Following the recent election, the establishment narrative has been that Obama over-reached; his initiatives were too liberal and he needs to tack to the right. This view isn't based on analysis, rather it is more a matter of group-think among the punditocracy. To them it's obvious.
However, actual analyses suggest that the right-wing surge in the 2010 mid-term elections hinged on Obama not being progressive enough and thereby loosing the support of his base.
First, lets dismiss with the false common wisdom, promoted by the establishment, that presidents almost
always suffer losses in the US House of Representatives during the mid-term elections. It's taken as unalterable fact. It's true that this occurred for George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, but during Franklin Roosevelt's first mid-term election, after he put forth radically progressive programs, the Democratic Party
gained seats in the US House of Representatives.
Second, is the contradiction between the establishment narratives of the mid-term elections. On the one hand, losses in the US House were predicted on the basis of an "enthusiasm gap;" the narrative was that Democrats were disillusioned with Obama and thus less likely to work on the mid-term election campaign and come out to vote on election day. This narrative conflicts with the post-election interpretation that says Obama is being too liberal and needs to tack to the right.
Third, there are the numbers. Below is a comparison of exit poll information for US House vote results for 2008 and 2010, each with about 17,000 people surveyed. As a percentage, Democratic voters were a significantly smaller proportion in 2010 than in 2008.
Percentage of Turnout by Party for
US House Vote
2008 Vs 2010
Party Affiliation
| 2008 Percentage
| 2010 Percentage
|
---|
Democratic | 40%
| 35%
|
Republican
| 33%
| 35%
|
Independent | 28%
| 29%
|
But percentages only tell part of the story. Did Democrats stay home, or did more Republicans come out in 2010 than 2008.
According to ABC News (Bold added),
[the] current estimate is that 90 million people voted [in 2010]. Exit poll says 45 percent were Obama voters in 2008. That’s 40.5 million voters.
In 2008, Obama won 69.5 million votes. So about 29 million Obama voters did not show up in 2010.
Exit poll also says 45 percent of people who voted yesterday were McCain voters in 2008, again 40.5 million. That, vs. his nearly 60 million in 2008, means about 19.5 million McCain voters did not show up.
So Obama had nearly 10 million more no-shows.
The following tables show that, of the Democrats that
did come out to vote in 2010, they for the most part stayed with the Democratic party compared with 2008 (91-92%).
However, there were shifts in both Republican and Independent votes away from the Democrats to the Republicans. As a percentage, we see a big shift in Independents voting 51% Democratic in 2008 to only 37% Democratic in 2010.
US House Vote by Party Affiliation - 2010
Party and % of Turnout
| % of Vote Dem
| % of Vote Rep
| % of Vote Other
|
---|
Democratic 35%
| 91
| 7
| 2
|
Republican 35%
| 5
| 94
| 1
|
Independent 29%
| 37
| 56
| 7
|
US House Vote by Party Affiliation - 2008
Party and % of Turnout
| % of Vote Dem
| % of Vote Rep
| % of Vote Other
|
---|
Democratic 40%
| 92
| 7
| 1
|
Republican 33%
| 9
| 89
| 2
|
Independent 28%
| 51
| 42
| 6
|
But it's wrong to conclude that Independents simply jumped ship from Democrats to Republicans. About 48.5 million Independents voted in 2008, but only about 34 million voted in 2010, nearly a 15 million voter difference. If the "enthusiasm gap" story is correct, leading to progressive Democrats and Independents staying home, then concluding that voters seek a more "centrist" or conservative policy agenda, based on 2010 exit polls in which many "unenthused" progressive voices were absent, is in error.
Sources:Re-posted from
Challenge the Establishment Blog.
2010 Exit Polls for House voting - CNN2008 Exit Polls for House voting - CNNThanks to
GLH Blog for the ABC News information.