Voting behaviour,turnout and gerrymandering
In most states, because the redrawing of political boundaries is undertaken by state legislatures, it has led to widespread claims that the system is open to abuse from unfair partisan gerrymandering. Examples such as the Maryland 3rd district and the Illinois 4th 'earmuff district', connecting two Latino areas by a thin strip of land, have been criticised as a manipulation of the electoral system. Many states, such as California following the approval of Proposition 20 in 2010, have handed control to a redistricting committee. Indeed groups such as FairVote have called for Congress to pass a Redistricting Act, which would require state legislatures to appoint independent commissions.
Many experts believe that gerrymandering has contributed to the extreme polarization between political parties.
It also has given the Republicans and advantage in recent election to state and federal legislatures.
After peaking at a high of 67% of the voting-age population in the 1960 election, voter turnout dropped in each of the next five presidential elections to 54.7% in 1980. After some small increases, turnout fell to just 51.4% in 1996. But the next three elections all registered increases in turnout, reaching 62.3% by 2008. But there was a significant drop in 2012 to 58.2%. 2016 was 59.2 % and 2020 in increase to above 66% (exact figure disputed but it was a big increase)
Turnout in US elections is one of the lowest of any western democracy, with turnout for the 2010 midterms standing at just over 41%. Reasons for this include:
· The first-past-the-post system, along with the use of gerrymandering, creates safe seats in which a vote for certain party candidates is wasted. A system in which huge numbers of votes are not counted discourages people from voting.
· The frequency of elections, which often take place all year round for various local, state and national posts, can lead to voter apathy. Similarly, the increasing length of election cycles, especially with the addition of invisible primaries due to frontloading, can lead to electoral boredom.
· Registration procedures are difficult and present a further barrier to voting. Attempts have been made to simplify the process, for example with the 1993 Motor Voter Act, which allowed citizens to register to vote when applying for a driving licence. However, estimates suggest that universal voter registration would increase turnout only by between 8 and 10%.
· The electorate's perceptions are important, with some highlighting how the system produces a lack of choice and is controlled by a wealthy elite with little hope for ordinary voters to change the system. Indeed, with turnout being less than 40% among the poorest fifth of the population, there is some weight to this argument.
Advocates for reform of the system thus propose an array of measures to tackle the problem. However, the main suggestion is for the implementation of a more proportional electoral system, such as national popular vote (NPV), followed by instant runoff voting (IRV) or preferential voting.
Election analysis 2016 New York Times
The result of a presidential election is decided principally in the swing states. A large number of states will almost always vote for the Democratic candidate — Massachusetts, New York, California and Illinois, for example. Other states are nowadays solidly Republican — Texas, Georgia, Kansas and South Carolina, for example. But there are a number of swing states, such as Ohio, Florida and Virginia, which will vote for the Democratic candidate in one election and then the Republican in another. Ohio has now voted for the winner in the last 13 presidential elections, stretching all the way back to 1964. Indeed, it is the swing states where the campaign is fought out, Obama and Romney made a total of 35 visits to Ohio between May and Election Day, 31 to Florida and 29 to Virginia.
Two-thirds (273 of 399) of the general-election campaign events in the 2016 presidential race were in just 6 states (Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, and Michigan).94% of the 2016 events (375 of the 399) were in 12 states
The Gender Gap refers to the fact that women have tend to vote Democrat-- in nine out of the ten elections between 1964 and 2000, women were significantly more supportive of the Democrat candidate than men.. In 2000, Bush gained the votes of 53% of men but only 43% of women. Gore, on the other hand, gained the votes of only 42% of men but 54% of women. The gap was even wider in 1996, when men split equally between Clinton and Dole but women favoured Clinton by 16 percentage points. But in 2004 the gender gap narrowed slightly. Bush enjoyed an 11-percentagepoint advantage among men while Kerry held only a 3-percentage-point advantage among women. But the gender gap was back in 2008, and in 2012 Obama gained an 11-percentage-point advantage among women whilst Romney had a 7-point advantage amongst men.
