Mapping the Political
Landscape 2005
Information in the public interest
Copyright © 2005 Pew Research Center
1615 L Street, NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20036-5610
Phone: 202.419.4300
www.pewresearch.org
Mapping the Political Landscape 2005
Foreword
This book uses a variety of data bases, research methods and analytical tools to examine
trends in partisanship and voting in the United States.
It has three sections. They each stand alone but they also complement one another to create
what we believe is a richly textured portrait of the American electorate.
The first section presents a political typology that sorts voters into nine groups based on
their values, political beliefs, self-reported ideology and party affiliation. This is the fourth such
typology that the Pew Research Center has produced since 1987,1 when it pioneered this method
of clustering respondents to public opinion surveys into like-minded groups.
The second section analyzes 2004 election returns at the national, regional, state, county and
congressional district levels. It finds that there is more congruence now than at any time in
modern history between where people live and which political party gets their votes.
The third section looks at the voting behavior and demographic traits of Hispanics, the
nation’s largest and fastest-growing minority. Analyzing Census Bureau data, it finds that
because so many Hispanics are either non-citizens or too young to vote, their representation in
the electorate lags far behind their population growth. This section also examines a lingering
question about how the Hispanic vote split in 2004 between President George W. Bush and Sen.
John F. Kerry.
Here is a summary of key findings:
•
The popular red vs. blue labels so often used to describe the current political landscape
are broadly accurate but incomplete. Yes, the electorate is closely divided and
increasingly polarized, but there are now large fissures within each major party as well
as differences between the two parties.
•
The groups making up the Republican coalition are mainly divided over their views
about the appropriate role of government; the groups making up the Democratic
coalition are mainly divided by their religious and cultural values.
1 The first two typology studies, in 1987 and 1994, were done by Andrew Kohut when he ran what was then the Times Mirror Center for the
People & the Press. It became the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in 1996.
i
•
In the post 9/11 world, different attitudes about foreign policy assertiveness, more than
any other factor, separate these two big and sometimes fractious coalitions from one
another. This had been a relatively minor factor in earlier typologies.
•
Geography now also plays a growing role in separating Republicans from Democrats. It’s
not just a matter of red and blue states. Increasingly, there are now red and blue regions,
counties and congressional districts as well. One by-product has been a decline in
electoral competition in races for all levels of federal office except the presidency.
•
In 2004 one Hispanic voted for every five Hispanics who live in this country (including
adults and children, citizens and non-citizens). For whites, the ratio was one of two. This
disparity has been widening for decades and, given current demographic and
immigration trends, will continue to limit Latino political power for years to come.
This book is the work of the Pew Research Center, an independent, nonpartisan “fact tank”
whose mission is to provide information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and
the world. The center houses six projects that focus on different topic areas (see inside back
cover for more details).
Section I was written by the staff of the oldest of these projects, the Pew Research Center for
the People & the Press, which conducts public opinion survey research. Section II was written
by Rhodes Cook, who publishes a newsletter on voting trends and is co-author of America Votes,
a biennial compilation of American election statistics published by Congressional Quarterly.
Section III was written by the staff of the Pew Hispanic Center, which studies the nation’s Latino
population. Paul Taylor and Peter Meredith edited the volume.
Andrew Kohut,
President, Pew Research Center
Paul Taylor
Vice President, Pew Research Center
ii
Mapping the Political Landscape 2005
Table of Contents
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
I. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Republicans Divided by Role of Government, Democrats by Social and Personal Values
II. The Political Typology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
An Evolving Landscape
Making the Typology
III. Demographics, Lifestyle and News Consumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Education, Wealth and Economic Outlook
Marriage and Children
Religion and Matters of Faith
Where People Turn for News
IV. Beyond Red vs. Blue: Value Divides Within Party Coalitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Foreign Policy Values
Cultural and Social Issues
Other Splits Within the Parties
V. Politics and the Typology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
The 2004 Election
Favorability Ratings of National Leaders
Looking Ahead to 2008
Views of the Parties and Party Leaders
Partisan Loyalty
VI. Issues and Shifting Coalitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Part One: Social Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Gay Marriage, Abortion, Stem Cell Research,
Teaching Creationism in Schools, Displaying the Ten Commandments,
The Supreme Court, Views of the Christian Conservative Movement
Part Two: Economic and Domestic Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Universal Health Care, Raising the Minimum Wage,
Tax Cuts, The Budget Deficit, Bankruptcy Law, Tort Reform,
Outsourcing, Trade Policy, Immigration Reform,
Drilling in ANWR, Social Security Private Accounts
Part Three: Military and Foreign Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Using Preemptive Force, The Iraq War, The Use of Torture,
The Patriot Act, Views of Muslims and the United Nations
Profiles of the Typology Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
iii
Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Demographic and Political Profiles of the Typology Groups
Typology Groups, the Issues, and Media Use
Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live Is How You Vote
I. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
II. Are We in an Age of Republican Dominance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
The Case For
The Case Against
III. A Sharply Divided Map: The Battle of the Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
Democratic Cities vs. Republican Countryside
What Is Changing: Blue-Collar Bastions, White-Collar Suburbs
IV. Fewer Split Tickets, Less Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
The Decline of the Split Ticket
The Decline in Competition
V. Sky-High Turnout in 2004: A Closer Look . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Turnout Up Everywhere
Wind at the GOP’s Back
More Than Population Growth
VI. Tensions in the Political Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Appendix I: How the Counties Vote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
A National Sampler of Democratic Strongholds
A National Sampler of Republican Strongholds
A National Sampler of Miscellaneous Counties
Appendix II: State-by-State Presidential Winners Since 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
I. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
II. Demographic Characteristics of the Hispanic Population and Electorate . . . . . 167
III. How Latinos Voted in 2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
IV. President Bush’s Gains Among Hispanics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
iv
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
The 2005 Political Typology was prepared by The Pew Research Center for the People & the
Press, which studies public attitudes toward the press, politics and public policy issues. The
Center charts trends in values and fundamental political and social attitudes; it also does regular
national surveys that measure public attentiveness to major news stories. All survey results are
available at www.people-press.org
Phone: 202.419.4350
Fax: 202.419.4399
www.people-press.org
Director:
Andrew Kohut
Associate Directors:
Carroll Doherty
Michael Dimock
Senior Editor:
Jodie Allen
Director of Survey Research:
Scott Keeter
Senior Project Director:
Carolyn Funk
Project Directors:
Nilanthi Samaranayake
Peyton Craighill
Nicole Speulda
Research Assistant:
Jason Owens
Staff Assistants:
Kate DeLuca
Courtney Kennedy
1.
I.
The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
OVERVIEW: Republicans divided about role of government, Democrats by social
and personal values
Coming out of the 2004 election, the American political landscape decidedly favored the
Republican Party. The GOP had extensive appeal among a disparate group of voters in the
middle of the electorate, drew extraordinary loyalty from its own varied constituencies, and
made some inroads among conservative Democrats. These advantages outweighed continued
nationwide parity in party affiliation. Looking forward, however, there is no assurance that
Republicans will be able to consolidate and build upon these advantages.
Republicans have neither gained nor lost in party identification in 2005. Moreover,
divisions within the Republican coalition over economic and domestic issues may loom larger in
the future, given the increasing salience of these matters. The Democratic party faces its own
formidable challenges, despite the fact that the public sides with them on many key values and
policy questions. Their constituencies are more diverse and, while united in opposition to
President Bush, the Democrats are fractured by
differences over social and personal values.
How Values Divide the Nation
These are among the conclusions of Pew’s
political typology study, which sorts voters into
homogeneous groups based on values, political
beliefs, and party affiliation. The current study is
based on two public opinion surveys – a
nationwide poll of 2,000 interviews conducted
Dec. 1-16, 2004, and a subsequent re-interview of
1,090 respondents conducted March 17-27 of this
year. This is the fourth such typology created by
the Pew Research Center for the People & the
Press since 1987. Many of the groups identified in
the current surveys are similar to those in past
typologies, reflecting the continuing importance of
a number of key beliefs and values. These themes
endure despite the consequential events of the past
four years – especially the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks
and the war in Iraq.
Divisions Between Parties: Large gaps
between Republicans and Democrats:
• National security
• Assertive foreign policy
Divisions Within Parties: Minor partisan gap,
but major fissures within one or both parties:
• Environmentalism
• Government regulation
• Isolationism vs. global activism
• Immigration
Divisions Between and Within Parties:
Partisan divides, but also intra-party gaps:
• Religious & moral values
• Welfare
• Cooperation with allies
• Business & the free market
• Cynicism about politics
• Individualism vs. fatalism
But clearly, those events – and the overall importance of national security issues – have a
major impact on the typology. Foreign affairs assertiveness now almost completely distinguishes
Republican-oriented voters from Democratic-oriented voters; this was a relatively minor factor in
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
past typologies. In contrast, attitudes relating to religion and social issues are not nearly as important
in determining party affiliation. Still, these issues do underscore differences within parties,
especially among the Democrats. While Republican-inclined voters range from the religious to the
very religious, the Democratic Party is much more divided in terms of religious and cultural values.
Its core constituents include both seculars and the highly religious.
The value gaps for the GOP are, perhaps surprisingly, greatest with respect to the role of
government. The Republicans’ bigger tent now includes more lower-income voters than it once did,
and many of these voters favor an activist government to help working class people. Government
regulation to protect the environment is an issue with particular potential to divide Republicans. On
this issue, wide divisions exist both within the GOP and among right-of-center voters more
generally.
Yet Republicans also have much in common beyond their overwhelming support for a
muscular foreign policy and broad agreement on social issues. Voters inclined toward the
Republican Party are distinguished from Democrats by their personal optimism and belief in the
power of the individual. While some voting blocs on the right are as financially stressed as poorer
Democrats, Republicans in this situation tend to be more hopeful and positive in their outlook than
their more fatalistic counterparts in the Democratic Party.
National security attitudes also generally unite the Democrats. Beyond their staunch
opposition to the war in Iraq, Democrats overwhelmingly believe that effective diplomacy, rather
than military strength, should serve as the basis for U.S. security policy. At home, Democrats remain
committed to a strong social safety net and are joined in opposition to most domestic policy
proposals from the Bush administration, from tougher bankruptcy laws to private accounts in Social
Security.
The typology study’s finding of significant cleavages within parties not only runs counter
to the widespread impression of a nation increasingly divided into two unified camps, but also raises
questions about political alignments in the future. In particular, the study suggests that if the political
agenda turns away from issues of defense and security, prospects for party unity could weaken
significantly. As the following chapters detail, numerous opportunities exist for building coalitions
across party lines on many issues currently facing the nation – coalitions that, in many cases,
include some strange political bedfellows. Overall, there are many more shades to the American
political landscape than just the red and blue dividing the Electoral College maps last Nov. 2.
2
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
The Political Middle
In some ways, the biggest difference between the latest Pew Research Center typology and
those in the Clinton era concerns the groups in the middle of the political spectrum. During the
1990s, the typology groups in the center were not particularly partisan, but today they lean decidedly
to the GOP.
The middle groups include Upbeats,
relatively moderate voters who have positive
views of their financial situation, government
performance, business, and the state of the nation
in general. They are generally well-educated and
fairly engaged in political news. While most
Upbeats do not formally identify with either
political party, they voted for Bush by more than
four-to-one last November.
The 2005 Political Typology:
The Middle Groups
Upbeats
Positive outlook & moderate
Disaffecteds
Working class & discouraged
Bystanders
Democracy’s dropouts
General Regist.
Public Voters
%
%
11
13
9
10
10
0
A second, very different group of centrist
voters, the Disaffecteds, is much less affluent and educated than the Upbeats. Consequently, they
have a distinctly different outlook on life and political matters. They are deeply cynical about
government and unsatisfied with their financial situation. Even so, Disaffecteds lean toward the
Republican Party and, though many did not vote in the presidential election, most of those who did
supported Bush’s reelection.
In effect, Republicans have succeeded in attracting two types of swing voters who could not
be more different. The common threads are a highly favorable opinion of President Bush personally
and support for an aggressive military stance against potential enemies of the U.S.
A third group in the center, Bystanders, largely consign themselves to the political sidelines.
This category of mostly young people, few of whom voted in 2004, has been included in all four of
the Center’s political typologies.
The Right
The Republican Party’s current advantage with the center makes up for the fact that the
GOP-oriented groups, when taken together, account for only 29% of the public. By contrast, the
three Democratic groups constitute 41% of the public. But the imbalance shifts to the GOP’s favor
when the inclinations of the two major groups in the center are taken into account – many of whom
lean Republican and most of whom voted for George W. Bush.
3
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
The three GOP groups are highly diverse, and this is reflected in their values. The staunchly
conservative Enterprisers have perhaps the most consistent ideological profile of any group in the
typology. They are highly patriotic and strongly pro-business, oppose social welfare and
overwhelmingly support an assertive foreign policy. This group is largely white, well-educated,
affluent and male – more than three-quarters are men.
While Enterprisers are a bit less religious
The 2005 Political Typology:
than the other GOP groups, they are socially
The Republican Groups
conservative in most respects. Two other groups
General Regist.
on the right are both highly religious and very
Public Voters
conservative on moral issues. Social
%
%
Enterprisers
9
11
Conservatives agree with Enterprisers on most
Staunch conservatives
issues, but they tend to be critical of business
Social Conservatives
11
13
Religious,
critical
of
business
and supportive of government regulation to
Pro-Government Conservatives
9
10
protect the public good and the environment.
Struggling social conservatives
They also express deep concerns about the
growing number of immigrants in America. This
largely female group includes many white evangelical Christians, and nearly half of Social
Conservatives live in the South.
Pro-Government Conservatives also are broadly religious and socially conservative, but
they deviate from the party line in their backing for government involvement in a wide range of
policy areas, such as government regulation and more generous assistance to the poor. This
relatively young, predominantly female group is under substantial financial pressure, but most feel
it is within their power to get ahead. This group also is highly concentrated in the South, and, of the
three core Republican groups, had the lowest turnout in the 2004 election.
Clearly, there is more than one kind of conservative. The Republican groups find common
ground on cultural values, but opinions on the role of government, a defining feature of conservative
philosophy for decades, are now among the most divisive for the GOP.
The Left
At the other end of the political spectrum, Liberals have swelled to become the largest
voting bloc in the typology. Liberals are opponents of an assertive foreign policy, strong supporters
of environmental protection, and solid backers of government assistance to the poor.
This affluent, well-educated, highly secular group is consistently liberal on social issues,
4
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ranging from freedom of expression to abortion. In contrast, Conservative Democrats are quite
religious, socially conservative and take more moderate positions on several key foreign policy
questions. The group is older, and includes many blacks and Hispanics; of all the core Democratic
groups, it has strongest sense of personal empowerment.
Disadvantaged Democrats also include many minority voters, and they are the least
financially secure voting bloc. Members of this heavily female, poorly educated group are highly
pessimistic about their opportunities in life, and
also very mistrustful of both business and
The 2005 Political Typology:
government. Nonetheless, they support
The Democratic Groups
government programs to help the needy.
While the Republican Party is divided
over government’s role, the Democrats are
divided by social and personal values. Most
Liberals live in a world apart from
Disadvantaged Democrats and Conservative
Democrats.
Liberals
Secular and anti-war
Disadvantaged Democrats
Social welfare loyalists
Conservative Democrats
Latter-day New Dealers
General Regist.
Public Voters
%
%
17
19
10
10
14
15
Other Major Findings
!
For the most part, opinions about the use of force are what divides Democratic-oriented
groups from the Republican groups. On other foreign policy issues, even contentious
questions about working with allies, the partisan pattern is not as clear.
!
Environmental protection now stands out as a major divide within the GOP’s coalition.
While a narrow majority of Enterprisers believe the country has gone too far in its efforts to
protect the environment, most others on the GOP side disagree.
!
Poorer Republicans and Democrats have strikingly different outlooks on their lives and
possibilities. Pro-Government Conservatives are optimistic and positive; Disadvantaged
Democrats are pessimistic and cynical.
!
Immigration divides both parties. Liberals overwhelmingly believe immigrants strengthen
American society, and most Enterprisers agree. Majorities of other groups in both parties say
immigrants threaten traditional American customs and values.
5
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
!
The Republican Party is doing a better job of standing up for its core issues than is the
Democratic Party, according to their respective constituents. Liberals are particularly
negative about the performance of the Democratic Party.
!
A plurality of the public wants Bush to select a nominee who will keep the Supreme Court
about the same as it is now. Only among Enterprisers and Social Conservatives is there
substantial support for a more conservative course.
!
Stem cell research deeply divides the GOP. Majorities in all three Democratic groups, and
the three independent groups, favor such research. Republican groups, to varying degrees,
are divided.
!
Enterprisers take conservative positions on most religious and cultural issues but are less
intense in their beliefs than are other GOP groups. They are more libertarian than other
Republican-oriented groups.
!
George W. Bush has the broadest personal appeal of any national political figure among the
main independent groups, the Upbeats and Disaffecteds.
!
Rudy Giuliani is widely popular with Republican groups but also has a favorable rating
among majorities in both independent groups, and is viewed positively by roughly half of
Conservative Democrats and Liberals.
!
Bill and Hillary Clinton’s favorable ratings have risen among the public, and both earn
relatively high ratings from the GOP’s Pro-Government Conservatives.
!
Liberals stand far apart from the rest of the electorate in their strong support for gay
marriage, and in opposing the public display of the Ten Commandments in government
buildings.
!
Enterprisers stand alone on key economic issues. Majorities in every other group – except
Enterprisers – support a government guarantee of universal health insurance. Enterprisers
also are the only group in which less than a majority supports increasing the minimum wage.
!
Private investment accounts in Social Security draw mixed reviews. Support for Bush’s plan
has faded not just among Democrats, but also independents. Disaffecteds are now evenly
split over the proposal; in December, they favored it by almost a two-to-one margin.
!
Enterprisers are the only voters to overwhelmingly believe that the Patriot Act is a necessary
tool in the war on terrorism. Liberals are the strongest opponents of the legislation.
6
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
II: The Political Typology
The 2005 Political Typology is the fourth of its kind, following on previous studies in 1987,
1994 and 1999. While the mood of the American electorate has changed markedly over this period,
underlying patterns persist. Many characteristics of the groups identified by the current survey, in
particular the ideological positions of Enterprisers, Liberals, and Disadvantaged Democrats, have
remained virtually unchanged over the 18 years of typology studies. This consistency reflects the
continuing importance of a number of key beliefs and values among some segments of the
electorate.
Still, the emergence of national security issues, as well as a fundamental reevaluation of
government by both Democrats and Republicans in an era of unified GOP control in Washington,
have produced new alignments within each of the two parties, and caused some once relevant groups
to disappear. Moreover, religious and social issues continue to divide both within and across party
lines, creating challenges to party leaders as they seek to build or maintain their majorities.
Each of the typologies developed by the Pew Research Center has been designed to provide
a more complete and detailed description of the political landscape, classifying people on the basis
of a broad range of value orientations rather than simply on the basis of party identification or selfreported ideology. Like past surveys, the new typology reveals substantial political and social
differences within as well as across the two political parties. It also provides insights into the
political attitudes of independents, who make up more than one-third of the American electorate but
are far from unified in terms of their values and ideological beliefs.
An Evolving Landscape
There are some notable shifts in this
Key Changes in the 2005 Typology
year’s political typology from past studies. The
! Democrats: Liberals grow in size; New
Liberal group has nearly doubled in size over
Democrats no longer distinct
the past six years. The “New Democrats” – a
! Republicans: Pro-Government Conservatives
key element of the Democratic coalition in
key to GOP victories, but cross-pressured
typology studies in the 1990s – no longer arise
! The middle: Republican Party winning support
as a distinct ideological grouping. This suggests
from centrist Upbeats and Disaffecteds
that some of the growth among Liberals comes
from former New Democrats, whose views on
national security and government regulation have become more polarized after more than four years
of GOP control.
The 2005 study also buttresses the finding in 1999 that the Republican Party’s base is now
7
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
divided into three core subgroups. In both 1987 and 1994 the predominant divisions on the right
were between two ideological clusters, Enterprisers and Moralists, defined by the relative emphasis
each placed on conservative economic and social values. The 1999 study found, and the 2005
analysis confirms, the development of a critical third element of the Republican base – a group we
refer to as Pro-Government Conservatives. While this group agrees fully with the religious values
of Social Conservatives, and the assertive foreign stance of both of the other Republican groups, its
members are predominantly lower income and struggling financially. Perhaps as a result, they favor
greater government action in assisting the poor and in regulating business to improve the
environment, as well as to protect morality.
As in the past, there are two very different groups in the center, aside from the generally
apathetic Bystanders. The Upbeats are affluent and optimistic; the Disaffecteds are struggling
financially and much more pessimistic. The Republican Party’s advantage in the ideological center
is substantial. Far more Upbeats and Disaffecteds identify with the GOP than with the Democratic
Party; when the leaning of those who view themselves as independent is taken into account, the GOP
advantage is even more apparent. In large part, this is reflective of Bush’s strong personal appeal
among these groups. Among
Disaffecteds, Bush is by far the
Partisanship and the Political Typology
most popular political figure
Independents who
tested and he rates near the top
Party Identification*
“lean” included**
of the list among Upbeats.
Repub- Dem- IndeRep./
Dem./
In all, the new typology
features three Republicanoriented groups, two
predominantly independent
groups, and three Democraticoriented groups, plus the
politically uninvolved
Bystanders. Because a person’s
typology assignment is mostly
determined by his or her
particular beliefs and values,
the degree of partisan
affiliation varies within each
group. On the right, while
Enterprisers and Social
lican
%
31
Total
ocrat pendent
%
%
34 35=100
lean R.
%
45
lean D.
%
46
Republican Groups
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
81
82
58
1
0
2
18=100
18=100
40=100
98
97
86
1
1
3
Middle Groups
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
Bystanders
39
30
22
5
2
22
56=100
68=100
56=100
73
60
39
14
10
38
0
0
89
84
11=100
16=100
0
0
98
99
1
59
40=100
2
92
Democratic Groups
Conservative Democrats
Disadvantaged
Democrats
Liberals
* Independents include respondents who say they have no preference.
** Respondents who do not initially choose a party identification are asked “as of today
do you lean more to the Republican Party or more to the Democratic Party?” These
columns include these leaners with those who choose a party initially.
8
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Conservatives are overwhelmingly Republican, there are many Pro-Government Conservatives who
think of themselves as independents (though most say they “lean toward” the Republican party in
a follow-up question). Similarly, while the left has two groups of Democratic loyalists (Conservative
and Disadvantaged Democrats), many Liberals think of themselves politically as independents
(virtually all of these independent Liberals lean Democratic).
Making the Typology
The 2005 Typology divides the public into eight politically engaged groups, in addition to
the Bystanders. These groups are defined by their attitudes toward government and politics and a
range of other social, economic and religious beliefs. In addition to partisan leanings and selfreported ideology, the typology is based on eight value orientations, each of which is reflected by
a scale derived from two or more questions in the survey. They are as follows:
•
Foreign Policy Assertiveness. Opinions on the efficacy of military strength vs.
diplomacy, use of force to defeat terrorism, and Americans’ duty to serve in the
military.
•
Religion and Morality. Attitudes concerning the importance of religion in
people's lives, the government’s role in protecting morality, and social issues
such as homosexuality.
•
Environmentalism and Regulation. Beliefs about the costs and benefits of
government regulation of business to protect the environment or the public
interest.
•
Social Welfare. Beliefs about the role of government in providing for the poor and
needy.
•
Immigration. Views concerning the impact of immigrants on American
culture and the U.S. economy.
•
Business Sentiment. Attitudes about the influence of business in American society.
•
Financial Security. Level of satisfaction with current economic status and feelings
of financial security.
9
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
•
•
Anti-Government Sentiment.
Beliefs
about
the
responsiveness of elected
officials, and views about
government performance.
Creating the Typology
The value dimensions used to create the typology are
each based on the combined responses to two or more survey
questions. The questions used to create each scale were those
shown statistically to be most strongly related to the
underlying dimension. Each of the individual survey
questions uses a "balanced alternative" format that presents
respondents with two statements and asks them to choose the
one that most closely reflects their own views. To measure
intensity, each question is followed by a probe to determine
whether or not respondents feel strongly about the choice
they selected.
Individualism. Beliefs about
whether all individuals have it
within their power to succeed,
or whether success is beyond a
person’s control.
As in past typologies, a measure of political
attentiveness and voting participation was used to extract the
"Bystander" group, people who are largely unengaged and
uninvolved in politics. A statistical cluster analysis was used
to sort the remaining respondents into relatively
homogeneous groups based on the nine value scales, party
identification, and self reported ideology. Several different
cluster solutions were evaluated for their effectiveness in
producing cohesive groups that are distinct from one another,
large enough in size to be analytically practical, and
substantively meaningful. The final solution selected to
produce the new political typology was judged to be strongest
on a statistical basis and to be most persuasive from a
substantive point of view. (A more complete description of
the cluster analysis appears in the Methodology.)
These measures of an individual’s
overall value orientation on each of these
dimensions do not take into account that
person’s position on current political issues,
such as the war in Iraq or whether gay marriage
should be allowed or banned. Instead, they are
based on more broadly oriented values
questions designed to measure a person’s
underlying beliefs about what’s right and
wrong, acceptable or unacceptable, or what
government should or should not be involved
in.
You can take the typology survey and find out where
you would be assigned by the methodology at our website:
www.people-press.org.
10
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
III: Demographics, Lifestyle and News Consumption
The nine groups in the political typology are defined by their beliefs and values, not by their
demographic characteristics. Yet each group has a distinctly different demographic profile, which
in some cases bears little resemblance to those of their ideological and political allies. For example,
Enterprisers have by far the highest percentage of men of any group (76%), while the other two GOP
groups are majority female (62% Pro-Government Conservatives, 58% Social Conservatives). (For
more on the demographics of the typology, see pg. 64.)
On the other hand, Enterprisers and
Liberals – whose political opinions mix no
better than oil and water – have a surprising
amount of common ground both economically
and educationally. These groups are the
wealthiest and best educated in the typology.
Roughly four-in-ten Enterprisers and Liberals
(41% each) have annual household incomes of
at least $75,000; only the Upbeats (39%) have
about as many people in that income category.
Wealthiest Typology Groups
Total
24
Enterprisers
41
30
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
10
Upbeats
39
13
Disaffecteds
Bystanders
8
Conservative Dems
15
Liberals have the highest education
41
Liberals
level of any typology group – 49% are college
Household Income of $75,000 or more
graduates and 26% have some postgraduate
education. But the Enterprisers also include a
relatively high percentage of college graduates (46%), although fewer Enterprisers than Liberals
have attended graduate school (14%).
Disadvantaged Dems
8
Pro-Government Conservatives stand out among Republican groups for their modest
incomes. About half (49%) have annual household incomes of less than $30,000; just 13% of
Enterprisers and 26% of Social Conservatives have incomes in that range. Pro-Government
Conservatives’ annual household incomes are comparable to those of Disadvantaged Democrats
and Bystanders, and much lower than those of other GOP groups.
Huge disparities in education also divide both Democratic and Republican typology groups.
Just 13% of Disdvantaged Democrats have completed college (9% college grads, 4% postgraduate),
compared with nearly half of Liberals. Educational differences between Liberals and Conservative
Democrats are nearly as large (49% vs. 16%).
11
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Among Republicans, just 15% of ProGovernment Conservatives have completed
college, compared with 45% of Enterprisers.
There also are wide disparities in education
among the three independent groups, with
Upbeats (37%) far more likely to have
completed college than Bystanders (13%) or
Disaffecteds (11%).
College Graduation Rates
by Typology Groups
16
Total
11
31
Enterprisers
19
Social Conservatives
10
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
14
9
5
24
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
9
2
Bystanders
7
6
13
Marriage and Children
11
5
Conservative Dems
The exit poll from the 2004 election
Disadvantaged Dems
9
4
showed that married people – especially
23
26
Liberals
parents with children at home – strongly
College Grad Post-Grad
favored the president. Overall, Bush led by
57%-42% among all married Americans, and
59%-40% among married people with children, according to the National Election Pool (NEP) exit
poll.
This pattern is reflected in the typology. Majorities in all three GOP groups are married: 77%
of Enterprisers; 66% of Social Conservatives; and 55% of Pro-Government Conservatives. That also
is the case for the two GOP-leaning independent
groups – 59% of Upbeats and 57% of Disaffecteds.
Married with Children
By contrast, about half of Conservative Democrats
27
Total
(49%) and smaller numbers of Liberals (44%) and
Disadvantaged Democrats (42%) are married.
Enterprisers
40
Social Conservatives
28
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
34
The Republican groups also have higher
proportions of married people with children living
28
Upbeats
at home. Four-in-ten Enterprisers are married and
22
Disaffecteds
have children under age 18 living at home, as do
Bystanders
28
34% of Pro-Government Conservatives and 28% of
23
Conservative Dems
Social Conservatives. Among Democratic groups,
Disadvantaged Dems
28
28% of Disadvantaged Democrats, 23% of
Liberals
20
Conservative Democrats, and just 20% of Liberals
are married and have children living at home.
Conservative and Disadvantaged Democrats are just as likely as Republican groups to have children
living at home, but larger percentages are single parents (14% and 19%, respectively).
12
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Economic Perceptions
Disadvantaged Democrats are largely defined by their feelings of financial stress. More than
three-quarters of this group (77%) say they often do not have enough money to make ends meet; just
19% say paying the bills is generally not a problem. Yet financial unease is nearly as extensive
among Pro-Government Conservatives; roughly two-thirds (68%) report that they have problems
making ends meet.
For the most part, paying the bills is not a problem for those in the financially well-off
groups – Enterprisers, Liberals and Upbeats. But most Social Conservatives, whose annual incomes
are significantly less than in these other groups, also report few problems making ends meet. Nearly
nine-in-ten Social Conservatives (88%) say that paying the bills is generally not a problem.
Among Disadvantaged Democrats, many more have also had personal experience with
unemployment than in other groups. More than half of Disadvantaged Democrats (58%) say they,
or someone in their household, have been out of work in the past year. Still, large minorities in most
other groups – including 39% of Pro-Government Conservatives – say they or someone in their
household have been jobless in the past year. Even about a quarter of the Enterprisers (28%) have
been without work in the past 12 months.
Financially Stressed: Disadvantaged Dems, Pro-Government Conservatives
Enter- Social Pro-Govt Up- Disaf- ByConserv Disadv
beats fecteds standers Dems Dems
Which comes
prisers Cons Cons
closer to your views...
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Paying the bills is not
generally a problem
88
88
29
90
38
48
63
19
I often can’t make
ends meet
9
10
68
7
54
49
33
77
2
3
3
8
3
4
4
Other/DK/Refused
3
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Liberals
%
75
24
1
100
Personal Optimism a Dividing Line
Pro-Government Conservatives and Disadvantaged Democrats have similar socioeconomic
backgrounds and confront many of the same financial struggles. Both groups are predominantly
female, both are relatively poor, and large majorities in both groups express dissatisfaction with their
financial circumstances.
But these groups have strikingly different outlooks on their lives and possibilities that go a
long way toward explaining the differences in their political attitudes. Feelings about the power of
13
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
the individual are a major factor in this division.
Pro-Government Conservatives are defined, at
least in part, by their optimism in this area.
About three-quarters (76%) believe that most
people can get ahead if they are willing to work
hard – and two-thirds (66%) strongly express that
view. An even higher percentage of ProGovernment Conservatives (81%) say that
everyone has it in his or her own power to
succeed.
Disadvantaged Democrats have a
gloomier outlook. Just 14% think that people can
get ahead by working hard; 79% say that hard
work is no guarantee of success, and 76%
express that view strongly. Only 44% of
Disadvantaged Democrats say that everyone has
the power to succeed, while slightly more (47%)
take the fatalistic view that success in life is
determined by forces outside one’s own control.
Struggling Groups:
Similar Fortunes, Different Outlooks
Gender
Men
Women
Pro-Gov Disadv
Cons Dems
%
%
38
40
62
60
100
100
Household income
Under $50,000
$50,000 and over
79
21
78
22
Education
College Graduate
Some College
High School or less
15
26
59
13
20
67
Financial Perceptions
I often can’t make ends meet
Not very satisfied financially
68
74
77
79
Personal Optimism
People can get ahead w/ hard work 76
Everyone has the power to succeed 81
14
44
More broadly, opinions on personal empowerment deeply divide both the Democratic groups
and independents. More than eight-in-ten Conservative Democrats (83%) think that most people
who work hard can get ahead, while Liberals are somewhat less likely to subscribe to this view and
Disadvantaged Democrats strongly disagree. Among center groups, Upbeats, by definition, are very
optimistic on this point, and Disaffecteds much less so.
Conservatives Have Strong Belief in Personal Empowerment
Enter- Social Pro-Govt
Up- Disaf- Conserv Disadv Libbeats fecteds Dems Dems erals
Which comes
prisers Cons Cons
closer to your views...
