Gallup: Democrats Lose Support As Independents Become Conservatives
Two new Gallup polls spell mega-trouble for the Democratic party: one finds that the Democratic party has now effectively lost the support it gained during the presidency of George W. Bush — and the second shows that independents now leaving the “independent” category are becoming conservatives.
Add that to a political mix where the party is being dissed by liberals/progressives (choose the word you want to use) for not being liberal enough and you get one more instance of how the 24/7 new/old media conventional wisdom needs to be swept under the rug. A new Democratic majority? The GOP merely a regional party? Not so faaaasssssst!
Here’s Gallup on the Democrats’ Bush years’ support evaporating:
The year 2009 marked the end of a three-year run of majority Democratic support among U.S. adults. Last year, an average of 49.0% of Americans identified as Democrats or said they leaned Democratic, the party’s first yearly average below 50% since 2005. Still, Democrats maintained an average eight-point advantage in support over Republicans last year, as 40.7% of Americans identified as Republicans or leaned Republican.
And, Gallup notes, the poll may not tell the whole bad-news story for Democrats:
The 2009 results are based on aggregated data from all Gallup and USA Today/Gallup polls conducted last year, encompassing interviews with more than 21,000 Americans. In each poll, Gallup asks Americans whether they consider themselves Republicans, Democrats, or independents. Independents are subsequently asked if they lean to the Republican or Democratic Party.
The 2009 results are based on aggregated data from all Gallup and USA Today/Gallup polls conducted last year, encompassing interviews with more than 21,000 Americans. In each poll, Gallup asks Americans whether they consider themselves Republicans, Democrats, or independents. Independents are subsequently asked if they lean to the Republican or Democratic Party.
Though total Republican support did increase last year, this came mostly from what can be considered “soft support.” The increase in overall GOP support is owing to an increase in the percentage of Republican-leaning independents…
Indeed, a second Gallup poll shows conservatives are now the country’s number one ideological group — a development that means as the Democratic leadership and White House try to juggle demands from its party base that wants more liberal policies, it risks losing overall support if it veers as far left as many liberals demand:
The increased conservatism that Gallup first identified among Americans last June persisted throughout the year, so that the final year-end political ideology figures confirm Gallup’s initial reporting: conservatives (40%) outnumbered both moderates (36%) and liberals (21%) across the nation in 2009.
More broadly, the percentage of Americans calling themselves either conservative or liberal has increased over the last decade, while the percentage of moderates has declined.
Since 1992, there have been only two other years — 2003 and 2004 — in which the average percentage of conservatives nationwide outnumbered moderates, and in both cases, it was by two percentage points (in contrast to the current four points).
The rather abrupt three-point increase between 2008 and 2009 in the percentage of Americans calling themselves conservative is largely owing to an increase — from 30% to 35% — in the percentage of political independents adopting the label. Over the same period, there was only a slight increase in professed conservatism among Republicans (from 70% to 71%) and no change among Democrats (at 21%).
And (not much of a surprise here and we have noted this before) many partisans don’t like the word “moderate”:
The proportion of independents calling themselves “moderate” held relatively steady in the mid-40s over the last decade, while the proportion of Republican and Democratic moderates dwindled. Between 2000 and 2009, the percentage of moderates fell five percentage points among Democrats (from 44% to 39%) and seven points among Republicans (from 31% to 24%).
Not surprisingly Gallup finds that:
The problem for the Demmies, Gallup concludes:
The effect of this shift among Democrats is most apparent when one reviews the trend in their ideological profile over the past decade. Whereas moderates constituted the largest bloc of Democrats in 2000, today they are about tied with liberals as twin leaders, and the proportion of conservatives has declined…
…Longer term, however, the 2000s showed a decline in political independence compared to the 1990s, with an average of 36.8% of Americans identifying as political independents from 1990-1999, compared with 34.8% from 2000-2009. Meanwhile, the proportion of Americans identifying as Republicans was a point higher in the 2000s (30.9%) than in the 1990s (29.9%), while Democratic support was steady at 33.3% in both decades.
Gallup’s overall conclusion is one we’ve noted here many times with many polls: it is further evidence of the polarization of American politics. Post-partisan, schmost partisan..
Political independents showed increased attachment to the “conservative” label in 2009, boosting the overall ranks of that group so that it now clearly outnumbers moderates in Gallup’s annual averages for the first time since 2004. Longer term, the proportions of Americans calling themselves conservative as well as liberal expanded slightly this past decade, largely because of increased partisan attachment to each label. At the same time, the percentage of “moderates” has dwindled, underscoring the heightened polarization of American politics as the nation heads into a new decade.