2016 Trump won 42% of the female vote Hilary won 54%- There was no 'female surge' Hilary did only a little better than Obama. Trump won 53% of men against Hilary's 42%
In several policy areas — abortion, defence, law and order, gun control and women's rights — the Democrats tend to take positions that are more favoured by women. Democrats are pro-choice on abortion, tend to favour lower levels of spending on defence, oppose capital punishment and support gun control. It was the Democrats who pushed — albeit unsuccessfully — for an Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution protecting the civil rights of women. In 2012, Romney further struggled with women voters after two Republican Senate candidates made injudicious remarks about rape; neither was his inelegant phrase about having been brought 'binders full of women' when making appointments as governor of Massachusetts exactly helpful. For many women, therefore, the Republican Party is out of touch. 2020 Trump reassured suburban women that he would give their husbands jobs.- For many women this displayed his vert old fashioned view of women.
Trump to women voters: 'We're getting your husbands back to work'
On October 16, 2020, Gallup polling found that 31% of Americans identified as Democrats, 31% identified as Republican, and 36% as Independent. Additionally, polling showed that 49% are either "Democrats or Democratic leaners" and 45% are either "Republicans or Republican leaners" when Independents are asked "do you lean more to the Democratic Party or the Republican Party?
So despite all that is said about the weakness of US political parties, party affiliation seems to be an important determinant of voting behaviour. In 12 out of the 16 presidential elections between 1952 and 2012, the party that managed to gain the highest level of support from its own identifiers was the party that won the election. In 2004, 89% of Democrats voted for Kerry, but 93% of Republicans voted for Bush. However, in both 2008 and 2012, while Obama won respectively 89% and 92% of the Democratic vote, McCain and Romney won respectively 90% and 93% of the Republican vote. What was significant in both elections was that far more Democrats turned out to vote than Republicans, thereby wiping out the Republicans' minor advantage.
Are independent- or swing voters the key? -- Not always
Elections are often said to be decided by so-called 'independent voters'. In seven of the nine elections from 1980 through to 2012, the candidate who won the majority of the independent votes won the election. But 2012 was one of those two exceptions with Romney beating Obama amongst independent voters 50% to 45%. A poll conducted by the Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation in July 2012 found that the one thing that independent voters were looking for from the two major parties was cooperation and compromise between them. When independent voters were asked, 'What's more important—parties sticking to their positions or cooperating across party lines, even if this means compromising?' only 24% of independents wanted the parties to stick to their positions whilst 70% wanted them to cooperate and compromise across party lines. When the same question was asked of self-identified Democrats and Republicans, the figures of those who wanted their party to compromise across party lines fell to 54% and 43% respectively.
2016 Hilary won 89% of Democrats, Trump won 90% o Republicans. Trump won 48% of Independents and Hilary 42%
The racial groups which are most significant are African-Americans and Hispanics. The reason for this is between 1980 and 2012, African-Americans never gave less than 83% support to the Democrats. This makes them the most loyal and predictable of groups. President Clinton was said to have a particular affinity with African-Americans during his presidency, and they were his most loyal group of supporters, especially during the difficult period of his impeachment and trial. With Barack Obama as the first African-American presidential candidate for a major party in 2008, the share of black people voting Democrat rose from 88% in 2004 to 95% in 2008. Black turnout was also up, accounting for 13% of the electorate in both 2008 and 2012 compared with 11% in 2004. But although black voters tend to overwhelmingly vote Democrat, they are not a monolith. According to a Pew Research Center study from January 2020, a quarter of black Democrats identify as conservative, and 43% as moderate.
Although Biden was personally not appealing to black voters- having a record in the 1990s of support for tough sentencing and mandatory sentencing for drug offences which disproportionately affected black people and during an interview in 2020 he appeared to take the black vote for granted by saying a voter who voted Trump was not really black, they still overwhelmingly voted for Biden.