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Most people can get
ahead w/ hard work
95
87
76
84
48
83
14
56
Hard work is no
guarantee of success
4
10
24
13
48
12
79
39
3
*
3
4
5
7
5
Other/DK/Refused
1
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
14
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Matters of Faith
The groups in the typology vary considerably in their religious traditions and in how they
express their religious faith. All of the groups include sizable numbers of people with a strong
religious commitment, but there are significant differences in how that commitment is manifested.
The U.S. remains a majority-Protestant
nation (56% overall say they belong to the
Protestant tradition), and this includes a
majority among all groups except the younger,
more secular Bystanders (49%) and Liberals
(36%). Among other groups, Protestants range
from 55% among the Upbeats up to 68%
among the Social Conservatives. White
evangelical Protestants, a core constituency for
President Bush, are a significant plurality
group among Social Conservatives (43%), ProGovernment Conservatives (37%), and
Enterprisers (34%). White evangelicals
constitute no more than 22% of any other
group in the typology, and include only 5% of
the Liberals.
Attend Bible Study or Prayer
Group Meetings
Total
36
Enterprisers
36
51
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
52
35
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
38
Bystanders
30
Conservative Democrats
44
41
Disadvantaged Dems
Liberals
13
In contrast with the great variability of evangelical representation across groups, Catholics
are not concentrated in any specific group or cluster of groups. Catholics are one-quarter of the
population (25%), but their proportions among groups vary only from 20% among Enterprisers to
30% among Upbeats. Catholics are 23% of the three Republican groups and 26% of the three
Democratic groups.
Jews make up approximately 3% of the public overall, but 8% of the Liberals. People who
identify with a religion outside of the Judeo-Christian tradition comprise about 5% of the population
but include 8% of Liberals and 8% of Bystanders.
Secular individuals – those who say they are agnostic, atheist, or say they have no religious
affiliation – are a significant portion only of Liberals: 22%. They include 12% of Bystanders and
9% of Disaffecteds, but otherwise constitute no more than 6% of the other groups.
15
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Religion and the Typology
Catholic
White Evangelical
Secular
Total
25
21
8
Enterprisers
20
34
6
Social Conservatives
24
43
3
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
25
37
4
Upbeats
30
22
5
Disaffecteds
22
20
9
Bystanders
26
17
12
Conservative Dems
29
16
1
Disadvantaged Dems
25
11
5
Liberals
23
5
22
Most Americans say that they attend religious services on at least an occasional basis, and
40% say they attend at least once per week. About half of the Republican groups report weekly (or
greater) attendance, with Social Conservatives highest at 53%. Among Democratic groups, more
than four-in-ten Conservative Democrats (46%) and Disadvantaged Democrats (43%) attend at least
weekly, but less than half as many
Liberals do so (18%).
Church Attendance
Attendance at religious services
may also take the form of participation in
Bible study or prayer meetings. More than
a third of Americans (36%) say they
engage in this type of activity. Over half
of Pro-Government Conservatives and
Social Conservatives (52% and 51%,
respectively) participate, compared with
36% among the other Republican group,
Enterprisers. Over four-in-ten
Conservative and Disadvantaged
Democrats (44%, 41%) say they take part
in Bible study or prayer meetings, but just
13% of Liberals do so.
Total
At least Some- Seldom/ DK/
weekly times** Never Refused
%
%
%
40
34
25
1=100
Republican Groups
Enterprisers
48
Social Conservatives
53
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives 52
26
31
35
25
15
11
1=100
1=100
2=100
Middle Groups
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
Bystanders
46
39
26
32
34
39
22
25
34
*=100
2=100
1=100
Democratic Groups
Conservative Democrats 46
Disadvantaged Democrats 43
Liberals
18
34
39
38
19
17
43
1=100
1=100
1=100
** Includes “once or twice a month” and “a few times a year”
16
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Financial Activity: Who Trades Stock
Enterprisers and Liberals have the same proportion
of high-income individuals. But Enterprisers are much
more likely than Liberals – or any other group – to invest
in the stock market or own a small business.
More than half of Enterprisers (53%) say they
trade stocks and bonds in the market. That is the highest
percentage among typology groups; about four-in-ten
Upbeats (42%) and Liberals (38%) say they are active in
the market. Trading stocks and bonds is far less common
in the lower-income groups: Just 11% of Bystanders and
14% of Pro-Government Conservatives say they trade
stocks and bonds.
Taking Financial Risks
Do you...
Trade Own a
stocks small bus.
%
%
28
16
Total
Republican Groups
Enterprisers
53
Social Conservatives
35
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives. 14
30
14
11
Middle Groups
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
Bystanders
42
17
11
15
21
10
Democratic Groups
Conservative Democrats 20
Disadvantaged Democrats 18
Liberals
38
14
8
17
Three-in-ten Enterprisers own small businesses,
more than any other group in the typology. Disaffecteds
also include a relatively large proportion of small business
owners (21%), despite their relatively low incomes; in fact, there are more small business owners
among the Disaffecteds than among the wealthier Upbeats (15%).
Lifestyle Notes: Showing the Flag
Nearly two-thirds of Americans (64%) say
they display the American flag at home, at work, or
on their car. Three-quarters or more of the GOP
groups say they show the flag. Democratic groups
show more variation: 72% of Conservative
Democrats say they display the flag, compared with
53% of Disadvantaged Democrats and just 41% of
Liberals.
Among independent groups, only about half
of Bystanders (47%) say they display the flag.
Bystanders are the youngest of the nine typology
groups – 39% are under 30. Generally, young
people are far less likely than older Americans to
show the flag – only about half (47%) say they do
17
Display the Flag?
Total
Yes
%
64
No
%
36
DK/Ref
%
*=100
Republican Groups
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov’t Conserv.
76
84
82
24
16
18
0=100
0=100
0=100
Middle Groups
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
Bystanders
68
72
47
32
28
53
0=100
0=100
0=100
Democratic Groups
Conservative Democrats 72
Disadvantaged Democrats 53
Liberals
41
27
47
59
1=100
0=100
0=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
so, compared with about two-thirds of those in older age categories.
Gun Ownership
Gun ownership is much more prevalent among GOP groups – especially Enterprisers and
Social Conservatives – than among Democrats. Solid majorities in both of those groups say they
have guns in their home (59% of Enterprisers, 56% of Social Conservatives). Disaffecteds have the
next highest percentage of gun owners (45%).
There has long been a gender gap in gun ownership, but Social Conservatives, while mostly
female (58%), have a relatively high percentage of gun ownership. By contrast, Pro-Government
Conservatives, a group that also is disproportionately female (62%), are far less likely to have guns
in their homes; slightly more than a third in this group (36%) say they have a gun. There are smaller
differences in gun ownership among Democrats, with about a third of Conservative Democrats
(34%) – and smaller percentages of the other groups – reporting that they have guns in the home.
Gun Ownership and Views of the NRA
Have a gun, rifle
at home?
Yes
No
DK/Refused
Opinion of the NRA
Favorable
Unfavorable
DK/Can’t Rate
Enter- Social Pro-Govt Up- Disaf- By- Conserv Disadv Libprisers Cons Cons
beats fecteds standers Dems Dems erals
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
59
56
36
40
45
30
34
27
23
34
39
62
59
51
67
65
70
76
7
5
2
1
4
3
1
3
1
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
80
12
8
100
60
20
20
100
64
22
14
100
53
34
13
100
64
31
5
100
52
29
19
100
46
38
16
100
37
51
12
100
20
73
7
100
Democrats are deeply divided in their opinions of the National Rifle Association (NRA). A
plurality of Conservative Democrats (46%) express a positive opinion of the NRA; fewer than half
as many Liberals (20%) have a favorable view of the pro-gun rights group. Among GOP groups,
80% of Enterprisers have a positive opinion of the NRA. Nearly two-thirds of Pro-Government
Conservatives (64%) have a favorable view of the NRA, despite their relatively low level of gun
ownership.
News Consumption: Cable Wars Continue
The public continues to get most of its news from television. Television is the dominant news
source for all of the typology groups, although Liberals (57%), Upbeats (67%) and Enterprisers
18
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
(68%) cite TV as their main news source less
frequently than do members of other groups.
There are wide differences, however, in the
specific TV news outlets the typology groups rely
upon, particularly cable news outlets. This partisan
gap in cable news audiences has been documented in
previous Pew studies on news consumption (see
“News Audiences Increasingly Politicized” June 8,
2004).
TV News and the Typology
Main news source
Network* CNN Fox
%
%
%
29
20
19
Total
Republican Groups
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov’t Conserv.
17
30
31
8
23
21
46
34
23
Middle Groups
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
Bystanders
29
30
24
20
15
19
17
16
19
The typology also reveals significant intraDemocratic Groups
party differences in news consumption. While many
Conservative Democrats 42
27
11
Disadvantaged
Democrats
32
31
12
more Republicans than Democrats rely on Fox News,
Liberals
22
18
6
a much higher percentage of Enterprisers (46%) get
* Net of those who cited ABC, NBC or CBS
most of their news from Fox than do either Social
Conservatives (34%) or Pro-Government
Conservatives (23%). Moreover, the last two groups
are much more likely than Enterprisers to cite CNN or the networks as main sources of news.
Among Democrats, nearly twice as
many Conservative Democrats as Liberals cite
one of the three network outlets as their main
source of news (42% vs. 22%). Age accounts
for much of this gap: The network news
audience is older – a third of those age 65 and
older get most of their news from the
networks, compared with 20% of those below
age 30. And Conservative Democrats are, as a
group, much older than Liberals.
Who Goes Online for News
24
Total
26
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
16
19
34
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
19
Bystanders
19
Conservative Dems
16
To a surprising degree, Liberals (and
Disadvantaged Dems
18
Liberals
37
young, well-educated people generally) are
turning away from TV news in favor of the
internet. Fully 37% of Liberals and 34% of
Upbeats say they get most of their news from the internet, far more than any other group. For both
groups, the number relying on the internet far exceeds any individual TV news source (network,
cable or local) and approaches newspaper usage.
19
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
IV: Beyond Red vs. Blue: Value Divides Within Party Coalitions
In an era when virtually all political
issues are seen through partisan lenses, the
political typology still finds numerous value
cleavages in American society, many of which
cut across party lines. In fact, public values
about security and the use of military force are
among the only value dimensions in which
Republican and Democratic groups clearly align
on opposite sides, and, even here, the intensity
of opinion differs significantly within each
coalition. Overall, the analysis finds that the
intense partisan divide over security and
military assertiveness is the exception, and not
the rule. In most cases, there are fissures within
the party coalitions that are at least as important
as the divide between the parties overall.
Partisan Divides on Use of Force
The Best Way to Ensure Peace
Is Through...
Good diplomacy
Military strength
Total
55 30
Enterprisers
13 70
Social Conservatives
25 55
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
38 49
Upbeats
54 30
Disaffecteds
46 32
Conservative Democrats
67 20
Disadvantaged Dems
Liberals
78 10
88 6
In the War on Terrorism...
Relying too much on force creates hatred and more terrorism
Military force is the best way to defeat terrorism
Foreign Policy Values
Total
51 39
The extreme partisan polarization over
Enterprisers
9 84
the war in Iraq in recent years is interwoven
Social Conservatives
20 72
with sharply divided judgments about national
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
30 61
security and foreign assertiveness. Asked
Upbeats
45 44
whether the best way to ensure peace is through
Disaffecteds
47 38
military strength or through good diplomacy,
the vast majority in all three Democratic-leaning
Conservative Democrats
52 37
groups choose diplomacy, while those in
Disadvantaged Dems
80 10
90 7
Liberals
Republican-leaning groups express more
confidence in military strength. While the
degree of intensity within partisan groups may differ, there is a significantly greater difference of
opinion between parties than there is within either party coalition.
This partisan divide is even broader when it comes to peoples’ views on the war on terrorism.
Across all Republican groups most believe that using overwhelming military force is the best way
to defeat terrorism around the world, while a clear majority in all Democratic groups believe relying
too much on military force to defeat terrorism creates hatred that leads to more terrorism. These
20
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
partisan cleavages underlie the fundamental divide over the war in Iraq and George W. Bush’s
emphasis on the preemptive use of force, key aspects of American politics in recent years.
However, most issues, even within the
realm of foreign policy more generally, do not
display such a clear partisan pattern. In fact, in
many cases the differences of opinion within the
partisan coalitions are far greater than any
partisan gap overall. Public opinions with
respect to how active a role America should
play in world affairs highlight this distinction.
Each party coalition includes typology groups
that express activist or isolationist sentiments.
By a margin of 73% to 20%, Enterprisers
believe it is best for the future of the country to
be active in world affairs. By contrast, ProGovernment Conservatives, by a 53% to 39%
margin, think we should pay less attention to
problems overseas and concentrate instead on
problems here at home. Similarly among the
predominantly Democratic groups, the majority
of Liberals favor an active role in world affairs,
while most Conservative and Disadvantaged
Democrats believe in focusing on problems here
at home.
Intra-Party Fissures
on Foreign Involvement
Best for the Future of Our Country to...
Focus on problems at home
Be active in world affairs
Total
49 44
Enterprisers
20 73
Social Conservatives
36 54
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
53 39
Upbeats
29 64
Disaffecteds
65 26
Conservative Democrats
64 29
Disadvantaged Dems
72 22
Liberals
40 55
U.S. Foreign Policy Should...
Account for allies' interests, even if it means compromises
Follow national interests even when allies disagree
Total
53 37
Enterprisers
24 73
Social Conservatives
43 49
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
50 40
Upbeats
59 30
In other areas, only the most
Disaffecteds
41 42
ideologically driven groups express views that
Conservative Democrats
53 37
are significantly different from the national
Disadvantaged Dems
56 31
average. In making foreign policy decisions,
82 14
Liberals
the Enterprisers overwhelmingly say America
should follow its own national interests even
when the allies strongly disagree, while the consensus among Liberals is that U.S. foreign policy
should take into account the interests and views of allies, even if it means making compromises with
them. Most other typology groups, whether on the right or the left, are internally divided on this
question, and have more in common with each other than they do with either of the extremes.
21
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Cultural Issues Divide Democrats
Despite differing degrees of religious
intensity among core Republican groups, there
is little evidence that the current slate of moral
and values-oriented issues threatens to divide
the Republican electoral base in any significant
way. While Enterprisers are defined mostly by
their pro-business, anti-government and antiregulatory beliefs rather than their religious or
moral conservatism, they nevertheless agree
fully with Social Conservatives and ProGovernment Conservatives when it comes to
issues such as abortion, gay marriage, and stem
cell research. (For more on social issues, see
pg. 35).
Republicans Agree on Social Issues
Enter- Social Pro-Gov
prisers Cons Cons
Homosexuality is a way of
%
%
%
life that should be discouraged 64
65
59
Feel strongly
50
59
55
It is necessary to believe in
God in order to be moral
and have good values
Feel strongly
42
33
61
57
68
66
The gov’t should do more to
protect morality in society
Feel strongly
52
35
56
44
69
60
While agreeing with the conservative position on most key issues, Enterprisers are
distinguished from other Republican-leaning groups by their relative lack of intensity with respect
to individual or social moral beliefs. Though Enterprisers attend church at about the same rate as
members of other Republican-leaning groups, just 42% say a person must believe in God in order
to be moral and have good values, compared with sizable majorities of Pro-Government and Social
Conservatives. And just 33% of Enterprisers feel strongly about the importance of faith, compared
with 57% and 66% of Social and Pro-Government Conservatives, respectively.
In addition, Enterprisers express less enthusiasm for government involvement in moral issues
– a position that is consistent with their generally anti-government ideology overall. Just 35% of
Enterprisers strongly support more government action to protect morality in society. By comparison,
60% of Pro-Government Conservatives, and 44% of Social Conservatives, strongly support more
government action in this regard.
Overall, divisions over social and religious issues continue to be far more intense on the left
than on the right. Conservative Democrats – who represent 14% of the general public and a quarter
of John Kerry’s voting base in 2004 – tend to agree with Republican groups more than other
Democratic groups when it comes to key social issues such as gay marriage and abortion.
Of equal importance, Liberals, who represent 17% of the general public and 39% of John
Kerry’s voting base in 2004 – are distinct from all other typology groups for their secular values.
Fully 84% of Liberals say a person need not believe in God in order to be moral and have good
22
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
values, while the majority of
Conservative and Disadvantaged
Democrats disagree. This
secular/religious divide is connected to
very different views of the role of
government. A majority of Conservative
Democrats would like to see the
government do more to protect morality
in society, while just 8% of Liberals
agree. Most strikingly, more than nine-inten Liberals (92%) say that
homosexuality should be accepted by
society as a way of life, whereas only half
of Disadvantaged Democrats (51%) and
only a third of Conservative Democrats
(34%) agree.
The Democrats’ Cultural Divide
Homosexuality is a way of life that...
Should be accepted by society
Should be discouraged by society
Neither/Both/Don’t know
To be moral and have good values...
It is necessary to believe in God
It is NOT necessary to believe in God
Neither/Both/Don’t know
The government should do more to
protect morality in society
I worry the government is getting too
involved in the issue of morality
Neither/Both/Don’t know
Lib- Disadv. Cons.
erals Dems Dems
%
%
%
92
51
34
5
41
58
8
8
3
100
100
100
15
84
1
100
54
43
3
100
74
24
4
100
8
32
54
88
4
100
59
9
100
38
8
100
Democrats Divide over Regulation, Environment, Immigration
While religious and moral beliefs form a clear area of contention within the Democratic
electoral coalition, this is not the only arena in which there is substantial disagreement. In particular,
the economic insecurity faced by most Disadvantaged Democrats is linked with a number of
attitudes toward regulation, the environment, and immigration that are not typically associated with
liberalism.
At root, most Disadvantaged Democrats, who make up 10% of the general public and 22%
of Kerry’s voting base in 2004, are struggling financially and are pessimistic about their
opportunities to improve their situation. This gap is most notable with respect to feelings of
individual empowerment. By a 79% to 14% margin, Disadvantaged Democrats believe that hard
work and determination provide no guarantee of success for most people. By comparison, the
majority of Liberals and Conservative Democrats believe that most people who want to get ahead
can make it if they are willing to work hard.
While the Democratic Party is generally viewed as more favorable toward the environment
and government, this basic difference with respect to wealth and opportunity creates significant
divisions within the party in these areas. While most Liberals and Conservative Democrats believe
government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest, the majority of
Disadvantaged Democrats believe government regulations usually do more harm than good. And
Liberals and Conservative Democrats believe that stricter environmental regulations are worth the
23
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
costs, a view shared by majorities in
two of the three Republican groups as
well. But fewer than half of
Disadvantaged Democrats agree,
while 44% say that stricter
environmental regulations cost too
many jobs and hurt the economy.
The various groups in the
Democratic coalition also have
different values with respect to the
impact of newcomers to America. By
an 87% to 9% margin, most Liberals
believe the growing number of
immigrants strengthens American
society, but only about a third of both
Disadvantaged and Conservative
Democrats agree. Instead, most in
these groups say the influx of
newcomers to this country poses a
threat to traditional American values
and customs.
Other Fissures in the Democratic Coalition
Lib- Disadv. Cons.
erals Dems Dems
Government regulation of business...
%
%
%
Usually does more harm than good
21
66
34
Is necessary to protect the public interest 72
21
51
13
15
Neither/Both/Don’t know
7
100
100
100
Stricter environmental regulations...
Are worth the costs
89
Cost too many jobs and hurt the economy 7
Neither/Both/Don’t know
4
100
48
44
8
100
60
29
11
100
The growing number of newcomers from other countries...
Threatens traditional American
customs and values
9
53
53
Strengthens American society
87
34
35
Neither/Both/Don’t know
4
13
12
100
100
100
Most people who want to get ahead can
make it if they’re willing to work hard
Hard work and determination are no
guarantee of success for most people
Neither/Both/Don’t know
56
14
83
39
5
100
79
7
100
12
5
100
These internal divisions even carry over into beliefs directly related to the role of
government. Disadvantaged Democrats express far more cynicism about persistent government
waste and inefficiency, as well as government officials losing touch with the people, than do other
Democratic typology groups. Conservative Democrats are much more likely to believe that poor
people have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything in return,
while Liberals and Disadvantaged Democrats strongly believe that poor people lead difficult lives
because benefits don’t go far enough.
Divided GOP Values on Government, Business, Poverty
The Republican Party is often characterized as being pro-business, anti-regulation, and
opposed to broad government programs to assist the poor. However, not all segments of the GOP’s
electoral coalition share these values. Most notably, Pro-Government Conservatives, who make up
9% of the general public and 15% of Bush’s 2004 voting base, tend to favor government action
across the board, whether the topic is public morality, anti-poverty assistance, or regulation. And
while both Social and Pro-Government Conservatives are strong advocates of traditional moral
24
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
values, there is a huge economic divide between the two, which leads to starkly differing views on
other social, economic, and governmental issues.
This combination contributes
to dramatic differences on such core
values as the government’s
responsibility to the poor. While 80%
of Pro-Government Conservatives say
the government should do more to
help the needy, even if it means going
deeper into debt, the majority of
Social Conservatives and two-thirds
of Enterprisers take the opposing view
– that the government can’t afford to
do much more to help the needy.
Fissures in the Republican Coalition
The gov’t should do more to help
needy Americans even if it means
going deeper into debt
The gov’t today can’t afford to do
much more to help the needy
Neither/Both/Don’t know
Too much power is concentrated in
the hands of a few large companies
The largest companies do NOT have
too much power
Neither/Both/Don’t know
Enter- Social Pro-gov
prisers Cons Cons
%
%
%
19
32
80
67
14
100
58
10
100
13
7
100
26
88
83
58
16
100
5
7
100
11
6
100
While Social Conservatives
Government regulation of business...
Is necessary to protect the public interest 16
58
66
largely side with Enterprisers on
Usually does more harm than good
78
32
27
welfare, they side with the less
Neither/Both/Don’t know
6
10
7
100
100
100
affluent Pro-Government
Stricter environmental regulations...
Conservatives when it comes to
Are worth the costs
16
67
61
business and regulatory issues. By
Cost too many jobs and hurt the economy 74
25
32
Neither/Both/Don’t know
10
8
7
overwhelming margins, both Social
100
100
100
Conservatives and Pro-Government
The growing number of newcomers
Conservatives hold negative views of
from other countries...
business, while Enterprisers stand
Threatens traditional American
customs and values
38
68
31
apart from the rest of the country with
Strengthens American society
53
21
62
their consistently favorable views of
Neither/Both/Don’t know
9
11
7
100
100
100
business and the marketplace. This
divide is reflected in other values
about regulation and the environment as well. While 78% of Enterprisers believe government
regulation usually does more harm than good, sizeable majorities of the other Republican typology
groups believe regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest.
Environmental protection also stands out as a major divide within the GOP’s coalition. Most
Enterprisers believe the country has gone too far in its efforts to protect the environment, while
roughly eight-in-ten Social and Pro-Government Conservatives take the opposing view that we
should do whatever it takes to protect the environment. Similarly, while three-quarters of
25
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Enterprisers see environmental regulation as mostly hurting the economy and jobs, more than six-inten in the other GOP groups say stricter environmental protections are worth the costs.
26
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
V: POLITICS AND THE TYPOLOGY
The political polarization evident in last fall’s presidential election is clearly reflected in the
Pew typology. The two most heavily Republican groups – Enterprisers and Social Conservatives,
who together account for 23% of registered voters – supported Bush by margins of 20-1 or more.
The strongest Democratic groups – Liberals and Disadvantaged Democrats, who together make up
29% of registered voters – backed Kerry just as convincingly.
Bush drew strong, but less
overwhelming, support from the other largely
Republican group, Pro-Government
Conservatives. This group, comprising 10% of
registered voters, favored the president by fiveto-one (61%-12%). On the Democratic side,
Conservative Democrats (15% of registered
voters) favored Kerry by about the same margin
65%-14%.
The 2004 Presidential Election
Voted for Kerry
Voted for Bush
Enterprisers
1 92
Social Conservatives
4 86
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
12 61
Upbeats
14 63
Disaffecteds
21 42
Conservative Democrats
65 14
Disadvantaged Dems
82 2
Taken together, the three Democratic
groups make up a larger share of registered
Liberals
81 2
voters than do the three Republican groups
(44% vs. 33%). But Bush countered this
advantage by drawing strong support from the GOP-leaning groups in the middle of the political
spectrum. A majority of Upbeats do not identify themselves with either party, but most lean to the
GOP. The Upbeats backed Bush nearly five-to-one (63%-14%). And though many Disaffecteds did
not turn out to vote, those who did were also an important part of Bush’s winning coalition (favoring
the incumbent by a 42%-21% margin). This group, too, is mostly independent, but 60% either
identify themselves as Republican or lean toward the GOP.
Moreover, Bush’s core supporters – Enterprisers and Social Conservatives – report higher
rates of voter turnout than do other groups in the typology. Just 4% of Enterprisers and 6% of Social
Conservatives say they did not vote last November. By contrast, 13% in each of the three
Democratic groups say they did not vote in the presidential election.
27
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Views of Political Figures
Most Americans (69%) say they would not want Bush to run for a third term, even if that
were permissible under the Constitution. Just 27% would like to see Bush serve as president for a
third term. A majority also opposes a hypothetical third term for Bill Clinton (55%), but significantly
more would like to see a third term for Clinton (43%) than for Bush.
Nearly two-thirds of Americans (64%) have a favorable opinion of Bill Clinton, the highest
positive rating of 11 political figures tested. Six-in-ten have a favorable opinion of former New York
City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and about the same number have a positive view of Sen. John McCain
(59%).
Ratings for both Bill and Hillary Clinton
had declined sharply in 2001 and 2002, following
the controversy over the pardons Bill Clinton had
issued before leaving office. But their ratings have
rebounded strongly – favorable opinions of Bill
Clinton have risen from 46% in December 2002 to
64% currently. Hillary Clinton’s favorable marks
have also risen, though not quite as dramatically
(from 47% in December 2002 to 57% in the current
survey).
Comeback Kids
Hillary Clinton
December 2002
July 2001
January 2001
Bill Clinton
December 2002
July 2001
January 2001
Favor- Unfavor- Can’t
able
able
Rate
%
%
%
57
36
7=100
47
44
8=100
53
42
4=100
60
35
5=100
64
46
50
64
32
49
46
34
4=100
5=100
4=100
2=100
The Typology and Leading Republicans
While partisanship also colors the favorability ratings, several political figures have broad
appeal across the typology groups. Rudy Giuliani is widely popular with Republican groups,
especially Enterprisers (90% positive), but also has a favorable rating among majorities in both
independent groups, and roughly half of Conservative Democrats (53%) and Liberals (47%).
Sen. John McCain is extraordinarily popular among Liberals, drawing a positive rating
among this group that is actually a bit higher than among Republicans generally (66% vs. 61%).
However, his favorability ratings among GOP typology groups are significantly lower than
Giuliani’s or those of the president and other administration officials.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is very popular with Republicans – her 97% favorable
rating among Enterprisers rivals Bush’s (96%) and Cheney’s (94%). But Rice also has robust ratings
28
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
among both independent groups and among Conservative Democrats. Rice and California Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger draw the highest positive ratings among Upbeats of all 11 political figures
tested (76% each).
Favorability of Republican Political Figures
Total
Favorable view of... %
Rudy Giuliani
60
John McCain
59
Enter- Social Pro-Gov
prisers Cons Cons
%
%
%
90
75
69
74
68
53
Up- Disafbeats fecteds
%
%
69
53
65
45
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals
%
%
%
53
37
47
53
45
66
A. Schwarzenegger
Condoleezza Rice
57
57
79
97
71
83
67
80
76
76
47
53
52
50
39
28
37
33
George Bush
Dick Cheney
Donald Rumsfeld
53
48
39
96
94
85
91
86
73
89
70
52
71
55
46
72
57
34
41
35
36
9
19
12
9
13
8
Other major administration figures elicit more partisan reactions. Bush has extensive appeal
among the GOP groups, as well as among Disaffecteds and Upbeats (72% and 71% favorable,
respectively); Bush also earns a 41% favorable mark among Conservative Democrats. But only
about one-in-ten Disadvantaged Democrats (9%) and Liberals (9%) express a positive opinion of
Bush.
Vice President Dick Cheney’s ratings are generally lower than the president’s, especially
among the two independent groups. Donald Rumsfeld has the lowest overall positive rating of the
Republicans tested. Fewer than half of those in the independent groups – and 52% of ProGovernment Conservatives – express a favorable opinion of the defense secretary.
Clintons’ Crossover Appeal
Bill and Hillary Clinton draw positive ratings ranging from 80% to 90% in the three
Democratic groups. More surprising is their popularity in the center, and even the center-right, of
the political spectrum. Roughly half of Pro-Government Conservatives, whose views stray from
GOP orthodoxy more than other Republican groups, express positive opinions of both Clintons
(53% Bill Clinton, 51% Hillary Clinton).
Both Clintons are very unpopular with Enterprisers, although about a third of Social
Conservatives express a favorable opinion of the former president (32%). However, Hillary Clinton
29
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
has lower favorability ratings among the two independent groups than Bill Clinton and most leading
GOP figures.
Favorability of Democratic Political Figures
Total
Favorable view of... %
Bill Clinton
64
Hillary Clinton
57
John Kerry
49
Howard Dean
32
Enter- Social Pro-Gov
prisers Cons Cons
%
%
%
21
32
53
10
24
51
11
18
23
8
21
13
Up- Disafbeats fecteds
%
%
50
49
44
34
38
23
27
19
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals
%
%
%
89
85
88
88
77
83
74
86
78
43
32
60
John Kerry’s positive appeal is largely limited to the three main Democratic groups. Howard
Dean is less well-known, and less popular, than other figures tested. Liberals are the only group in
which a majority (60%) expresses a favorable opinion of Dean.
Looking to ’08
John McCain’s extensive popularity among Liberals is evident in early opinions about the
2008 presidential race. Overall, about a third of the public (32%) say they would like to see McCain
nominated as the GOP candidate, slightly more than the number who favor Giuliani (27%). But
much of McCain’s strength comes from the Liberal group. Fully 55% of Liberals say they most want
to see McCain win the GOP nomination; that is more than double the percentage in any GOP group
that wants McCain to capture the nomination.
The Republicans and 2008
Most like to see
GOP nominate...
John McCain
Rudy Giuliani
Condoleezza Rice
Jeb Bush
Bill Frist
Total
%
32
27
17
7
4
Enter- Social Pro-Gov
prisers Cons Cons
%
%
%
20
24
27
30
30
33
23
17
24
13
14
6
12
5
2
Up- Disafbeats fecteds
%
%
27
23
29
30
21
17
4
11
4
2
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals
%
%
%
32
30
55
30
19
20
14
16
14
4
3
2
5
8
2
Giuliani’s support, by contrast, is distributed far more evenly across the typology groups.
Giuliani is the top choice among the three GOP groups, but also is rated highly by Upbeats,
Disaffecteds and Conservative Democrats. Condoleezza Rice also has fairly broad support; among
the Republican groups, Rice’s backing is on par with McCain’s. And about one-in-five Upbeats
(21%) and Disaffecteds (17%) want Rice to win the GOP nod in 2008.
30
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
The Democrats and 2008
Most like to see
Total
Democrats nominate...%
Hillary Clinton
34
John Kerry
16
John Edwards
16
Howard Dean
9
Bill Richardson
9
Enter- Social Pro-Gov
prisers Cons Cons
%
%
%
14
13
41
6
8
11
16
22
18
15
10
7
29
18
8
Up- Disafbeats fecteds
%
%
26
20
16
11
20
16
11
11
8
9
Cons Disadv LibDems Dems erals
%
%
%
43
49
45
21
31
14
19
6
14
7
4
11
3
5
5
Among Democrats, Hillary Clinton has the early advantage. Clinton is the top choice of all
three Democratic groups; overall, about a third (34%) would like to see her win the Democratic
nomination. In addition, on the Republican side, 41% of Pro-Government Conservatives want
Clinton to win the Democratic nomination. John Kerry and John Edwards both trail Clinton among
Democrats, although Kerry attracts sizable backing among Disadvantaged Democrats (31%).
Views of the Parties
As expected, the groups constituting the electoral base for each political party view that party
in mostly favorable terms
while holding largely
Opinions of the Parties
unfavorable opinions of the
opposing party. When it
Republican Party
Democratic Party
comes to party performance
DK
Fav Unfav DK
Fav Unfav
%
%
%
%
%
%
in standing up for its
All
52
42
6=100 53
41
6=100
traditional positions,
Enterprisers
96
4
0=100
7
92
1=100
however, Democratic groups
Social Conservatives
89
8
3=100 25
70
5=100
are more critical of their
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
78
17
5=100 38
57
5=100
own party’s leadership than
Upbeats
76
17
7=100 42
50
8=100
Disaffecteds
59
27
14=100 39
49 12=100
Republicans are of GOP
Conservative Democrats
33
60
7=100 82
12
6=100
leaders. And among the
Disadvantaged Democrats 16
79
5=100 83
12
5=100
Democrats, Liberals are the
Liberals
14
83
3=100 77
20
3=100
most critical of their own
party’s leadership.
