War may tilt partisan balance (let's hope so)

The Hill ^ | April 16, 2003 | Dr. David Hill

[fightinJAG]

War may tilt partisan balance By Dr. David Hill

Wars make a difference. Like other cataclysmic events of our times, including assassinations and economic depressions or recessions, wars become milestones in the evolution of our individual political identities. Recent polling suggests that the war against Iraq may be shaping the partisanship — the political party that people identify with — of a new generation of voters.

Once upon a time, lasting well into the 1960s for most Americans, our partisanship was something we inherited. “Grandpa was a Republican, so I am, too.” “Us Thompsons are all Democrats.”

That was all there was to it. Our party was our tribe. We generally belonged to a social class and church that reinforced these tribal ties. We intermarried with our tribe. We took jobs close to home to maintain tribal ties. So our partisanship was seldom a matter that required much thought or introspection.

But the bonds of those partisan ties weakened. Higher education qualified people for employment outside their social classes. People moved far from ancestral homes. Episcopalians married Catholics. The assassinations of the Kennedys and King, the civil rights movement and Vietnam War are thought to have created an apocalyptic cocktail that changed the partisan complexion of this nation forever, leaving the white South more Republican and baby boomers everywhere more Democratic.

Such partisan ties have profoundly influenced elections in the past two decades. They have been competitive times, with the Republicans and Democrats closely matched in partisan percentages and electoral successes. Therefore, any trend that might upset that partisan balance merits close scrutiny.

That’s why we should pay attention to recent polls by the Pew Research Center and anecdotal reporting by The New York Times of college students’ views, both suggesting that voters under 30 years old are among the most supportive of the war with Iraq.

During a time when most young Americans are forming the political partisanship that they no longer inherit, along comes Sept. 11 and the war with Iraq. History will ultimately judge those as critical events in aligning the majority of today’s under-30 generation with the Republican Party.

Expect the first manifestation of those new Republicans to be visible during the 2004 election campaigns. We will see TV spots featuring young returning reservist veterans of the Iraq War endorsing Republican candidates who challenge Democrats who waffled on the war. We will see young parents endorsing Republicans with the courage to make the world safer for their families.

This war was fought and won by young men and women who will return as heroes in their communities. They work at the mall, the police station, the local insurance agency. They will become an inspiration and role model for others of their generation.

And they know which party supported them. It wasn’t the party of Daschle and Pelosi. That impression, formed in the crucible of war, could last a lifetime.

Dr. David B. Hill is director of Hill Research Consultants, a Texas-based firm that has polled for Republican candidates and causes since 1988.

[fightinJAG]

"Recent polling suggests that the war against Iraq may be shaping the partisanship — the political party that people identify with — of a new generation of voters."

I saw a report by a journalist from MTV who spent several weeks with the troops in the field before the war started. His comment was that having several hundred thousand young people who were combat veterans in a popular war would change our country for at least a generation.

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

Is there any truth to the rumor that the dems are trying to get a Constitutional Amendment requiring 100 votes in The Senate in order for a judicial appointment to reach the floor for a vote?

[colorado tanker]

Tom Daschle is troubled and concerned about this.

[Little Bill]

One of the intersesting things that I have noticed is the age of the FReepers that come to Rallies and Freeps, Twenties and Thirties, I am a boomer, first evolution, I am very proud of these young people, they have their act together.

[My2Cents]

He skirted the obvious conclusion: The Democrat Party may experience political oblivion for at least a generation (or at least until the current generation of Democrat leaders dies out). This is interesting, because the election of 2000 showed the nation polarized, but evenly balanced between the poles (rural vs. urban, marrieds vs. singles, interior of the country vs. the two coast). We need a break-out election to decisively tip the balance. The 2004 election proved that national security, after 9/11, trumped the economy. So on the #1 issue of our era, the Democrats have been wrong, wrong, wrong, and most voters know it. The activists in the Democrat Party hate George W. Bush more than they love America, and most voters know it. In a time where leadership is defined by moral clarity, the Democrats have proven to be morally bankrupt, and most voters know it.

We're still quite a ways out from the next year's election, but a blow-out of Nixon/McGovern portions is possible. And that could seal the fate of the Democrats for a generation.

[My2Cents]

I'm right with you, Bill. Sadly, our generation (Boomers) spent so much time trying to "find ourselves," that time has passed us by. We've wasted a lot of what should have been our time in the spotlight. The first President of our generation was perhaps the worst person (perhaps not the worst President, but the worst person) to ever serve in that office. W is redeeming us a bit. But I feel better about the coming generation, more so than I do about my own.

[Dark Wing]

For your information and evaluation.

[ffusco]

Bush is ideologically a pre-1968 Boomer. Most Boomers are ideologically post-1968, Vietnam and Watergate were the defining momenst for them.

The Boomers are petty, vain, shallow, nearsighted, narcissistic and selfish.

No, I'm not bitter that my Boomer parents divorced when I was 3 years old.............

[My2Cents]

The Boomers are petty, vain, shallow, nearsighted, narcissistic and selfish.

You pretty much described x42. His self-absorption appealed to that whole post-68 Boomer mentality, which is where he derived his support.

[ffusco]

Exactly, he vallidated their whole bag!
The loveless marriage, The infidelity, the contempt for the military, The moral relativism, the greed....

And they just won't go away!

[Nick Danger]

Oh good, here's another comeback for the Emerging Democratic Majority types who say that Republicans are hosed because the minorities are coming to get us.

Maybe not.

[Little Bill]

The Boomers are petty, vain, shallow, nearsighted, narcissistic and selfish.

I don't think that all boomers meet the above quals. My Old Man was a near RINO, but my Grandfather, was hard corps conservitive, 19th Century (Born 1886), take no prisoners type. There were values and you went with them or you were one of those.

I went into the Army in 1965 and spent most of the next three years out of the country and came back to a different world. The thing that I miss most is the loss of values, those lines drawn in the sand that define civilization and personal intercourse.

Bush is not a pre 1968 person, he is a follower of the Trickey Dick maxim of get elected as a Republican rule as a DemoRAT. He with Modification is his fathers son.

[ffusco]

Of couse they all don't fit that description. It is more an observation about the "wonderful" world they crafted.

OTOH your appraissal of W is a specious argument.

[fightinJAG]

Good analysis. I hope you're right and I think you're right.

[fightinJAG]

HAHAHAAHAHAAAA

[Sir Gawain]

The 2004 election proved that national security, after 9/11, trumped the economy.

Back from the future?

[rwfromkansas]

It could also go the other way, though I hope not.

[rwfromkansas]

Sure. cough.

[Little Bill]

Time will tell, I wouldn't want to play Poker with GW, but as a New England Conservitive I am going to lay off my bets, he is playing to the middle and that has hurt us in the past.

An admitted Tricky Dick supporter.

[ffusco]

Regarding Nixon, Watergate was 20 years too early to stop Clinton.

I admire Nixon. Anti-intellectual, pragmatic and a geo-political genius. While Nixon was uncomfortable with his personal demons, Clinton was too comfortable.