23 Responses to “Gallup: Democrats Lose Support As Independents Become Conservatives”
OKAAY?! The gap in party identification narrows a tiny amount as a few conservatives who had left the GOP in disgust reluctantly return to the fold, and this is 'mega-trouble' for the Democratic party?? Seriously?!
The gap between independents and Democrats in % of moderates is still much, much narrower than the gap between independents and the GOP, which means that if these trends continue moderates will still mostly coalition with Democrats, rather than the GOP. Considering that independents plus liberals is 57% of the electorate. This spells mega trouble for the GOP.
I agree that this is further evidence that we are becoming more partisian as a nation and that this is not a good thing. The rest of this analysis was pretty sloppy, though.
And, Gallup notes, the poll may not tell the whole bad-news story for Democrats
http://www.damaverick.com/zenb16.jpg
These polls are all based on self-identified labels. Since they never identify what a conservative, moderate, or liberal is supposed to be, there's a strong element of unknown to them. As others have noted before, a conservative in New York is quite a bit different from a conservative in Montana. Yes, they'll pick up some of the discontent, but can they keep them?
Something's wrong with the analysis here. 52% of the population voted for Obama in '08, but if we're to believe these numbers, as of 2008, Democratic votes were comprised of the 22% of liberals and the 14% moderate Dems (math, 14%=(37% moderate)*(38% of moderates who are Dems)), which equals 36%.
That 36% doesn't include independent moderates, who make up 17% of the population (37% times 46%). Say half of indie moderates voted for Obama, bringing the total Dem vote share to 44.5%, which is still below the 52% of the votes that Obama got. That suggests that either a large majority of claimed moderate Independents are actually Democratic voters, or at least 20% of conservatives vote Democratic (math: 20%=(52%-44.5%)/37%)), or some combination of the two.
That means that rising “conservative” identification don't necessarily mean that Democrats are losing voters. Remember that there are quite a few conservative Ds, especially in recent years. It seems most likely to me that people newly identifying as conservative are the most moderate ones, who still may be receptive to Democrats.
Most of the people I talk to pragmatically don't give a fig what party they're “signed up” with to get their ballot and other voting materials, or to keep their parents or spouse happy. Behind the curtain they vote how they think privately. And due to the enormous pressures coming from the fringe on either side, those private thoughts are less and less revealed to the pollsters.
That's why we see all the upsets we do since the internet started up. Access to information that one can privately interpret has a huge impact on thinking processes and decision making. Graph that trend while you're at it..lol..
You guys should thank your lucky stars that we post at these sites. Reality is often the best pony on the race to bet on..
Self-identifiers are the pet rocks of polls – just the fashion statement for the moment, reflecting the popularity based on who's *not* in power versus those that are. People were leaning left since 2005 when W was in office and virtually solid left when Obama was gaining traction in 2008. It does not surprise me a bit that these “same” people are suddenly conservative. I'll bet a nickel that if the Reps gain significant seats in Novemeber these same people will be angling left again.
I think Sil makes a good point, and it's one that probably explains why so many polls bounce all over the place. That said, IF there proves to be a swing back to R's in 2010, then many of us would see that as just more evidence of a society that isn't terribly swift when it comes to understanding the kinds of problems we face and the real need for them to be addressed – not only in a sane, effective way, but at all. Too many of the republican approaches seem to involve willful ignoring of important issues… to put it mildly. For those who would take issue with that last comment, please show me evidence of a republican vision for the future that is in any way viable and sensible. I'd love to see it.
Golly, no sooner do the liberals launch a massive campaign to attack Rasmussen than Gallup comes along and nails them with this.
Don't worry Democrats, it's nothing at all. Everything is just fine. All you need to do is ram.. uh, pass ObamaCare and the people will be grateful and sing your praises. And hew to that “Vision of the Future” that rests on higher taxes, higher deficits, and the theory that people are freezing to death tonight because of Anthropogenic Global Warming — the Creation Science of the left. Speaking of “realistic”, when can we see that great Amnesty bill that the Democrats have in store for us?
The is no point is using the words liberal, moderate, or conservative. Blacks poll as being conservative but in reality are very liberal. The same applies to Hispanics and to Asians.
What matters is how people act at the polls and the percentage of the people who will automatically vote for the Democratic candidate is growing. That is all that matters.
Many people claim to be moderates but probably haven't voted for a Republican in decades.