More than nine-in-ten Enterprisers (96%) have a favorable view of the GOP, and almost as
many express a negative view of the Democrats (92%). Social Conservatives are nearly as partisan.
However, Pro-Government Conservatives are far less critical of the Democratic party than are the
other groups making up the Republican base – 38% have a positive opinion of the Democratic Party.
31
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Roughly eight-in-ten members of all three core Democratic groups give their party a
favorable assessment. Liberals are the least enthusiastic (77% favorable to 20% unfavorable). Both
Disadvantaged Democrats and Conservative Democrats hold similar views of their party, but
Conservative Democrats are less negative in their feelings toward the Republican party.
Upbeats and Disaffecteds are less polarized in their views of the two parties. Large majorities
in both groups hold favorable views of the GOP but about four-in-ten in each group also hold a
favorable view of the Democratic Party (42% of Upbeats, 39% of Disaffecteds).
Party Performance: Liberals Are Critical
While both parties receive favorable
ratings from their base, Republicans are much
more positive about the performance of GOP
leaders than Democrats are about their party
leadership. About half of Republicans and
Republican-leaning independents (51%) say
GOP leaders are doing an excellent or good
job of standing up for traditional party
positions, such as reducing the size of
government and promoting conservative social
values. By contrast, just a third of Democrats
and Democratic-leaning independents give
party leaders high marks in standing up for
traditional Democratic positions, such as
helping the needy, representing working
people, and protecting the interests of
minorities.
GOP Stands Up for Core Issues
Republicans rate their party's job standing up for
its traditional positions on key issues
Only fair/Poor
Excellent/Good
All Rep/Rep leaners
45 51
Enterprisers
39 60
Social Conservatives
34 63
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
52 41
Democratic Party Failing the Base
Democrats rate their party's job standing up for
its traditional positions on key issues
Only fair/Poor
Excellent/Good
All Dem/Dem leaners
65 33
Conservative Dems
53 44
Disadvantaged Dems
66 34
76 23
Liberals
Liberals are particularly negative in
their assessment of the Democratic Party
leadership. Just 23% of Liberals say the
leaders are doing an excellent or good job in standing up for key party stances, while 76% rate their
performance as only fair (55%) or poor (21%). Among Democrats, Conservative Democrats are the
least critical of the leaders’ performance, with 44% saying they are doing an excellent or good job
and a narrow majority (53%) rating their performance as only fair or poor.
32
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Strength of Partisanship
While Liberals are a core part of the
Democratic electoral base, and now constitute
the largest group in the typology, their
identification with the party is the weakest
among Democratic groups.
Liberals Have Weaker Party Ties
Cons.
Dems
%
51
37
10
2
100
Party Identification
Strong Democrat
Not Strong Democrat
Ind.-Lean Democrat
Other
Disadv.
Dems Liberal
%
55
29
14
2
100
%
35
24
32
9
100
Just 35% of Liberals consider themselves
strong Democrats. About a quarter (24%)
identify themselves as Democrats but not
strongly, and about three-in-ten (32%) are Democratic-leaning independents. This contrasts with
both Conservative Democrats and Disadvantaged Democrats, where a majority are strong Democrats
(51% and 55%, respectively) and only about one-in-ten are Democratic-leaning independents.
Among Republican groups, 62% of Enterprisers and 51% of Social Conservatives consider
themselves strong Republicans. By contrast, only a third of Pro-Government Conservatives are
strong Republicans while 28% in this
group are Republican-leaning
Fewer Democrats Change Party Over Lifetime
independents.
More GOP Converts
Throughout the 1970s and early
1980s, Demo crats outnumbered
Republicans in the adult population. The
two parties are now at parity with roughly
equal proportions identifying with each
party. While part of this aggregate shift
stems from generational replacement as
New Deal-era Democrats have aged and
been replaced with younger, more
Republican-leaning generations, at least
some of the change has resulted from
individual changes in party affiliation.
Republican/lean Repub.
Ever thought of
yourself
as a Democrat?
No
Yes
DK
(N)
%
%
%
38
61 1=100 (525)
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Govt. Conservatives
37
36
32
63
64
68
0=100 (134)
0=100 (125)
0=100 (67)
Ever though of yourself
as a Republican?
Yes
DK
No
Democrat/lean Democrat
%
22
%
78
%
*=100 (481)
Conservative Democrats
Disadvantaged Democrats
Liberals
12
14
26
88
86
74
*=100 (99)
0=100 (72)
0=100 (219)
*Asked of those who identify with or lean towards the party.
It is not surprising, then, that a
sizable minority of Republicans (38%) say
that, at some point in the past, they thought of themselves as Democrats. Comparable percentages
in the three GOP typology groups say they had a prior allegiance to the Democrats. More generally,
33
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
older Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (age 50 and older) are more likely to have
shifted partisan allegiances than have younger Republicans.
Overall, only about one-in-five Democrats (22%) say they have thought of themselves as
Republicans in the past. Liberals are the most likely to have changed party over their lifetime. Only
a small portion of Conservative Democrats and Disadvantaged Democrats have thought of
themselves as anything but a Democrat (12% and 14%, respectively).
Party Loyalty in the Voting Booth
Majorities in parties have voted across party lines at some point, but more Republicans say
they have voted for Democratic candidates than vice versa. Among Republicans, 22% remain loyal
while 71% say they vote across party lines. By comparison, 38% of Democrats say they are loyal
in their vote, while 56% sometimes cross party lines.
A similar pattern was found in
1987 when 66% of Democrats said they
“usually prefer Democratic candidates
but I sometimes support Republicans”
compared with 77% of Republicans
who said they sometimes crossed over
to vote for Democratic candidates.
Cross-Party Voting
Sometimes Always
vote for
vote
other party party line
DK
(N)
Republicans/lean Rep.
%
71
%
22
%
7=100 (955)
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
74
73
67
25
23
27
1=100 (215)
4=100 (230)
6=100 (143)
Among typology groups with
Democrats/Lean Dem.
56
38
6=100 (872)
strong partisan attachments, nearly half
Conservative Democrats
60
37
3=100 (256)
of Disadvantaged Democrats (48%) say
Disadvantaged Dems.
51
48
1=100 (165)
they always support their party’s
Liberals
59
37
4=100 (327)
candidates, the highest percentage
*Questions asked of partisans and leaning independents.
among any group. Somewhat fewer
Conservative Democrats and Liberals
(37% each) say they always vote Democratic. On the GOP side, only about a quarter of Social
Conservatives (23%), Enterprisers (25%), and Pro-Government Conservatives (27%) say they are
always loyal to the party in the voting booth.
34
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
VI: ISSUES AND SHIFTING COALITIONS
The extensive divisions within the two parties over fundamental political values are mirrored
in disagreements over contemporary issues. Economic issues tend to divide Republican typology
groups, while social issues split the Democrats. On many national security issues, especially the war
in Iraq, internal partisan fissures are overshadowed by the vast gulf dividing Republicans and
Democrats. However, tensions are evident among Democrats on some of these issues, especially in
attitudes toward preemptive military action and the use of torture against suspected terrorists.
Part One: Social Policy
The public is divided over whether homosexuality should be accepted or discouraged, but
Americans continue to decisively reject gay marriage. Americans oppose gay marriage by nearly
two-to-one (61%-32%), a margin that has remained stable since the middle of 2003.
Fully 90% of Enterprisers are opposed
to gay marriage. Social Conservatives are
close behind at 84% opposition (with 65%
strongly opposed, the highest of any group).
Majorities in all of the other groups – except
Liberals – also oppose gay marriage by wide
margins. Conservative Democrats oppose gay
marriage by roughly four-to-one (74%-19%),
and Disadvantaged Democrats oppose it by
(55%-37%). But 80% of Liberals favor gay
marriage, more than twice the percentage in
each of the other two Democratic groups.
Opinion on Gay Marriage
Oppose
Total
Favor
61 32
Enterprisers
90
Social Conservatives
84
8
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
76 17
Upbeats
64 28
Disaffecteds
67 26
Conservative Democrats
74 19
Disadvantaged Dems
55 37
Liberals
15 80
12
Nearly half of Americans (46%) say
they have a friend, colleague, or family
member who is gay, with Republicans (at 40%) a little less likely than Democrats (51%) to say this.
Liberals are much more apt than those in other typology groups to say they have a gay associate or
family member (73% vs. less than 50% in any other group).
35
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Abortion Divides Most Groups
Abortion remains a contentious issue,
with nearly all groups in the typology divided
to some extent. Overall, 55% oppose making
it more difficult for a woman to obtain an
abortion, while 36% disagree. By roughly a
five-to-four margin, each of the three GOPleaning groups favors greater restrictions on
abortion.
Pluralities or majorities of all other
groups oppose making abortions more difficult
to obtain. But sizable minorities of
Conservative Democrats, Upbeats, and
Disaffecteds (37% each) support tougher
restrictions on abortion.
Stem Cell Splits the GOP
Public sentiment in favor of conducting
stem cell research appears to be growing. Most
Americans (56%) say it is more important to
conduct stem cell research that may result in
medical cures, while only about a third (32%)
believe it is more important to avoid
destroying the potential life of human embryos
involved in such research. In 2002, 43% felt it
was more important to conduct stem cell
research.
Making it more DIFFICULT for a
woman to get an abortion
Oppose
Favor
Total
55 36
Enterprisers
38 54
Social Conservatives
40 54
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
41 53
Upbeats
54 37
Disaffecteds
47 37
Conservative Democrats
51 37
Disadvantaged Dems
67 22
88
Liberals
10
Priority in Stem Cell Research
Not destroying potential life of human embryos
Conducting research that may result in new cures
Total
32 56
Enterprisers
49 38
Social Conservatives
45 40
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
46 47
Upbeats
36 53
Disaffecteds
31 53
Solid majorities of the DemocraticConservative Democrats
30 57
leaning groups support stem cell research, with
Disadvantaged Dems
26 60
Liberals
11 84
Liberals expressing the greatest support
(84%). Republican-leaning groups, by
contrast, are much more divided. By small
margins, Enterprisers and Social Conservatives say it is more important to avoid destroying the
potential life of human embryos than to conduct research that may lead to medical advances; ProGovernment Conservatives are about evenly split.
36
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Significantly, the middle groups in the typology fall closer to the Democratic side than to the
Republican side, with 53% each of Upbeats and Disaffecteds believing it is more important to
conduct stem cell research than to avoid destroying embryos.
In December 2004, nearly half of the public (47%) reported having heard “a lot” about the
issue of stem cell research, up five points from August. Awareness of the stem cell issue was much
higher among Liberals (71% had heard a lot) and the Enterprisers (63%) than among other typology
groups.
Creationism and the Ten Commandments
Two religious issues recently in the
news are the teaching of creationism in public
schools and the propriety of displaying the Ten
Commandments publicly in government
buildings. Majorities of Americans support
both of these ideas, with nearly three-quarters
(74%) saying the public display of the
commandments is proper, and 57% in favor of
teaching creationism, along with evolution, in
public schools. One-third of the public (33%)
favors the teaching of creationism instead of
evolution.
On both issues, there is relatively little
variation in support across the typology, with
two important exceptions. Liberals stand out
for their strong belief that the display of the
Ten Commandments in government buildings
is improper – 61% of Liberals say that,
compared with no more than 16% in any other
group. The other Democratic groups are in line
with Republican-leaning groups expressing the
view that the public display of the
commandments is proper.
Opinion on Displaying Ten
Commandments in Gov't Bldgs.
Improper
Proper
Total
22 74
Enterprisers
10 89
Social Conservatives
5 92
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
8 92
Upbeats
15 81
Disaffecteds
10 80
Conservative Democrats
16 82
Disadvantaged Dems
11 84
Liberals
61 35
Teaching Creationism ALONG with
Evolution in Public Schools
Oppose
Favor
Total
33 57
Enterprisers
12 83
Social Conservatives
28 62
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
22 64
Upbeats
34 61
Disaffecteds
22 60
Conservative Democrats
33 46
Disadvantaged Dems
36 50
Liberals
49 49
On the teaching of evolution, it is the
Enterprisers who stand out. While between
46% and 64% of every other group favors the
37
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
teaching of creationism, fully 83% of Enterprisers do so. But on the question of whether creationism
should be taught instead of evolution, Social Conservatives are most supportive – about half (51%)
would remove evolution from the schools and replace it with creationism.
The Supreme Court
With respect to President Bush’s next
appointment to the Supreme Court, a plurality
of Americans (41%) believe Bush should
choose someone who will keep the court about
the same as it is now, while roughly equal
numbers support a more conservative nominee
(28%) or a more liberal one (24%).
Next Supreme Court Appointment
Should be...
More liberal
41
24
Total
Enterprisers
5
Social Conservatives
Only two groups, Enterprisers (64%)
and Social Conservatives (50%), clearly favor
a choice that would make the court more
conservative. In five of the other groups,
pluralities – or, in the case of Upbeats and
Disaffecteds, majorities – feel that the
president should choose someone who would
keep the Court’s ideological balance about the
same as it is now. Most Liberals (52%) would
prefer a nominee who will make the court
more liberal.
More conservative
About the same
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
9
28
4 26
64
40
50
41
36
Upbeats
13
53
30
Disaffecteds
10
53
30
27
Conservative Democrats
Disadvantaged Dems
Liberals
33
52
40
26
43
15
39
5
Next Supreme Court Appointment is
"Very Important"
Total
Nearly six-in-ten Enterprisers (59%)
say the choice is very important personally, as
do roughly half of Liberals (49%) and Social
Conservatives (47%). Fewer than four-in-ten
in the other typology groups attach great
personal importance to the choice of the next
Supreme Court justice.
38
Enterprisers
59
47
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
33
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
Conservative Democrats
Disadvantaged Dems
Liberals
38
37
30
28
31
49
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Views of ‘Christian Conservative’ Movement
Majorities of all of the typology groups consider the United States to be “a Christian nation,”
with 71% overall saying that it is. Liberals and Disadvantaged Democrats are least likely to agree,
but even among these groups, 57% say the U.S. is a Christian nation.
Yet despite this view and the predominance of the Christian tradition among personal
religious choices, public opinion is divided regarding the Christian conservative movement. About
four-in-ten (41%) have a favorable view of the
movement, while 34% have an unfavorable
Views of the Christian
view. Republicans are strongly favorable (61%
Conservative Movement
vs. 16% unfavorable), while opinion among
Unfavorable Favorable
Democrats tilts negative (35% vs. 45%).
Total
34 41
The Democratic groups are divided in
their views of the Christian conservative
movement, with Conservative Democrats
favorably disposed (53% positive, 18%
negative), and Liberals sharply negative (78%
unfavorable – of those, 46% very
unfavorable).
Enterprisers
21 63
Social Conservatives
10 59
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
12 60
Upbeats
35 38
Disaffecteds
28 41
Conservative Democrats
18 53
Disadvantaged Dems
45 32
Liberals
39
78
10
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Part Two: Economic and Domestic Policy
Republicans are less cohesive on matters involving economic policies than on cultural and
foreign affairs issues. These differences are most obvious with respect to such issues as the
desirability of government-guaranteed health insurance, stricter bankruptcy laws, and in attitudes
toward tax reduction. Democrats, by contrast,
are much more unified on these issues.
Among GOP groups, Pro-Government
Conservatives are generally supportive of an
activist government, particularly in helping the
poor. Enterprisers, by contrast, stand out for
their broad support for tax cuts and opposition
to expanding government programs.
Health Insurance, Minimum Wage
Solid majorities of every group, with
the sole exception of Enterprisers, favor a
government guarantee of health insurance for
all Americans, even if it means raising taxes.
Across the electorate, support for guaranteed
health insurance ranges from 55% among
Upbeats and 59% among Social Conservatives
to 90% among Liberals. By contrast,
Enterprisers strongly oppose guaranteed health
insurance for all, if it means higher taxes (76%
oppose, 23% favor).
Gov't Health Insurance for All,
Even if Taxes Increase
Oppose
Favor
Total
30 65
Enterprisers
76 23
Social Conservatives
37 59
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
33 63
Upbeats
38 55
Disaffecteds
26 64
Conservative Democrats
23 73
Disadvantaged Dems
29 65
Liberals
8 90
Raising the Minimum Wage
Oppose
Favor
Total
12 86
Enterprisers
49 46
Social Conservatives
18 79
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
5 94
Similarly, overwhelming support for an
increase in the minimum wage extends across
Upbeats
11 86
Disaffecteds
13 84
all groups, again with the exception of
Enterprisers. Overall 86% of the public favors
Conservative Democrats
6 92
a hike in the minimum wage from its current
Disadvantaged Dems
3 95
level of $5.15 to $6.45 per hour. More than
Liberals
5 94
90% of Pro-Government Conservatives,
Conservative Democrats, Disadvantaged
Democrats and Liberals support such an increase. Among Enterprisers, however, a plurality (49%)
opposes the move, although nearly as many (46%) favor it.
40
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Taxes and Budget
On tax policy, Enterprisers stand alone
in their view – shared by 82% in this group –
that all of the tax cuts from President Bush’s
first term be made permanent. By contrast,
only about half as many Social Conservatives
(42%) and even fewer Pro-Government
Conservatives (27%) support making all of the
tax cuts permanent.
Opinion on Bush's Tax Cuts
All recent tax cuts should be repealed
Tax cuts for wealthy should be repealed, while others stay
All of the recent tax cuts should be made permanent
Total
25
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
28
85
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
35
17
25
30
33
82
42
27
By about a two-to-one margin, most of
the electorate would give higher priority to
Upbeats
23
35
27
reducing the federal budget deficit than to
27
Disaffecteds
24
33
cutting taxes. That margin holds roughly true
43
Conservative Democrats
31
14
across all groups with a few exceptions:
Disadvantaged
Dems
30
13
47
Liberals, who choose deficit cutting over tax
49
Liberals
34
8
cutting by an overwhelming margin (83% to
14%); Disaffecteds, who opt for deficit cutting
by a relatively small margin (47%-42%); and Enterprisers who, alone among typology groups, give
tax cuts priority over deficit reduction, by a margin of 50% to 43%.
However, majorities in all the groups, except Liberals, agree that while reducing the federal
budget deficit is an important priority, it should not be the top priority for the president and Congress
to deal with this year.
Even among Liberals, just half (50%)
rate deficit reduction a top priority.
Enterprisers are least likely to deem red ink
curtailment a top priority--23% of the group
does so, compared with 59% who call it an
important but lower priority. Across the other
groups, the percentages rating deficit reduction
a top priority range from slightly less than a
third among Social Conservatives and
Upbeats, to about four-in-ten (41% to 45%)
among Disadvantaged
Democrats,
Conservative Democrats, Disaffecteds, and
Pro-Government Conservatives.
Higher Priority -- Cutting Taxes or
Reducing the Deficit?
Reducing budget deficit
Cutting taxes
Total
61 32
Enterprisers
43 50
Social Conservatives
61 31
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
57 37
Upbeats
64 29
Disaffecteds
47 42
Conservative Democrats
62 31
Disadvantaged Dems
61 32
Liberals
83 14
41
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
A similar pattern is seen with regard to opinions about ways to reduce the budget deficit. A
majority of the public (54%) supports cutting domestic spending to reduce the deficit; about a third
each favor cuts in military spending (35%) or raising taxes (31%).
At one extreme, 81% of Enterprisers favor cutting spending on domestic programs to reduce
the deficit. They are joined in that view by 60% or more among Social Conservatives and Upbeats.
Disadvantaged Democrats are the most reluctant to cut domestic spending, with only 29% in favor.
Still, nearly half (48%) of Liberals, as well as the same proportion of Conservative Democrats, also
support cuts in domestic spending to reduce the deficit.
Where the Liberals differ most
from other groups on budget issues is in
their willingness to cut defense and
military spending to reduce the deficit
(65% favor such cuts). By contrast,
among all other groups, support for
military and defense cuts ranges from a
low of 16% among Enterprisers and
Social Conservatives to 41% among
Disadvantaged Democrats.
Support for Proposals to Reduce the Deficit
Total
Cut
Cut military/
Raise
domestic
defense
taxes
spending spending
%
%
%
54
35
31
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
81
63
53
16
16
19
12
27
32
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
61
44
31
33
34
19
Conservative Democrats
48
29
25
In addition, a far higher percentage
Disadvantaged Democrats
29
41
23
of Liberals than those in other groups
Liberals
48
65
56
would raise taxes to reduce the deficit.
Percent within each group that would favor each as a means of reducing
the federal budget deficit.
More than half of Liberals (56%) support
raising taxes to meet the goal of deficit
reduction – no more than about a third in
any other group agree (Upbeats 34%). At the low end, just 12% of Enterprisers favor raising taxes
for this purpose.
Bankruptcy, Malpractice Awards
On issues affecting the courts, the surveys also find divisions cutting across partisan lines.
For example, bankruptcy laws allowing individuals deeply in debt to seek protection from their
creditors realign several normally Republican or Republican-leaning groups with predominantly
Democratic groups.
42
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
At a time when Congress had under
consideration legislation making it more
difficult for individuals to file for bankruptcy
protection – legislation that was signed into
law by the president a month later (April 20,
2005) – the March survey found that 39% of
the general public favors stricter rules.
Overall, a 47% plurality of the public feels that
no change is needed in bankruptcy protections
for debtors, while 8% say that access to
bankruptcy should be made easier, rather than
more difficult, for individuals.
Make Declaring Bankruptcy...
Easier
Same
5
Upbeats
Conservative Democrats
Disadvantaged Dems
Liberals
53
13
8
22
7
61
33
33
58
8
55
31
1
Social Conservatives
39
33
2
Enterprisers
Disaffecteds
47
8
Total
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
More difficult
58
32
53
49
57
35
16
30
Both ideological and economic factors
are evident in opinions toward bankruptcy.
Majorities of the relatively affluent Enterprisers and Upbeats (55% and 58%, respectively) think that
the laws should make it more difficult for individuals to claim bankruptcy. However, a third in both
groups favor leaving bankruptcy law as it was at the time of the survey in March. Social
Conservatives, although somewhat less financially secure as a group than the Enterprisers or
Upbeats, are at least as supportive of making bankruptcy more difficult to declare, with 61%
favoring stricter laws.
Pro-Government Conservatives, however, part company with their more affluent fellow
Republicans on the bankruptcy issue. Only a third (33%) would make personal bankruptcy more
difficult, while 53% would leave the law unchanged, and 13% would make bankruptcy easier. In
this, their views are not dissimilar from those of other financially strained groups in the center and
Democratic portions of the political spectrum. The economically pressured and GOP-leaning
Disaffecteds also oppose tightening the bankruptcy laws. While only 8% favor making it easier to
declare bankruptcy, 58% would retain current provisions.
On the Democratic side, about 50%-60% of the three groups favor maintaining the status
quo. However, a relatively large minority of Disadvantaged Democrats (22%) believe it should be
easier for people to declare bankruptcy.
43
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
On the question of limiting awards in
medical malpractice lawsuits, typology groups
are in rare unanimity. Majorities in every
group favor such limitations. Enterprisers
provide the strongest support for limiting
malpractice awards (81% favor) followed by
Social Conservatives (76% favor) and Upbeats
(72%).
However, support remains strong
across the political spectrum with Liberals
favoring malpractice award limits by a margin
of 58% in favor to 37% opposed. The least
enthusiastic, but still net favorable groups, are
Disaffecteds (54% favor, 37% opposed) and
Disadvantaged Democrats (53% vs. 41%).
Limit Amount of Awards
in Malpractice Lawsuits
Oppose
Favor
Total
30 63
Enterprisers
16 81
Social Conservatives
18 76
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
30 61
Upbeats
23 72
Disaffecteds
37 54
Conservative Democrats
35 57
Disadvantaged Dems
41 53
Liberals
37 58
Jobs and Trade
The public generally takes a negative view of the hiring by U.S. businesses of lower-cost
workers in other countries to produce goods and services. About seven-in-ten Americans (69%)
believe “outsourcing” is a bad thing because it sends good jobs overseas; just 22% feel it is good
because it keeps costs down.
Among the typology groups, only the
steadfastly pro-business Enterprisers are torn
on this issue, with 44% viewing outsourcing
positively, and 43% negatively.
Opposition is especially strong among
less affluent typology groups. Nearly nine-inten Disadvantaged Democrats (87%) think
outsourcing is bad for the economy because it
sends jobs overseas; 81% of Conservative
Democrats,78% of Disaffecteds, and 71% of
Pro-Government Conservatives agree.
However, even the upwardly mobile Upbeats
take a generally dim view of outsourcing with
a 55% majority calling it a bad thing and just
Outsourcing's Impact on the Economy
Bad
Good
Total
69 22
Enterprisers
43 44
Social Conservatives
67 18
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
71 22
Upbeats
55 37
Disaffecteds
78 13
Conservative Democrats
Disadvantaged Dems
Liberals
44
81
87 8
72 19
10
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
37% offering a positive opinion of this trend.
There is little consensus, however, on
the economic impact of regional and
multilateral trade agreements such as the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
and the World Trade Organization (WTO). In
no group does a majority describe such
agreements as bad for the United States.
Moreover, only among Social Conservatives
and Disaffecteds do pluralities express
disapproval (44% of Social Conservatives,
43% of Disaffecteds). Even Disadvantaged
Democrats are evenly split (41%-41%)
between the good and bad appellations.
Impact of Trade Agreements
Bad for the US
Good for the US
Total
34 47
Enterprisers
40 47
Social Conservatives
44 36
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
27 47
Upbeats
24 59
Disaffecteds
43 40
Conservative Democrats
34 43
Disadvantaged Dems
41 41
Liberals
34 50
Yet there also is little apparent
enthusiasm for such trade deals, aside from the pro-business Upbeats (59% good thing). Enterprisers
and Liberals, the other two groups with high annual incomes, on balance believe such agreements
are good for the U.S., but only about half in each group views them positively.
Enterprisers strongly favor allowing
immigrants to enter and work in the United
States legally for limited periods of time (by
71% to 26%). This issue produces an unusual
alliance between Enterprisers and Liberals,
who, reflecting their generally pro-immigrant
stance, register high levels of support for such
temporary visas (58%-36%), as do the probusiness Upbeats (57%-38%).
Policy Allowing Immigrants to
Work in the US Temporarily?
Oppose
Favor
Total
44 50
Enterprisers
26 71
Social Conservatives
50 44
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
47 47
Upbeats
38 57
Disaffecteds
51 46
On this question, opposition falls along
economic rather than party lines. While
Conservative Democrats
50 43
Disadvantaged Democrats are the group most
Disadvantaged Dems
63 30
Liberals
36 58
reluctant to ease entry for immigrant workers,
with 63% opposed and only 30% in favor, they
are joined by majorities among Disaffecteds (51%), Social Conservatives and Conservative
Democrats (50% in each group).
45
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Protecting the Environment
Support for laws and regulations to
protect the environment runs strongly among
the public. As noted earlier, more than threequarters (77%) believe the country should do
whatever it takes to protect the environment
and 63% subscribe to that view strongly.
Allow Drilling in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
Oppose
Total
Favor
49 46
Enterprisers
5 92
Social Conservatives
23 71
50 46
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
But the public, and the party coalitions,
are divided over a proposal, currently before
Upbeats
47 49
Congress, to permit oil and gas drilling in the
Disaffecteds
32 60
Alaskan Arctic Wildlife Refuge. Among
46 46
Conservative Democrats
Republicans, Enterprisers overwhelmingly
Disadvantaged Dems
57 30
favor drilling (92%-5%), as does a solid
85 14
Liberals
majority of Social Conservatives (71%). But
Pro-Government Conservatives are split, with
46% supporting the proposal and 50% opposed. And while Liberals strongly oppose oil and gas
drilling in the Alaska refuge (by 85%-14%), Conservative Democrats are evenly divided (46%46%).
Support for Private Accounts Slips
Opinions on the
Allowing Private Accounts in Social Security
president’s proposal to allow
younger workers to invest
December
March
Change
Favor Oppose
Favor Oppose in Fav
some of their Social Security
%
%
%
%
taxes in private retirement
54
30
46
44
-8
Total
accounts track more
Enterprisers
89
6
88
7
-1
predictably along partisan
Social Conservatives
61
20
56
30
-5
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
63
19
59
26
-4
lines. As general support for
the plan has weakened since it
Upbeats
64
20
59
28
-5
Disaffecteds
53
28
44
44
-9
was first announced, the
March survey finds the overall
Conservative Democrats
48
38
36
58
-12
Disadvantaged Democrats
33
50
17
76
-16
public nearly evenly divided,
Liberals
38
47
28
65
-10
with 46% favoring the idea
and 44% opposed.
A comparison of the December and March surveys shows that support declined most sharply
among Democratic groups. But there also has been significant erosion of support among the
independent groups, especially the Disaffecteds. This group backed private accounts by nearly two46
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
to-one in December; currently, Disaffecteds are evenly split over the idea.
The proposal, however, still garners the support of nearly nine-in-ten Enterprisers (88%), and
majorities in the other GOP groups, as well as 59% of Upbeats. However, no more than about a third
in any of the Democratic groups support private accounts (36% of Conservative Democrats).
47
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Part Three: Military and Foreign Policy
The partisan lines dividing the electorate come into sharpest focus on issues involving
current foreign and military policies. Support for the use of military force is strongest among
groups that are reliably Republican, somewhat less so among centrist groups, and weakest among
Democratic groups.
Public opinion is cautiously in favor of
at least the occasional use of U.S. military
force against countries that have not attacked
the U.S., but may seriously threaten America.
At the extremes, only 14% think preemption is
often justified, while the same number think
preemption is never justified. The plurality
(46%) takes the view that it is sometimes
justified, and 21% think it is justified at least
on rare occasions.
Preemptive Military Force
Can be Justified...
Rarely/Never
Total
Often/Sometimes
35
60
10
Enterprisers
Social Conservatives
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
Upbeats
Disaffecteds
15
27
23
27
89
82
67
71
63
Conservative Democrats
32
58
Across groups in the electorate, these
Disadvantaged Dems 54
38
proportions vary substantially. Enterprisers are
33
Liberals 67
the most likely to support preemption, with
about nine-in-ten (89%) saying it is sometimes
(57%) or often (32%) justified. Nearly as many Social Conservatives say preemptive military action
is at least sometimes justified (82%), but there is less support for this idea among Pro-Government
Conservatives (67%).
Moving leftward across the political spectrum, reservations about the use of preemptive
military force increase. Only about four-in-ten Disadvantaged Democrats (38%) and fewer Liberals
(33%) believe preemptive military action is often or sometimes justified.
Iraq Attitudes Polarized
The same pattern is displayed even more clearly with respect to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in
2003. The consistently wide partisan divisions over the war are seen in the opinions of the typology
groups. In the December survey, Enterprisers (94%), Social Conservatives (88%) and Pro-
48
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Government Conservatives
(72%) endorsed the war by
overwhelming majorities. So
t o o
d i d
t w o thirds of Upbeats (66%) and
half of Disaffecteds.
Opinions on the War in Iraq
War in Iraq
was the...
Right
Wrong
decision decision
%
%
49
44
Total
What to do now?
Keep
Bring
troops in troops home
Iraq
soon
%
%
56
40
Enterprisers
94
5
Among Democratic
Social Conservatives
88
8
groups, opposition to the
Pro-Gov’t Conservatives
72
18
Iraq war is equally strong.
Upbeats
66
24
Liberals judge the war a
Disaffecteds
50
40
mistake by a lopsided 87%Conservative Democrats
28
61
11% margin. Conservative
Disadvantaged Democrats
15
76
Liberals
11
87
Democrats oppose it by twoto-one (61% wrong decision
versus 28% right decision),
while support is even lower among Disadvantaged Democrats (76% to 15%).
88
81
68
10
18
29
72
45
24
49
33
26
52
64
68
44
However, opinions shift with respect to the question of whether the government should keep
U.S. troops in Iraq until the situation there stabilizes, or bring them home as quickly as possible.
Enterprisers, Social Conservatives and Pro-Government Conservatives maintain nearly as high
levels of support (88%, 81% and 68%, respectively) for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq as they did for
their initial deployment.
Conservative Democrats and Disadvantaged Democrats, who opposed the decision to go to
war by substantial margins, want U.S. troops withdrawn quickly. But Liberals – the group most
inclined to view the Iraq intervention as a mistake – are divided on this point. A majority of Liberals
(52%) say they would keep troops in Iraq, compared with 44% who would now bring them home.
Can Torture Be Justified?
Overall, the public is divided over using torture against suspected terrorists when such tactics
may yield important information. Roughly half (51%) say it is never or rarely justified, but 45%
believe it is at least sometimes justified.
