America The Liberal?

The New Republic: Obama's Victory Marks A Radical Realignment In American Politics. But What About An Enduring Dem. Majority?

(The New Republic)  This column was written by John B. Judis.

---

Even before the final results, showing a Democratic sweep, were in, Washington's pundits were declaring that nothing had really changed politically in the country. In a cover story labeled "America the Conservative," Newsweek editor Jon Meacham warned that, "[s]hould Obama win, he will have to govern a nation that is more instinctively conservative than it is liberal." Meacham's judgment was echoed by Peter Wehner, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. "America remains, in the main, a center-right nation," Wehner wrote in the Washington Post.

These guys--and the others who are counseling Barack Obama and the Democrats to "go slow"--couldn't be more wrong. They are looking at Obama's election through the prism of Jimmy Carter's win in 1976 and Bill Clinton's victory in 1992. Both Carter and Clinton did misjudge the mood of the country. They tried unsuccessfully to govern a country from the center-left that was moving to the right (in Carter's case) or that was only just beginning to move leftward (in Clinton's case), and were rebuked by the voters. But Obama is taking office under dramatically different circumstances. His election is the culmination of a Democratic realignment that began in the '90s, was held in abeyance by September 11, and had resumed in the 2006 election.

This realignment is predicated on a change in political demography and geography. Groups that had been disproportionately Republican have become disproportionately Democratic; and red states like Virginia have become blue. But underlying these changes has been a shift in the nation's "fundamentals"--in the structure of society and industry, and in the way Americans think of family, job, and government. The country is definitely no longer "America the conservative." And with the Republican Party and big business identified with a potentially disastrous downturn, it could become over the next four years "America the liberal." That's what makes this election fundamentally different from 1976 or 1992. Unlike Carter and Clinton, Obama will be taking office with the wind at his back rather than in his face.

Realignments are not scientifically predictable events like lunar eclipses, but they have occurred with some regularity over last two hundred years--in 1828, 1860, 1896, 1932, and 1980. Political scientist Walter Dean Burnham called the realignment "America's surrogate for revolution." It is how a rigid two-party system has adjusted when the ground has shifted that has sustained the dominant party.

If you look at the two most recent realignments, they can be seen as the political superstructure's belated acknowledgement of tectonic changes that had been occurring in the country's economic base. In the case of the New Deal, it was the rise of an urban industrial order in the North; in the case of Reagan conservatism, it was the shift of industry and population from the North to the lower-wage, non-unionized suburban Sunbelt stretching from Virginia down to Florida and across to Texas and southern California. The voters in these states--many of them white evangelicals--became the foot soldiers of Reagan conservatism.

If you look at the new Democratic realignment, it reflects the shift that began decades ago toward a post-industrial economy centered in large urban-suburban metropolitan areas devoted primarily to the production of ideas and services rather than material goods. (In The Emerging Democratic Majority, Ruy Teixeira and I called these "ideopolises.") And if you look at the main groups that constitute the new Democratic majority, the states and cities where they live correspond almost exactly to those parts of the country that have been making this transition to a post-industrial economy.

The three main groups in the new Democratic majority are professionals (college-educated workers who produce ideas and services), minorities (including African-Americans, Latinos, and Asian-Americans), and women (particularly working, single, and college-educated women). These groups, which overlap in membership, are also the key components of the new post-industrial economy.

As late as the 1950s, professionals were the most Republican of voting blocs, but they were also a relatively small group--about seven percent of the labor force. The professionals, who are the brains, so to speak, of the new post-industrial economy, are now over 17 percent of the labor force, and are a quarter or more of the electorate in many northern and western states. They range from nurses and teachers to television producers, software programmers, and engineers. They began voting Democratic in 1988, and have continued to do so ever since.

Ruy Teixeira and I calculated from census data that, from 1988 to 2000, professionals voted for the Democratic presidential candidate by 52 to 40 percent. But the exit polls don't include professionals as a category. The best approximation is a somewhat smaller (and maybe even slightly more conservative) group--people with advanced degrees. And the results in 2008 show Obama winning these voters by a whopping 58 to 40 percent. He even won college graduates as a whole 53 to 45 percent. This may be the first time ever that a Democrat has accomplished this. In 1996, for instance, Clinton failed to carry college graduates against Bob Dole.

