RGIII and the Future of American Politics

For a better read, view this email in your browser. Dec. 3, 2014 No. 149 By Jonathan V. Last COLD OPEN One of the reasons the left was so gobsmacked by the midterm election was that they have spent the last two decades (or so) under the belief that demographics are in the process of delivering the Democratic party to a promised land where it holds an operating majority of voters by simple dint of race and ethnicity. This demographic destiny was supposed to have been grinding both quickly and inexorably in their direction. Which meant that not only were Democrats on the right side of some grand force_you know how they love that_but that with every passing election, their prospects were supposed to get better. So when the voting got worse for the Democrats_and not just a little, but a lot worse_it upset not just their immediate political plans, but their entire conceptual framework for how their party is supposed to operate. As a matter of practical politics, you could distill the Democrats' surprise and despair into a single electoral proposition: White voters still matter. Three out of every four voters in November were white_which is up only slightly from the share of white votes in 2012. Byron York put the raw power of white voters in perspective last year when he ran a simulation on the 2012 election asking the following question: Would Mitt Romney have been better off winning 72 percent of the Hispanic vote_a colossal 45-point swing_or by increasing his share of the white vote by a measly 4 percentage points. The answer, as York found, wasn't even close. All of which is why political scientist George Hawley's new book, White Voters in 21st Century America, is so important. (Particularly for the professionals who run campaigns.) I've written about Hawley before. He's an interesting guy who looks at electoral politics empirically. In his new book, he makes a very close examination of the voting patterns of whites_how they differ geographically; how different white subgroups have trended in their politics; and even how voting behavior of whites changes in response to diversity. It's a fascinating book, filled with detailed, data-drive insights. For instance, in 2012, the single biggest driver of white votes for Mitt Romney was religiosity. It wasn't even close. Consider the effect of income on voting_white voters in the top quartile of income were a little less than twice as likely to vote for Romney. But born-again Protestants who attended church weekly were more than four times as likely to vote for Romney. There's a great deal of interesting data in Hawley's White Voters in 21st Century America (though much of it is quite technical). But perhaps the most important take-away is that whites are the most politically-heterodox racial group in America_that is, they do not vote in a bloc for one party. Most people assume that this resistance to identity politics is the America norm, and that the identity politics driving voting in other groups is an aberration which will be undone over time. Hawley's big question is whether or not we have this backwards: If perhaps white voting behavior has been the exception to the identity politics rule. And, consequently, if it's this aberration which might be diminishing. It's a troubling notion. And I suspect that this_not immigration, or diversity, or any of the other things we hear about so often_will be the big driver of politics in the coming decades. Hawley's White Voters in 21st Century America is a challenging book, but it's worth the effort. It contributes mightily to our understanding of what's really going on in American electoral politics. LOOKING BACK "Republicans, giddy and gloating, are understandably proud of the outcome of the election. Democrats from Boston to San Francisco are on a 24-hour suicide watch. Before the GOP euphoria gets out of hand, though, consider that the next four years could be challenging in ways unimagined. "I'm not thinking mainly of the president's domestic agenda, court vacancies, or Iraq, difficult as those tasks may be. No, the far greater challenge may come in mastering the global economic Rubik's Cube of a world dramatically more financially integrated than even when the president's father was in office. No surprise event, sudden imbalance, or price shock occurs these days without ramifications on our shores. Worse, a lot of the old, reliable solutions may no longer suffice. Even the experts are confounded." _David M. Smick, "Be Afraid..." from our December 6, 2004, issue. Remember you get full access to THE WEEKLY STANDARD archive when you subscribe.   No Deal With Iran.   Portman Passes on Presidency.   