Liberals are most strongly opposed to resorting to torture; 77% say it is rarely or never
justified. But that number falls to 57% among Disadvantaged Democrats, and Conservative
Democrats are evenly split over whether torturing terrorist suspects can be justified. Majorities of
49
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Disaffecteds – and of the three GOP groups –
believe the torture of suspected terrorists can
at least sometimes be justified.
Torture Against Suspected Terrorists
Can Be Justified...
Rarely/Never
Total
Often/Sometimes
51
45
Patriot Act: Ideological Divisions
32
63
Enterprisers
The Patriot Act almost perfectly
44
53
Social Conservatives
encapsulates the black-and-white differences
41
54
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
in the national security attitudes of
Enterprisers and Liberals. Fully 73% of
52
45
Upbeats
37
Disaffecteds
Enterprisers see the Patriot Act as a necessary
54
tool in the war on terror; a virtually identical
48
49
Conservative Democrats
percentage of Liberals (71%) say the Patriot
Disadvantaged Dems
57
37
Act goes too far and threatens civil liberties.
21
Liberals 77
And while many Americans are only dimly
aware of the act – from half to two-thirds of
most groups in the electorate say they know little or nothing about it – awareness is greatest among
the Enterprisers and Liberals.
Other typology groups fall somewhere
between these extremes, although
Disadvantaged Democrats also register strong
objections to the Patriot Act. Significantly,
while Pro-Government Conservatives are more
supportive of an activist government than are
other GOP groups, many have reservations
about the Patriot Act. A small plurality of ProGovernment Conservatives (38%) deem it a
necessary tool, compared with 28% saying it
goes too far and threatens civil liberties.
Views of the Patriot Act
Goes too far and threatens civil liberties
Necessary tool to help find terrorists
Total
39 33
Enterprisers
12 73
Social Conservatives
13 53
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
28 38
Upbeats
27 46
Disaffecteds
44 28
Conservative Democrats
40 29
Disadvantaged Dems
60 8
The Republican-leaning Disaffecteds,
71 15
Liberals
however, by a margin of 44% to 28% side with
Democratic groups in thinking that the Patriot
Act’s costs to civil liberties outweigh its benefits in fighting terrorism. Upbeats, the other
independent group, support the act by a similar margin (46%-27%).
50
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Favorability Ratings: Muslims, the U.N.
Regardless of their opinion on Islamic
terrorism and their view of U.S. military action
in Iraq, most Americans do not harbor
negative feelings toward members of the
Muslim faith in general. A plurality (45%)
expresses a favorable opinion of Muslims,
while only 28% have an unfavorable
assessment. A significant minority (27%) say
they are not familiar enough with Muslims to
offer an opinion.
Favorable views are highest among the
relatively well-educated Liberals (63%) and
Upbeats (55%). Among Social Conservatives,
negative views of Muslims outweigh positive
ones by 38%-27%, and two other groups are
about evenly divided: the Disaffecteds (32%
unfavorable/29% favorable) and Conservative
Democrats (34%/35%).
Attitudes toward the United Nations
divide in a more predictably partisan pattern.
The public, by a margin of 59% to 32%, has a
favorable view of the world body. Among
Enterprisers, however, just 15% have a
favorable opinion of the U.N., compared with
82% who express a negative opinion. A
majority in only one other group, Social
Conservatives, express a negative opinion of
the U.N. (54% unfavorable).
Favorability Ratings: Muslims
Unfavorable
Favorable
Total
28 45
Enterpriser
32 46
Soc. Conservative
38 27
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
27 40
Upbeats
31 55
Disaffecteds
32 29
Conservative Democrats
34 35
Disadvantaged Dem.
30 41
Liberals
16 63
Favorability Ratings: United Nations
Unfavorable
Favorable
Total
32 59
Enterpriser
82 15
Soc. Conservative
54 36
Pro-Gov't Conservatives
23 66
Upbeats
31 64
Disaffecteds
37 48
Conservative Democrats
24 65
Disadvantaged Dem.
21 70
Liberals
18 77
By contrast, two-thirds (66%) of Pro-Government Conservatives join with other groups in
the center and left of the political spectrum in expressing positive views of the U.N. Liberals are the
most likely to view the U.N. favorably (77% do so), but they are also joined in this view by 64% of
Upbeats, 65% of Conservative Democrats and 70% of Disadvantaged Democrats.
51
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PROFILES OF THE TYPOLOGY GROUPS
52
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ENTERPRISERS
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Staunch Conservatives, Enterprisers
9% OF ADULT POPULATION
10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 81% Republican, 18% Independent/No Preference, 1% Democrat (98% Rep/Lean Rep)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: As in 1994 and 1999, this extremely partisan Republican group’s politics are
driven by a belief in the free enterprise system and social values that reflect a conservative agenda.
Enterprisers are also the strongest backers of an assertive foreign policy, which includes nearly unanimous
support for the war in Iraq and strong support for such anti-terrorism efforts as the Patriot Act.
DEFINING VALUES: Assertive on foreign policy and patriotic; anti-regulation and pro-business; very little
support for government help to the poor; strong belief that individuals are responsible for their own well
being. Conservative on social issues such as gay marriage, but not much more religious than the nation as
a whole. Very satisfied with personal financial situation.
General
Population
Enterprisers
Most corporations make a fair and reasonable amount of profit
39%
88%
Stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and
hurt the economy
31%
74%
Using overwhelming military force is the best way to defeat
terrorism around the world
39%
84%
Poor people today have it easy because they can get government
benefits without doing anything in return
34%
73%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Predominantly white (91%), male (76%) and financially well-off (62% have household
incomes of at least $50,000, compared with 40% nationwide). Nearly half (46%) have a college degree, and
77% are married. Nearly a quarter (23%) are themselves military veterans. Only 10% are under age 30.
LIFESTYLE NOTES: 59% have a gun in the home; 53% trade stocks and bonds, and 30% are small
business owners – all of which are the highest percentages among typology groups. 48% attend church
weekly; 36% attend bible study or prayer group meetings.
2004 ELECTION: Bush 92%, Kerry 1%. Bush’s most reliable supporters (just 4% of Enterprisers did not
vote).
MEDIA USE: Enterprisers follow news about government and politics more closely than any other group,
and exhibit the most knowledge about world affairs. The Fox News Channel is their primary source of news
(46% cite it as a main source) followed by newspapers (42%) radio (31%) and the internet (26%).
53
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Moralists, Moderate Republicans
11% OF ADULT POPULATION
13% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 82% Republican, 18% Independent/No Preference, 0% Democrat (97% Rep/Lean Rep)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: While supportive of an assertive foreign policy, this group is somewhat more
religious than are Enterprisers. In policy terms, they break from the Enterprisers in their cynical views of
business, modest support for environmental and other regulation, and strong anti-immigrant sentiment.
DEFINING VALUES: Conservative on social issues ranging from gay marriage to abortion. Support an
assertive foreign policy and oppose government aid for the needy, believing people need to make it on their
own. Strongly worried about impact of immigrants on American society. More middle-of-the-road on
economic and domestic policies, expressing some skepticism about business power and profits, and some
support for government regulation to protect the environment. While not significantly better-off than the
rest of the nation, most express strong feelings of financial satisfaction and security.
General
Population
Social
Conservatives
Homosexuality is a way of life that should be discouraged by society
44%
65%
The growing number of newcomers from other countries threatens
traditional American customs and values
40%
68%
Poor people today have it easy because they can get government
benefits without doing anything in return
34%
68%
Business corporations make too much profit
54%
66%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Predominantly white (91%), female (58%) and the oldest of all groups (average age is
52; 47% are 50 or older); nearly half live in the South. Most (53%) attend church weekly; 43% are white
evangelical Protestants (double the national average of 21%).
LIFESTYLE NOTES: 56% have a gun in their home, and 51% attend Bible study groups.
2004 ELECTION: Bush 86%, Kerry 4%.
MEDIA USE: Half of Social Conservatives cite newspapers as a main source of news; the Fox News
Channel (34%) and network evening news (30%) are their major TV news sources.
54
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PRO-GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVES
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Populist Republicans
9% OF ADULT POPULATION
10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 58% Republican, 40% Independent/No Preference, 2% Democrat (86% Rep/Lean Rep)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: Pro-Government Conservatives stand out for their strong religious faith and
conservative views on many moral issues. They also express broad support for a social safety net, which sets
them apart from other GOP groups. Pro-Government Conservatives are skeptical about the effectiveness of
the marketplace, favoring government regulation to protect the public interest and government assistance for
the needy. They supported George W. Bush by roughly five-to-one.
DEFINING VALUES: Religious, financially insecure, and favorable toward government programs. Support
the Iraq war and an assertive foreign policy, but less uniformly so than Enterprisers or Social Conservatives.
Back government involvement in a wide range of policy areas, from poverty assistance to protecting morality
and regulating industry.
General
Population
Pro-gov’t
Conservatives
Books that contain dangerous ideas should be banned from public
school libraries
44%
62%
Religion is a very important part of my life
74%
91%
The government should do more to help needy Americans, even if it
means going deeper into debt
57%
80%
Government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public
interest
49%
66%
We should all be willing to fight for our country, whether it is right
or wrong
46%
67%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Predominantly female (62%) and relatively young; highest percentage of minority
members of any Republican-leaning group (10% black, 12% Hispanic). Most (59%) have no more than a
high school diploma. Poorer than other Republican groups; nearly half (49%) have household incomes of less
than $30,000 (about on par with Disadvantaged Democrats). Nearly half (47%) are parents of children living
at home; 42% live in the South.
LIFESTYLE NOTES: Most (52%) attend religious services at least weekly; nearly all describe religion as
“very important” in their lives. Gun ownership is lower (36%) than in other GOP groups. Just 14% trade
stocks and bonds in the market; 39% say someone in their home has faced unemployment in the past year.
2004 ELECTION: Bush 61%, Kerry 12%. Fully 21% said they didn’t vote in November.
MEDIA USE: Most Pro-Government Conservatives consult traditional news sources, including newspapers
(48%) and network TV (31%). No more or less engaged in politics than the national average.
55
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
UPBEATS
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: New Prosperity Independents, Upbeats
11% OF ADULT POPULATION
13% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 56% Independent/No Preference, 39% Republican, 5% Democrat (73% Rep/Lean Rep)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: Upbeats express positive views about the economy, government and society.
Satisfied with their own financial situation and the direction the nation is heading, these voters support
George W. Bush’s leadership in economic matters more than on moral or foreign policy issues. Combining
highly favorable views of government with equally positive views of business and the marketplace, Upbeats
believe that success is in people’s own hands, and that businesses make a positive contribution to society.
This group also has a very favorable view of immigrants.
DEFINING VALUES: Very favorable views of government performance and responsiveness defines the
group, along with similarly positive outlook on the role of business in society. While most support the war
in Iraq, Upbeats have mixed views on foreign policy – but most favor preemptive military action against
countries that threaten the U.S. Religious, but decidedly moderate in views about morality.
General
Population
Upbeats
Government often does a better job than people give it credit for
45%
68%
Most elected officials care what people like me think
32%
64%
Most corporations make a fair and reasonable profit
39%
78%
Immigrants strengthen our country
45%
72%
As Americans, we can always find ways to solve our problems and
get what we want
59%
74%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Relatively young (26% are under 30) and well-educated, Upbeats are among the
wealthiest typology groups (39% have household incomes of $75,000 or more). The highest proportion of
Catholics (30%) and white mainline Protestants (28%) of all groups, although fewer than half (46%) attend
church weekly. Mostly white (87%), suburban, and married, they are evenly split between men and women.
LIFESTYLE NOTES: High rate of stock ownership (42%, 2nd after Enterprisers).
2004 ELECTION: Bush 63%, Kerry 14%.
MEDIA USE: Upbeats are second only to Liberals in citing the internet as their main news source (34%
compared with 23% nationwide); 46% also cite newspapers. No more or less engaged in politics than the
national average.
56
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DISAFFECTEDS
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Embittered, Disaffecteds
9% OF ADULT POPULATION
10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 68% Independent/No Preference, 30% Republican, 2% Democrat (60% Rep/Lean Rep)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: Disaffecteds are deeply cynical about government and unsatisfied with both their
own economic situation and the overall state of the nation. Under heavy financial pressure personally, this
group is deeply concerned about immigration and environmental policies, particularly to the extent that they
affect jobs. Alienated from politics, Disaffecteds have little interest in keeping up with news about politics
and government, and few participated in the last election.
DEFINING VALUES: Despite personal financial strain – and belief that success is mostly beyond a
person’s control – Disaffecteds are only moderate supporters of government welfare and assistance to the
poor. Strongly oppose immigration as well as regulatory and environmental policies on the grounds that
government is ineffective and such measures cost jobs.
General
Population
Disaffecteds
Immigrants today are a burden on our country because they take our
jobs, housing and health care
44%
80%
Government is always wasteful and inefficient
47%
70%
Most elected officials don’t care what people like me think
63%
84%
Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most
people
28%
48%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Less educated (70% have attended no college, compared with 49% nationwide) and
predominantly male (57%). While a majority (60%) leans Republican, three-in-ten are strict independents,
triple the national rate. Disaffecteds live in all parts of the country, though somewhat more are from rural and
suburban areas than urban.
LIFESTYLE NOTES: Somewhat higher percentages than the national average have a gun in the home, and
report that someone in their house has been unemployed in the past year.
2004 ELECTION: Bush 42%, Kerry 21%. Nearly a quarter (23%) said they didn’t vote in the last election.
MEDIA USE: Disaffecteds have little interest in current events and pay little attention to the news. No single
medium or network stands out as a main source.
57
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
LIBERALS
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Liberal Democrats/Seculars/60's Democrats
17% OF GENERAL POPULATION
19% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 59% Democrat; 40% Independent/No Preference, 1% Republican (92% Dem/Lean Dem)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: This group has nearly doubled in proportion since 1999. Liberal Democrats now
comprise the largest share of Democrats. They are the most opposed to an assertive foreign policy, the most
secular, and take the most liberal views on social issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and censorship.
They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration.
DEFINING VALUES: Strongest preference for diplomacy over use of military force. Pro-choice, supportive
of gay marriage and strongly favor environmental protection. Low participation in religious activities. Most
sympathetic of any group to immigrants as well as labor unions, and most opposed to the anti-terrorism
Patriot Act.
General
Population
Liberals
Relying too much on military force to defeat terrorism creates hatred
that leads to more terrorism
51%
90%
I worry the government is getting too involved in the issue of
morality
51%
88%
Stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost
60%
89%
Poor people have hard lives because government benefits don’t go
far enough to help them live decently
52%
80%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Most (62%) identify themselves as liberal. Predominantly white (83%), most highly
educated group (49% have a college degree or more), and youngest group after Bystanders. Least religious
group in typology: 43% report they seldom or never attend religious services; nearly a quarter (22%) are
seculars. More than one-third never married (36%). Largest group residing in urban areas (42%) and in the
western half the country (34%). Wealthiest Democratic group (41% earn at least $75,000).
LIFESTYLE NOTES: Largest group to have been born (or whose parents were born) outside of the U.S.
or Canada (20%). Least likely to have a gun in the home (23%) or attend bible study or prayer group meetings
(13%).
2004 ELECTION: Bush 2%, Kerry 81%
MEDIA USE: Liberals are second only to Enterprisers in following news about government and public
affairs most of the time (60%). Liberals’ use of the internet to get news is the highest among all groups (37%).
58
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Socially Conservative Democrats / New Dealers
14% OF ADULT POPULATION
15% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 89% Democrat, 11% Independent/No Preference, 0% Republican,(98% Dem/Lean Dem)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: Religious orientation and conservative views set this group apart from other
Democratic-leaning groups on many social and political issues. Conservative Democrats’ views are moderate
with respect to key policy issues such as foreign policy, regulation of the environment and the role of
government in providing a social safety net. Their neutrality on assistance to the poor is linked, at least in
part, to their belief in personal responsibility.
DEFINING VALUES: Less extreme on moral beliefs than core Republican groups, but most oppose gay
marriage and the acceptance of homosexuality, and support a more active role for government in protecting
morality. No more conservative than the national average on other social issues such as abortion and stemcell research. Most oppose the war in Iraq, but views of America’s overall foreign policy are mixed and they
are less opposed to Bush’s assertive stance than are other Democratic groups.
General
Population
Conservative
Democrats
It is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good
values
50%
72%
Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they’re willing to
work hard
68%
82%
We should all be willing to fight for our country, whether it is right
or wrong
46%
49%**
The government should do more to help needy Americans, even if it
means going deeper into debt
57%
59%**
Key Beliefs:
** Figures are notable for being so different from other Democratic groups.
WHO THEY ARE: Older women and blacks make up a sizeable proportion of this group (27% and 30%,
respectively). Somewhat less educated and poorer than the nation overall. Allegiance to the Democratic
party is quite strong (51% describe themselves as “strong” Democrats) but fully 85% describe themselves
as either conservative or moderate ideologically.
LIFESTYLE NOTES: 46% attend church at least once a week, 44% attend Bible study or prayer group
meetings, a third (34%) have a gun in their house.
2004 ELECTION: Bush 14%, Kerry 65%.
MEDIA USE: Emphasis on traditional providers as main news sources: newspapers (50%) and network TV
news (42%).
59
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DISADVANTAGED DEMOCRATS
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Partisan Poor
10% OF GENERAL POPULATION
10% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 84% Democrat; 16% Independent/No Preference, 0% Republican (99% Dem/Lean Dem)
BASIC DESCRIPTION: Least financially secure of all the groups, these voters are very anti-business, and
strong supporters of government efforts to help the needy. Minorities account for a significant proportion of
this group; nearly a third (32%) are black, roughly the same proportion as among Conservative Democrats.
Levels of disapproval of George W. Bush job performance (91%) and candidate choice in 2004 (82% for
Kerry) are comparable to those among Liberals.
DEFINING VALUES: Most likely to be skeptical of an individual’s ability to succeed without impediments
and most anti-business. Strong belief that government should do more to help the poor, yet most are
disenchanted with government. Strongly supportive of organized labor (71% have a favorable view of labor
unions).
General
Population
Disadvantaged
Democrats
Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most
people
28%
79%
Poor people have hard lives because government benefits don’t go
far enough to help them live decently
52%
80%
Most elected officials don’t care what people like me think
63%
87%
Business corporations make too much profit
54%
76%
We should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate
on problems here at home
49%
72%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Low average incomes (32% below $20,000 in household income); most (77%) often
can’t make ends meet. Six-in-ten are female. Three-in-ten (32%) are black and 14% are Hispanic. Not very
well educated, 67% have at most a high-school degree. Nearly half (47%) are parents of children living at
home.
LIFESTYLE NOTES: Nearly a quarter (23%) report someone in their household is a member of a labor
union, and 58% report that they or someone in the home has been unemployed in the past year– both far
larger proportions than in any other group. Only 27% have a gun in the home.
2004 ELECTION: 2% Bush, 82% Kerry
MEDIA USE: Largest viewership of CNN as main news source among all groups (31%). Only group in
which a majority (53%) reads newspapers.
60
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
BYSTANDERS
PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Bystanders
10% OF ADULT POPULATION
0% OF REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY ID: 56% Independent/No Preference, 22% Republican, 22% Democrat
BASIC DESCRIPTION: These Americans choose not to participate in or pay attention to politics, or are
not eligible to do so (non-citizens).
DEFINING VALUES: Cynical about government and the political system. Uninterested in political news.
General
Population
Bystander
s
Follow what’s going on in government and public affairs most/some
of the time
80%
45%
Voted in 2004 Presidential election
74%
3%
Key Beliefs:
WHO THEY ARE: Young (39% are under age 30, average age is 37). Lowest education (24% have not
finished high school). Less religious than any group other than Liberals (26% attend church weekly). Largely
concentrated in the South and West, relatively few in the East and Midwest. One-in-five are Hispanic.
LIFESTYLE NOTES: About half (49%) say they often can’t make ends meet, fewer than among ProGovernment Conservatives, Disadvantaged Democrats or Disaffecteds; 30% attend bible groups or prayer
meetings; 30% own a gun.
2004 ELECTION: 96% did not vote in presidential election.
MEDIA USE: Television is the main news source for Bystanders (79%) as for all other typology groups,
with network news (24%) the most frequently cited TV source; 34% read newspapers and 23% get their news
from the radio.
61
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ABOUT THE SURVEYS
Results for the main Political Typology Survey are based on telephone interviews conducted under
the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International among a nationwide sample of 2,000
adults, 18 years of age or older, during the period Dec. 1-16, 2004. For results based on the total sample, one
can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points.
For results based on Form 1 (N=993) or Form 2 (N=1007) only, the error attributable to sampling is plus or
minus 3.5 percentage points. For results based on abbreviated field periods, with sample sizes ranging from
419 to 523, the margin of error is plus or minus 5.5 percentage points.
The Typology Callback Survey obtained callback telephone interviews with 1,090 respondents from
the December 2004 Typology survey from March 17 to March 27, 2005. Statistical results are weighted to
correct known demographic discrepancies. The margin of sampling error for the recontacted respondents is
plus or minus 3.5% percentage points.
In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties
in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY IN DETAIL
The sample for this survey is a random digit sample of telephone numbers selected from telephone
exchanges in the continental United States. The random digit aspect of the sample is used to avoid "listing"
bias and provides representation of both listed and unlisted numbers (including not-yet-listed). The design
of the sample ensures this representation by random generation of the last two digits of telephone numbers
selected on the basis of their area code, telephone exchange, and bank number.
The telephone exchanges were selected with probabilities proportional to their size. The first eight
digits of the sampled telephone numbers (area code, telephone exchange, bank number) were selected to be
proportionally stratified by county and by telephone exchange within county. That is, the number of
telephone numbers randomly sampled from within a given county is proportional to that county's share of
telephone numbers in the U.S. Only working banks of telephone numbers are selected. A working bank is
defined as 100 contiguous telephone numbers containing three or more residential listings.
The sample was released for interviewing in replicates. Using replicates to control the release of
sample to the field ensures that the complete call procedures are followed for the entire sample.
At least 10 attempts were made to complete an interview at every sampled telephone number. The
calls were staggered over times of day and days of the week to maximize the chances of making a contact
with a potential respondent. All interview breakoffs and refusals were re-contacted at least once in order to
attempt to convert them to completed interviews. In each contacted household, interviewers asked to speak
with the "youngest male 18 or older who is at home." If there was no eligible man at home, interviewers asked
to speak with "the oldest woman 18 or older who is at home." This systematic respondent selection technique
has been shown empirically to produce samples that closely mirror the population in terms of age and gender.
Non-response in telephone interview surveys produces some known biases in survey-derived
estimates because participation tends to vary for different subgroups of the population, and these subgroups
are likely to vary also on questions of substantive interest. In order to compensate for these known biases,
62
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
the sample data are weighted in analysis.
The demographic weighting parameters are derived from a special analysis of the most recently
available Annual Social & Economic Supplement data from the Census Bureau (March 2003). This analysis
produced population parameters for the demographic characteristics of households with adults 18 or older,
which are then compared with the sample characteristics to construct sample weights. The analysis only
included households in the continental United States that contain a telephone. The weights are derived using
an iterative technique that simultaneously balances the distributions of all weighting parameters.
For the typology callback survey, as many as 10 attempts were made to contact each original survey
respondent. Calls were staggered over times of day and days of the week to maximize the chance of making
contact with potential respondents. Each household received at least one daytime call in an attempt to
complete and interview. The 1,090 interviews represent a recontact rate of 55%.
METHODOLOGY FOR CREATING THE TYPOLOGY
The value dimensions used to create the typology are each based on the combined responses to two or
more survey questions. The questions used to create each scale were those shown statistically to be most
strongly related to the underlying dimension. Each of the individual survey questions use a "balanced
alternative" format that presents respondents with two statements and asks them to choose the one that most
closely reflects their own views. To measure intensity, each question is followed by a probe to determine
whether or not respondents feel strongly about the choice they selected.
As in past typologies, a measure of political attentiveness and voting participation was used to extract
the "Bystander" group, people who are largely unengaged and uninvolved in politics. A statistical cluster
analysis was used to sort the remaining respondents into relatively homogeneous groups based on the nine
value scales, party identification, and self reported ideology. Several different cluster solutions were
evaluated for their effectiveness in producing cohesive groups that are distinct from one another, large enough
in size to be analytically practical, and substantively meaningful. The final solution selected to produce the
new political typology was judged to be strongest on a statistical basis and to be most persuasive from a
substantive point of view.
63
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS
Total
%
Sex
Male
Female
Social
Pro-Government
Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats
%
%
%
%
Disaffecteds
%
Conservative Disadvantaged
Democrats
Democrats Liberals
%
%
%
Bystanders
%
48
52
100
76
24
100
42
58
100
38
62
100
50
50
100
57
43
100
44
56
100
40
60
100
46
54
100
48
52
100
Age
Under 30
30-49
50-64
65 and older
21
39
22
16
10
46
24
18
13
37
21
26
24
39
22
14
26
36
21
16
12
44
27
15
17
37
23
23
17
37
30
13
28
40
21
10
39
40
12
8
Sex and Age
Men 18-29
Men 30-49
Men 50+
11
19
18
9
34
31
6
14
21
10
12
16
12
18
19
7
26
22
8
17
18
10
13
17
14
18
12
21
18
8
Women 18-29
Women 30-49
Women 50+
10
20
20
1
12
11
7
24
26
14
27
20
14
18
18
4
18
20
8
20
27
8
24
26
14
21
18
18
22
12
Race
White
Black
Hispanic*
Other
80
12
10
7
91
1
5
6
91
4
7
4
85
10
12
3
87
7
7
6
81
7
8
9
64
30
11
5
58
32
14
9
83
6
9
9
80
7
20
11
Education
College Grad.
Some College
High School Grad.
<H.S. Grad.
27
24
37
12
46
25
26
3
28
26
39
7
15
26
43
16
37
33
25
4
11
18
52
18
16
26
44
14
13
20
44
23
49
26
23
2
13
14
49
24
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
Sample size - December 2004
* The designation Hispanic is unrelated to the white-black categorization.
Continued ...
64
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS (continued)
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
Liberals
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Total
%
Enterprisers
%
Region
East
Midwest
South
West
19
24
35
22
17
22
34
27
14
22
47
17
18
23
42
17
21
28
33
18
21
27
30
22
21
23
41
15
19
32
35
14
24
20
22
34
16
19
35
30
Family Income
(based on those that answered)
$75,000+
$50,000-$74,999
$30,000-$49,999
$20,000-$29,999
<$20,000
24
16
25
16
19
41
21
25
6
7
30
17
27
15
11
10
11
30
17
32
39
20
23
8
10
13
16
27
17
27
15
14
29
22
20
8
14
26
20
32
41
15
20
12
12
8
15
24
26
27
Religious Affiliation
Protestant
Catholic
Other Christian
Jewish
Secular
56
25
3
3
8
61
20
6
3
6
68
24
2
0
3
64
25
2
1
4
55
30
4
1
5
58
22
4
2
9
62
29
1
2
1
59
25
1
2
5
36
23
2
8
22
49
26
2
0
12
White Protestant Evangelical
White Prot. Non-Evangelical
White Catholic
Black Protestant
21
23
17
9
34
23
12
0
43
21
18
2
37
19
17
7
22
28
26
4
20
27
18
5
16
20
17
24
11
17
15
26
5
24
17
3
17
25
11
6
Attend Religious Services
At least once a week
At least a few times a year
Seldom or never
40
34
25
48
26
25
53
31
15
52
35
11
46
32
22
39
34
25
46
34
19
43
39
17
18
38
43
26
39
34
Labor Union member
Yes, someone in household
Yes, respondent a member
14
9
10
7
14
7
10
6
8
7
13
9
18
14
23
13
14
10
10
4
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
Sample size - December 2004
Bystanders
%
Continued ...
65
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS (continued)
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
Liberals
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Total
%
Enterprisers
%
Military Veteran
Yes, someone in household
Yes, respondent a veteran
21
13
27
23
28
17
23
12
24
16
23
13
23
14
23
10
12
7
9
7
Marital Status
Married
Never Married
Divorced/Separated
Widowed
54
23
14
8
77
10
8
5
66
11
13
10
55
19
15
11
59
22
11
7
57
15
19
7
49
22
16
13
42
29
18
11
44
36
15
5
49
34
12
5
Parental Status
Parent, child living at home
37
43
32
47
33
31
37
47
27
46
Have any guns in your home
Yes
No
37
60
59
34
56
39
36
62
40
59
45
51
34
65
27
70
23
76
30
66
Own a small business
Yes
No
16
84
30
69
14
85
11
88
15
85
21
78
14
86
8
92
17
83
10
90
Trade stocks or bonds in the market
Yes
No
28
71
53
46
35
64
14
85
42
57
17
80
20
80
18
82
38
61
11
89
Someone in household
unemployed within last 12 months
Yes
No
37
63
28
72
18
82
39
60
28
72
42
57
37
63
58
42
40
60
45
54
You or your parents born in country
other than U.S. or Canada
Yes
No
16
84
12
88
12
88
11
89
18
82
14
86
13
87
9
91
20
80
28
72
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
Sample size - December 2004
66
Bystanders
%
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
POLITICAL PROFILE OF TYPOLOGY GROUPS
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
%
%
%
%
%
%
Total
%
Enterprisers
%
2004 Presidential Vote
Bush
Kerry
Didn’t vote
36
36
22
92
1
4
86
4
6
61
12
21
63
14
14
42
21
23
14
65
13
Party Identification
Republican
Democrat
Independent
Other
No preference/DK
30
34
30
*
6
81
1
15
0
3
82
0
15
0
3
58
2
33
0
7
39
5
45
*
11
30
2
53
2
13
Republican/lean Republican
Democrat/lean Democrat
Independent, no leaning
45
46
9
98
1
1
97
1
2
86
3
11
73
14
13
Strong Republican
Strong Democrat
17
19
62
0
51
0
33
0
Ideology
Conservative
Moderate
Liberal
39
37
19
85
14
1
66
29
3
Conservative Republican
Moderate/Liberal Repub.
Conserv./Moderate Dem.
Liberal Democrat
20
10
22
10
70
11
1
0
Bush Job Approval*
Approve
Disapprove
49
46
Overall opinion of George W. Bush*
Favorable
Unfavorable
Sample size - December 2004
Liberals
%
Bystanders
%
2
82
13
2
81
13
2
1
96
0
89
11
0
*
0
84
14
0
2
1
59
38
0
2
22
22
43
0
13
60
10
30
0
98
2
0
99
1
2
92
6
39
38
23
16
1
14
0
0
51
0
55
0
35
8
6
58
38
2
47
43
6
29
46
16
41
44
9
27
48
16
1
35
62
32
33
24
56
24
0
0
36
21
2
0
22
17
5
0
10
18
2
0
0
0
76
8
0
0
62
14
0
1
17
42
11
10
13
8
95
5
88
6
77
16
67
25
62
30
33
59
4
95
11
86
45
45
53
45
96
3
91
7
89
10
71
28
72
22
41
56
9
91
9
89
58
37
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
67
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES
Total
%
With next Supreme Court appointment,
Bush should make the court...
More liberal
24
More conservative
28
About the same as it is now
41
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Liberals
%
Bystanders
%
4
64
26
5
50
40
9
36
41
13
30
53
10
30
53
27
26
40
33
15
43
52
5
39
26
17
38
38
36
23
59
29
12
47
36
14
33
51
15
37
37
24
30
28
34
28
39
29
31
41
23
49
31
19
19
38
37
46
44
88
7
56
30
59
26
59
28
44
44
36
58
17
76
28
65
48
32
View of Pres. Bush’s tax cuts
All should be made permanent
28
Tax cuts for wealthy should be repealed 35
All tax cuts should be repealed
25
82
5
8
42
30
17
27
33
25
35
27
23
33
27
24
14
43
31
13
47
30
8
49
34
18
35
28
Increase in minimum wage from
$5.15 per hour to $6.45 per hour
Favor
Oppose
86
12
46
49
79
18
94
5
86
11
84
13
92
6
95
3
94
5
92
7
Gov’t guaranteeing health insurance
for all citizens
Favor
Oppose
65
30
23
76
59
37
63
33
55
38
64
26
73
23
65
29
90
8
67
25
(2000)
(1090)
(219)
(139)
(236)
(135)
(163)
(86)
(248)
(133)
(179)
(90)
(261)
(120)
(167)
(78)
(359)
(240)
(168)
(69)
Importance of next Sup. Court justice
Very important
Somewhat important
Not too/ at all important
Economic Issues
Social Security private accounts*
Favor
Oppose
Sample size - December 2004
*Sample size - March 2005
Continued ...
68
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued)
Total
%
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Liberals
%
Bystanders
%
Limiting the amount patients can be
awarded in medical malpractice lawsuits
Favor
63
Oppose
30
81
16
76
18
61
30
72
23
54
37
57
35
53
41
58
37
61
29
“Outsourcing” is...