Most minorities--with the exception of Cubans, Chinese-Americans, and Vietnamese-Americans--have voted Democratic since the 1930s. But with the shift of the economy and the liberalization of immigration laws, the number of Latinos and Asian Americans has expanded. Some of the new immigrants are professionals, but others form the working class of the post-industrial economy. They are orderlies, childcare workers, janitors, and fast food cooks and servers. As late as 1972, minorities as a whole made less than ten percent of the electorate. In this election, non-white voters made up 26 percent of the electorate. Blacks, of course, went overwhelmingly for Obama, but he won Hispanics by 66 to 31 percent and Asians--who as a group used to split their vote between Democrats and Republicans--by 62 to 35 percent.

Women, too, were once disproportionately Republican--in 1960, Richard Nixon won the women's vote. But their voting patterns began to change as they entered the labor force. In 1950, only a third of women worked; today, 60 percent of women work, making up 46 percent of the total labor force. Over 90 percent of women work in white-collar jobs; and 24.1 percent work as professionals--compared to 16.8 percent of men. In 1980, women began disproportionately backing Democrats, and the trend has continued. This year, Obama enjoyed a 14-point lead among women voters--56 to 42 percent--and only a two-point lead among men. He carried working women by 61 to 38 percent.

[virginiaharr]

Now that the 2008 election and its historic high turnout is history, there is much greater appreciation for the privilege of voting.

But most people don''t realize that out of 44 American presidents, only the last 15 were elected in a truly democratic fashion by all of our citizens -- men AND women.

Until 1920 women were denied the vote, and few people have any idea of the struggle our suffragettes had to go through to right this wrong. It''s an amazing, awe-inspiring story!

Now you can subscribe FREE to my exciting historical e-mail series that reveals HOW the suffragettes won votes for women. Believe me, it wasn''t easy!

"The Privilege of Voting" is drawing rave reviews from readers all over the world. Dramatic, sequential short-story episodes follow the lives of eight of the world''s most famous women to tell the true stories of the courage of the suffragettes. Read this FREE e-mail series on your coffeebreaks and fall in love with these amazing women!

Subscribe free at

www.CoffeebreakReaders.com/subscribe.html

[kaelinda]

Marriages should be performed in church. Marriage is a religious ritual, not a civil ritual. Civil unions exist already between men and women - ceremonies or rituals performed by a justice of the peace. But marriages are religious, not secular. Our nation has already thrown God out of church, out of court, out of city hall - why not throw him out of the family, as well?

[samthetvcat]

---"actually Obama did endorse the "No on 8" side"---
Posted by andor3

Actually Double-talk Barack true to form took all sides of the issue and when his own words saying he was against gay marriage were used in robocalls to target his supporters to get support for passing prop 8, he didn''t speak out on the issue at a time when he could have made the difference.

I think he could have made a difference . . .

[andor3]

"Marriage is a term used for a man and a women."

yes. it is a term used for any two people in love who want to make their union official. Some of those people are men and some are women as you say. The state does not have the right to decide which gender pairs are acceptable. Now California has a choice: throw out Prop 8 or invalidate ALL marriages, anything else is discrimination based on gender, which is not legal.

[andor3]

"I kind of know how you must feel that he didn''''t do it this time around because look at the blowout he had at the poll"

actually Obama did endorse the "No on 8" side.

[samthetvcat]

PS My math might be a little off . . .

[samthetvcat]

---"Now I just want to forget about all of it, because I am not sure I can handle the rage and sorrow I feel today"---
Posted by aakalan

This probably isn''t much comfort to your feelings of betrayal, but since the last time a gay marriage amendment was put to the public in 2000 something like 8% of the population have changed their minds.

Hopefully Jerry Brown''ll be able to keep the marriages that have already taken place legal, and in 2016 maybe another 8%''ll come around . . .

Maybe by then Barack''ll be in more of a position to take a stand to make it legal too (?) I kind of know how you must feel that he didn''t do it this time around because look at the blowout he had at the polls - with that cushion he totally could have gone to bat for somebody else, like by putting Hillary on the ticket . . . it blows that women might have to wait another 25 years for the next chance at the White House.

Whatever . . .

[darrren12000]

Sorry but your article is a piece of dung.

Try this out for a reality check:

http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2008/11/free-at-last-no.html

[sincity_q]

The mistake that all political types make, especially in an election year, is in assuming a mandate where one doesn''t exist.

America is, for the greater part, a nation of centrists. They don''t buy into half of the extremist crud shoveled by the bureaucrats but rather... merely vote for the lesser of the available evils.

Sorry, that''s just how it is.