Hispanics are the fastest growing group. According to the 2000 census, they formed 12% of the population, but by the 2010 census, this figure had increased to over 16%. They are a young group and a significant proportion are not yet of voting age, their full political importance is yet to show. The states where Hispanics make up more than 25% of the population include California, Nevada, Arizona, Texas and New Mexico. Hispanics are a disparate group — from Mexico, Puerto Rico and Cuba, as well as other Central American countries. Bush's Republican campaign in 2000 made a significant pitch for the Hispanic vote. Bush himself speaks fluent Spanish. His brother, Jeb Bush, the former governor of Florida, is married to a Hispanic. The Republican vote among Hispanics increased significantly from 20% in 1996 to 31% in 2000 and to 43% in 2004. But in 2008, the figure was 31% and down to 27% in 2012, with Obama holding a 44-percentage-point lead amongst Hispanic voters in 2012. As Hispanics become a larger cohort within the voting-age population in future decades, they will become an increasingly important racial group for the two parties to attract. 2016 Trump won the White vote by a significant margin-58% to 37%.
There was no surge of Hispanic voters for Hilary- given Trump's plan to build a wall between Mexico and his assertion that Mexica sends its 'criminals' and 'rapists' to the USA, this might seem hard to explain. However, Reagan's remark that 'Hispanic people were 'natural Republicans' may help. 65% voted Hilary and 29% Trump. So Trump did better amoung Hispanics than Romney.
2020 Trump’s relative success with Latino voters, particularly in Florida and Texas, demonstrates the fallacy of treating broad racial groups as blocs. Latinos as a whole voted for Joe Biden by a margin of more than 30 points, but Florida’s anti-socialist Cuban community backed Mr Trump by 55 per cent against 42 for Biden. Latino voters shifted towards Mr Trump by around 8 percentage points nationally since 2016. Many Hispanics were impressed by Trump's conservative values, fear of socialism and delight in Trump's nomination of anti-abortion judge Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court. A 2017 Gallup poll, for example, found that 67% of Hispanic people said they worried a great deal or a fair amount about illegal immigration - higher than the proportion of non-Hispanic whites (59%) who answered the same way.
First, Protestant voters tend to vote Republican, giving a majority of their votes to every Republican candidate from Ronald Reagan in 1980 to 'Mitt Romney in 2012. Protestant Christianity is closely linked with the religious right, with social conservatism, with the Bible Belt — a line of southern states from Texas to southern and central Virginia. Second, Catholic voters have tended to vote Democrat, giving a majority of their votes to Clinton in both 1992 and 1996, and to Gore in 2000. However, the Democrats' pro-choice' stance on abortion can cause problems for Catholic voters, whose church is unmistakably 'pro-life'. In 2004 Bush won 52% of the Catholic vote against a Democrat who was a Catholic, though the majority of Catholic voters returned to the Democratic Party in both 2008 and 2012, Obama having a 2-percentage-point lead among this group of voters in 2012.. One of the important issues in garnering this high level of support from white evangelicals is appointments to the Supreme Court. This group more than any other puts a high premium on the appointment of strict constructionist judges
Jewish voters vote solidly for Democrats. They gave 78% support to Clinton in both of his elections and 79% to Gore in 2000. One might have expected a rather higher percentage in 2000, given that Joe Lieberman, Gore's running mate, was Jewish (the first Jew to appear on a major party's national ticket). The 69% vote by Jewish voters for Obama in 2012, however, was their lowest vote for a Democratic candidate since 1984, reflecting their unease about Obama's first-term policy positions towards Israel. Jewish voters, who typically strongly support the Democrat Party. American Jews are usually strongly liberal, sympathising with the less fortunate and with minorities, and support greater government assistance for those with low socio-economic status. Despite issues with Israel and Palestine, Jews are far more likely to say that Muslims in America are discriminated against compared to the general population. However, Jews only make up around two per cent of the population.