Bad for the economy
Good for the economy
69
22
43
44
67
18
71
22
55
37
78
13
81
10
87
8
72
19
65
26
Allowing immigrants to enter the U.S.
legally and work here for a limited
amount of time*
Favor
Oppose
50
44
71
26
44
50
47
47
57
38
46
51
43
50
30
63
58
36
40
54
Priority of reducing budget deficit*
Top priority
Important but lower priority
Not too important
Doesn’t need to be addressed
39
46
6
5
23
59
10
8
33
50
7
6
41
45
6
5
32
55
8
2
43
37
8
5
44
35
8
7
45
43
1
3
50
42
4
3
30
52
3
11
Raising taxes in order to reduce deficit*
Favor
31
Oppose
66
12
87
27
73
32
67
34
63
19
78
25
71
23
66
56
41
18
76
Lowering defense/military spending
in order to reduce deficit*
Favor
Oppose
35
60
16
84
16
78
19
77
31
65
33
60
29
63
41
50
65
33
35
57
Lowering domestic spending
in order to reduce deficit*
Favor
Oppose
54
35
81
13
63
23
53
36
61
30
44
38
48
40
29
45
48
47
60
26
Sample size - December 2004
*Sample size - March 2005
(2000)
(1090)
(219)
(139)
(236)
(135)
(163)
(86)
(248)
(133)
(179)
(90)
(261)
(120)
(167)
(78)
(359)
(240)
69
(168)
(69)
Continued ...
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued)
Total
%
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Liberals
%
Bystanders
%
Programs designed to help blacks,
women and other minorities get better
jobs and education*
Favor
Oppose
67
28
31
63
49
45
71
24
70
27
60
31
74
22
68
25
82
14
79
16
Drilling in the ANWR*
Favor
Oppose
46
49
92
5
71
23
46
51
49
47
60
32
46
46
30
57
14
85
36
59
Free trade agreements like
NAFTA and WTO for U.S.
Good thing for the U.S.
Bad thing for the U.S.
47
34
47
40
36
44
47
27
59
24
40
43
43
34
41
41
50
34
58
23
Higher priority right now
Cutting taxes
Reducing the Federal deficit
Neither
32
61
2
50
43
3
31
61
1
37
57
2
29
64
*
42
47
3
31
62
2
32
61
1
14
83
1
36
50
2
Stem cell research priorities
Research that might result in new cures 56
Not destroying potential life of embryos 32
38
49
40
45
47
46
53
36
53
31
57
30
60
26
84
11
55
32
Making it more difficult for a woman
to get an abortion
Favor
Oppose
36
55
54
38
54
40
53
41
37
54
35
47
37
51
22
67
10
88
43
49
Allowing gays and lesbians
to marry legally
Favor
Oppose
32
61
8
90
12
84
17
76
28
64
26
67
19
74
37
55
80
15
32
59
(2000)
(1090)
(219)
(139)
(236)
(135)
(163)
(86)
(248)
(133)
(179)
(90)
(261)
(120)
(167)
(78)
(359)
(240)
(168)
(69)
Social Issues
Sample size - December 2004
*Sample size - March 2005
Continued ...
70
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued)
Total
%
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Liberals
%
Bystanders
%
Teaching creationism ALONG WITH
evolution in public schools*
Favor
Oppose
57
33
83
12
62
28
64
22
61
34
60
22
46
33
50
36
49
48
48
39
Teaching creationism INSTEAD OF
evolution in public schools*
Favor
Oppose
33
54
41
49
51
33
40
44
34
59
40
44
41
36
24
60
11
85
44
39
Displaying the Ten Commandments
in government buildings*
Proper
Improper
74
22
89
10
92
5
92
8
81
15
80
10
82
16
84
11
35
61
77
17
Attend Bible study or prayer group
Yes
No
36
64
36
63
51
48
52
48
35
65
38
61
44
56
41
59
13
87
30
70
Have a friend, colleague, or family
member who is gay*
Yes
No
46
54
37
60
37
61
41
59
43
55
33
67
34
66
48
52
73
27
36
64
20
54
19
41
54
1
30
61
4
24
59
13
21
62
10
26
48
21
18
55
18
13
42
38
10
47
37
11
57
23
Use of torture against suspected terrorist
in order to gain important information
Often justified
15
Sometimes justified
30
Rarely justified
24
Never justified
27
24
39
22
10
17
36
30
14
11
43
19
22
9
36
26
26
24
30
18
19
20
29
16
32
8
29
16
41
6
15
39
38
20
31
18
28
Foreign Policy Issues
Spending on national defense
Increase
Keep same
Cut back
71
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND THE ISSUES (continued)
Total
Using military force against countries %
that may seriously threaten our country
but have not attacked us
Often justified
14
Sometimes justified
46
Rarely justified
21
Never justified
14
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Liberals
%
Bystanders
%
32
57
7
3
24
58
11
4
13
54
16
11
14
57
18
5
17
46
15
12
15
43
18
14
5
33
26
28
1
32
44
23
12
41
18
20
Using military force in Iraq
Right decision
Wrong decision
49
44
94
5
88
8
72
18
66
24
50
40
28
61
15
76
11
87
57
35
How well is the U.S. military
effort in Iraq going
Very well
Fairly well
Not too well
Not at all well
10
40
28
18
24
64
8
2
21
62
14
1
14
58
18
7
11
52
23
8
10
38
23
22
7
29
41
20
4
21
39
32
2
14
41
42
4
43
28
14
What to do in Iraq...
Keep troops in Iraq until stabilized
Bring troops home as soon as possible
56
40
88
10
81
18
68
29
72
24
45
49
33
64
26
68
52
44
46
48
Patriot Act
Necessary tool
Goes too far
33
39
73
12
53
13
38
28
46
27
28
44
29
40
8
60
15
71
22
36
Have a friend, colleague, or family
member who has served in Iraq*
Yes
No
49
51
49
51
54
46
51
49
41
59
48
52
48
52
57
43
45
54
48
52
(2000)
(1090)
(219)
(139)
(236)
(135)
(163)
(86)
(248)
(133)
(179)
(90)
(261)
(120)
(167)
(78)
(359)
(240)
(168)
(69)
Sample size - December 2004
*Sample size - March 2005
Continued ...
72
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
TYPOLOGY GROUPS AND MEDIA USE
Total
Social
Pro-Government
Conservative Disadvantaged
Enterprisers Conservatives Conservatives Upbeats Disaffecteds Democrats
Democrats
Liberals
Bystanders
Main News Source*
Television
Local
Network (NET)
CNN
Fox News Channel
Newspapers
Radio
Magazines
Internet
Sample size - December 2004
74
68
83
82
67
76
85
78
57
79
15
29
20
19
10
17
8
46
13
30
23
34
19
31
21
23
16
29
20
17
22
30
15
16
14
42
27
11
14
32
31
12
9
22
18
6
23
24
19
19
45
21
4
23
42
31
5
26
50
16
4
16
48
18
3
19
46
21
6
34
38
20
3
19
50
14
3
16
53
16
2
18
46
28
7
37
34
23
2
19
(2000)
(219)
(236)
(163)
(248)
(179)
(261)
(167)
(359)
(168)
* Note: Figures add to more than 100% because respondents could list more than one main news source.
Party ID Within Center Groups*
Upbeats Disaffected
%
%
1994 Republican/lean Rep 39
34
Democrat/lean Dem 48
51
Independent/no lean 13
15
100
100
73
1999 Republican/lean Rep
Democrat/lean Dem
Independent/no lean
54
21
25
100
33
31
36
100
2005 Republican/lean Rep
Democrat/lean Dem
Independent/no lean
73
14
13
100
60
10
30
100
* The names of the “middle” groups have changed over the
years. Columns show most comparable previous Typology
groups to the current Upbeats and Disaffecteds.
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS
DECEMBER 2004 POLITICAL TYPOLOGY SURVEY
FINAL TOPLINE
December 1 - 16, 2004
N=2000
ON FORM ONE Q.1/1a PRECEDES Q.2 --- ON FORM TWO, Q.2 PRECEDES Q.1/1a
Q.1
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? [IF DK
ENTER AS DK. IF DEPENDS PROBE ONCE WITH: Overall do you approve or disapprove of the
way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? IF STILL DEPENDS ENTER AS DK]
December, 2004
Mid-October, 2004
August, 2004
July, 2004
June, 2004
May, 2004
Late April, 2004
Early April, 2004
Late March, 2004
Mid-March, 2004
February, 2004
Mid-January, 2004
Early January, 2004
2003
December, 2003
November, 2003
October, 2003
September, 2003
Mid-August, 2003
Early August, 2003
Mid-July, 2003
Early July, 2003
June, 2003
May, 2003
April 10-16, 2003
April 9, 2003
April 2-7, 2003
March 28-April 1, 2003
March 25-27, 2003
March 20-24, 2003
March 13-16, 2003
February, 2003
January, 2003
2002
December, 2002
Late October, 2002
Early October, 2002
Mid-September, 2002
Early September, 2002
Late August, 2002
DisApprove approve
48
44
44
48
46
45
46
46
48
43
44
48
48
43
43
47
47
44
46
47
48
44
56
34
58
35
Don’t
know
8=100
8=100
9=100
8=100
9=100
8=100
9=100
10=100
9=100
7=100
8=100
10=100
7=100
57
50
50
55
56
53
58
60
62
65
72
74
69
71
70
67
55
54
58
34
40
42
36
32
37
32
29
27
27
22
20
25
23
24
26
34
36
32
9=100
10=100
8=100
9=100
12=100
10=100
10=100
11=100
11=100
8=100
6=100
6=100
6=100
6=100
6=100
7=100
11=100
10=100
10=100
61
59
61
67
63
60
28
29
30
22
26
27
11=100
12=100
9=100
11=100
11=100
13=100
August, 2002
Late July, 2002
July, 2002
June, 2002
April, 2002
Early April, 2002
February, 2002
January, 2002
2001
Mid-November, 2001
Early October, 2001
Late September, 2001
Mid-September, 2001
Early September, 2001
August, 2001
July, 2001
June, 2001
May, 2001
April, 2001
March, 2001
February, 2001
74
DisApprove approve
67
21
65
25
67
21
70
20
69
18
74
16
78
13
80
11
84
84
86
80
51
50
51
50
53
56
55
53
9
8
7
9
34
32
32
33
32
27
25
21
Don’t
know
12=100
10=100
12=100
10=100
13=100
10=100
9=100
9=100
7=100
8=100
7=100
11=100
15=100
18=100
17=100
17=100
15=100
17=100
20=100
26=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
IF APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE (1,2 IN Q.1) ASK:
Q.1a
Do you (approve/disapprove) very strongly, or not so strongly?
48 Approve
34
Very strongly
12
Not so strongly
2
Don’t know (VOL)
44 Disapprove
35
Very strongly
8
Not so strongly
1
Don’t know (VOL)
8 Don't know/Refused
100
Nov 2003
50
34
14
2
40
30
9
1
10
100
Sept 2003
55
35
18
2
36
27
9
*
9
100
June 2002
70
46
21
3
20
8
12
0
10
100
April 2001
56
34
20
2
27
18
9
*
17
100
ASK ALL:
Q.2
All in all, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in this country today?
SatDisisfied satisfied
December, 2004
39
54
Mid-October, 2004
36
58
July, 2004
38
55
May, 2004
33
61
Late February, 2004
39
55
Early January, 2004
45
48
December, 2003
44
47
October, 2003
38
56
August, 2003
40
53
April, 20031
50
41
January, 2003
44
50
November, 2002
41
48
September, 20022
41
55
Late August, 2002
47
44
May, 2002
44
44
March, 2002
50
40
Late September, 2001
57
34
Early September, 2001 41
53
June, 2001
43
52
March, 2001
47
45
February, 2001
46
43
January, 2001
55
41
October, 2000 (RV’s)
54
39
September, 2000
51
41
June, 2000
47
45
April, 2000
48
43
August, 1999
56
39
SatDisisfied satisfied
January, 1999
53
41
November, 1998
46
44
Early September, 1998 54
42
Late August, 1998
55
41
Early August, 1998
50
44
February, 1998
59
37
January, 1998
46
50
September, 1997
45
49
August, 1997
49
46
January, 1997
38
58
July, 1996
29
67
March, 1996
28
70
October, 1995
23
73
June, 1995
25
73
April, 1995
23
74
July, 1994
24
73
March, 1994
24
71
October, 1993
22
73
September, 1993
20
75
May, 1993
22
71
January, 1993
39
50
January, 1992
28
68
November, 1991
34
61
Late Feb, 1991 (Gallup) 66
31
August, 1990
47
48
May, 1990
41
54
January, 1989
45
50
September, 1988 (RVs) 50
45
May, 1988
41
54
January, 1988
39
55
No
Opinion
7=100
6=100
7=100
6=100
6=100
7=100
9=100
6=100
7=100
9=100
6=100
11=100
4=100
9=100
12=100
10=100
9=100
6=100
5=100
8=100
11=100
4=100
7=100
8=100
8=100
9=100
5=100
1
Asked April 8, 2003 only; N=395.
2
The September 2002 trend is from a Pew
Global Attitudes Project survey, fielded
August 19 to September 8, 2002 and
released December 4, 2002.
75
No
Opinion
6=100
10=100
4=100
4=100
6=100
4=100
4=100
6=100
5=100
4=100
4=100
2=100
4=100
2=100
3=100
3=100
5=100
5=100
4=100
7=100
11=100
4=100
5=100
3=100
5=100
5=100
5=100
5=100
5=100
6=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ASK FORM 1 ONLY [N=993]:
Q.3F1 What’s your view… Do you think the country is more politically divided these days than in the past, or not?
66
26
8
100
More politically divided
Not more divided
Don’t know/Refused
ASK FORM 2 ONLY [N=1007]:
Q.4F2 Thinking about the people you know, are they more divided over politics these days than in the past, or not?
53
40
7
100
More divided
Not more divided
Don’t know/Refused
ASK IF ‘MORE DIVIDED’ IN EITHER (1 IN Q.3F1 OR 1 IN Q.4F2) [N=1178]:
Q.5
Why do you think people are more divided these days? What are they more divided about? [OPEN END;
ENTER MULTIPLE RESPONSES BUT DO NOT PROBE FOR ADDITIONAL; IF RESPONDENT
VOLUNTEERS “BUSH” ENTER BUSH, BUT ALSO PROBE “What is it about George W. Bush that
divides people?”]
36
32
3
2
19
13
3
2
1
4
14
5
3
3
2
1
1
3
12
6
1
1
4
4
3
2
*
1
3
3
3
2
FOREIGN POLICY (NET)
War/Iraq
Terrorism/ 9/11
Other foreign policy issues
DOMESTIC ISSUES (NET)
Economy/jobs
Healthcare
Taxes
Social Security
Other domestic issues
RELIGION AND MORALITY (NET)
Religion
Values/morals
Gay marriage/gay rights
Abortion
Church-State divide
Christian Right
Other religious/moral issues
LEADERSHIP/ELECTED OFFICIALS (NET)
President Bush
Democrats/liberals
Republicans/conservatives
Other leaders/the way the country is run
People are ignorant/selfish/scared/stubborn
CAMPAIGN/ELECTION (NET)
Election/Close election
Negative Campaign
Other campaign/election
Rich-poor gap
Politics
Political parties/Both Republicans and Democrats
Everything is more divided
76
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.5 CONTINUED...
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
6
9
Money
People have different views
Ideology/political philosophy
Media
Race
The way things are going
Immigrants
Other
Don’t know
ASK ALL:
Q.6
All in all, how do you feel about George W. Bush being reelected President? Are you [READ]
15
34
29
15
7
100
Q.7
a.
Excited
Happy
Unhappy
Or depressed
(VOL. DO NOT READ) Don’t know/Refused
Here are some stories covered by news organizations this past month. For each, please tell me if you
happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely.
[INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE WITH ITEMS a FIRST, FOLLOWED BY RANDOMIZED ITEMS
b THRU e; OBSERVE FORM SPLITS AND DATES]
Very
Fairly Not too Not at all
Closely Closely Closely Closely DK/Ref
News about the current situation in Iraq
34
44
15
6
1=100
Mid-October, 2004
42
38
11
8
1=100
Early September, 2004
47
37
9
6
1=100
August, 2004
39
42
12
6
1=100
July, 2004
43
40
11
6
*=100
June, 2004
39
42
12
6
1=100
April, 2004
54
33
8
5
*=100
Mid-March, 2004
47
36
12
4
1=100
Early February, 2004
47
38
10
4
1=100
Mid-January, 2004
48
39
9
4
*=100
December, 2003
44
38
11
6
1=100
November, 2003
52
33
9
5
1=100
October, 2003
38
40
14
7
1=100
September, 2003
50
33
10
6
1=100
Mid-August, 2003
45
39
10
5
1=100
Early July, 2003
37
41
13
8
1=100
June, 2003
46
35
13
6
*=100
May, 2003
63
29
6
2
*=100
April 11-16, 20033
47
40
10
2
1=100
April 2-7, 2003
54
34
9
2
1=100
March 20-24, 2003
57
33
7
2
1=100
3
From March 20 to April 16, 2003 the story was listed as “News about the war in Iraq.”
77
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.7 CONTINUED...
Very
Closely
62
62
55
51
53
60
48
March 13-16, 20034
February, 2003
January, 2003
December, 2002
Late October, 2002
Early October, 2002
Early September, 2002
Fairly Not too Not at all
Closely Closely Closely DK/Ref
27
6
4
1=100
25
8
4
1=100
29
10
4
2=100
32
10
6
1=100
33
8
5
1=100
28
6
5
1=100
29
15
6
2=100
ASK FORM 1 ONLY, DECEMBER 1-7, 2004 ONLY [N=523]:
b1.F1 A fistfight between players and fans at an NBA game
24
25
25
26
*=100
ASK FORM 1 ONLY, DECEMBER 8-15, 2004 ONLY [N=419]:
b2.F2 Recent reports of steroid use by some
Major League Baseball players
22
28
23
27
0=100
ASK FORM 1 ONLY [N=993]:
c.F1
Controversy over the results of the recent election in Ukraine
10
22
29
38
1=100
ASK FORM 2 ONLY, DECEMBER 1-7, 2004 ONLY [N=523]:
d1.F2 The conviction of Scott Peterson for the murder of his wife,
Laci Peterson
April, 20045
July, 2003
May, 2003
21
20
22
31
27
37
34
31
27
24
26
21
24
17
17
16
1=100
2=100
1=100
1=100
ASK FORM 2 ONLY, DECEMBER 8-15, 2004 ONLY [N=436]:
d2.F2 The debate in Washington over reorganizing the nation’s
intelligence system
16
31
29
22
2=100
ASK FORM 2 ONLY [N=1007]:
e.F2
The death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat
18
38
25
17
2=100
NO QUESTION 8
4
From October 2002 to March 13-16, 2003 the story was listed as “Debate over the possibility that the U.S. will take
military action in Iraq.” In Early September 2002 the story was listed as “Debate over the possibility that the U.S. will
invade Iraq.”
5
In April, 2004 the story was listed as “The murder of Laci Peterson.” In 2003 the story was listed as “The murder of Laci
Peterson, the pregnant California woman whose husband has been charged in her death.”
78
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ASK ALL:
Q.9
Can you tell me the name of the person George W. Bush has nominated to replace Colin Powell as
Secretary of State?
43
5
52
100
Q.10
Yes, Correct, Condoleezza Rice / Condi / Rice
Yes, Incorrect, any other person
No, Don't know/Refused
Do you happen to know when Iraq is scheduled to hold its first national elections? Will it be this winter,
sometime in the spring, or later in the summer?
57
10
5
28
100
This winter
Sometime in the spring
Later in the summer
Don’t know/Refused
ASK ALL:
Q.11
I'm going to read you some pairs of statements that will help us understand how you feel about a number of
things. As I read each pair, tell me whether the FIRST statement or the SECOND statement comes closer
to your own views — even if neither is exactly right. The first pair is... (READ AND RANDOMIZE)
(AFTER CHOICE IS MADE, PROBE: Do you feel STRONGLY about that, or not?)
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
a.
47
38
9
45
28
17
8
100
Government is almost always
wasteful and inefficient
Strongly
Not Strongly
Government often does a better
job than people give it credit for
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
48 -38 -10 --
-- 52 51 -- 59 56 -- 63 63 64 66
-- 43 41 -- 49 48 -- 53 51 54 54
-- 9 10 -- 10 8 -- 10 12 10 12
46
28
18
6
100
-- 40 43 --- 27 28 --- 13 15 --- 8 6 -100 100
-----
36
23
13
5
100
39
25
14
5
100
-- 34 34 32
-- 20 19 19
-- 14 15 13
-- 3 3 4
100 100 100
31
17
14
3
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
b.
49
32
17
41
30
11
10
100
Government regulation of business is
necessary to protect the public interest
Strongly
Not Strongly
Government regulation of business
usually does more harm than good
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
79
-- 54 50 -- 48 --- 39 35 -- 32 --- 15 15 -- 16 --
-- 45 -- 45 43 38 41
-- 29 -- 28 25 24 24
-- 16 -- 17 18 14 17
-- 36 41 --- 27 31 --- 9 10 --- 10 9 -100 100
-- 46 -- 50
-- 33 -- 37
-- 13 -- 13
-- 9 -- 5
100
100
44
32
12
8
100
-----
51
38
13
6
100
55
41
14
7
100
54
39
15
5
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.11 CONTINUED...
c.
34
23
11
52
40
12
14
100
d.
57
46
11
33
22
11
10
100
Poor people today have it easy because
they can get government benefits
without doing anything in return
Strongly
Not Strongly
Poor people have hard lives because
government benefits don't go far
enough to help them live decently
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
The government should do more to help
needy Americans, even if it means going
deeper into debt
Strongly
Not Strongly
The government today can't afford to do
much more to help the needy
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
34 -24 -10 --
----
-- 45 -- 45 46 -- 54 52 48 53
-- 30 -- 33 35 -- 36 37 35 37
-- 15 -- 12 11 -- 18 15 13 16
55
42
13
11
100
-----
-----
-----
42
31
11
13
100
-----
42
31
11
13
100
40
28
12
14
100
-----
36
25
11
10
100
39
28
11
9
100
41
31
10
11
100
39
27
12
8
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
----
----
----
-- 57 --- 44 --- 13 --
-- 46 49 47 46 50 48
-- 36 42 35 33 39 35
-- 10 7 12 13 11 13
-----
-----
-----
-- 35 --- 23 --- 12 --- 8 -100
-----
44
31
13
10
100
44
34
10
7
100
47
31
16
6
100
47
34
13
7
100
43
31
12
7
100
47
32
15
5
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
e.
73
59
14
20
14
6
7
100
f.
27
18
9
60
44
16
13
100
The position of blacks in American society
has improved in recent years
Strongly
Not Strongly
There hasn't been much real progress for
blacks in recent years
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
Racial discrimination is the main
reason why many black people
can't get ahead these days
Strongly
Not Strongly
Blacks who can't get ahead in this
country are mostly responsible for
their own condition
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
----
-- 78 -- 73 73 -- 69 70 67 72
-- 63 -- 55 57 -- 52 52 50 52
-- 15 -- 18 16 -- 17 18 17 20
-----
-----
-----
-- 18 -- 22 21 -- 27
-- 13 -- 16 16 -- 20
-- 5 -- 6 5 -- 7
-- 4 -- 5 6 -- 4
100
100 100
100
26
19
7
4
100
27
20
7
6
100
25
18
7
3
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
24 -16 -8 --
-- 31 28 25 33 28 -- 37 34 34 32
-- 22 19 -- 22 19 -- 25 21 24 20
-- 9 9 -- 11 9 -- 12 13 10 12
64
50
14
12
100
-----
80
-----
54
43
11
15
100
59
46
13
13
100
61
--14
100
54
41
13
13
100
58
45
13
14
100
-----
53
38
15
10
100
56
40
16
10
100
54
40
14
12
100
59
43
16
9
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.11 CONTINUED...
g.
45
32
13
44
34
10
11
100
Immigrants today strengthen our
country because of their hard
work and talents
Strongly
Not Strongly
Immigrants today are a burden on
our country because they take our
jobs, housing and health care
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don’t know
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Apr Jun Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 97 96 95 95 94 94
46 -30 -16 --
-- 50 46 41 41 38 37 --- 36 30 -- 26 19 -- --- 14 16 -- 15 19 -- --
----
-- 31
-- 17
-- 14
44
35
9
10
100
-- 38 44 48 48
-- 29 34 -- 37
-- 9 10 -- 11
-- 12 10 11 11
100 100 100 100
-----
-- 63
-- 49
-- 14
-- 6
100
-----
52
38
14
10
100
54
--9
100
-----
NO ITEM H.
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
i.
30
25
5
55
46
9
15
100
The best way to ensure peace is through
military strength
Strongly
Not Strongly
Good diplomacy is the best way to
ensure peace
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
----
-- 33 --- 26 --- 7 --
-- 36 -- 36 35 40 36
-- 30 -- 28 27 32 28
-- 6 -- 8 8 8 8
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 53 -- 59
-- 44 -- 49
-- 9 -- 10
-- 11 -- 5
100
100
55
45
10
12
100
-----
58
46
12
7
100
52
43
9
8
100
58
46
12
6
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
j.
46
39
7
46
38
8
8
100
We should all be willing to fight for our
country, whether it is right or wrong
Strongly
Not Strongly
It's acceptable to refuse to fight in a war
you believe is morally wrong
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 48 47 --- 41 39 --- 7 8 --
-- 48 -- 49 49 47 52
-- 39 -- 38 39 39 43
-- 7 -- 11 10 8 9
-----
-----
-- 45 47 -- -- 47 -- 48
-- 37 38 -- -- 39 -- 38
-- 8 9 -- -- 8 -- 10
-- 7 6 -- -- 7 -- 3
100 100
100
100
47
38
9
4
100
47
37
10
6
100
45
35
10
3
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
k.
68
62
6
28
22
6
4
100
Most people who want to get ahead can
make it if they're willing to work hard
Strongly
Not strongly
Hard work and determination are no
guarantee of success for most people
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
81
----
----
-- 73 74 --- 66 66 --- 7 8 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 68
-- 59
-- 9
-----
-----
-- 24 23 --- 20 18 --- 4 5 --- 3 3 -100 100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 30
-- 22
-- 8
-- 2
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.11 CONTINUED...
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
l.
16
11
5
78
68
10
6
100
Success in life is pretty much determined
by forces outside of our control
-Strongly
-Not strongly
-Everyone has it in their own power to succeed Strongly
-Not strongly
-Neither/Don't know
--
--------
--------
--------
15
10
5
80
72
8
5
100
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------
18
12
6
79
67
12
3
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
m.
77
64
13
16
9
7
7
100
Too much power is concentrated in the
hands of a few large companies
Strongly
Not Strongly
The largest companies do NOT have
too much power
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
-- 80 77 -- 77 --- 67 62 -- 62 --- 13 15 -- 15 --
-- 75 -- 77 75 73 76
-- 61 -- 62 59 58 59
-- 14 -- 15 16 15 17
-- 12
-- 7
-- 5
-- 8
100
-- 18
-- 10
-- 8
-- 7
100
17
9
8
6
100
-- 17 --- 10 --- 7 --- 6 -100
-- 18 20 20
-- 9 10 10
-- 9 10 10
-- 5 5 7
100 100 100
19
9
10
5
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
n.
53
46
7
39
25
14
8
100
Business corporations make too
much profit
Strongly
Not Strongly
Most corporations make a fair
and reasonable amount of profit
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
51 58 54 54 52 -- 51 51 -- 53 51 50 52
43 51 44 46 42 -- 43 43 -- 44 42 40 43
8 7 10 8 10 -- 8 8 -- 9 9 10 9
42
27
15
7
100
33
22
11
9
100
39
24
15
7
100
38
28
10
8
100
42
29
13
6
100
-- 43 42 --- 28 27 --- 15 15 --- 6 7 -100 100
43
27
16
4
100
44
26
18
5
100
44
28
16
6
100
43
27
16
5
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
o.
66
54
12
26
15
11
8
100
Elected officials in Washington lose touch
with the people pretty quickly
Strongly
Not Strongly
Elected officials in Washington try hard to
stay in touch with voters back home
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
82
----
----
-- 66 68 --- 53 55 --- 13 13 --
-- 69 72 73 76 74 71
-- 58 59 60 64 61 58
-- 11 13 13 12 13 13
-----
-----
-- 27 26 --- 18 16 --- 9 10 --- 7 6 -100 100
-- 25 23 24
-- 15 14 14
-- 10 9 10
-- 6 5 3
100 100 100
21
12
9
3
100
22
13
9
4
100
25
14
11
4
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
p.
32
19
13
63
52
11
5
100
Q.12
a.
b.
Most elected officials care what
people like me think
Strongly
Not Strongly
Most elected officials don't care
what people like me think
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
33 -18 -15 --
-- 39 35 -- 28 38 -- 33 32 29 34
-- 26 21 -- 17 23 -- 18 18 17 18
-- 13 14 -- 11 15 -- 15 14 12 16
62
51
11
5
100
-- 55 60 --- 44 49 --- 11 11 --- 6 5 -100 100
-----
67
55
12
5
100
58
48
10
4
100
-- 64 64 68
-- 53 53 56
-- 11 11 12
-- 3 4 3
100 100 100
64
51
13
2
100
Would you say your overall opinion of… [INSERT ITEM; ROTATE ITEMS a. AND b. WITH c.
ALWAYS LAST] is very favorable, mostly favorable, mostly UNfavorable, or very unfavorable?
[INTERVIEWERS: PROBE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN “NEVER HEARD OF” AND “CAN’T
RATE.”] How about [NEXT ITEM]?
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly
The Republican Party
52
15
37
June, 2004
51
12
39
Early February, 2004
52
14
38
June, 2003
58
14
44
April, 2003
63
14
49
December, 2002
59
18
41
July, 2001
48
11
37
January, 2001
56
13
43
September, 2000 (RVs)
53
11
42
August, 1999
53
8
45
February, 1999
44
7
37
January, 1999
44
10
34
Early December, 1998
46
11
35
Early October, 1998 (RVs) 52
9
43
Early September, 1998
56
9
47
March, 1998
50
10
40
August, 1997
47
9
38
June, 1997
51
8
43
January, 1997
52
8
44
October, 1995
52
10
42
December, 1994
67
21
46
July, 1994
63
12
51
May, 1993
54
12
42
July, 1992
46
9
37
The Democratic Party
June, 2004
Early February, 2004
June, 2003
April, 2003
December, 2002
July, 2001
January, 2001
53
54
58
54
57
54
58
60
13
12
14
11
13
15
18
18
40
42
44
43
44
39
40
42
83
-----Unfavorable----Total Very Mostly
42
17
25
40
14
26
42
16
26
33
10
23
31
10
21
33
11
22
42
15
27
35
13
22
40
12
28
43
12
31
51
15
36
50
23
27
47
20
27
42
14
28
37
11
26
43
12
31
47
11
36
42
11
31
43
10
33
44
16
28
27
8
19
33
8
25
35
10
25
48
17
31
41
36
37
38
36
37
34
30
14
11
9
10
11
10
10
9
27
25
28
28
25
27
24
21
Never
Heard of
0
0
*
0
*
*
*
*
0
*
0
0
*
0
*
*
*
1
*
*
*
*
0
*
Can’t
Rate
6=100
9=100
6=100
9=100
6=100
8=100
10=100
9=100
7=100
4=100
5=100
6=100
7=100
6=100
7=100
7=100
6=100
6=100
5=100
4=100
6=100
4=100
11=100
6=100
*
0
*
0
*
*
*
1
6=100
10=100
5=100
8=100
7=100
9=100
8=100
9=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.12 CONTINUED...
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly
September, 2000 (RVs)
60
16
44
August, 1999
59
14
45
February, 1999
58
11
47
January, 1999
55
14
41
Early December, 1998
59
18
41
Early October, 1998 (RVs) 56
11
45
Early September, 1998
60
13
47
March, 1998
58
15
43
August, 1997
52
11
41
June, 1997
61
10
51
January, 1997
60
13
47
October, 1995
49
9
40
December, 1994
50
13
37
July, 1994
62
13
49
May, 1993
57
14
43
July, 1992
61
17
44
c.
The news media
Late October, 2000 (RVs)
February, 1999 (RVs)
March, 1998 (RVs)
October, 1997 (RVs)
43
50
48
45
50
8
7
6
7
6
35
43
42
38
44
-----Unfavorable----Total Very Mostly
35
12
23
37
9
28
37
11
26
38
12
26
34
10
24
38
9
29
33
8
25
36
10
26
42
10
32
33
8
25
35
7
28
48
11
37
44
13
31
34
7
27
34
9
25
33
9
24
51
45
49
53
48
18
14
14
17
14
33
31
35
36
34
Never
Heard of
*
*
0
0
0
*
*
*
0
*
*
0
*
*
0
*
Can’t
Rate
5=100
4=100
5=100
7=100
7=100
6=100
7=100
6=100
6=100
6=100
5=100
3=100
6=100
4=100
9=100
6=100
*
0
0
*
*
6=100
5=100
3=100
2=100
2=100
NO QUESTION 13-14
Q.15
How would you rate economic conditions in this country today… as excellent, good, only fair, or poor?