As the U.S. becomes a one party state, it does not matter what people believe politically. Clout and seniority will be the only two part of politics. Instead of spending money on election, people will spend ever more money on lobbying such as Valerie Jarrett used to be.
When asked I will say I am conservative because I am against liberal markets and liberal trade not to mention many other liberal things that are actually more GOP than Dem. If asked party I lean hard to the Dem side. Not sure if there are many more like me but to me conservative means things are pretty good the way we are, not and I do repeat not 100 years ago that would not make me a conservative but retrogradist maybe(a word must exist I either cant think of it now or I am ignorant of it utterly)? It also would mean things like healthcare reform that is being pushed through now as it is close as possible to the way things are while trying to stop some abusive practices and runaway costs because things will of course not stay this way or get better if not. Either way to me the word conservative means buttoned down and working hard but it also means things like paying bills and the like which of course neither party does in any way I can think of. And you'll love this, to me one of the most conservative stances one could take would be socialisim because it would enshrine the status quo for survival, I am just not that hardcore of a conservative
. I prefer movement and change just in incremental, and hence adjustable, steps hence conservative. Social conservatives are not the only conservatives on the block and neither is the US view of conservatism well defined even in our own nation. It is a conservative stance to take care of you and yours and ignore what others do with the freedoms you protect and do not care for, thank you libertarians for understanding this.
Stereotypes don't work very well. Black voters may vote Democrat 90+ percent of the time but they also vote against legalizing gay marriage at a much higher percent than whites. Exit polls showed that without the black vote in California, Prop 8 would not have passed, and that turnout was boosted by Obama being at the top of the ticket.
If we are becoming a one party state, what happened in Virginia and New Jersey late last year? Virginia went Republican in landslide proportions, and Joisey elected a Republican governor — I didn't think they even made Republicans in New Jersey anymore.
I share your concern for the degradation of democratic principles under one party Democrat rule, but I'm less pessimistic than you are SD. The pendulum swings back and forth, and right now it seems to be headed toward conservatism again. It's about time.
“Most of the people I talk to pragmatically don't give a fig what party they're “signed up” with to get their ballot and other voting materials, or to keep their parents or spouse happy. Behind the curtain they vote how they think privately.”
1. Well, does that mean you're not concerned by Dem vote fraud, the normal concern that normal Americans have when the Dems push “moter voter,” or if the Dems succeed in any “universal voter registration” effort like Barney Frank and Chucky Schumer are pursuing? (You know, people from the same party who bring us vote fraud, resistance against voter legitimacy efforts like ID checks, and who raise suspicions about misconduct with the Census as well as future redistricting fun and games.)
2. What about privacy versus no privacy where unionizing votes and “card check” are involved?
3. For that matter, and it may be too deep-thought a side issue for some to tolerate, withstand, or merely intrigue, but what about the practice of public versus private (secret) voting in Congress?
There are many takes on this but from my view its likely the tea partiers joining up preparing for the primaries mixed with ex-GOP that hated what the party had become but in no way shape or form agree with the current setup of a full Dem boat either. I also think it is therefore hard to predict what this summer is going to look like but the primaries will be the battle grounds. Will the tea partiers vote for a non-tea party candidate? Will GOP moderates (or exGOP) vote for tea party candidates? You mix that with their current funding issues and this could go very badly for the GOP this year and possibly so badly that another party is formed and they are replaced, on the other hand if they get some really charismatic candidates they may be able to pull off something huge which would be a political earthquake. Populist time periods tend to be like that but one of the downsides of those time periods is if things do not go well they turn on you like rabid dogs and I am talking torches and pitchfork time now. My guess is that Dems are gonna show up in larger numbers than people are talking now because then they will have some tangible things to lose instead of still being whinny that we are still at war. Also right wing media will be going full tilt and some of which in high paranoia propaganda mode(you know election season for both sides). This sometimes has a backfire effect if it scares Dem or Dem leaning voters to much. Much time, news, fund raising and scandals have yet to happen but it should be an interesting year. My guess Reps will win much smaller than thought and things will get ugly, meaning I think there may be rioting. I hope I am wrong.
I may not agree with all of your conclusions but my compliments on a solid post which could serve as a good warning to Republicans not to be complacent or overconfident. Thank you for not calling Tea Partiers by a sexual innuendo — that promotes meaningful dialogue. And you can chalk up a like for your post; can we use those to buy coffee?
There are splits to be healed in both parties. The big tsunami that will hit this year will be a push for Amnesty/CIR. It will be interesting to see that issue impact on both parties and their divisions.