There is a continuing correlation between frequency of attendance at religious services and voting for Republican candidates. Those 2012 voters who attended a religious service more than once a week cast 63% of their votes for Mitt Romney, whilst amongst those who stated they never attended such services, only 34% voted for
Romney. Despite his Mormon faith, Romney gained the votes of 78% of white evangelical Christians, a higher percentage than John McCain had won in 2008.
2016.Trump won the Christian vote (Protestant 58% -39%) Catholics (52%-45%) It looks like they voted Republican values rather than Trump's values.
White evangelicals constitute one of the most pro-Trump religious segments in America. Exit polls in 2016 reported that 80% of White evangelical Christians voted for Trump; Gallup data show that 74% of White, highly religious Protestants now approve of the job Trump is doing (a good surrogate for intention to vote for Trump); and a recent Pew Research report estimated that 82% of White evangelicals would vote for Trump over Biden. 2020
In 2012 there was a close correlation between age and voting. The younger the voters, the more likely they were to vote Democratic; the older they were, the more likely they were to vote Republican. President Obama received his strongest support from 18-29-year-olds; Governor Romney's strongest support came from those aged 65 and over. As with gender and race, this is linked to the policies espoused by the parties: the Democrats being more attractive to younger voters. GovernOr Romney even complained after the election that the President's Affordable Care Act provision, which allowed those up to 26 years old to stay on their parent's health insurance, was a 'gift' to young voters. 18-29-Year-olds supported Hilary (55%-37%) but again no'Jeremy Corbin like' surge. Obama won 60%. 2020 President Trump won the senior vote, but by a much smaller margin than in 2016. Voters aged 65 and older supported him 53-44 four years ago. On average the numbers suggest that the 18- to 29-year-old group, already heavily Democratic, did not significantly shift towards either party in 2020.
The gender gap may have widened in recent elections but the wealth gap has narrowed. It is not nearly as big as it was back in the New Deal period; not even as large as when President George H. W. Bush was elected in 1988. Then, the Republicans carried the highest income group by 25 percentage points — and the Democrats carried the lowest income group by the same margin.
In 2012, Obama did win those earning under $35,000 by 28 percentage points, but the disparity between the two candidates in other wealth groups was much less, with Romney's support increasing as personal income increased. As a rule, Obama had won the Wal-Mart/beer vote and Romney had won the Starbucks/wine vote. 2016 Hilary won fewer poorer voters than Obama. (53% 2016 63% 2012)
According to exit polling in the 2020 Presidential Election in the United States, 57 percent of surveyed voters making less than 50,000 U.S. dollars reported voting for former Vice President Joe Biden. In the race to become the next president of the United States, 54 percent of voters with an income of 100,000 U.S. dollars or more reported voting for incumbent President Donald Trump.
There are two important trends when it comes to voting in relation to geographic region. First, the Northeast has become the new heartland of the Democratic Party. Gone are the days of the Democrats' solid South'. Now it is the 'solid Northeast'. In the seven elections from 1984 through to 2008, the Northeast gave the Democratic Party candidate his largest percentage of the vote. In 2012, the Democrats won every north-eastern state. But the bad news for the Democrats is that the Northeast is the one region that has a declining proportion of the nation's population.
Second, the South has moved from being 'solid' for Democrats to being very Republican. This was shown most clearly when in 1996 the South was the only region in which the Democratic ticket of Clinton and Gore — both southerners — failed to beat the Republican ticket of Dole and Kemp, neither of whom was from the South. In 2000, the Republicans won every state in the South, including Gore's home state of Tennessee, and they did the same again in 2004. In 2008, Barack Obama managed to flip three southern states — Virginia, North Carolina and Florida — into the Democratic column. In 2012, the Republicans won back North Carolina, leaving Obama with just two southern states. However 2020 Biden took Georgia and narrowed the gap in Texas in S Carolina.
Biden's success in a traditionally Republican state was the culmination of slow, steady gains there by the party and reflected the changing demographics of the south- more diverse, more urban and younger. This was also reflected in the victories of both Democrats in the run off election for the Senate. In January 2021.