In 2004, Bush made the mistake of assuming he had a mandate, referring to it as ''political collateral'' and then promptly nose dived into pitiful abscurity.

Obama is now in that sweet spot where one''s ego gets really hard to ignore. The humble man will be grateful, reaching back out to those who elected him while adjusting his rhetoric and agenda to fit the moment. The narcissist, though, will assume his own infallibility and ignore the voices of his people.

One thing is for sure; our media is lost in its own brand of narcissitic bliss, ignoring history and the people who keep them in ink.

[ausus-2009]

I can''t see the big deal over gay marriage. A full civil union with full rights should have no legal difference from a marriage. The difference is only semantic. I just happen to prefer the dictionary definition and the common usage to be that marriage is a union between a husband and wife, with the husband male and wife female. There should be no prejudice or bigotry. It''s a bit like preferring male only and female only toilets to unisex toilets.

[thuderstone]

Liberal should be redefined simply because the Clintons are a bunch of Zionist arse-kissers. Libreal non-Zionist should have its own fraction.

[pmaldona]

With 9 of 10 marijuana reform laws passing around the country, if Obama were able to legalize, regulate, and successfully tax marijuana (we''re talking hundreds of billions of dollars in additional revenue), anything else he did for me would be icing on the cake.

=)

[endofempire]

freelysboy: Barak Hussein Obama (I guess nobody now will be called a racist now that he''s won) pretended to go centrist during his campaign. Whether he''ll stay with the change on his traditional lean towards the hard left, that remains to be seen.
What is more likely is that he will not antagonize the Pelosi doctrine and take advantage of his four years to institute as much change as he can get away with. Unemployment "reforms", socialized healthcare, universal post-secondary education will be the ones he will be remembered for. The ones people will prefer to forget will be the property ownership reforms and the nationalization of much of American industry. All good stuff that has worked in France and Spain, at the cost of 15% unemployment.
Consider yourselves lucky if three or four justices don''t cede their slots or die of "natural causes" in the next couple of years. If that happens, the 22nd amendment could be history and we could be in for several presidencies'' worth of Change.
For now, lets all give Barak Hussein the benefit of the doubt, all the while keeping our powder dry.

[ioweign]

Marriage is a term used for a man and a women.

Civil is for the rest of you.

Posted by mopar1956 at 08:53 AM : Nov 06, 2008


There is more important things in life than this.

When is MacDonald''s going to get rid of that "special sauce"??

[freelysboy]

At the end of the day nothing in the electorate has changed. Obama won, not by being liberal but by staying in the center. He won a lot of electoral votes, but that roughly 6 million popular vote edge could very easily be in the republican column the next time around. there should not be to much read into it.

[markangeloo]

Define man & woman!!
What was that that had a baby this summer.
Mopar U are a clone.

[pdchapin]

On election night in 1980, Senator Goldwater was asked if the Reagan win represented a fundamental change in American politics. He responded (the following is a paraphrase - it was a will back) "No. We''ll have a good 25 years and then we''ll run out of ideas and the Democrats will come back."

It took 28 years, but the principle still applies. We Democrats should have a good run for a few years but eventually we''ll get something very wrong and be voted out again.

[mopar1956]

akaalan,
You are the one that doesn''t get it. They have a civil union in law now that gives all of you the same rights.

Marriage is a term used for a man and a women.

Civil is for the rest of you.

[darrren12000]

Another white guy says the country is now radically leftwing. Probably a heterosexual too. So, Calif. just voted to strip gay people of equality. So did Florida and Arkansas. Nebraska to get rid of affirmative action. And a lot of the big wins were actually close. Anyway, I''m a black man, and I am happy but because I know what discrimination means, I wish these white liberals would shut up.

[aakalan]

Oh how I wish you were right.
Unfortunately, you''re not.

You''re claiming minorities as one of the legs of your 3-legged stool - as liberal bulwarks.

Then why did they vote 70%-30% against gay rights in California? That''s not liberal, as far as I know. That''s downright reactionary - to take away people''s civil rights.

I had hoped, truly hoped that the ascendence of Barack Obama might be the indication of a more compassionate, caring, tolerant and positive nation.

My hope has been dashed in California, Arkansas (big surprise) and Florida. The religious zealots, the haters, have won once again. And, just as one opressed group finally sees their dream come true, they turn their wrath on another opressed group.

I was delirious when Obama won. I am brokenhearted, and afraid for America, when Prop 8 passed.

Now I just want to forget about all of it, because I am not sure I can handle the rage and sorrow I feel today.