December, 2004
Early November, 2004 (RVs)
Mid-September, 2004
August, 2004
Late April, 2004
Late February, 2004
February 9-12, 2004 (Gallup)
January 12-15, 2004 (Gallup)
January 2-5, 2004 (Gallup)
December 11-14, 2003 (Gallup)
November 3-5, 2003 (Gallup)
October 24-26, 2003 (Gallup)
October 6-8, 2003 (Gallup)
September 8-10, 2003 (Gallup)
August 4-6, 2003 (Gallup)
August 5-8, 2002 (Gallup)
August 16-19, 2001 (Gallup)
August 18-19, 2000 (Gallup)
August 24-26, 1999 (Gallup)
September 1, 1998 (Gallup)
August 22-25, 1997 (Gallup)
October 26-29, 1996 (Gallup)
November 6-8, 1995 (Gallup)
Excellent
3
5
4
3
4
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
25
14
11
8
5
2
Good
33
31
34
30
34
29
31
34
40
34
28
24
20
20
24
27
34
49
50
54
41
42
28
84
Only
Fair Poor
43
20
37
26
40
20
45
21
38
22
42
26
46
21
42
21
41
16
44
19
49
21
44
30
50
27
49
30
52
23
52
19
49
14
21
4
28
7
25
9
38
13
39
13
47
22
Don’t know/
Refused
1=100
1=100
2=100
1=100
2=100
1=100
0=100
0=100
*=100
*=100
*=100
*=100
1=100
*=100
*=100
1=100
1=100
1=100
1=100
1=100
*=100
1=100
1=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.15 CONTINUED...
Excellent
July 15-17, 1994 (Gallup)
1
June 29-30, 1993 (Gallup)
1
Aug. 31-Sept., 1992 (Gallup) (RVs)
1
Good
26
14
9
Only
Fair Poor
52
21
52
32
37
53
Don’t know/
Refused
*=100
1=100
*=100
NO QUESTION 16
On another subject...
Q.17
How have you been getting most of your news about national and international issues? From television,
from newspapers, from radio, from magazines, or from the Internet? [ACCEPT TWO ANSWERS: IF
ONLY ONE RESPONSE IS GIVEN, PROBE FOR ADDITIONAL RESPONSE]
Other Don’t Know/
Television Newspapers Radio Magazines Internet (VOL) Refused
December, 2004
74
46
21
4
24
2
3
October, 2003
80
50
18
4
20
2
1
August, 2003
79
46
15
3
18
2
1
Early July, 2003
79
45
16
5
19
1
*
March, 20036
89
24
19
*
11
2
*
February, 2003
83
42
19
4
15
3
*
January, 2003
81
44
22
4
17
2
1
January, 2002
82
42
21
3
14
2
*
Mid-September, 2001
90
11
14
*
5
1
1
Early September, 2001 74
45
18
6
13
1
*
February, 2001
76
40
16
4
10
2
1
October, 1999
80
48
19
5
11
2
*
January, 1999
82
42
18
4
6
2
*
January, 1996
88
61
25
8
-2
*
September, 1995
82
63
20
10
-1
1
January, 1994
83
51
15
10
-5
1
September, 1993
83
60
17
9
-3
*
January, 1993
83
52
17
5
-1
1
Early January, 1991
82
40
15
4
-1
*
6
In March 2003, the question was worded “news about the war in Iraq.” In Mid-September 2001, the question was worded
“news about the terrorist attacks.” In September 1995, question wording did not include “international.” In Early January
1991 the question asked about “the latest developments in the Persian Gulf.”
85
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
IF RESPONDENT ANSWERED '1' TELEVISION AS EITHER 1ST OR 2ND RESPONSE IN Q.17 ASK
Q.18. IF NOT, SKIP TO Q.19
Q.18
Do you get most of your news about national and international issues from [READ, RANDOMIZE
ITEMS 2 THRU 4 AND 5 THRU 8 SEPARATELY, AND RANDOMIZE SETS OF ITEMS
(LOCAL; NETWORK; CABLE). ACCEPT MULTIPLE ANSWERS BUT DO NOT PROBE FOR
ADDITIONAL]
Early
BASED ON TOTAL:
Oct
Aug
July
Jan
2003
2003
2003
2002
15
Local news programming
17
17
17
16
11
ABC Network news
12
12
12
11
9
CBS Network news
8
10
11
11
14
NBC Network news
13
15
14
15
20
CNN Cable news
20
26
27
28
6
MSNBC Cable news
6
7
9
8
19
The Fox News Cable Channel
17
18
22
16
3
CNBC Cable news7
-3
3
4
3
(DO NOT READ) Don't know/Refused
4
4
3
2
ASK ALL:
Q.19
Some people seem to follow what’s going on in government and public affairs most of the time,
whether there’s an election or not. Other’s aren’t that interested. Would you say you follow what’s going
on in government and public affairs most of the time, some of the time, only now and then, or hardly at all?
December, 2004
November, 2004 (RVs)
Mid-October, 2004 (RVs)
June, 2004
August, 2003
November, 2002
August, 2002
March, 2001
Early November, 2000 (RVs)
September, 2000 (RVs)
June, 2000
Late September, 1999
August, 1999
November, 1998
Late October, 1998 (RVs)
Early October, 1998 (RVs)
Early September, 1998
June, 1998
November, 1997
November, 1996 (RVs)
October, 1996 (RVs)
June, 1996
October, 1995
April, 1995
November, 1994
7
Most of
the time
45
61
63
44
48
49
54
49
51
51
38
39
40
46
57
51
45
36
41
52
43
41
46
43
49
Some of Only now Hardly
the time and then at all DK/Ref
35
14
5
1=100
27
9
3
*=100
26
8
3
*=100
34
15
7
*=100
33
12
6
1=100
27
14
9
1=100
30
11
5
*=100
27
13
10
1=100
32
12
5
*=100
34
10
4
1=100
32
19
11
*=100
32
20
9
*=100
35
17
8
*=100
27
14
13
*=100
29
10
4
*=100
33
11
5
*=100
34
15
6
*=100
34
21
9
*=100
36
16
7
*=100
32
12
4
*=100
37
13
6
1=100
34
17
8
*=100
35
14
5
*=100
35
16
6
*=100
30
13
7
1=100
In October 2003, CNBC Cable news item was not asked due to programming error.
86
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.19 CONTINUED...
October, 1994
July, 1994
May, 1990
February, 1989
October, 1988
September, 1988
May, 1988
January, 1988
November, 1987
May, 1987
July, 1985
Q.20
Most of
the time
45
46
39
47
52
58
37
37
49
41
36
Some of Only now Hardly (VOL.)
the time and then at all DK/Ref
35
14
6
*=100
33
15
6
*=100
34
18
9
*=100
34
14
4
1=100
33
11
4
*=100
32
8
2
*=100
37
17
6
3=100
35
18
8
2=100
32
14
4
1=100
35
15
7
2=100
33
18
12
1=100
Now I'm going to read a few more pairs of statements. Again, just tell me whether the FIRST statement or
the SECOND statement comes closer to your own views — even if neither is exactly right. The first pair
is... (READ AND RANDOMIZE ITEMS Q THRU Z FOLLOWED BY RANDOMIZED ITEMS AA
THRU HH) (AFTER CHOICE IS MADE, PROBE: Do you feel STRONGLY about that, or not?)
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
q.
77
63
14
18
12
6
5
100
This country should do whatever it takes
to protect the environment
Strongly
Not Strongly
This country has gone too far in its efforts
to protect the environment
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 78 80 --- 67 67 --- 11 13 --
-- 77 -- 77 74 77 78
-- 66 -- 65 63 65 62
-- 11 -- 12 11 12 16
-----
-----
-- 17 15 --- 12 10 --- 5 5 --- 5 5 -100 100
-- 18 -- 20 22 19
-- 13 -- 13 15 13
-- 5 -- 7 7 6
-- 5 -- 3 4 4
100
100 100 100
19
12
7
3
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
r.
31
21
10
60
48
12
9
100
Stricter environmental laws and regulations
cost too many jobs and hurt the economy
Strongly
Not Strongly
Stricter environmental laws and regulations
are worth the cost
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
87
----
----
-- 31 28 --- 22 19 --- 9 9 --
-- 30 -- 35 39 32 33
-- 22 -- 23 28 23 21
-- 8 -- 12 11 9 12
-----
-----
-- 61 65 --- 50 50 --- 11 15 --- 8 7 -100 100
-- 63 -- 61
-- 51 -- 47
-- 12 -- 14
-- 7 -- 4
100
100
57
44
13
4
100
62
49
13
6
100
62
45
17
5
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.20 CONTINUED...
s.
51
36
15
41
30
11
8
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
There are no real limits to growth
in this country today
Strongly
Not strongly
People in this country should learn
to live with less
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
----
-- 54 --- 38 --- 16 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 51
-- 33
-- 18
-----
-----
-----
-- 40 --- 30 --- 9 --- 6 -100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 45
-- 30
-- 15
-- 4
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
t.
59
45
14
36
27
9
5
100
As Americans, we can always find ways
to solve our problems and get what we want
Strongly
Not strongly
This country can't solve many of its
important problems
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 59 63 --- 46 47 --- 13 16 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 52
-- 35
-- 17
-----
-----
-- 36 32 --- 29 24 --- 7 8 --- 5 5 -100 100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 45
-- 30
-- 15
-- 3
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
u.
49
35
14
44
38
6
7
100
Homosexuality is a way of life
that should be accepted by society
Strongly
Not Strongly
Homosexuality is a way of life that
should be discouraged by society
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don’t know
47 -33 -14 --
-- 50 49 46 45 44 44 45 47 46 46
-- 35 33 -- 32 32 29 29 30 33 26
-- 15 16 -- 13 12 15 16 17 13 20
45
38
7
8
100
-- 41 44 48
-- 35 37 --- 6 7 --- 9 7 6
100 100 100
-----
50
43
7
5
100
49
42
7
7
100
49
42
7
7
100
50
41
9
5
100
48
40
8
5
100
48
41
7
6
100
49
41
8
5
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Oct Jun Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 95 95 95 94 94
v.
44
38
6
51
41
10
5
100
Books that contain dangerous ideas should
be banned from public school libraries
Strongly
Not Strongly
Public school libraries should be allowed
to carry any books they want
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
45 -39 -6 --
-- 48 52 -- 46 44 46 42 45 42 46
-- 41 43 -- 39 39 37 -- 40 36 37
-- 7 9 -- 7 5 9 -- 5 6 9
52
43
9
3
100
-- 48 45 --- 40 36 --- 8 9 --- 4 3 -100 100
88
-----
50
40
10
4
100
51
43
9
4
100
52
41
11
2
100
53
--5
100
52
44
9
2
100
53
47
8
3
100
55
39
12
3
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.20 CONTINUED...
w.
74
66
8
24
15
9
2
100
Religion is a very important part of my life
Strongly
Not Strongly
Religion is not that important to me
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't Know
Jun
03
--------
Jul
02
--------
Feb
02
--------
Sep Aug Oct
00 99 97
75 75 -69 67 -6 8 -23 22 -15 12 -8 10 -2 2 -100 100
Jun
97
--------
Oct
96
--------
Apr
96
--------
Oct
95
--------
Apr
95
--------
Oct
94
--------
Jul
94
--------
NO ITEM X.
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
y.
59
44
15
39
33
6
2
100
I'm generally satisfied with the way
things are going for me financially
Strongly
Not Strongly
I'm not very satisfied with my financial
situation
Strongly
Not Strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 59 64 --- 46 48 --- 13 16 --
-- 57 57 --- 43 44 --- 14 13 --
----
-- 56
-- 36
-- 20
-----
-----
-- 39 34 --- 33 28 --- 6 6 --- 2 2 -100 100
-- 41 42 --- 36 37 --- 5 5 --- 2 1 -100 100
-----
-- 43
-- 33
-- 10
-- 1
100
Jun Jul Feb Sep Aug Oct Jun Oct Apr Oct Apr Oct Jul
03 02 02 00 99 97 97 96 96 95 95 94 94
z.
35
29
6
62
48
14
3
100
I often don't have enough money
to make ends meet
Strongly
Not strongly
Paying the bills is generally not a
problem for me
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
----
----
-- 37 29 --- 30 22 --- 7 7 --
----
----
----
----
----
-- 36
-- 27
-- 9
-----
-----
-- 59 68 --- 48 54 --- 11 14 --- 4 3 -100 100
-----
-----
-----
-----
-----
-- 63
-- 43
-- 20
-- 1
100
March
2002
aa.
46
36
10
51
46
5
3
100
It IS NOT necessary to believe in God in
order to be moral and have good values
Strongly
Not strongly
It IS necessary to believe in God in order
to be moral and have good values
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
50
--47
--3
100
89
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.20 CONTINUED...
bb.
39
30
9
51
42
9
10
100
cc.
53
38
15
37
27
10
10
100
dd.
40
29
11
50
34
16
10
100
ee.
44
33
11
49
41
8
7
100
Using overwhelming military force is the best
way to defeat terrorism around the world
Strongly
Not strongly
Relying too much on military force to defeat
terrorism creates hatred that leads to more terrorism
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
In foreign policy, the U.S. should take into account the interests
of its allies even if it means making compromises with them
Strongly
Not strongly
In foreign policy, the U.S. should follow its OWN national
interests even when its allies strongly disagree
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
The growing number of newcomers from other countries
threaten traditional American customs and values
Strongly
Not strongly
The growing number of newcomers from other countries
strengthens American society
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
It’s best for the future of our country to be active in world affairs
Strongly
Not strongly
We should pay less attention to problems overseas and
concentrate on problems here at home
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
90
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.20 CONTINUED...
ff.
35
24
11
60
51
9
5
100
gg.
41
31
10
51
40
11
8
100
Americans need to be willing to give up more privacy and
freedom in order to be safe from terrorism
Strongly
Not strongly
Americans shouldn’t have to give up more privacy and
freedom in order to be safe from terrorism
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
The government should do more to protect morality in society
Strongly
Not strongly
I worry the government is getting too involved in the issue of morality
Strongly
Not strongly
Neither/Don't know
NO QUESTIONS 21 THROUGH 30
On another subject...
Q.31 How much, if anything, have you heard about a proposal which would allow younger workers to invest a
portion of their Social Security taxes in private retirement accounts, which might include stocks or mutual
funds — a lot, a little or nothing at all?
RV’s
Early Sept
Sept
20048
2000
23
A lot
19
26
43
A little
41
43
33
Nothing at all
39
30
1
Don't know/Refused
1
1
100
100
100
Q.32
Generally, do you favor or oppose this proposal?
Heard about
Total Proposal9
54
30
16
100
54
Favor
35
Oppose
11
Don't know/Refused
100
(N=1420)
-- Early Sept 2004 -Heard about
Total Proposal
58
61
26
28
16
11
100
100
---- Sept 2000 ---Heard about
RV's Proposal
70
71
21
23
9
6
100
100
8
In Early September 2004 and 2000 the question was worded “... portion of their payroll taxes in private retirement
accounts, which might include stocks or mutual funds, rather than having all of it go toward Social Security.”
9
Based on the percent who heard "A lot" or "A little" in Q.31.
91
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.33
As you may know, the federal government has debated whether to fund certain kinds of medical research
known as ‘stem cell research’ … How much have you heard about this? [READ, IN ORDER]
47
41
11
1
100
Q.34
A lot
A little [OR]
Nothing at all
Don’t know/Refused (VOL.)
Aug
2004
42
43
15
*
100
March
2002
27
52
20
1
100
All in all, which is more important… [READ, IN ORDER]
56
32
12
100
Q.35
28
35
25
12
100
Q.36
Conducting stem cell research that might result in new medical cures
[OR]
Not destroying the potential life of human embryos involved in this research
Don’t know/Refused [VOL, DO NOT READ]
March
2002
52
43
34
14
100
38
19
100
Which comes closer to your view about the tax cuts passed under President Bush over the past few
years?[READ IN ORDER]
Early Sept
2004
All of the tax cuts should be made permanent
27
Tax cuts for the wealthy should be repealed, while others stay in place, OR
31
All of the tax cuts should be repealed
28
Don’t know/Refused (VOL. DO NOT READ)
14
100
Do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose [INSERT ITEM, RANDOMIZE]?
How about… [NEXT ITEM]?
------- FAVOR ------Strongly
Net Favor Favor
a.
Aug
2004
Making it more DIFFICULT for a woman
to get an abortion
Early February, 2004
November, 2003
August, 200310
May, 1993
May, 1992
May, 1990
May, 1987
May, 1985
10
36
36
35
36
32
30
38
41
47
19
17
19
17
15
-21
18
--
17
19
16
19
17
-17
23
--
----- OPPOSE ------Strongly
Net Oppose Oppose
55
58
57
57
60
62
55
51
49
29
30
29
30
35
-29
33
--
26
28
28
27
25
-26
18
--
Don’t
know
9=100
6=100
8=100
7=100
8=100
8=100
7=100
8=100
4=100
In August 2003 and earlier the question was worded: “Changing the laws to make it more difficult for a woman to get an
abortion.”
92
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.36 CONTINUED...
------- FAVOR ------Strongly
Net Favor Favor
32
14
18
29
8
21
32
10
22
32
10
22
30
9
21
30
10
20
31
9
21
38
10
28
35
8
27
27
6
21
----- OPPOSE ------Strongly
Net Oppose Oppose
61
38
23
60
35
25
56
33
23
59
35
24
63
42
21
62
41
21
58
33
25
53
30
23
57
34
23
65
41
24
Don’t
know
7=100
11=100
12=100
9=100
7=100
8=100
12=100
9=100
8=100
8=100
b.
Allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally
August, 2004
July, 2004
March, 2004
Early February, 2004
November, 2003
October, 2003
Mid-July, 2003
March, 2001
June, 1996
c.
An increase in the minimum wage,
from $5.15 an hour to $6.45 an hour
June, 2001
October, 1999
February, 199811
86
87
82
80
53
49
48
48
33
38
34
32
12
12
16
19
4
4
4
5
8
8
12
14
2=100
1=100
2=100
1=100
The U.S. government guaranteeing health
insurance for all citizens, even if it means
raising taxes
Early September, 2004
August, 2003
65
66
67
31
30
23
34
36
44
30
26
29
10
11
10
20
15
19
5=100
8=100
4=100
Limiting the amount that patients can be
awarded in medical malpractice lawsuits
63
31
32
30
14
16
7=100
d.
e.
Q.37
20
54
19
7
100
Do you think that we should increase our spending on national defense, keep it about the same, or cut it
back?
Mid- Early (RVs)
Oct- Oct- OctJuly Oct Sept Sept Aug June Sept Feb Oct Sept Nov Nov Nov Nov Dec
2004 2001 2001 2000 1999 1999 1997 199512 94+ 1993 90+ 86+ 82+ 78+ 74+
Increase
25
50
32
34
27
31
17
19
18 10 12 21 22 32 13
Keep same 53
41
44
48
54
47
57
56
53 52 53 55 52 45 47
Cut back
18
7
20
14
16
19
24
24
26 36 32 23 24 16 33
DK/Ref.
4
2
4
4
3
3
2
1
3
2
3
3
3
7
8
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
+ Chicago Council on Foreign Relations
11
In February 1998, the question was worded: "An increase in the minimum wage, from $5.15 an hour to $6.15 an hour."
12
In 1995 and previous years, the question was worded: “Do you think that we should expand our spending on national
defense, keep it about the same or cut it back?”
93
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.38
Do you think that using military force against countries that may seriously threaten our country, but have
not attacked us, can often be justified, sometimes be justified, rarely be justified, or never be justified?
14
46
21
14
5
100
Often justified
Sometimes justified
Rarely justified
Never justified
Don't know/Refused (VOL.)
July Aug May
2004 2003 2003
20
20
22
40
43
45
22
19
17
14
13
13
4
5
3
100 100 100
NO QUESTIONS 39-40
Thinking about trade for a moment…
Q.41
In general, do you think that free trade agreements like NAFTA, and the World Trade Organization, have
been a good thing or a bad thing for the United States? [INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT ASKS
WHAT NAFTA IS, “The North American Free Trade Agreement”]
47
34
19
100
Good thing
Bad thing
Don’t know/Refused (VOL.)
July
2004
47
34
19
100
March
2004
44
37
19
100
Dec13
2003
34
33
33
100
Early
Sept
2001
49
29
22
100
Nov
1997
45
34
21
100
Sept
1997
47
30
23
100
NO QUESTIONS 42- 43
Q.44
All in all, which do you think should be the higher priority right now – cutting taxes or reducing the federal
budget deficit?
CBS/NY Times
Nov 2004
32
Cutting taxes
28
61
Reducing the federal budget deficit
67
1
Neither (VOL.)
1
Don’t know/Refused
4
6
100
100
13
In December 2003 the question’s wording and interviewer instructions were: “...free trade agreements like NAFTA, (the
North American Free Trade Agreement) and the WTO (World Trade Organization)... [INTERVIEWER: READ OUT
FULL NAMES ONLY IF RESPONDENT IS UNCERTAIN]. In Early September 2001 and earlier the question was
worded: “So far, do you think that NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement, has been a good thing or a bad
thing from a U.S. point of view?”
94
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.45
Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force against Iraq?
December, 2004
November, 2004 (RVs)
Mid-October, 2004
Early October, 2004
Early September, 2004
August, 2004
July, 2004
June, 2004
May, 2004
Early April, 2004
Mid-March, 2004
Late February, 2004
Early February, 2004
Mid-January, 2004
Early January, 2004
December, 2003
October, 2003
September, 2003
August, 2003
Early July, 2003
May, 2003
Q.46
Right
decision
49
48
46
50
53
53
52
55
51
57
55
60
56
65
62
67
60
63
63
67
74
Wrong
decision
44
41
42
39
39
41
43
38
42
35
39
32
39
30
28
26
33
31
30
30
20
Don't know/
Refused
7=100
11=100
12=100
11=100
8=100
6=100
5=100
7=100
7=100
8=100
6=100
8=100
5=100
5=100
10=100
7=100
7=100
6=100
7=100
7=100
6=100
How well is the U.S. military effort in Iraq going? [READ IN ORDER]
Very
well
December, 2004
10
Mid-October, 2004
13
Early September, 2004 12
August, 2004
12
July, 2004
13
June, 2004
16
May, 2004
10
Late April, 2004
12
Early April, 2004
14
Mid-March, 2004
16
Early February, 2004
17
Mid-January, 2004
22
Early January, 2004
23
December, 2003
28
October, 2003
16
September, 2003
15
August, 2003
19
Early July, 2003
23
April 10-16, 2003
61
April 8-9, 2003
60
April 2-7, 2003
55
March 25-April 1, 2003 39
March 23-24, 2003
45
March 20-22, 2003
65
Fairly Not too Not at all Don’t know/
well
well
well
Refused
40
28
18
4=100
38
26
17
6=100
40
26
18
4=100
41
28
16
3=100
42
26
16
3=100
41
25
14
4=100
36
32
19
3=100
43
26
15
4=100
43
26
13
4=100
45
26
11
2=100
46
23
11
3=100
51
18
6
3=100
47
18
7
5=100
47
16
6
3=100
44
25
11
4=100
47
26
9
3=100
43
24
11
3=100
52
16
5
4=100
32
3
1
3=100
32
3
3
2=100
37
3
2
3=100
46
8
2
5=100
41
6
2
6=100
25
2
1
7=100
95
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.47
Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until the situation has stabilized, or do you think
the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?
56
40
4
100
Q.48
Keep troops in Iraq
Bring troops home
Don’t know/Refused
MidOct
2004
57
36
7
100
Early
Sept Aug July June14
2004 2004 2004 2004
54
54
53
51
40
42
43
44
6
4
4
5
100 100 100 100
Late Early
May April April
2004 2004 2004
53
53
50
42
40
44
5
7
6
100 100 100
Early
Jan Oct Sept
2004 2003 2003
63
58
64
32
39
32
5
3
4
100 100 100
How much have you heard or read about the Patriot Act, adopted in 2001, which is now up for renewal in
Congress – a lot, some, not much, or nothing at all?
15
29
27
26
3
100
A lot
Some
Not much
Nothing at all
Don’t know/Refused
CBS/NY Times
April 2004
12
27
28
30
2
100
ASKED DECEMBER 2-15, 2004 ONLY [N=1700]:
Q.49
Which comes closer to your view… Is the Patriot Act a necessary tool that helps the government find
terrorists or does it go too far and pose a threat to civil liberties?
Based on those
who had heard of it
Total
A lot/Some
33
46
39
48
28
6
100
100
(N=804)
CBS/NY Times
April 200415
Necessary tool
Goes too far
Don’t know/Refused
52
42
6
100
Now thinking about your personal life...
Q.50 For each description I read, please tell me if it applies to you or not. (First,)... (INSERT ITEM;
RANDOMIZE ITEMS)
Yes
No
Don’t Know
a. Do you happen to have any guns, rifles or pistols in your home?
37
60
3=100
Mid-October, 2004
39
59
2=100
34
63
3=100
Mid-July, 200316
August, 2002
35
62
3=100
April, 2000
35
62
3=100
14
In June 2004 and earlier, the question was worded: “Do you think the U.S. should keep military troops in Iraq until a stable
government is established there, or do you think the U.S. should bring its troops home as soon as possible?”
15
The CBS/NY Times question was preceded with: “Some people say the Patriot Act is a necessary tool that helps the
government find terrorists, while others say it goes too far and is a threat to civil liberites.”
16
From 1997 to 2003, the question asked about “guns or revolvers in your home.” In 1993, the question asked about “guns
in this household.”
96
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.50 CONTINUED...
June, 1997
December, 1993
Yes
40
45
No
57
53
Don’t Know
3=100
2=100
b.
Are you the owner of a small business?
Mid-October, 2004
August, 1999
16
15
14
84
85
86
*=100
*=100
*=100
c.
Do you trade stocks or bonds in the stock market?
Mid-October, 2004
Mid-July, 2003
August, 2002
August, 1999
28
31
29
34
25
71
68
69
65
75
1=100
1=100
2=100
1=100
*=100
d.
Over the past 12 months, has there been a time when you or
someone in your household has been without a job and looking
for work, or not?
Mid-October, 2004
37
36
63
63
*=100
1=100
Were you or either of your parents born in a
country other than the United States or Canada?
August, 2002
August, 1999
16
14
15
84
86
84
*=100
*=100
1=100
Do you attend Bible study or prayer group meetings?
August, 2002
August, 1999
36
41
34
64
58
66
*=100
1=100
*=100
e.
f.
ASK ALL:
INT1 Do you use a computer at your workplace, at school, at home, or anywhere else on at least an occasional
basis?
INT2 Do you ever go online to access the Internet or World Wide Web or to send and receive email?
BASED ON GENERAL PUBLIC [N=2000]:
Computer User
Yes
No
DK/Ref
December, 2004
80
20
*=100
Mid-October, 2004
79
21
*=100
Early September, 2004
78
22
*=100
August, 2004
75
25
*=100
April, 2004
73
27
0=100
March, 200417
75
25
*=100
August, 2003
77
23
*=100
Mid-July, 2003
75
25
*=100
January, 2003
76
24
0=100
December, 2002
76
24
*=100
Early October, 2002
75
25
*=100
August, 2002
78
22
*=100
INT1/INT2 CONTINUED...
17
Based on Total Respondents:
Goes Online
Yes
No
DK/Ref
72
28
*=100
72
28
*=100
72
28
*=100
68
32
0=100
66
34
*=100
68
32
*=100
67
33
*=100
65
35
*=100
67
33
*=100
67
33
*=100
63
37
*=100
69
31
*=100
Based on Total Respondents:
Beginning in 2004, the online use question is asked of all respondents (in previous years it was asked only of those who
identified themselves as computer users). This modification was made to adjust to changes in technology and means of
access to the Internet, and increases the percent who are classified as Internet users by 1-2 percentage points.
97
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
June, 2002
May, 2002
April, 2002
February, 2002
January, 2002
Mid-November, 2001
Mid-September, 2001
June, 2001
May, 2001
April, 2001
February, 2001
January, 2001
July, 2000
June, 2000
April, 2000
March, 200018
February, 2000
January, 2000
December, 1999
October, 1999
Late September, 1999
September, 1999
August, 1999
July, 1999
June, 1999
May, 1999
April, 1999
March, 1999
February, 1999
January, 1999
Early December, 1998
November, 1998
Early September, 1998
Late August, 1998
Early August, 1998
April, 1998
January, 1998
November, 1997
June, 1997
Early September, 1996
July, 1996
April, 1996
March, 1996
February, 1996
January, 1996
June, 199519
Yes
74
75
71
71
73
73
72
72
75
72
72
71
68
68
68
72
67
68
67
67
68
70
67
68
64
66
71
68
68
69
64
-64
66
66
61
65
66
60
56
56
58
61
60
59
--
Computer User
No
DK/Ref
26
*=100
25
*=100
29
*=100
29
*=100
27
0=100
27
0=100
28
*=100
28
*=100
25
*=100
28
*=100
28
0=100
29
*=100
31
1=100
31
1=100
32
*=100
28
0=100
33
*=100
32
*=100
33
*=100
33
*=100
32
*=100
30
*=100
33
*=100
32
*=100
35
1=100
33
1=100
29
*=100
32
*=100
32
*=100
31
*=100
36
*=100
--36
*=100
34
0=100
34
*=100
39
*=100
35
*=100
34
*=100
40
0=100
44
*=100
44
*=100
42
*=100
39
*=100
40
0=100
41
0=100
---
Yes
66
66
62
62
62
62
62
62
64
62
60
61
55
56
54
61
52
52
53
50
52
53
52
49
50
48
51
49
49
47
42
37
42
43
41
36
37
36
29
22
23
21
22
21
21
14
Goes Online
No
DK/Ref
34
*=100
34
*=100
38
0=100
38
0=100
38
0=100
38
0=100
38
*=100
38
0=100
36
0=100
38
0=100
40
*=100
39
0=100
45
*=100
44
*=100
46
*=100
39
0=100
48
0=100
48
*=100
47
0=100
50
0=100
48
*=100
47
0=100
48
0=100
51
0=100
50
*=100
52
0=100
49
*=100
51
*=100
51
*=100
53
*=100
58
0=100
63
*=100
58
*=100
57
*=100
59
*=100
64
0=100
63
0=100
63
1=100
71
0=100
78
0=100
77
0=100
79
*=100
78
0=100
79
*=100
79
0=100
86
*=100
18
In March 2000, "or anywhere else" was added to the question wording.
19
The 1995 figure combines responses from two separate questions: (1) Do you or anyone in your household ever use a
modem to connect to any computer bulletin boards, information services such as CompuServe or Prodigy, or other
computers at other locations? (IF YES, PROBE: Is that you, someone else or both?) (2) Do you, yourself, ever use a
computer at (work) (school) (work or school) to connect with computer bulletin boards, information services such as
America Online or Prodigy, or other computers over the Internet?
98
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
ASK ALL:
PARTY In politics TODAY, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or Independent?
2004 Trend
December, 2004
Mid-October, 2004
Late September, 2004
Mid-September, 2004
Early September, 2004
August, 2004
July, 2004
June, 2004
May, 2004
Early May, 2004
Late April, 2004
Early April, 2004
Late March, 2004
March, 2004
Mid-February, 2004
Early February, 2004
Mid-January, 2004
Early January, 2004
Yearly Totals
2004
2003
2002
2001
2001 Post-Sept 11
2001 Pre-Sept 11
2000
1999
1998
1997
Republican
31
30
29
29
30
31
29
30
29
27
30
31
30
27
30
31
31
29
(VOL)
(VOL)
No
Other
Democrat Independent Preference Party Don't know
34
30
3
*
2=100
33
30
4
*
3=100
30
31
6
*
4=100
31
30
5
*
5=100
33
31
3
*
3=100
35
27
4
*
3=100
33
32
3
*
3=100
34
31
3
*
2=100
35
26
5
1
4=100
34
31
4
1
3=100
31
31
5
*
3=100
32
28
4
1
4=100
34
28
4
*
4=100
35
32
4
*
2=100
33
30
4
*
3=100
33
31
3
*
2=100
31
31
4
1
2=100
34
31
4
*
2=100
30
30
30
29
31
28
28
27
28
28
33
31
31
34
32
35
33
33
33
33
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
29
32
30
27
28
31
31
33
30
32
34
33
32
33
1989
1987
33
26
33
35
30
31
30
29
28
30
29
34
32
32
4
5
5
5
5
5
6
4
5
4
No Preference/
Other/DK
33
5=100
34
4=100
34
4=100
34
5=100
35
4=100
33
4=100
30
6=100
Independent/
No Pref/Oth/DK
34=100
39=100
99
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
3=100
3=100
3=100
3=100
3=100
2=100
4=100
2=100
2=100
2=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
IF ANSWERED 1 IN PARTY, ASK [N=662]:
PARTYSTR
Do you consider yourself a STRONG Republican, or NOT a strong Republican?
