A friend who is aware of my interest in the link between demographic change and political change slipped me this article, Why Demography Does Not Equal Destiny. You don’t hear much these days about demographics in politics since last November 9th, other than the talk about that new group that politicos recently discovered; the white working class. Who are these guys and where did they come from?
So it’s no surprise there is a lot of handwringing among the Demographics=Destiny crowd. The article summarizes its main points:
- Demographic change is not evenly dispersed in states and voting districts throughout the country.
- Voting behavior is not static. Voters more readily change which party they support than the demography-is-destiny models anticipated.
- Despite the large change in the demographic composition of the electorate, most voters still do not self-identify as liberals. In fact, liberals remain bronze medalists in the ideological breakdown of the electorate—ever since the question was first asked decades ago.
I don’t disagree with the generalities of these points. In fact I share them to a degree and wrote about the snags and hiccups on the way to permanent Democratic rule over two years ago. Most voters are not liberal, at least they are not self-identified ones, and the purging of the moderate wing that began in 2010 has left the Democratic Party with few moderates for mainstream Americans to identify with. Political decisions matter too, and President Obama’s decision to go make Obamacare, rather than “comprehensive immigration reform” his first massive push doomed his party to an easy opening for attack. The Tea Party sprang up to fight Obamacare and the political cost for moderate blue dog Democrats to vote for it was the loss of their seats, leaving a smaller, and more left leaning Democratic Party in its wake.
So for the past few years, the Democratic Party has been hurt more by stupid political decisions than helped by Demographic change. Nobody told them that they had to make a granny with 30 years of criminal investigations and corruption behind her the party’s nominee.
Even though the Democrats nominated the worst candidate possible she still won the popular vote by 3 million votes. That really brings truth to the old saying about yellow dog Democrats; they would vote for a dog if it was running on the Democratic ticket. But that goes to Point One; demographic change is not evenly dispersed. No it isn’t. Particularly when you consider that the Hillary’s popular vote lead is entirely attributable to California. Without California, Trump won the popular vote by 1.4 million votes. That’s the power of demographics.
California is the textbook case, and the canary in the coal mine on unbridled Demographic change. The Center for Immigration Studies did a study comparing California from 1970 to 2008. Just a few observations:
Legal and illegal immigrants went from 9 to 27%.
Went from 7th most educated workforce to 50th (that’s dead last for the California educated!).
Went from 25th in income inequality to 6th.
Conclusion? If you try to replicate Latin America in California, don’t be surprised if you get something that looks very much like…Latin America; high income inequality, with a very wealthy and educated elite with a large poor and uneducated mass of people, and of course, one party rule. California has successfully duplicated the Mexican model. And California, which has for decades been the early adopter of future American trends, shows us what the entire country will look like in a few decades.
So yes, other things matter too, not just demographics, however as California demonstrates, all things being equal, over time demographic change is probably the largest single determinate. Demographically speaking, as Ann Coulter pointed out, “If the same country that voted in 1980 had voted in 2012, Romney would have won a bigger landslide than Reagan did.”
In the Trump, Black Swan era, it’s easy to dismiss demographic change as having an effect on our politics, but there it is, chugging along, year after year, turning the United States into California.