Campaign Diaries

I often describe how the massive shifts in partisan breakdown make Democrats heavily favored this year, and it is important to remember that talk of that shift does not simply result from national or state polls in which the share of self-identified Democrats is much higher than it was in the 2004 exit polls. There is tangible evidence beyond polls to support the argument that Democrats have gained a significant advantage over Republicans over the past 4 years. First, the difference in turnout in the two parties’ respective primaries. And second, voter registration patterns.

We already knew about Pennsylvania, where Democrats are posting massive gains at a rapid pace: Just in the two months after the 04/22 primary, Democrats increased their registration lead by 40,000 voters — more than a fourth of Kerry’s lead over Bush in 2004. Now, we are getting similar reports from Florida and Nevada:

• In Florida, the discrepancy is impressive: Since January alone, Democratic rolls have increased by a net 106,508 voters and the Republican rolls by 16,686. That is a 7:1 ratio, which has allowed Dems to outnumber their opposition in 6 new counties. Groups like ACORN are devoting a lot of resources to register new voters, and the law passed by Governor Crist that reestablishes felons’ right to vote should also have an impact on turnout.

• In Nevada, the gap is even more outstanding as it represents a significant shift away from the 2004 numbers, where GOP voters constituted 1% more of the electorate than Democratic voters. Bush won the state by 3% and 21,000 votes. Now, Democrats have gained a 6% advantage — 55,000 voters ahead — and their advantage keeps growing: 5,000 just between May and June.

Naturally, the importance of these numbers should not be overstated since this does not mean that voters switched from red to blue but that (1) a number of Republicans became independents, (2) a number of independents became Democrats and (3) Democrats are registering more new voters. The first two of these lessons will not necessarily result in many new votes: independents who embraced the Democratic Party were surely more liberal-leaning in the first place and those who left the GOP are probably still willing to vote for the party’s nominee. Overall, what this means is that the pool of voters who are now independents is more conservative than the pool of voters who identified themselves as independents in 2004.

That said, there is no question that for Democrats to now secure the vote of a growing number of independents is a very positive development for a party that had trouble winning that group in 2004. And the GOP is bleeding support of disgruntled conservatives, a group that Obama is intent on seducing. The enthusiasm gap that this is creating will surely have a major impact on the election and on the two parties’ turnout operations. Add to that the fact that Democratic efforts of voter registration seem far superior this cycle, and Republicans have a problem.

The GOP will now have to play catch-up: For Democrats to outnumber Republicans in a state like Kentucky does not mean much, as many registered Democrats there vote for Republicans in federal races — but the same cannot be said in Nevada. As long as Obama can secure his base, Republicans will have to keep their base as mobilized and win a large share of the independent vote just to pull even with the Democrat. In Nevada, that’s a 6% deficit they now have to catch-up to, and that’s no easy task.

Also, the New York Times magazine published a long article this week-end on Florida’s Cuban vote and whether it would be less loyal to the GOP this year. Some are predicting that Fidel Castro’s departure and the emergence of a generation of Cuban-American voters that is less attached to Cuban politics might make this demographic group no longer vote on which party they perceive is more hostile to communist Cuba and thus start exhibiting voting patterns that resemble other Hispanic groups.

The consequences of any such shift cannot be overstated, as it would tremendously endanger the GOP’s hold on Florida. In 2004, Bush won the state’s Latino vote (15% of the vote) with 56%. If Democrats simply get ahead among Florida’s Hispanic vote, it would make it very difficult for Republicans to win statewide elections. This is what happened to the GOP in California, once a reliable state for them: The Hispanic vote turned against them in the 1990s after Republicans heightened their anti-immigration stance and the party never recovered.

Yet, it is important to note that there is such speculation about the Cuban vote every four years (perhaps not about Castro’s declining influence but certainly about the generational gap), but there hasn’t been a significant shift. I am not aware of any evidence that would suggest that 2008 will be different. The all-Cuban FL-21 and FL-25 House elections will be a key test as to whether there are any changing allegiances.