18
Strong
13
Not strong
31%
Late
July Aug Sept Sept Aug Nov Oct April Oct July June May Feb May Jan May
2004 2003 2000 1999 1999 1997 1995 1995 1994 1994 1992 1990 1989 1988 1988 1987
17 14 14 10 11 11 11 15 16 13 11 13 15 13 12 11
12 13 13 14 14 14 19 15 15 16 17 15 16 15 15 14
29 27 27 24 25 25 30 30 31 29 28 28 31 28 27 25
IF ANSWERED 2 IN PARTY, ASK [N=641]:
PARTYSTR Do you consider yourself a STRONG Democrat, or NOT a strong Democrat?
19
Strong
15
Not strong
34%
July
204
20
13
33
Late
Aug Sept Sept Aug Nov Oct April Oct July June May Feb May Jan May
2003 2000 1999 1999 1997 1995 1995 1994 1994 1992 1990 1989 1988 1988 1987
15 19 15 15 14 14 14 18 15 14 16 17 19 19 18
16 15 16 18 18 16 15 14 18 18 17 21 19 20 19
31 34 31 33 32 30 29 32 33 32 33 38 38 39 37
IF ANSWERED 3,4,5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK [N=697]:
PARTYLN As of TODAY, do you LEAN more to the Republican Party or the Democratic Party?
(VOL.)
Republican Democrat Other/DK/Ref.
December, 2004
41
33
26=100
August, 2003
29
39
32=100
August, 2002
32
34
34=100
September, 2000
28
33
39=100
Late September, 1999
31
34
35=100
August, 1999
34
36
30=100
IF REPUBLICAN OR LEAN REPUBLICAN (1 IN PARTY OR 1 IN PARTYLN) ASK [N=955]:
Q.24
Do you ever vote for Democratic candidates, or do you always vote Republican?
71
22
7
100
Sometimes vote for Democratic candidates
Always vote Republican
Don’t know/Refused
IF DEMOCRAT OR LEAN DEMOCRAT (2 IN PARTY OR 2 IN PARTYLN) ASK [N=872]:
Q.25
Do you ever vote for Republican candidates, or do you always vote Democratic?
56
38
6
100
Sometimes vote for Republican candidates
Always vote Democratic
Don’t know/Refused
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS
LATE MARCH 2005 POLITICAL TYPOLOGY CALLBACK SURVEY
FINAL TOPLINE
March 17-27, 2005
N=1,090
Q.1
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? [IF DK
ENTER AS DK. IF DEPENDS PROBE ONCE WITH: Overall do you approve or disapprove of the
way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? IF STILL DEPENDS ENTER AS DK]
Late March, 2005
Mid-March, 2005
February, 2005
January, 2005
2004
December, 2004
Mid-October, 2004
August, 2004
July, 2004
June, 2004
May, 2004
Late April, 2004
Early April, 2004
Late March, 2004
Mid-March, 2004
February, 2004
Mid-January, 2004
Early January, 2004
2003
December, 2003
November, 2003
October, 2003
September, 2003
Mid-August, 2003
Early August, 2003
Mid-July, 2003
Early July, 2003
June, 2003
May, 2003
April 10-16, 2003
April 9, 2003
April 2-7, 2003
March 28-April 1, 2003
March 25-27, 2003
March 20-24, 2003
March 13-16, 2003
February, 2003
January, 2003
2002
December, 2002
Late October, 2002
Early October, 2002
DisApprove approve
49
46
45
46
46
47
50
43
Don’t
know
5=100
9=100
7=100
7=100
48
44
46
46
48
44
48
43
47
46
48
56
58
44
48
45
46
43
48
43
47
44
47
44
34
35
8=100
8=100
9=100
8=100
9=100
8=100
9=100
10=100
9=100
7=100
8=100
10=100
7=100
57
50
50
55
56
53
58
60
62
65
72
74
69
71
70
67
55
54
58
34
40
42
36
32
37
32
29
27
27
22
20
25
23
24
26
34
36
32
9=100
10=100
8=100
9=100
12=100
10=100
10=100
11=100
11=100
8=100
6=100
6=100
6=100
6=100
6=100
7=100
11=100
10=100
10=100
61
59
61
28
29
30
11=100
12=100
9=100
Mid-September, 2002
Early September, 2002
Late August, 2002
August, 2002
Late July, 2002
July, 2002
June, 2002
April, 2002
Early April, 2002
February, 2002
January, 2002
2001
Mid-November, 2001
Early October, 2001
Late September, 2001
Mid-September, 2001
Early September, 2001
August, 2001
July, 2001
June, 2001
May, 2001
April, 2001
March, 2001
February, 2001
101
DisApprove approve
67
22
63
26
60
27
67
21
65
25
67
21
70
20
69
18
74
16
78
13
80
11
84
84
86
80
51
50
51
50
53
56
55
53
9
8
7
9
34
32
32
33
32
27
25
21
Don’t
know
11=100
11=100
13=100
12=100
10=100
12=100
10=100
13=100
10=100
9=100
9=100
7=100
8=100
7=100
11=100
15=100
18=100
17=100
17=100
15=100
17=100
20=100
26=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
IF APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE (1,2 IN Q.1) ASK:
Q.1a
Do you (approve/disapprove) very strongly, or not so strongly?
Dec
2004
48
34
12
2
44
35
8
1
8
100
49 Approve
32 Very strongly
16 Not so strongly
1 Don’t know (VOL)
46 Disapprove
36 Very strongly
10 Not so strongly
* Don’t know (VOL)
5 Don't know/Refused
100
Nov
2003
50
34
14
2
40
30
9
1
10
100
Sept
2003
55
35
18
2
36
27
9
*
9
100
June
2002
70
46
21
3
20
8
12
0
10
100
April
2001
56
34
20
2
27
18
9
*
17
100
ASK ALL:
Q.2
Now I’d like your views on some people and organizations. (First,) would you say your overall opinion
of… [INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE ITEMS a THRU k, FOLLOWED BY RANDOMIZED ITEMS
l THRU p WITH ITEM q ALWAYS LAST] is very favorable, mostly favorable, mostly UNfavorable, or
very unfavorable? [INTERVIEWERS: PROBE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN “NEVER HEARD
OF” AND “CAN’T RATE.”]
-------Favorable------ -----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t
Total Very Mostly Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate
a.
George W. Bush
53
23
30
45
27
18
0
2=100
Mid-October, 2004 (RVs)
56
26
30
42
23
19
*
2=100
Early October, 2004 (RVs)
57
27
30
40
20
20
0
3=100
Early September, 2004
52
25
27
43
24
19
*
5=100
September 11-14
49
24
25
46
27
19
0
5=100
September 8-10
55
28
27
40
21
19
*
5=100
August, 2004
58
27
31
39
22
17
0
3=100
June, 2004
52
19
33
45
22
23
*
3=100
Early February, 2004
53
21
32
44
25
19
0
3=100
Gallup: January 29 - February 1, 2004
52
--47
---1=100
Gallup: January 2-5, 2004
65
--35
---*=100
Gallup: October 6-8, 2003
60
--39
---1=100
Gallup: June 9-10, 2003
66
--33
---1=100
April, 2003
72
37
35
25
11
14
0
3=100
December, 2002
68
35
33
27
11
16
0
5=100
July, 2001
61
22
39
35
14
21
*
4=100
January, 2001
60
24
36
33
12
21
0
7=100
May, 2000
58
18
40
31
12
19
1 10=100
March, 199920
61
21
40
21
7
14
4 14=100
November, 1997
54
13
41
18
6
12
9 19=100
b.
Dick Cheney
Mid-October, 2004 (RVs)
Early October, 2004 (RVs)
Early September, 2004
September 11-14
September 8-10
20
48
48
48
43
41
48
15
17
14
13
13
14
33
31
34
30
28
34
42
46
41
42
44
40
20
25
20
23
24
23
22
21
21
19
20
17
In March 1999 and November 1997 the category was listed: “Texas Governor George W. Bush.”
102
2
*
*
2
1
2
8=100
6=100
11=100
13=100
14=100
10=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.2 CONTINUED...
August, 2004
April, 2003
December, 2002
July, 2001
January, 2001
December, 1994
March, 199121
May, 1990
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly
47
13
34
60
21
39
59
20
39
58
19
39
62
20
42
42
10
32
68
33
35
20
3
17
-----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t
Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate
41
20
21
2 10=100
27
12
15
3 10=100
26
10
16
5 10=100
26
6
20
6 10=100
18
5
13
2 18=100
19
5
14
21 18=100
6
2
4
10 16=100
11
3
8
44 25=100
c.
Donald Rumsfeld
April, 2003
39
61
10
24
29
37
41
19
18
6
23
13
7
9
13=100
11=100
d.
Condoleezza Rice
57
22
35
28
11
17
5
10=100
e.
Hillary Clinton
December 2002
July, 2001
January, 2001
May, 2000
Early December, 1998
Early October, 1998 (RVs)
Early September, 1998
Late August, 1998
March, 1998
January, 1997
June, 1996
April, 1996
February, 1996
January, 1996
October, 1995
August, 1995
December, 1994
July, 1994
May, 1993
57
47
53
60
49
66
58
64
63
65
57
53
49
42
42
58
49
50
57
60
22
15
20
25
15
32
24
24
25
26
17
13
12
14
10
14
16
17
19
19
35
32
33
35
34
34
34
40
38
39
40
40
37
28
32
44
33
33
38
41
36
44
42
35
42
31
36
31
34
31
40
43
46
54
54
38
47
45
40
29
17
23
23
16
22
15
18
13
13
14
17
17
19
27
26
14
22
20
18
11
19
21
19
19
20
16
18
18
21
17
23
26
27
27
28
24
25
25
22
18
*
1
1
*
1
*
*
0
*
*
*
*
0
0
0
-*
1
1
1
7=100
8=100
4=100
5=100
8=100
3=100
6=100
5=100
3=100
4=100
3=100
4=100
5=100
4=100
4=100
4=100
4=100
4=100
2=100
10=100
f.
Bill Clinton
December, 2002
July, 2001
January, 2001
May, 2000
March, 1999
December, 1998
Early October, 1998 (RVs)
Early September, 1998
Late August, 1998
March, 1998
November, 1997
October, 1997
September, 1997
64
46
50
64
48
55
55
52
57
54
62
63
62
62
24
17
20
23
17
21
23
15
18
18
22
19
15
18
40
29
30
41
31
34
32
37
39
36
40
44
47
44
32
49
46
34
47
42
43
44
41
44
35
35
36
35
13
27
27
17
28
23
24
24
23
24
16
14
16
14
19
22
19
17
19
19
19
20
18
20
19
21
20
21
0
*
0
0
*
*
0
0
0
0
*
0
*
0
4=100
5=100
4=100
2=100
5=100
3=100
2=100
4=100
2=100
2=100
3=100
2=100
2=100
3=100
21
In March 1991 and May 1990 the category was listed: “Richard Cheney.”
103
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.2 CONTINUED...
August, 1997
April, 1997
January, 1997
October, 1996 (RVs)
June, 1996
April, 1996
February, 1996
January, 1996
August, 1995
February, 1995
December, 1994
July, 1994
May, 1993
July, 1992
June, 1992
May, 1992
March, 1992
February, 1992
January, 1992
November, 1991
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly
61
16
45
61
17
44
66
17
49
57
12
45
61
16
45
57
16
41
55
20
35
56
13
43
49
13
36
55
14
41
51
17
34
58
15
43
60
18
42
59
17
42
46
10
36
53
11
42
53
10
43
59
15
44
37
9
28
30
5
25
-----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t
Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate
38
17
21
0
1=100
37
16
21
*
2=100
32
14
18
*
2=100
41
19
22
0
2=100
37
14
23
*
2=100
40
16
24
0
3=100
43
21
22
0
2=100
42
15
27
0
2=100
49
20
29
0
2=100
42
17
25
0
3=100
46
22
24
0
3=100
41
16
25
*
1=100
35
12
23
0
5=100
34
9
25
0
7=100
47
14
33
1
6=100
42
10
32
*
5=100
40
11
29
1
6=100
31
7
24
2
8=100
15
4
11
27 21=100
10
2
8
39 21=100
g.
John Kerry
Mid-October, 2004 (RVs)
Early October, 2004 (RVs)
Early September, 2004
September 11-14
September 8-10
August, 2004
June, 2004
Early February, 2004
January, 2003
49
56
53
49
51
50
56
50
58
30
13
21
16
17
17
18
23
11
14
6
36
35
37
32
34
32
33
39
44
24
41
40
41
43
40
44
36
41
28
16
17
16
16
19
19
18
14
16
8
4
24
24
25
24
21
26
22
25
20
12
2
0
*
*
*
0
1
0
1
36
8=100
3=100
6=100
8=100
9=100
6=100
7=100
9=100
13=100
18=100
h.
Howard Dean
January, 2003
32
13
6
2
26
11
31
12
11
3
20
9
12
57
25=100
18=100
i.
Rudy Giuliani
May, 2000
60
37
20
9
40
28
17
18
5
6
12
12
7
26
16=100
19=100
John McCain
July, 2001
January, 2001
May, 2000
ABC/WP: February, 2000
CNN/USA Today/Gallup: December, 199922
59
51
59
54
60
57
15
14
18
14
---
44
37
41
40
---
17
22
15
20
21
11
4
5
3
5
---
13
17
12
15
---
8
13
9
11
-14
16=100
14=100
17=100
15=100
19=100
18=100
k.
57
13
44
28
10
18
1
14=100
j.
Arnold Schwarzenegger
22
For the CNN/USAToday/Gallup Poll in December 1999, the category was listed: "Arizona Senator John McCain."
104
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.2 CONTINUED...
l.
The United Nations
Late February, 2004
Early September, 2001
August, 1999
June, 1999
Early September, 1998
September, 1997
February, 1996
June, 1995
February, 1995
July, 1994
May, 1993
May, 1990
m.
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly
59
14
45
55
14
41
77
23
54
76
19
57
70
19
51
69
14
55
64
11
53
65
19
46
67
14
53
62
13
49
76
21
55
73
21
52
70
15
55
-----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t
Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate
32
11
21
*
9=100
35
15
20
-- 10=100
18
6
12
1
4=100
19
5
14
*
5=100
23
7
16
0
7=100
23
7
16
*
8=100
28
9
19
*
8=100
29
9
20
1
5=100
28
8
20
*
5=100
26
8
18
* 12=100
19
5
14
1
4=100
17
4
13
0 10=100
19
6
13
1 10=100
The military
June, 2004
Newsweek: May 16-17, 2002
Newsweek: September 13-14, 2001
July, 2001
January, 2001
August, 1999
June, 1999
Early September, 1998
October, 1997
May, 1997
February, 1996
July, 1994
May, 1993
March, 1991
May, 1990
January, 1988
April, 1987
January, 1987
July, 1986
June, 1985
87
85
93
94
81
82
89
83
86
78
80
82
87
85
94
73
77
80
73
85
77
49
48
59
58
29
32
30
36
29
22
23
33
30
32
60
18
20
17
19
32
24
38
37
34
36
52
50
59
47
57
56
57
49
57
53
34
55
57
63
54
53
53
9
10
5
4
11
12
10
13
10
18
16
16
11
10
4
21
17
16
16
10
18
3
3
2
2
4
3
2
2
3
5
5
4
3
2
2
6
3
4
5
3
5
6
7
3
2
7
9
8
11
7
13
11
12
8
8
2
15
14
12
11
7
13
*
*
--*
0
*
0
0
0
0
*
*
0
0
*
*
0
*
0
*
4=100
5=100
2=100
2=100
8=100
6=100
1=100
4=100
4=100
4=100
4=100
2=100
2=100
5=100
2=100
6=100
6=100
4=100
11=100
5=100
5=100
n.
56
59
51
63
59
52
58
49
47
54
57
52
46
17
15
12
16
12
12
15
15
10
17
14
10
9
39
44
39
47
47
40
43
34
37
37
43
42
37
33
32
36
28
36
38
35
39
45
41
38
39
47
9
9
10
7
9
13
10
13
17
14
10
10
17
24
23
26
21
27
25
25
26
28
27
28
29
30
1
1
1
1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10=100
8=100
12=100
8=100
5=100
10=100
7=100
12=100
8=100
5=100
5=100
9=100
7=100
Labor unions
March, 2002
July, 2001
March, 2001
August, 1999
Early September, 1998
June, 1997
May, 1997
April, 1996
February, 1996
July, 1994
January, 1988
July, 1985
105
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.2 CONTINUED...
o.
-------Favorable-----Total Very Mostly
The Christian conservative movement 41
15
26
March, 2002
45
10
35
March, 2001
42
9
33
-----Unfavorable----- Never Can’t
Total Very Mostly Heard of Rate
34
15
19
9 16=100
29
11
18
12 15=100
31
11
20
11 16=100
p.
The National Rifle Association
June, 1999
September, 1998
August, 1995
June, 1995
July, 1994
49
46
48
44
44
55
18
17
16
16
16
19
31
29
32
28
28
36
39
45
40
45
48
37
17
21
18
21
24
16
22
24
22
24
24
21
2
1
2
1
2
1
10=100
8=100
10=100
10=100
6=100
7=100
q.
Muslims
Late February, 2004
Mid-July, 2003
June, 2003
March, 2002
45
48
47
50
47
7
13
9
12
7
38
35
38
38
40
28
32
31
30
29
9
14
12
10
11
19
18
19
20
18
1
-1
1
1
26=100
20=100
21=100
19=100
23=100
ROTATE Q.3 AND Q.4
Q.3
If George W. Bush could run for president again in 2008, would you like to see him serve as president for a
third term, or not?
27
69
4
100
Q.4
Yes
No
Don’t know/Refused
If Bill Clinton could run for president again in 2008, would you like to see him serve as president again, or
not?
43
55
2
100
Yes
No
Don’t know/Refused
ROTATE Q.5 AND Q.6
Q.5
Now I am going to read you the names of some possible candidates for the REPUBLICAN nomination for
president in 2008. AFTER I READ ALL THE NAMES, please tell me which one you would most like to
see nominated as the Republican party’s candidate for president? (PROBE IF NECESSARY: Well as of
today, to whom do you most lean?) (READ AND RANDOMIZE)
7
4
27
32
17
*
7
6
100
Jeb Bush
Bill Frist
Rudy Giuliani
John McCain
Condoleezza Rice
Other (VOL. DO NOT READ)
None (VOL. DO NOT READ)
Don’t know/Refused (VOL. DO NOT READ)
106
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.6
Now I am going to read you the names of some possible candidates for the DEMOCRATIC nomination for
president in 2008. AFTER I READ ALL THE NAMES, please tell me which one you would most like to
see nominated as the Democratic party’s candidate for president? (PROBE IF NECESSARY: Well as of
today, to whom do you most lean?) (READ AND RANDOMIZE)
34
9
16
16
9
1
10
5
100
Hillary Clinton
Howard Dean
John Edwards
John Kerry
Bill Richardson
Other (VOL. DO NOT READ)
None (VOL. DO NOT READ)
Don’t know/Refused (VOL. DO NOT READ)
On a different subject…
Q.7
How much, if anything, have you heard about a proposal which would allow younger workers to invest a
portion of their Social Security taxes in private retirement accounts, which might include stocks or mutual
funds — have you heard a lot, a little or nothing at all?
48
41
11
*
100
Q.8
A lot
A little
Nothing at all
Don't know/Refused
MidMarch
2005
46
32
22
*
100
Feb
2005
43
35
21
1
100
Dec
2004
23
43
33
1
100
Early23
Sept
2004
19
41
39
1
100
(RVs)
Sept
2000
26
43
30
1
100
Dec
2004
54
30
16
100
Early
Sept
2004
58
26
16
100
(RVs)
Sept
2000
70
21
9
100
Generally, do you favor or oppose this proposal?
MidMarch
2005
44
40
16
100
Feb
2005
46
38
16
100
46
44
10
100
Favor
Oppose
Don't know/Refused
23
In Early September 2004 and 2000 the question was worded “... portion of their payroll taxes in private retirement
accounts, which might include stocks or mutual funds, rather than having all of it go toward Social Security.”
107
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.9
In general, do you think that personal bankruptcy should be made easier for people to claim, more difficult
for people to claim, or should it remain as it is?
8
39
47
6
100
Q.10
Easier
More difficult
Remain as it is
Don’t know/Refused
Gallup
May 1997
7
39
48
6
100
Would you favor or oppose allowing oil and gas drilling in the Alaskan Arctic National Wildlife Refuge?
46
49
5
100
Favor
Oppose
Don’t know/Refused
Mid-March
2005
42
46
12
100
ROTATE QUESTIONS 11 AND 12
Q.11
Would you generally favor or oppose teaching creationism ALONG WITH evolution in public schools?
57
33
10
100
Q.12
Would you generally favor or oppose teaching creationism INSTEAD OF evolution in public schools?
33
54
13
100
Q.13
Favor
Oppose
Don’t know/Refused
CBS/NY Times
Nov 200424
65
29
6
100
Favor
Oppose
Don’t know/Refused
CBS/NY Times
Nov 2004
37
51
12
100
Do you favor or oppose affirmative action programs designed to help blacks, women and other minorities
get better jobs and education?
Aug25
May
Aug
2003
1995
2003
67
Favor
64
63
58
28
Oppose
31
29
36
5
Don’t know/Refused
5
8
3
100
100
100
100
24
CBS/New York Times question asked about “creation” instead of “creationism” in Q.11 only.
25
In August 2003 the question was part of a list of items. In May 2003 and August 1995 the question opened with: “In order
to overcome past discrimination...”
108
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.14
Do you think the use of torture against suspected terrorists in order to gain important information can often
be justified, sometimes be justified, rarely be justified, or never be justified?
15
30
24
27
4
100
Q.15
Often justified
Sometimes justified
Rarely justified
Never justified
Don’t know/Refused
July 2004
15
28
21
32
4
100
There’s been some discussion recently about “outsourcing” – meaning when American businesses hire
workers in other parts of the world in order to save money. Which comes closer to your view on this issue?
[READ AND ROTATE]
69
22
2
2
5
100
Outsourcing is bad for the American economy because it sends good jobs overseas
OR
Outsourcing is good for the American economy because it keeps the cost of goods and services
down
Both [VOL.]
Neither [VOL.]
Don’t know/Refused
Q.16
Do you believe that it is proper or improper for the Ten Commandments to be displayed in a government
building?
Aug 2004
74
Proper
72
22
Improper
23
4
Don’t know/Refused
5
100
100
Q.17
Considering what the president and Congress need to deal with this year, do you think reducing the budget
deficit should be a top priority, important but lower priority, not too important or does it not need to be
addressed this year?
39
46
6
5
4
100
Top priority
Important but lower priority
Not too important
Does not need to be addressed this year
Don’t know/Refused
109
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.18
Q.19
Would you favor or oppose [INSERT ITEM, RANDOMIZE] as a way to reduce the budget deficit?
Favor
31
Oppose
66
DK/Ref
3=100
Lowering defense and military spending
35
60
5=100
Lowering domestic spending
54
35
11=100
a.
Raising taxes
b.
c.
Would you favor or oppose a policy allowing immigrants to enter the U.S. legally and work here for a
limited period of time, but then they would have to go home?
50
44
6
100
Favor
Oppose
Don’t know/Refused
Q.20
In making his next appointment to the Supreme Court, should President Bush choose someone who will
make the court more liberal, someone who will make it more conservative, or someone who will keep the
court about the same as it is now?
Clinton
Gallup
March 1993
24
More liberal
29
28
More conservative
29
41
About the same as it is now
38
7
Don’t know/Refused
4
100
100
Q.21
How important is the president’s choice of the next Supreme Court justice to you personally? [READ]
38
36
15
8
3
100
Q.22
Very important
Somewhat important
Not too important
Not at all important
Don’t know/Refused (VOL.)
Some people think of American society as divided into two groups, the “haves” and the “have-nots,” while
others think it’s incorrect to think of America that way. Do you, yourself, think of America as divided into
“haves” and “have-nots,” or don’t you think of America that way?
--- Gallup --Late Feb June
Oct
Aug
CBS/NY Times
2004
2001
1999
1988
Aug 1984
38
Yes, divided into “haves” and “have-nots”
38
44
39
26
31
59
No
59
53
59
71
61
3
Don’t know/Refused
3
3
2
3
8
100
100
100
100
100
100
110
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
Q.23
If you had to choose, which of these groups are you in, the haves or the have-nots?
48
34
8
10
100
--- Gallup --Oct
Aug
1999
1988
67
59
24
17
6
15
3
9
100
100
Late Feb June
2004
2001
59
52
27
32
7
10
7
6
100
100
Haves
Have-nots
Neither (VOL)
Don’t know/Refused
ASK ALL:
PARTY In politics TODAY, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or Independent?
Trend
Late March, 2005
Mid-March, 2005
February, 2005
January, 2005
December, 2004
Mid-October, 2004
Late September, 2004
Mid-September, 2004
Early September, 2004
August, 2004
July, 2004
June, 2004
May, 2004
Early May, 2004
Late April, 2004
Early April, 2004
Late March, 2004
March, 2004
Mid-February, 2004
Early February, 2004
Mid-January, 2004
Early January, 2004
Yearly Totals
2004
2003
2002
2001
2001 Post-Sept 11
2001 Pre-Sept 11
2000
1999
1998
1997
Republican
29
30
31
32
31
30
29
29
30
31
29
30
29
27
30
31
30
27
30
31
31
29
30
30
30
29
31
28
28
27
28
28
(VOL)
(VOL)
No
Other
Democrat Independent Preference Party Don't know
32
36
2
*
1=100
34
29
4
*
3=100
32
30
4
1
2=100
33
30
4
*
1=100
34
30
3
*
2=100
33
30
4
*
3=100
30
31
6
*
4=100
31
30
5
*
5=100
33
31
3
*
3=100
35
27
4
*
3=100
33
32
3
*
3=100
34
31
3
*
2=100
35
26
5
1
4=100
34
31
4
1
3=100
31
31
5
*
3=100
32
28
4
1
4=100
34
28
4
*
4=100
35
32
4
*
2=100
33
30
4
*
3=100
33
31
3
*
2=100
31
31
4
1
2=100
34
31
4
*
2=100
33
31
31
34
32
35
33
33
33
33
30
31
30
29
28
30
29
34
32
32
111
4
5
5
5
5
5
6
4
5
4
*
*
1
*
1
*
*
*
*
1
3=100
3=100
3=100
3=100
3=100
2=100
4=100
2=100
2=100
2=100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PARTY CONTINUED...
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
Republican
29
32
30
27
28
31
31
1989
1987
33
26
No Preference/
Democrat Independent Other/DK
33
33
5=100
30
34
4=100
32
34
4=100
34
34
5=100
33
35
4=100
32
33
4=100
33
30
6=100
Independent/
No Pref/Oth/DK
33
34=100
35
39=100
(All party identification trends based on general public.)
IF ANSWERED 1 IN PARTY, ASK:
PARTYSTR Do you consider yourself a STRONG Republican, or NOT a strong Republican?
Late March, 2005
December, 2004
July, 2004
August, 2003
September, 2000
Late September, 1999
August, 1999
November, 1997
October, 1995
April, 1995
October, 1994
July, 1994
June, 1992
May, 1990
February, 1989
May, 1988
January, 1988
May, 1987
Strong
16
18
17
14
14
10
11
11
11
15
16
13
11
13
15
13
12
11
Not strong
13=29%
13=31%
12=29%
13=27%
13=27%
14=24%
14=25%
14=25%
19=30%
15=30%
15=31%
16=29%
17=28%
15=28%
16=31%
15=28%
15=27%
14=25%
IF ANSWERED 2 IN PARTY, ASK:
PARTYSTR Do you consider yourself a STRONG Democrat, or NOT a strong Democrat?
Late March, 2005
December, 2004
July, 2004
August, 2003
September, 2000
Late September, 1999
August, 1999
November, 1997
October, 1995
April, 1995
October, 1994
Strong
18
19
20
15
19
15
15
14
14
14
18
Not strong
14=32%
15=34%
13=33%
16=31%
15=34%
16=31%
18=33%
18=32%
16=30%
15=29%
14=32%
112
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
PARTYSTR CONTINUED...
July, 1994
June, 1992
May, 1990
February, 1989
May, 1988
January, 1988
May, 1987
Strong
15
14
16
17
19
19
18
Not strong
18=33%
18=32%
17=33%
21=38%
19=38%
20=39%
19=37%
IF ANSWERED 3, 4, 5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK:
PARTYLN As of today do you lean more to the Republican Party or more to the Democratic Party?
Late March, 2005
December, 2004
August, 2003
August, 2002
September, 2000
Late September, 1999
August, 1999
Republican
13
14
12
12
11
14
15
Democrat
17
12
16
13
13
15
15
Refused
to lean
9=39%
9=35%
14=42%
13=38%
15=39%
16=45%
12=42%
ASK REPUBLICANS AND REPUBLICAN LEANERS ONLY (PARTY=1 OR PARTYLN=1):
Q.24R How good a job is the Republican Party doing these days in standing up for its traditional positions on such
things as reducing the size of government, cutting taxes and promoting conservative social values — would
you say the Party is doing an excellent job, a good job, only a fair job or a poor job?
BASED ON REPUBLICANS/REPUBLICAN LEANERS [N=525]:
8
43
36
9
4
100
Excellent
Good
Only fair
Poor
Don’t know/Refused
July 2004
12
49
33
4
2
100
Aug 2003
6
51
37
5
1
100
May 2002
6
49
38
5
2
100
May 2001
10
50
32
5
3
100
(RVs)
Sept 2000
6
43
44
5
2
100
ASK DEMOCRATS AND DEMOCRATIC LEANERS ONLY (PARTY=2 OR PARTYLN=2):
Q.24D How good a job is the Democratic Party doing these days in standing up for its traditional positions on such
things as protecting the interests of minorities, helping the poor and needy, and representing working
people — would you say the Party is doing an excellent job, a good job, only a fair job or a poor job?
BASED ON DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS [N=481]:
3
30
51
14
2
100
Excellent
Good
Only fair
Poor
Don’t know/Refused
July 2004
6
43
40
8
3
100
Aug 2003
5
33
51
9
2
100
113
May 2002
5
39
43
10
3
100
May 2001
8
39
40
7
6
100
(RVs)
Sept 2000
11
52
32
4
1
100
1. The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue
IF ANSWERED 1,2 IN PARTY, ASK [N=674]:
Q.25
Has there ever been a time when you have thought of yourself as an INDEPENDENT?
50
49
1
100
Yes
No
Don’t know/Refused
ROTATE Q.26 AND Q.27
IF ANSWERED 1, 3, 4, 5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK [N=784]:
Q.26
Has there ever been a time when you have thought of yourself as a DEMOCRAT?
46
52
2
100
Yes
No
Don’t know/Refused
IF ANSWERED 2, 3, 4, 5 OR 9 IN PARTY, ASK [N=722]:
Q.27
Has there ever been a time when you have thought of yourself as a REPUBLICAN?
31
67
2
100
Yes
No
Don’t know/Refused
ASK ALL:
Q.28
And one last short list… [INSERT ITEM; RANDOMIZE WITH ITEM d ALWAYS LAST]
a.
Do you display the flag at your home, in your office, or on your car?
Mid-July, 2003
August, 2002
Yes
64
69
75
No
36
29
25
DK/Ref
*=100
2=100
*=100
b.
Do you smoke cigarettes on a regular basis?
August, 2002
August, 1999
18
23
24
82
77
76
*=100
*=100
*=100
c.
Do you have a friend, colleague or family member who has served
in the military effort in Iraq over the past two years?
49
51
*=100
d.
Do you have a friend, colleague, or family member who is gay?
Mid-October, 2004
Mid-July, 2003
August, 2002
August, 1999
46
46
45
45
39
54
52
52
53
60
*=100
2=100
3=100
2=100
1=100
Q.29
Do you consider the United States a Christian nation, or not?
71
26
3
100
March 2002
67
25
8
100
Yes
No
Don't know/Refused
114
June 1996
60
34
6
100
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live Is How You Vote
This 2005 survey of voting trends was prepared for the Pew Research Center by Rhodes
Cook, who publishes a newsletter on voting trends and is co-author of America Votes, a biennial
compilation of American election statistics published by Congressional Quarterly.
Section Two Errata:
P. 117 — Text, last line — should be 3,153 counties (rather than 3,155).
P. 120 — Table, “GOP Territorial Advantage by States, Districts, Counties”
• Counties Won, 1960 line — should be Reps. 1,856, Dems. 1,202, Others 71 (rather than Reps. 1,867, Dems. 1,208, Others 54).
