How did Reagan Democrats vote post Reagan?

[pbrower2a]

A regional split explains much more. 


My guess -- in the Mountain and Deep South:
 
1988: Lean Bush
1992: Lean Clinton
1996: Strong Clinton
2000: 50/50
2004: 50/50
2008: Lean McCain
2012: Strong  Romney


My guess -- elsewhere
 
1988: Lean Bush
1992: Lean Clinton
1996: Strong Clinton
2000: 50/50
2004: Lean Bush
2008: Strong Obama
2012: Lean Obama

[Nym90]

I think a lot of political junkies overestimate the extent to which ideology is determinative of vote choice.

Reagan was the most charismatic Presidential candidate perhaps ever (which shouldn't be a surprise, considering that he was a professional actor). Many voted for him due to personal characteristics. Most of those "Reagan Democrats" haven't voted for another Republican since.

However, it is true that many who identified as Democrats but voted for Reagan were too conservative for the modern Democratic party and are thus now Republicans, or at least independents.

So overall, I would say they are a swing group.

[136or142]

I remember in the era of Mondale and Dukakis a lot of people telling me the only time they ever voted Republican was Nixon in 1972. They voted for Mondale and Dukakis, but not McGovern.

True, but my point was the Nixon was the first Republican to go after the so-called mostly white 'blue collar' (or working class if you prefer) workers that had been part of the Democratic base up until then due to their unionism by emphasizing to some degree social issues (opposition to busing, starting 'the war on drugs' years before Reagan (re)started it...), by promoting himself as a cold war hawk and by especially espousing 'law and order.'

In many other ways, Nixon would probably be considered a 'RINO' today and obviously even his 'war hawk' credentials would in some areas be questioned with actions we are all familiar with, just as would Ronald Reagan.

Of course, Eisenhower also received a fair percentage of votes from Democrats, but that was mainly due to his personal popularity and, to a lesser degree, Democratic Party fatigue and was probably not so much based on issues.

Ronald Reagan largely just followed on Nixon's strategy though he obviously added in economics concerns that weren't as big an issue for Nixon given the economy at the time in the late 1960s.  So, that is why I say the more accurate term for these largely white blue collar (working class) social conservative former Democrats is 'Nixon Democrats.' and not 'Reagan Democrats.'

Of course, busing wasn't much of an issue by 1980 (I don't believe it was anyway, though it was mentioned in a WKRP episode) but Reagan appealed to (mostly) white working class voters with anti government rhetoric and tax cuts.  Interesting that in being 'anti government' Reagan also promised to wage a 'war on drugs' (and crime in general, though not white collar crime) as well as dramatically increase defense spending.  In regards to tax cuts, while some tax cuts did go to the white working class, it was at least partly taken away by later increases on payroll taxes.

The implied message of Reagan though was that (white) working class voters shouldn't have to pay taxes to support the 'others.'

"Nixon Democrat" is a rarely used term, but there are some political scientists and U.S historians who use the term and I didn't originate the argument.

Here is one:
https://books.google.ca/books?id=NFT1sAoJyqgC&pg=PT354&lpg=PT354&dq=nixon+democrats+not+reagan+democrats&source=bl&ots=mjit-RErmV&sig=TKy_SX_Nq147bBd06tAUmCRivT4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=46mDVYy-JYHpsQW7-YDoDQ&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=nixon%20democrats%20not%20reagan%20democrats&f=false

Here is another who argues they might even be more accurately referred to as "Wallace Democrats"

https://books.google.ca/books?id=53rmOMcKGZ8C&pg=PA243&lpg=PA243&dq=nixon+democrats+not+reagan+democrats&source=bl&ots=gFG6oQhLnV&sig=-7yZnxk2ZtZ8ecDBet9ilddnt_s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=46mDVYy-JYHpsQW7-YDoDQ&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=nixon%20democrats%20not%20reagan%20democrats&f=false

Wallace in the end only received something like 13% of the vote mostly from southern states, but for awhile he was polling around 30% and had significant support in many midwestern states and even liberal states like Massachusetts.

Gerald Ford it seems according to the second book appealed more to the traditional 'country club' Republicans and may not have gone after the white working class vote, which largely went for Jimmy Carter.

[136or142]

I think a lot of political junkies overestimate the extent to which ideology is determinative of vote choice.

Reagan was the most charismatic Presidential candidate perhaps ever (which shouldn't be a surprise, considering that he was a professional actor). Many voted for him due to personal characteristics. Most of those "Reagan Democrats" haven't voted for another Republican since.

However, it is true that many who identified as Democrats but voted for Reagan were too conservative for the modern Democratic party and are thus now Republicans, or at least independents.

So overall, I would say they are a swing group.