The one caveat I would offer your analysis is on fund raising. A lot of conservatives swore off giving to the Republican Party vs directly to their chosen candidates. I have not seen a good analysis that takes this trend into consideration, no doubt in part because it would be difficult to do. But that may explain the lackluster fund raising by the party vs reports that some candidates like Rubio, Palin, Hoffman, and others did/are doing quite well. I'm not asserting anything, just raising the possibility.
http://brightcove.vo.llnwd.net/d6/unsecured/media/1119379849/1119379849_1593323861_4599f5ecd1779b2cd90994ca8cbc2e6465a05350.jpg” rel=”nofollow”>http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:93uBPA9Cxxa_…
Actually it's one big comedy… most of the comedic moments being provided by the people who keep falling into the same partisan ruts. They don't realize it, don't get it, haven't figured it out, probably have little interest in doing so, and consequently end up being fodder for interests who ultimately don't care about them. (take this moment to look at ProfElwood's link
Also, consider this yet another pitch for IRV.
Hah!
No doubt a picture of one of the wayward Congressional Reps being briefed at the Double Super-Secret House/Senate reconciliation session. “When $ 300 million is not enough”
I'm a Democrat of the Democratic Party, and I do not agree with our Democratic Party representatives in Washington.
Our Democratic Party has abandoned many of its older principles and ideals, and we as Democrats are extremely dissatisfied with the “Change We Can Believe In” politicians and their obsession with making our Nation more like the Europe our founding fathers had left behind.
Most Democrats already know their pleas to the Democratic Party are only being answered by repeated insult and injury. Many of our elected officials are no longer thinking of themselves as being our representatives, but instead refer to themselves as leaders in the true form of tyrants.
To all intents and purposes, our elected representatives within the Democratic Party are no longer following in the time-honored footsteps laid down by the founding fathers of our great Nation. In fact, we as democrats see our elected representatives within the Democratic Party abandoning the principles and values as set forth within the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.
Furthermore, many of our Democratic Party representatives in Washington are tainted by corruption, and the liberals among us are supporting socialist radicals with their agendas based on moving our Nation deeper into a socialist form of government. This is a real threat to everything we hold sacred in America, and they are gaining evermore control over our Democratic Party, our Nation, and the American people.
Despite this, we as Democrats can restore control of the Democratic Party back to the party members. All we need to do is provide our support in making sure donations are made directly to patriotic and honorable Democratic Party candidates that are not corrupt or socialists.
So please help spread the message to everyone of our fellow Democrats. Also, don't forget to contact and request the Unions and other outside contributors to follow our lead as patriotic Americans.
Thank you, and God Bless America.
Eric Pearson, senior administrator for Democrats seeking reform with the Democratic Party.
Web site: http://www.democraticreformparty.com
Waaaayyy too much tin.
All one needs to do to see how off track to the far left the Democratic Party has gone is read John Kennedy's inspiring inaugural address.
http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres56.html
Imagine lines like this, for example, being spoken by a modern Democrat. And Kennedy was considered a liberal!
“And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe—the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.”
“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”
Yeah, I've been a Democrat. That was before they jumped off the Statist/Socialist cliff, decided there was no room for God in a secular society, and stopped caring about freedom in places like Iraq. Good luck with your efforts to reclaim the party Mr Pearson, you will need it.
OF course the noise being made from the god-fearing reactionaries about “socialism” is nothing new and dates back decades. You would think those folks would have learned a new song by now. Still waiting to see an inspiring vision the right has for the nation as we move into the future. This would include those who pretend to be democrats as well. All I see so far is more fear and more “no”. Not much to go on there I'm afraid.
When JFK got elected the top marginal tax rate was 91%, He reduced it to a whopping 70%. Today the top marginal tax rate is 35%… The Democrats are thinking of raising it to a whopping 37.5% and they are called Socialists…
After 50 years of transferring the Tax Burden from the wealthy to the middle-class under Democratic and Republican Administration and the best insult the TeaBaggers can come up with is Socialist…
And before you tell us that the top 10% more taxes than they ever have, let me point out that it's because they are wealthier than they have ever been…
Economist View – Is Our Tax System Helping Us Create Wealth?
Chart – Comparing Income Growth and Income Tax Burdens in 1961 and 2006
All that extra money that the wealthy used to pay in taxes was used to maintain and build the infrastructure, today it's used to gamble on Wall Street, with you the tax payer covering the losses. PS. All that infrastructure is now paid out of local taxes…
Economic Analysis: Is the Income Tax Really Progressive?