population and Electorate The differences between the Hispanic population and the Hispanic electorate are more than just a matter of size. Latinos who are eligible to vote and those who actually do vote have distinctly different characteristics from the Latino population as a whole. The most obvious difference involves nativity. Because so many Latino immigrants are not eligible to vote, a far greater share of the Hispanic adult population (56%) is foreign-born than is the case among those who reported voting in 2004 (28%). Table 2. Characteristics of the Hispanic Adult Population by Voting Eligibility, November 2004 CPS (percentages) Eligible Voters
18 & over, non-citizen
All Hispanic Adults
Age 18 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65
31 21 20 18 11
35 32 18 11 4
32 26 19 15 8
Sex Male Female
49 51
55 45
51 49
Nativity Foreign born Native born
25 75
100 0
56 44
Spanish only spoken in household? No Yes
89 11
50 50
73 27
Family income Under $15,000 $15,000 to 29,999 $30,000 to 49,999 $50,000 to 74,999 $75,000 or more
17 22 26 19 16
24 33 27 10 7
20 27 26 15 12
Education Less than 9th grade 9th to 12th grade H.S. graduate or some college Bachelorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degree or more
13 16 59 13
39 20 35 7
23 17 49 10
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 November Current Population Survey
167
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
Differences in nativity bring with them differences in language use. Surveys show that virtually all native-born Latinos speak English fluently while about a third are bilingual and almost none speak only Spanish. Meanwhile, virtually all of the foreign-born speak Spanish, about a quarter are bilingual and almost none speak only English.2 The Census Bureauâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Current Population Survey, from which most of the data in this section are drawn, does not measure bilingualism, but it does identify people who live in households where only Spanish is spoken. Fewer than 11% of eligible voters and fewer than 9% of actual voters live in Spanish-only households, compared with 27% of the entire Hispanic adult population and 50% of adult non-citizens. Given that the growth of the immigrant population is fed by the arrival of young adults, it is not surprising that the population as a whole is somewhat younger than the electorate. In the entire adult population, 58% of Hispanics are younger than 40 compared with 52% of eligible voters. Two thirds of adult non-citizen Hispanics are under 40. Hispanic eligible voters are somewhat more affluent than nonvoters. For example, 34% earn family incomes of more than $50,000 a year, compared with 27% of the Hispanic adult population as a whole. And the electorate is better educated. Among eligible voters, just 28% failed to complete high school, compared with 40% of the entire adult population.
2 Pew Hispanic Center & Kaiser Family Foundation. 2002. The 2002 National Survey of Latinos. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center.
168
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
III. How Latinos Voted in 2004 Although the CPS does not ask respondents how they voted, it does shed some light on a lingering question about how Hispanics voted in the 2004 presidential race and suggests that Latino support for President Bush may have been slightly lower than initially reported. The uncertainty over the partisan breakdown of the Latino vote last year stems from questions about whether the Hispanic sample in the national exit poll was in fact representative of the Hispanic vote. The National Election Pool (NEP) was conducted on behalf of a consortium of news organizations using a well-established methodology that involves interviewing voters at a sample of precincts chosen to be representative of all polling places across the nation. The NEP national exit poll indicated that President Bush had taken 44% of the Hispanic voteâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;a 10 percentage point increase over his share in 2000. This 44% figure was widely reported by news organizations. In this national poll, which was conducted at 250 precincts designed to be representative of the nation as a whole, 1,037 respondents identified themselves as Hispanics. At the same time as the national poll was being conducted on Election Day, the NEP was also conducting 51 individual polls designed to produce results representative in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. These polls were taken at 1,469 precincts at which 4,469 Hispanics were interviewed. The Pew Hispanic Center has aggregated data from the 51 state polls and weighted the results to produce results for the nation as a whole. As first noted by Ana Maria Arumi, a polling specialist then with NBC who offered fresh insights on the exit poll at an event hosted by the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ) on Dec. 2, 2004, the 51 state polls show that Bush drew 40% of the Hispanic vote rather than the 44% in the national poll. A comparison of the profiles of Hispanic voters in the national and the combined state polls offers several clues why the national poll indicated a higher level of Latino support for President Bush. Compared to the combined sample in the 51 state polls, the national NEP data have fewer young Latino voters, fewer voters residing in cities with more than 50,000 residents, fewer women, fewer voters who identified themselves as Democrats and fewer who said they disapproved of the war in Iraq. All of these characteristics are shared by Hispanics who voted for Sen. John F. Kerry, the Democratic candidate. The national poll also had more Cuban voters in the Miami area, a traditionally Republican voting bloc.
169
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
It is impossible to determine definitively whether the national or the 51 state exit polls more accurately captured Hispanic voter preferences. However, the Latino voter profile in the 51 state polls more closely matches the CPS on a few important points. For example, the CPS has 27% of the Hispanic vote coming from California, which is in line with the 26% in the state exit poll rather than the 21% in the national poll. And both the CPS and the state polls have the male share of the Hispanic vote at about 46% compared with more than 48% in the national exit poll (Table 3). The state polls (7.5%) come closer to the CPS finding on the Hispanic share of the total vote (6.0%) than the national exit poll (8.4%).