There is a high degree of correlation between voting and population area, in that the more densely populated areas tend to vote Democratic, while the more sparsely populated areas tend to vote Republican. The battleground of an election is therefore often in the suburbs. The Democrats have won at least 60% of the vote in cities over 500,000 in each of the last eight elections, with the exception of 1992 when independent candidate Ross Perot kept the Democratic vote down to 58% in big cities. But in ten of the last 11 presidential elections, the party that won the suburbs won the election. The one exception was 2012 when Romney beat Obama in the suburbs by 50% to 48%.
America is more and increasingly divided by the kind of community, with urban areas heavily supporting the Democrats while small towns and rural areas swung significantly to the Republicans. Whereas in 2012, Mitt Romney won small towns and rural areas by just 2 percentage points (50–48), in 2016 Trump won the same communities by 27 points (61–34).
It was particularly in small town and rural communities that had seen significant economic decline that Trump's message of ‘Make America great again’ most resonated.
The geographic polarisation of the US continued. When Bill Clinton won election to the White House in 1992, two-thirds of votes were cast in counties that were fairly even split between Democrats and Republicans, with the winning party securing less than 60 per cent of the vote. Less than one per cent were in ultra-partisan counties where one side won 80 per cent. Since then, the middle has been steadily hollowed out of American political geography. This year evenly split counties accounted for only around 40 per cent of votes, while one vote in 13 was cast in a deeply red or blue county where supporters of the winning party outnumber their opponents four-to-one or more.
If millions of Americans live in communities of like minded people where alternative views are never encountered and people share the views they have found on selected media-is this the root of the riots and attacks on the Congress seen in January 2020 and the widely held belief that the election was stolen from Trump?
'This election thus carved a divide between cities and non-metropolitan areas as stark as American politics has produced since the years just before and after 1920.'
'I love the poorly educated.'
'We won with young. We won with old. We won with highly educated. We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated.' Donald Trump 2016
In 2012, Obama won both voters who had graduated from college and those who hadn't; he took 50 percent among the former group and 51 percent among the latter. In 2016 there was a far bigger divide. Clinton won voters with a college degree 52 percent to 43 percent. Trump won voters without a college degree by eight points. Trump 67% White without a college degree-Hilary 28%
Recent Pew Research Center studies also have found increasing differences in party identification between those with more and less education. And there is a growing ideological divide between these groups, with highly educated adults holding increasingly liberal attitudes across a range of issues.
This might be because education tends to produce more socially liberal values — such as greater acceptance of different racial groups and religions, and support for civil liberties — so more educated voters are more likely to reject the socially conservative elements of the Republican Party. However, some have argued that there is a tendency for liberals or Democrats to value education more, so they stay in education for longer — so being liberal leads to higher education, not the other way around.
'It's the Economy Stupid'
Policies can be an important determinant of voting. Which policies they are tends to vary from one election cycle to another. Immigration, health reform, gun control can all be important but the state of the economy consistently remains critical. In 1980 Reagan asked voters if they 'felt better off' after four years of Carter and in 1992 Clintons campaign manger told his tean that if they wondered what the election was about they should remember ' It's the economy stupid'. In 2012 Obama succeeded in persuading enough voters both that recovery was under way and also that the economic difficulties which he had faced in his first term were so severe that he could not be blamed for failing to turn things around in 4 years.
2016 the economy was seen as the most significant issue and Hilary won overall among those who said it was the most important issue - but Just 1 in 3 voters said they thought the country was “generally going in the right direction.” Clinton won 90 percent of that group. But, among the two-thirds of people who said things were “seriously off on the wrong track,” Trump took 69 percent. So Trump won the 'something's gotta change' vote.
Until the arrival of the pandemic and the Covid virus in March 2020, it would be fair to say that Trump appeared to be heading for a second term on the back of a booming economy.
Tom Steyer took the debate stage in Manchester, NH during the Democrat primary debate to make the case that the 2020 presidential election will come down to the economy