As a Democratic supporter, I'd say Clinton was more charismatic.  That isn't a surprise. While people may vote on charisma as much as issues, Democrats tend to like charismatic moderate/liberals while Republicans tend to like charismatic conservatives/lunatics.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Wallace in the end only received something like 13% of the vote mostly from southern states, but for awhile he was polling around 30% and had significant support in many midwestern states and even liberal states like Massachusetts.

I do remember that some of the "Nixon Democrats" I talked to in my day thought Wallace was a backwards joke. I'm pretty sure the "Nixon Democrats" I knew were for Humphrey in '68.

I remember reading that McGovern lacked labor support that other Democrats had. I think he was against "right-to-work" per se, but he voted against repealing Taft-Hartley.

[136or142]

Wallace in the end only received something like 13% of the vote mostly from southern states, but for awhile he was polling around 30% and had significant support in many midwestern states and even liberal states like Massachusetts.

I do remember that some of the "Nixon Democrats" I talked to in my day thought Wallace was a backwards joke. I'm pretty sure the "Nixon Democrats" I knew were for Humphrey in '68.

I remember reading that McGovern lacked labor support that other Democrats had. I think he was against "right-to-work" per se, but he voted against repealing Taft-Hartley.

Wallace obviously lost a good deal of support during the election.  Can't say that I agree that a lot of "Nixon Democrats" supported Humphrey in 1968 as the Democrats only dropped around 5% from 1968 to 1972 (43% to 38%) although it's possible those 5% were all the Nixon Democrats.  Of course, there were probably a handful of voters who switched from Nixon or Wallace to McGovern, especially those who always vote against the incumbent party.

I don't know if there were specific issues the unions didn't like about McGovern or if they just saw him as having no hope of winning.

[RogueBeaver]

Meany used a certain labor vote as a fig leaf to ditch McGovern, but in reality Meany was a hawk and cultural conservative who loathed the New Left. He called McGovern an "apologist for the Communist world."

[136or142]

Meany used a certain labor vote as a fig leaf to ditch McGovern, but in reality Meany was a hawk and cultural conservative who loathed the New Left. He called McGovern an "apologist for the Communist world."

While all that is true, he was also according to wiki a proponent of industrial planning (what would be called now, and probably even then, socialism) a backer of universal healthcare and, though not an early supporter of civil rights, also a supporter prior to the passage of the civil rights act of 1964. He also battled the corruption in the Teamster's Union.

His opposition to the New Left seems rooted in his belief that "When you don't have anything, you have nothing to lose by these radical actions. But when you become a person who has a home and has property, to some extent you become conservative." which sounds completely sensible to me. (That quote is from 1965).

He also endorsed neither McGovern or Nixon in 1972.

So, despite his support for the Vietnam War,  his opposition to gay marriage and his support of police crackdowns on some anti Vietnam protests, he sounds on balance to be a rather decent person, and certainly a much better person than the vile Peter Brennan.

[Badger]

In the south, they leaned R against Bubba (many having become full-fledged Republicans in the intervening 12-16 years).

In the north, they largely voted Democratic after 84, with only a "strong lean" for Dukakis.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Clinton during 90's, Dubya during 2000's and switched to Obama in 2008, but voted Romney post 2010.

[Prince of Salem]

After 84:

Strong Bush
Lean Clinton
Lean Clinton
Lean Bush
Lean Bush
Strong McCain
Strong Romney

This, definitely.

[dudeabides]

My guess
1988: Lean Bush
1992: Lean Clinton
1996: Strong Clinton
2000: 50/50
2004: 50/50
2008: Lean McCain
2012: Lean Romney

1988: Bush 52% Dukakis 47%
1992: Clinton 50% Bush 42% Perot 8%
1996: Clinton 53% Dole 44% Perot 3%
2000: Gore 49.9% Bush 49.8%
2004: Bush 50% Kerry 49%
2008: Obama 52% McCain 47%
2012: Romney 51% Obama 48%

[Bojack Horseman]

In the South, they never stopped voting Republican.

[Skill and Chance]

My guess
1988: Lean Bush
1992: Lean Clinton
1996: Strong Clinton
2000: 50/50
2004: 50/50
2008: Lean McCain
2012: Lean Romney

1988: Bush 52% Dukakis 47%
1992: Clinton 50% Bush 42% Perot 8%
1996: Clinton 53% Dole 44% Perot 3%
2000: Gore 49.9% Bush 49.8%
2004: Bush 50% Kerry 49%
2008: Obama 52% McCain 47%
2012: Romney 51% Obama 48%

This looks right, but I think you're underestimating G.W. Bush's share by 2-4% both times.  The swing to Romney was quite pronounced among this group, which many seem to have overlooked.