Table 3. Characteristics of Hispanic Voters, 51 State Exit Polls 2004 (percentages) Sex Male Female
47 53
Age 18 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 and over
32 20 22 19 7
Family income under $15,000 $15,000 to 29,999 $30,000 to 49,999 $50,000 to 74,999 $75,000 or more
10 18 24 22 25
Religion Protestant/other Christian Catholic Jewish Something else None
32 55 1 4 8
Political party identification Democrat Republican Independent
49 27 24
Political philosophy Liberal Moderate Conservative
26 45 30
Size of place City over 50,000 Suburbs Small city or rural
44 42 14
State Arizona California Florida Illinois New Jersey New York Texas Other
3 26 13 5 4 7 17 26
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 Combined State Exit Polls, National Election Pool
170
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
IV. President Bush’s Gains Among Hispanics
Table 4. Support for Bush Among Hispanic Voters, 2000 and 2004, from 51 State Exit Polls (percentages)
Whether he received 40% or 44% of the Hispanic vote last year or something in between, President Bush improved his showing from 2000 to 2004 among Hispanics by a bigger margin than he did among the population as a whole. Data from the combined state exit polls suggest that religion may have played a role in President Bush’s greater success with Hispanics. Hispanic Protestants, who are mostly evangelicals rather than members of mainline Protestant denominations, comprised 32% of the Latino vote in 2004, up from 25% in 2000, according to the 51 state polls conducted during those elections.3 In addition, this segment of the Latino electorate tilted more heavily toward Bush in 2004, giving him 56% of their votes last year compared with 44% in 2000. Thus, Hispanic Protestants were both a growing and increasingly pro-Republican constituency between the two elections. Meanwhile, Bush’s share of the Hispanic Catholic vote held steady at 33% in the state exit polls. Aside from his strong support from Hispanic Protestants, President Bush also gained some ground among nearly all segments of the Hispanic vote (Table 4). His share of the vote increased among female Hispanic voters and across all age categories and income groups. He did better among big-city Hispanic voters. The only Hispanic vote segments of the Hispanic electorate where his share did not increase were among Catholics, political independents, conservatives, and rural voters.
2004
2000
Change To 2004
All Hispanic Voters
40
34
6
Sex Male Female
43 37
39 30
3 7
Age 18 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 64 65 and over
34 40 43 43 45
33 39 33 33 26
1 1 10 10 20
Family income Under $15,000 $15,000 to 29,999 $30,000 to 49,999 $50,000 to 74,999 $75,000 or more
28 30 37 45 47
26 25 32 40 46
2 6 5 5 0
Religion Protestant/other Christian Catholic
56 33
44 33
12 0
Political party identification Democrat Republican Independent
12 90 39
10 84 42
2 6 -3
Political philosophy Liberal Moderate Conservative
17 35 66
12 33 66
5 2 0
Size of place City over 50,000 Suburbs Small city or rural
36 43 43
26 38 50
10 4 -8
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 Combined State Exit Polls, National Election Pool
3 The combined state NEP exit poll data do not reveal whether a voter was a “born-again or evangelical” Christian. The Protestant designation in the text refers to non-Catholic Christians; that is, it includes Hispanics identifying themselves as Protestant, Mormon/Latter Day Saints and “other Christian” (excluding Catholic). Pre-election surveys reveal that the bulk of Hispanic non-Catholic Christian registered voters are evangelical or born-again Christians. Five out of six Hispanic non-Catholic Christian registered voters are evangelical Christians, as opposed to mainline Protestants (Leal, David L., Matt A. Barreto, Jongho Lee, and Rodolfo A. de la Garza. 2005. “the Latino Vote in the 2004 Election,” Political Science and Politics, January, pages 41-49).
171
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
The data from the combined state exit polls also shed some light on the issue of Latino realignment in political party leanings. Surveys of registered Latino voters typically reveal that Latinos identify with the Democratic Party over the GOP by at least a two-to-one advantage.4 However, in the 2004 exit poll, the margin was somewhat smaller: 49% of Hispanic voters identified with the Democrats, 27% with the Republicans, and 24% indicated independent leanings. Hispanic Democratic affiliation declined from the 2000 election, where the comparable NEP exit poll data indicate a 55%-to-24% split in favor of Democratic over Republicans. Whether the decline in the fortunes of the Democrats among Hispanic voters from 2000 to 2004 reflects the relative popularity of President Bush among Hispanic voters or marks a more permanent shift in Hispanic party loyalties remains an open question.
4 Pew Hispanic Center & Kaiser Family Foundation. 2004. The 2004 National Survey of Latinos: Politics and Civic Participation. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center.
172
About The Pew Research Center The Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan “fact tank” that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It does so by conducting public opinion polling and social science research; by reporting news and analyzing news coverage, and by holding forums and briefings. It does not take positions on policy issues. For more information go to www.pewresearch.org. The Center’s work is carried out by six projects: Pew Research Center for the People & the Press www.people-press.org Stateline.org www.Stateline.org Pew Internet & American Life Project www.pewinternet.org Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life pewforum.org Pew Hispanic Center www.pewhispanic.org Pew Global Attitudes Project www.pewglobal.org The Center is a non-profit, tax-exempt corporation which operates under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service code. It was established in 2004 as a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a Philadelphia-based public charity (www.pewtrusts.org).
Pew Research Center 1615 L Street, NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036-5610 Phone: 202-419-4300 â&#x20AC;˘ Fax: 202-419-4349 www.pewresearch.org