THE READING LIST Matthew Continetti on Christopher Nolan and Interstellar. * * * A report on ISIS at the border of Turkey. * * * Alabama-Auburn: The 2013 Iron Bowl, a year later. INSTANT CLASSIC "Where, in short, are the flying cars? Where are the force fields, tractor beams, teleportation pods, antigravity sleds, tricorders, immortality drugs, colonies on Mars, and all the other technological wonders any child growing up in the mid-to-late twentieth century assumed would exist by now? Even those inventions that seemed ready to emerge_like cloning or cryogenics_ended up betraying their lofty promises. What happened to them? "We are well informed of the wonders of computers, as if this is some sort of unanticipated compensation, but, in fact, we haven't moved even computing to the point of progress that people in the fifties expected we'd have reached by now. We don't have computers we can have an interesting conversation with, or robots that can walk our dogs or take our clothes to the Laundromat. "As someone who was eight years old at the time of the Apollo moon landing, I remember calculating that I would be thirty-nine in the magic year 2000 and wondering what the world would be like. Did I expect I would be living in such a world of wonders? Of course. Everyone did. Do I feel cheated now? It seemed unlikely that I'd live to see all the things I was reading about in science fiction, but it never occurred to me that I wouldn't see any of them." _ David Graeber on our lost future THE LAST WORD We close today with sports. Because I come from southern New Jersey and grew up rooting for Philadelphia teams, my heart is coal-black. Sure, I enjoy it when the Eagles do well_as they have, again, this year. But like a good Philly fan, I know that the 9-3 record I'm staring at right now is just prelude to an early playoff loss. In Philadelphia, every spot of silver is surrounded by big, ugly clouds. No, for me the real pleasure in sports comes from luxuriating in the failure of others. Which is why my time in Washington has been, in a way, a Golden Age of sports fandom: I've had a front-row seat as the Washington Redskins became a national joke. The most recent Redskins calamity was the benching, last week, of quarterback Robert Griffin III. But this is no ordinary QB controversy: Griffin seems destined to replace Ryan Leaf as the biggest draft disaster in the history of the NFL. The symmetry between Leaf and Griffin is remarkable and pleasing. In both the 1998 draft and the 2012 draft, the top pick was held by the Indianapolis Colts. In both drafts, the top quarterback prospect was graded as being one of the best in league history_Peyton Manning in 1998 and Andrew Luck in 2012. In both drafts, the #2 quarterback was a player with a meteoric rise from relative obscurity. And in both cases, otherwise neutral observers honestly believed that there was very little difference between #1 and #2. Oh_one other thing: In both drafts, a desperate, foolish team traded to jump up and take the #2 guy. In 1998, the San Diego Chargers gave up their #3 pick, a first-round pick, a second-round pick, and Pro-Bowler Eric Metcalf to get Leaf. In 2012, the Redskins gave up the #6 pick, two first-round picks, and a second-round pick to get Griffin. Four years after he was drafted for a king's ransom, Ryan Leaf was out of the league. Griffin is headed in the same direction, though it may take an additional year or two before bottom-feeding general managers (Hello Oakland!) give up on him. The spectacle of RLeaf III unspooling has been especially delicious because the people of Washington have been so insanely Pollyanna-ish about him. The D.C. sports establishment_both media and fans_have been ready to put Griffin in the Hall of Fame since the day he was drafted. What with the RGIII HOPE posters, the special-edition videogame tie-in sneakers, the triumph of the will-style rehab video, his personal RGIII logo_"revealed," of course, on Instagram_well, the entire thing was as ridiculous as it was insufferable. Even Ryan Leaf wasn't that obnoxious. And to add injury to insult, at least in the 1998 draft, there weren't any other good quarterbacks after Manning_only Charlie Batch and Matt Hasselbeck spent any significant time starting in the league. But in the 2012 draft there were three other high-caliber quarterbacks available_Luck, Russell Wilson, and Nick Foles. The Redskins managed to pick the one clunker. Couple that with price they paid, and the mass delusion about his talent, and you have what's probably the worst draft bust in league history. And I couldn't be happier. So as he leaves town, I thank RLeafIII for the memories: They'll be a great comfort when the Eagles lose in the first round of the playoffs. Probably to the Detroit Lions. Best, JVL P.S. To unsubscribe, click here. I won't take it personally. MORE FROM THE WEEKLY STANDARD The Bitter End Mary Landrieu's last stand. Read more...   French Curtains Eric Zemmour's raw attack of France's elites. Read more...   Mark Strand, 1934-2014 Lee Smith remembers a poet laureate. Read more...     Online Store Squeeze the head to the left to relieve stress. Yes you can! Only at our store.     Subscribe Today Get the magazine that The Economist has called "a wry observer of the American scene."   Read probing editorials and unconventional analysis from political writers with a dose of political humor at weeklystandard.com. To unsubscribe, click here.