• Counties Won, 2004 line — should be Reps. 2,569, Dems. 584 (rather than Reps. 2,571, Dems. 584).
• Note: There should be 3,153 counties in 2004 (rather than 3,155).
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
I. Overview
More so now than at any time in
modern history, partisan voting
patterns in this country line up by
where people live. Electoral
politics, like real estate, has
increasingly become a game of
location, location and location.
Some have dubbed this
phenomenon the “big sort.”1 It is
most apparent in those famous redvs.-blue Electoral College maps
from the 2000 and 2004 elections
that divide the nation into crisply
delineated Republican and
Democratic sectors.
But this growing link between
geography and partisanship is not
limited to states and regions.
Increasingly, it now extends all the
way down to the county and
congressional district levels.
In 2004, a presidential race that
was very close nationally (just 2.4
percentage points separated the
winner from the loser) was not
especially competitive in most of the
nation’s states and counties. In 40 of
the 50 states, the winner had a margin
of at least 5 percentage points, and in
31 states the winning margin was at
least 10 percentage points.
At the county level, the partisan
sorting was even more dramatic.
Nearly 60% of the nation’s 3,155
2004 Presidential Candidates’ Victory Margins,
by State
■ Kerry
Utah
Wyoming
Idaho
Nebraska
Oklahoma
North Dakota
Alabama
Alaska
Kansas
Texas
South Dakota
Indiana
Montana
Kentucky
Mississippi
South Carolina
Georgia
Louisiana
Tennessee
West Virginia
North Carolina
Arizona
Arkansas
Virginia
Missouri
Florida
Colorado
Nevada
Ohio
New Mexico
Iowa
Wisconsin
New Hampshire
Pennsylvania
Michigan
Minnesota
Oregon
New Jersey
Washington
Delaware
Hawaii
Maine
Connecticut
California
Illinois
Maryland
New York
Vermont
Rhode Island
Massachusetts
25
30%
18
20
21
7
7
8
9
9
10
10
10
13
20%
10%
■ Bush
0.4
1
3
3
3
4
3
2
0.8
0.7
0%
5
5
8
7
27
26
26
25
23
21
21
21
20
20
17
17
15
14
13
12
10
10
10%
20%
33
31
30%
40
38
40%
46
50%
Note: Kerry won the District of Columbia by an 80% margin.
Source: Unless otherwise noted, the primary sources for charts and tables in this
chapter are America at the Polls, 1920-1956 and 1960-2000, America Votes 24 (the
2000 edition), and Congressional Quarterly’s Guide to U.S. Elections, Fourth Edition,
Volume I. All were published by CQ Press. Election data for 2004 are based on
official returns obtained from state election boards.
1 Bill Bishop and Richard Florida coined this phrase in an article in the Austin American-Statesman in 2003.
117
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
counties went either to President Bush or to Senator Kerry by at least 60% of the vote. There
were many more of these “landslide counties” last year than in any other close election in
modern history.
The 2004 election also saw a
sharp decline in the number of
congressional districts that voted for
a presidential candidate of one party
and a congressional candidate of the
opposite party. Last year there were
just 59 such ticket-splitting districts
out of 435, down from 86 in 2000
and 148 when Bush’s father was
elected president in 1988.
In both 2000 and 2004,
Republicans dominated in the large,
L-shaped portion of the country that
includes the South, the Plains states
and the Mountain West (plus
Alaska). Democrats, meantime,
controlled the two coasts (the
Northeast and the Pacific West),
leaving only the industrial Midwest
from Ohio west to Iowa as a prime
regional battleground.
2004 Presidential Vote by Region
Industrial Midwest
Democratic
Coast
Democratic
Coast
Republican L
Percentage of
Electoral
Popular Vote
Vote
Bush (R) Kerry (D) Bush (R) Kerry (D)
Republican L
58%
42%
232
0
Democratic Coasts
44%
55%
5
194
Up for Grabs: Industrial Midwest 50%
50%
49
57
NATIONAL TOTAL
51%
48%
286
251*
* One Democratic elector in Minnesota cast his ballot for John Edwards rather
than Kerry.
Last year, as in 2000, Republicans ruled in rural America and Democrats dominated in the
cities, leaving only the suburbs to be hotly contested. But even there, a geographic pattern was
evident: Democrats posted a clear advantage in older, inner suburbs adjoining central cities,
while Republicans prevailed in fast-growing outlying areas, commonly known as exurbs.
Not only are these red and blue boundary lines sharp, they have proved to be durable. It is
rare in American electoral history for voting results in successive elections to be as similar as
those of 2000 and 2004. Just three states switched their presidential votes between the two
elections, the smallest number for any back-to-back pair of presidential contests since
1904/1908. The switchers—New Hampshire to the Democrats, Iowa and New Mexico to the
Republicans—had all been decided by fewer than 10,000 votes in 2000 and all three were
extremely close once again in 2004.
118
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Despite this continuity in voting patterns between 2000 and 2004, however, there was one
very big difference between those two elections: the turnout level.
2004 Turnout Rate Highest Since 1968
70%
63.4
60%
61.2
64.9
62.8 61.9
53.3
50%
56.6 55.1 54.7 56.0
53.1
58.1
51.5
54.2
60.7
40%
30%
20%
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1968
1964
1960
1956
1952
0%
1972*
10%
1948
Percentage of Eligible Voters who Voted
Voter interest in politics was
unusually high last year, as
passions evoked by the Sept. 11
attacks, the war in Iraq, and the
lingering vote-count controversy
from the photo-finish election
of 2000 sent record numbers of
people to the polls. The 122.3
million ballots cast in 2004
dwarfed the previous high set
four years earlier by nearly 17
million. The turnout rate,
measured as a percentage of the
eligible voting age population,
surpassed 60% for the first
time since 1968, the last
presidential election before the
national voting age was
lowered from 21 to 18.
* Voting age lowered to 18 in 1971
Note: Turnout is expressed as a percentage of the estimated number of eligible citizens of
voting age, a number that has risen steadily from 91.5 million in 1948 to 201.5 million in
2004. There are different ways to calculate the turnout rate; scholars increasingly prefer to
factor out the millions of noncitizens from the estimated voting age population (VAP). That
is the method used in this chart.
Sources: Congressional Quarterly’s Guide to U.S. Elections, Vol. I, for the presidential
vote; the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate for the estimated voting age
population of eligible citizens
A Turnout Record: 17 Million New Votes
Presidential elections with the greatest increases in turnout from four years earlier
Election
Increase from
Previous
Election
Election
Outcome
Winner
2004
1992
1952
2000
1920
1928
1960
1984
1936
16,898,696
12,830,205
12,757,092
9,118,755
8,233,168
7,710,928
6,811,311
6,137,621
5,896,004
Status quo
Change
Change
Change
Change
Status quo
Change
Status quo
Status quo
G.W. BUSH (R)* over Kerry (D)
CLINTON (D) over Bush (R)*
EISENHOWER (R) over Stevenson (D)
G.W. BUSH (R) over Gore (D)
HARDING (R) over Cox (D)
HOOVER (R) over Smith (D)
KENNEDY (D) over Nixon (R)
REAGAN (R)* over Mondale (D)
F.D. ROOSEVELT (D)* over Landon (R)
* Incumbent
119
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Yet unlike many of the high-turnout elections of the past, 2004 did not produce a vote for
change. Both parties succeeded in significantly expanding their totals from 2000, but a big new
vote for change was ultimately trumped by an even bigger new vote for the status quo. The
Democratic presidential vote increased by 8 million while the Republican vote increased by
more than 11 million.
Republicans once again covered the national electoral map in a sea of red. Bush carried 62%
of the states (31) and more than 80% of the nation’s counties. Fully nine out of every 10 of the
“landslide” counties voted for President Bush.
But Kerry nearly offset the GOP’s huge territorial advantage by rolling up landslide margins
of his own in many of the nation’s vote-rich urban counties. He won New York City by more
than 1.2 million votes, Cook County (which includes Chicago) by more than 840,000, Los
Angeles County by more than 830,000, and Philadelphia by more than 410,000 votes.
GOP Territorial Advantage by States, Districts, Counties
Democrats have won five of the 12 presidential elections since 1960, yet their presidential candidate has won
the most congressional districts in just four of those contests, the most states in just three of them, and the most
counties in only two.
Nominees
States Won
Reps. Dems. Others
Districts Won
Reps. Dems. Others
Counties Won
Reps. Dems. Others
Election Democrat
Republican
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
John Kennedy
Lyndon Johnson*
Hubert Humphrey
George McGovern
Jimmy Carter
Richard Nixon
Barry Goldwater
Richard Nixon
Richard Nixon*
Gerald Ford*
26
6
32
49
27
23
44
13
1
23
1
—
5
—
—
228
60
226
378
215
206
375
161
57
220
3
—
48
—
—
1,867 1,208
828 2,291
1,859 692
2,997 133
1,422 1,711
54
6
578
—
—
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
Jimmy Carter*
Walter Mondale
Michael Dukakis
Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton*
Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan*
George Bush
George Bush*
Bob Dole
44
49
40
18
19
6
1
10
32
31
—
—
—
—
—
309
371
297
179
155
126
64
138
256
280
—
—
—
—
—
2,229 904
2,807 332
2,319 820
1,609 1,525
1,619 1,533
—
—
—
17
—
2000
2004
Al Gore
John Kerry
George W. Bush
George W. Bush*
30
31
20
19
—
—
228
255
207
180
—
—
2,478
2,571
—
—
674
584
Notes: * indicates incumbent. Winners in bold type. Columns marked “Others” are for an unpledged Democratic elector slate in Mississippi in 1960 and in
Alabama in 1964, American Independent Party candidate George Wallace in 1968, and independent Ross Perot in 1992. Counties where the presidential vote
was a tie are not included in the aggregate totals. The District of Columbia is not included in any of the categories. Since 1960, the number of congressional
districts has stayed constant at 435 (after a brief increase to 437 in 1960). The number of counties has varied slightly from a low of 3,125 in 1964 to a high of
3,155 in 2004. The total number of counties includes independent cities in Virginia, election districts in Alaska, parishes in Louisiana, and cities such as
Baltimore, Md., and St. Louis, Mo, which are separate jurisdictions within their states.
120
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Basically, both parties mined their bases in 2004, winning by larger margins in those areas
where they were already strong—a pattern that has been playing out for decades.
In the closely fought 1960 election
between Democrat John F. Kennedy and
Republican Richard Nixon, there were
just 1,382 “landslide” counties (those in
which the winner received at least 60% of
the vote). In 1976, when Democrat Jimmy
Carter of Georgia edged Republican
Gerald Ford of Michigan, the number
dropped to 1,042, as Carter cut into the
GOP’s normal advantage in the South and
in rural counties elsewhere. In 2000, when
George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore
battled to a virtual tie in both the
nationwide popular and electoral votes,
there were 1,421 counties won with at
least 60% of the total vote. Last year, the
number rose to 1,832.
The Rising Percentage of Landslide Counties
in Close Elections
■ Dems.
■ Reps.
58. 1
60%
44. 2
16. 4
40%
27. 8
20%
5. 2
52. 9
45. 1
4. 7
40. 4
33. 2
23. 3
9. 9
0%
1960
1976
2000
2004
Note: Landslide counties are those carried by the presidential candidate of
one party or the other with at least 60% of the total vote. See previous table
for explanation of numbers and definitions of counties.
This “sortedness,” as noted above, is also evident in the sharp increase in congruency in
presidential and congressional voting. No longer does the South vote Republican for president
and Democratic for members of Congress, nor does the Northeast vote Democratic for president
while electing a large complement of
moderate Republicans to seats on
The Decline In Competition For U.S. House Seats
Capitol Hill.
One byproduct is a growing
partisan and ideological edge to the
way Congress does business. A
national legislative body that no
longer houses a significant number
of conservative Southern
Democrats or liberal Northeastern
Republicans has fewer moderating
influences, a weaker center and
greater difficulty coming to
bipartisan compromise.
Percent of Competitive House Races
30%
25.5
25%
22.5 21.6
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
13.1
13.1
10.8
10.8
7.4
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004
Note: Competitive races are defined as those won with less than 55% of the total vote.
121
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Another byproduct is a decline in electoral competition. It is particularly noticeable in the
U.S. House of Representatives, where the rise in safe, one-party districts comes not just from a
geographic sorting of voters but also from sophisticated computer programs that enable
lawmakers to bring more precision to the task of drawing congressional district boundaries that
favor one party or the other. In 2004, only 32 House candidates were elected with less than 55%
of the total vote, barely one third the number of marginal districts that existed as recently as 1996.
At the federal level, few incumbents of any kind have been seriously threatened in recent
years—only one sitting senator and just seven House members were defeated in the 2004
general election. And with the reelection of President Bush, the nation is set to have its first
back-to-back, two-term presidents since the early 19th century.
House, Senate Incumbent Reelection Rates Since 1960
House
Percentage Reelected
100%
80%
96.6
96.8
86.6
92.6
Senate
95.8
93.6
84.8
74.1
71.4
60%
98.3
95.4
89.6
90.7
64.0
94.0
88.3
85.2
97.8
90.5
82.1
97.8
96.2
79.3
55.2*
40%
20%
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
1968
1966
1964
1962
1960
0%
* In 1980, Republicans won control of the Senate for the first time in more than a quarter-century.
Source: Vital Statistics on Congress, 2001-2002 (AEI Press). CQ Weekly, Nov. 6, 2004, was basis for 2004.
For those looking for political competition, the nation’s governorships are about all that is left.
Governors—who deliver services such as schools, roads and health care—often find themselves
on the front lines of American politics in a way their counterparts in Congress are not. Term
limits in many state legislatures produce a constant turnover among the cadre of officeholders, so
there’s never a shortage of gubernatorial hopefuls. And like the president, many governors can
only serve two terms, which produces a high number of competitive open-seat races.
The fact that incumbency has become so powerful and competition so weak at the federal
level does not mean this will be the case indefinitely. To the contrary, the United States is a
mobile and fast-growing nation, with an ever-changing racial and demographic mix and a heavy
stream of new immigrants.
122
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Moreover, it’s not clear whether the infusion of new voters in 2004 represents the dawn of a
new age of political engagement or a one-time exception to the modern norm of low turnouts.
History offers little guidance; in the past, elections that have followed elections with big turnout
spikes sometimes continue the pattern and sometimes do not.
What Happens After Banner Turnouts?
Since women won the right to vote in national elections in 1920, there have been seven presidential contests in
which the number of votes cast has increased by at least 10% from the previous election.
Elections
First
Election
Next
Election
1920–1924
1928–1932
1936–1940
1952–1956
1960–1964
1992–1996
2004–2008
Up 44.4%
Up 26.5%
Up 14.8%
Up 26.1%
Up 11.0%
Up 14.0%
Up 16.0%
Up 8.7%
Up 8.0%
Up 9.3%
Up 0.8%
Up 2.6%
Down 7.8%
?
Comments
First and second elections in which women could vote
Democrats begin consolidating the large urban vote
War in Europe, FDR third-term bid keep turnout growing in ’40
Ike-Adlai rematch in ’56 fails to excite
LBJ landslide in ’64 never in doubt
Little drama in ’96 Clinton-Dole contest; Perot factor recedes
A similar caveat should be applied to the other “verities” of our current political
alignment—the locked-in Electoral College map, the crisp regional divide and the stark
urban/rural split. These are all as compelling now as they have been at any time in living
memory. But, politics being politics, that doesn’t mean they’ll stay that way.
123
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
II. Are We in an Age of Republican Dominance?
The Republicans won an
impressively broad but not especially
deep victory in 2004. They retained
the White House, expanded their
narrow majorities in the Senate and
House, and kept control of most of
the nation’s governorships. But the
election was no landslide, whether at
the presidential, congressional or
statehouse level, and it did not move
the nation beyond the closely
divided, highly partisan environment
that marks the current era of
American politics.
Election 2004: Where The Parties Stand
President
George W. Bush (R)
John Kerry (D)
Popular Vote
Electoral Vote*
62,040,610
59,028,439
286
251
Popular Vote Winner: Bush by 3,012,171
Electoral Vote Winner: Bush by 35
Before
Election
After
Election
Net Change
in Seats
51
48
1
55
44
1
Republicans
Gain 4
House of Representatives
Republicans
227
Democrats
205
Independent
1
Vacancies
2
232
202
1
—
Republicans
Gain 3**
28
22
No Change
Senate
Republicans
Democrats
Independent
Governors
Republicans
Democrats
28
22
Note: Figures based on official results for all 50 states and the District of Columbia
* One Democratic elector in Minnesota cast a vote for John Edwards rather than Kerry.
** Although the Republican House total increased to 232 from 227 as a result of the
election, the GOP is credited with a net gain of three because two of the seats it won were
vacancies it had previously held.
124
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In short, both the magnitude and
the significance of the GOP victory
last year are, at least to some degree,
in the eye of the beholder. Viewed
from one angle, Republicans scored
a decisive triumph that gave
President Bush the mandate he so
quickly claimed after the Nov. 2
balloting. Viewed from a different
perspective, the president’s victory
over Democrat John Kerry was tepid
by historic standards.
The Case For
Looking at the results from the
GOP vantage point, partisans have
good cause to lay claim to an
impressive victory. Their party
fashioned a clear message that
focused on the president’s decisive
leadership on national security and
raised doubts about whether Kerry
was a suitable alternative in a
dangerous time. The GOP buttressed
this message with a quietly effective
voter targeting operation that the
Democrats did not match.
The result: Republicans
strengthened their grip on both ends
of Pennsylvania Avenue in an
election that produced the nation’s
highest voter turnout ever.
Incumbents and Reelection Campaigns: How
Bush’s Victory Measures Up
Since the popular vote for president was first recorded
nationwide in 1824, roughly two out of three incumbents who
ran for another term have won.
Election
Share of
Popular
Vote
Won with at least 55%
Lyndon Johnson (D)*
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
Richard Nixon (R)
Ronald Reagan (R)
Dwight Eisenhower (R)
Theodore Roosevelt (R)*
Ulysses Grant (R)
Abraham Lincoln (R)
1964
1936
1972
1984
1956
1904
1872
1864
61.1%
60.8%
60.7%
58.8%
57.4%
56.4%
55.6%
55.1%
+11.4%
+ 3.4%
+17.3%
+ 8.1%
+ 2.3%
+ 4.7%
+ 2.9%
+15.2%
Won with less than 55%
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
Andrew Jackson (D)
Calvin Coolidge (R)*
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
William McKinley (R)
George W. Bush (R)
Harry Truman (D)*
Bill Clinton (D)
Woodrow Wilson (D)
1940
1832
1924
1944
1900
2004
1948
1996
1916
54.7%
54.2%
54.0%
53.4%
51.7%
50.7%
49.6%
49.2%
49.2%
-6.1%
-1.8%
-6.3%
-1.3%
+ 0.6%
+ 2.8%
-3.8%
+ 6.2%
+ 7.4%
Defeated
Grover Cleveland (D)
Gerald Ford (R)*
Martin Van Buren (D)
John Quincy Adams (NR)
Benjamin Harrison (R)
Jimmy Carter (D)
Herbert Hoover (R)
George Bush (R)
William Howard Taft (R)
1888
1976
1840
1828
1892
1980
1932
1992
1912
48.6%
48.0%
46.8%
43.6%
43.0%
41.0%
39.6%
37.4%
23.2%
-0.3%
-12.7%
-4.0%
+12.7%
-4.8%
-9.1%
-18.6%
-16.0%
-28.4%
President
Change from
Previous
Election
* Incumbents who were not elected to initial term. NR = National Republican
For the first time since 1988, a presidential candidate of either party captured a majority of
the popular vote; Bush took 51%.
For the first time since 1924, the GOP reelected a president and won control of both the
Senate and the House of Representatives.
125
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
For the first time ever, a presidential
candidate won more than 60 million votes, as
Bush easily surpassed the previous record of
nearly 54.5 million set by Ronald Reagan in
1984.
Was it a Mandate?
The 50-Million Vote Club
Bush won more popular votes last year than any
previous presidential candidate in history. But so
did Kerry.
And the incumbent prevailed in the face of
a record high turnout in terms of the number
of ballots cast. Throughout the 2004 campaign,
there had been a widespread belief that a big
turnout would benefit the challenger. But in
the end, it was Bush who benefited most from
the additional ballots.
Candidate
George W. Bush (R)*
John Kerry (D)
Ronald Reagan (R)*
Al Gore (D)
George W. Bush (R)
Election
Vote
Outcome
2004
2004
1984
2000
2000
62,040,610
59,028,439
54,455,075
50,992,335
50,455,156
Won
Lost
Won
Lost
Won
* Incumbent
While Kerry won 59 million votes, fully 8 million more than Democratic nominee Al Gore
received in 2000, Bush hiked his own total by nearly 11.6 million votes from four years
earlier—the largest jump in a president’s tally since Richard Nixon increased his total by more
than 15 million votes from 1968 to 1972.
In every state, Bush received more votes in
2004 than in 2000. So did Kerry when
compared with Gore in 2000, but in the vast
majority of states (38) there were more
additional ballots for Bush than for the
Democrat.
The increase in Bush’s vote from four years
earlier was not a regional phenomenon. It was
broad based, as his share of the vote went up
from 2000 in all but three states—North
Carolina, South Dakota and Vermont. In a
majority of states (29), Bush captured at least
50% of the vote.
There were some specific state or regional
issues that may have had a bearing on the
presidential vote, though not necessarily in the
way it was generally reported last year. For
example, many pundits argued during the
campaign that the fact that 11 states were
Gay Marriage Bans and the Bush Vote:
A Nonfactor?
Measures to ban same-sex marriage were on the
ballot in 11 states in 2004. The measure passed
handily in all 11. Bush carried nine of them, as he
had in 2000. The aggregate increase in his share of
the vote in these 11 states from 2000 to 2004 was 1
percentage point below his increase nationally.
Mississippi
Georgia
Oklahoma
Kentucky
Arkansas
North Dakota
Montana
Utah
Ohio
Michigan
Oregon
Vote to Ban
Gay Marriage
Bush
Vote
Change in
Bush Percentage
2000-2004
86%
76%
76%
75%
74%
73%
67%
66%
61%
59%
57%
60%
58%
66%
60%
54%
63%
59%
72%
51%
48% (lost)
47% (lost)
+2%
+3%
+5%
+3%
+3%
+2%
+1%
+5%
+1%
+2%
+1%
54%
+2%
51%
+3%
11-State Total
NATIONAL
126
N/A
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
holding votes on constitutional amendments to ban gay marriage would prove to be a boon to Bush
because it would disproportionately drive up turnout among religious conservatives in those states.
In fact, the overall turnout increase in those 11 states from 2000 to 2004 was only slightly greater
than the turnout increase nationally, and the increase in Bush’s vote percentage in those states from
2000 to 2004 was 1 percentage point below his increase nationwide (2 points rather than 3).
On the other hand, the
trauma of 9/11 appears to
have had a particular
resonance in three states
within a close radius of
ground zero—New York, New
Jersey and Connecticut. Bush
drew about 1 million more
votes last year in those three
states than he had received in
2000. The increase was not
enough for the president to
come close to carrying any of
the three; they are all stalwart
“blue states.” But Bush’s
improved performance in the
three states was much greater,
proportionately, than his
improved performance
nationally.
From 2000 To 2004: States Where Each Candidate
Gained Most
Bush posted the largest increases in his vote percentage over 2000 in a
disparate array of states from Hawaii, with its large military presence, to
the Democratic-oriented Northeast, including the three states most
intimately touched by the terrorist attacks of 9/11—New York, New
Jersey and Connecticut. Kerry pushed up the Democratic vote share
from 2000 in several states in New England, as well as a number of
Western states, many in the Republican-oriented Mountain West.
Bush’s Biggest Gains
Over His 2000 Tallies
Increase
(% points)
Rank State
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Kerry’s Biggest Gains
Over Gore’s 2000 Tallies
Hawaii
Rhode Island
Alabama
New Jersey
Tennessee
Connecticut
Oklahoma*
New York
Utah*
Massachusetts
7.8%
6.8%
6.0%
5.9%
5.7%
5.5%
5.3%
4.9%
4.7%
4.3%
Increase
(% points)
Rank
State
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Vermont
Alaska
Montana*
Colorado
Maine
Oregon*
New Hampshire
Minnesota
Idaho
Washington
8.3%
7.8%
5.2%
4.6%
4.5%
4.3%
3.4%
3.2%
2.7%
2.6%
* Gay marriage ban also on general election ballot
Note: The Democratic share of the presidential vote went up 4.0 percentage points from 2000 in the
District of Columbia, which would rank seventh highest on the Kerry list if the District were treated
as a state.
The Republican showing
in the 2004 election becomes
more impressive when one looks beyond the presidential race to the congressional balloting.
Since the election of 2000, GOP numbers in the Senate have swelled to 55 seats from 50, and in
the House to 232 seats from 221. The Republican Senate total after the election tied the party’s
highest number since the eve of the New Deal; the number of Republican House members was
the highest post-election total for the party since 1946.
The margins are not yet of a magnitude to support a case that there has been a Republican
realignment. But there is little doubt that the election of 2004 provided new evidence for those
who believe that the pendulum of American politics continues to swing steadily in the
Republicans’ direction since the “perfect tie” of 2000.
127
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
The Case Against
Yet the 2004 election can also be viewed in a way that points to a more hopeful scenario for
the Democrats.
Reelected Presidents and Their Electoral
Vote Margins
Bush’s margin of victory in the popular
vote—barely 3 million—was the smallest for
any reelected president since Harry Truman
scored a close, come-from-behind victory in
1948. And back then, fewer than half as many
votes were cast as in 2004.
President
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
Ronald Reagan (R)
Richard Nixon (R)
Lyndon Johnson (D)*
Dwight Eisenhower (R)
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
Calvin Coolidge (R)*
Bill Clinton (D)
Theodore Roosevelt (R)*
William McKinley (R)
Harry Truman (D)*
George W. Bush (R)
Woodrow Wilson (D)
Bush’s margin of victory in the electoral
vote—35—was the smallest for any reelected
president since Woodrow Wilson won by 23 in
1916. And other than Wilson’s, there has been
no other successful presidential reelection in
the Electoral College as narrow as Bush’s
since the founding of the Republic.
Election
1936
1984
1972
1964
1956
1940
1944
1924
1996
1904
1900
1948
2004
1916
Victory Margin
(in electoral votes)
515
512
503
434
384
367
333
246
220
196
137
114
35
23
* Incumbent was not elected to initial term.
Moreover, Bush’s popular vote margin of
victory in percentage terms—2.4%—was the
smallest for a reelected president in history.
Reelected Presidents and Their Popular
Vote Margins
The scope of Bush’s victory last year may
look impressive when compared with his father’s
1992 reelection defeat or “W’s” own win on a
split decision in 2000, when he won the election
by just five electoral votes while losing the
popular vote by more than a half million.
But it looks a lot less robust when
compared with the performance of recent
incumbents such as Lyndon Johnson, Richard
Nixon and Ronald Reagan, who parlayed their
popularity (and their opponents’ weaknesses)
into reelection landslides that exceeded 15
million votes. For that matter, Bush’s
predecessor, Bill Clinton, won a second term in
1996 by a margin of more than 8 million votes.
128
President
Calvin Coolidge (R)*
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
Richard Nixon (R)
Lyndon Johnson (D)*
Theodore Roosevelt (R)*
Ronald Reagan (R)
Andrew Jackson (D)
Dwight Eisenhower (R)
Ulysses Grant (R)
Abraham Lincoln (R)
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
Bill Clinton (D)
Franklin Roosevelt (D)
William McKinley (R)
Harry Truman (D)*
Woodrow Wilson (D)
George W. Bush (R)
Election
Victory Margin
(in popular votes)
1924
1936
1972
1964
1904
1984
1832
1956
1872
1864
1940
1996
1944
1900
1948
1916
2004
25.2%
24.3%
23.2%
22.6%
18.8%
18.2%
16.8%
15.4%
11.8%
10.2%
9.9%
8.5%
7.5%
6.2%
4.5%
3.1%
2.4%
* Incumbent was not elected to initial term.
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Indeed, it could be argued that Bush’s triumph in 2004 was less a rousing nationwide vote of
approval than a more limited triumph based largely in one region, the South.
It was the same story at the
congressional level. Republicans came out
of the 2004 election with a 22-to-4 edge in
Southern Senate seats, and a 91-to-51
advantage in Southern House seats. Without
the South, not only would Kerry be in the
White House but Democrats would control
both chambers of Congress. Put another
way, if Democrats have deep problems in
rural America and in the South,
Republicans have concerns almost as
troublesome in the large metropolitan areas
of the Northeast, Midwest and the West.
The Republican Base Shifts to the South…
Average GOP Electoral
Votes per Election
The president swept the 13 states of the
South (the 11 states of the old Confederacy
plus Kentucky and Oklahoma) by nearly 6
million votes, but was beaten by Kerry in
the rest of the country by nearly 3 million.
In electoral votes, it was 168-to-0 for Bush
inside the South, 251-to-118 for Kerry
outside the South.
■ South*
350
300
250
150
100
50
0
10
318
230
203
200
■ Non-South
64
122
138
83
1856-1948 1952-1968 1972-1988 1992-2004
* 11 states of the old Confederacy plus Kentucky and Oklahoma
…Which Now Anchors GOP Control of
White House and Congress
South
Rest of Country
2004 Presidential Vote
Popular Vote
Bush by 5,851,698
Electoral Vote
Bush, 168-0
Kerry by 2,839,527
Kerry, 251-118-1*
2005 Congressional makeup
Senate
R, 22-4
House
R, 91-51
D, 40-33-1 Ind.
D, 151-141-1 Ind.
* One Democratic elector in Minnesota voted for John Edwards.
Clearly, the Democrats are not the
woebegone force they were at the presidential level in the 1970s and 1980s. In those two
decades they not only lost four of five presidential elections, but in three of them fell below 50
electoral votes and barely reached 100 in another.
By contrast, the Democrats have won at least 250 electoral votes of the 270 needed to take
the White House in each of the last four elections. In the process, they have won with regularity
big electoral vote prizes such as California, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois and
Michigan. And in many of these megastates, the vote has not even been close.
In every presidential election since 1992, the Democrats have carried California by at least
1.2 million votes, New York by at least 1 million, and Illinois by at least 500,000 votes. A part
of the vast Republican presidential terrain in the eras of Nixon and Reagan, these vote-rich
states have now become cornerstones of the Democratic presidential coalition.
129
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Presidential Elections Since 1960
Election
1960
1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
Candidates
KENNEDY (D) - Nixon (R)
JOHNSON (D)* - Goldwater (R)
NIXON (R) - Humphrey (D) - Wallace (AI)
NIXON (R)* - McGovern (D)
CARTER (D) - Ford (R)*
REAGAN (R) - Carter (D)* - Anderson (I)
REAGAN (R)* - Mondale (D)
BUSH (R) - Dukakis (D)
CLINTON (D) - Bush (R)* - Perot (I)
CLINTON (D)* - Dole (R) - Perot (Ref.)
G.W. BUSH (R) - Gore (D)
2004
G.W. BUSH (R)* - Kerry (D)
Turnout
68,838,219
70,644,592
73,211,875
77,718,554
81,555,889
86,515,221
92,652,842
91,594,809
104,425,014
96,277,872
105,396,627
POPULAR VOTE
% of Total Vote
Reps. Dems. Others
50%
50%
1%
39%
61%
0%
43%
43% 14%
61%
38%
2%
48%
50%
2%
51%
41%
8%
59%
41%
1%
53%
46%
1%
37%
43% 20%
41%
49% 10%
48%
48%
4%
122,295,323 51% 48%
1%
ELECTORAL VOTE
Plurality
(in votes)
118,574 D
15,951,378 D
510,314 R
17,999,528 R
1,682,970 D
8,420,270 R
16,877,890 R
7,077,023 R
5,805,444 D
8,203,602 D
537,179 D
Reps. Dems. Others
219
303
15
52
486
—
301
191
46
520
17
1
240
297
1
489
49
—
525
13
—
426
111
1
168
370
—
159
379
—
271
266
1
3,012,171 R
286
251
1
Note: Winners are listed first and in capital letters. An incumbent is indicated with an asterisk (*). Independent or third-party candidates who received at least
5% of the popular vote are included, and designations are as follows: “AI”, American Independent; “I”, Independent; “Ref.”, Reform. Because of rounding,
percentages do not always add to 100.
And in all three states, Republicans have problems at the congressional level as well.
Democrats came out of the 2004 election holding all six Senate seats and 25 more House seats
in these states than the Republicans.
Indeed, in the 2004 Senate races, the GOP barely managed a blip on the radar screen in any
of the three states. Democrats Barbara Boxer in California, Barack Obama in Illinois and
Charles Schumer in New York all won by more than 2 million votes—in each case, rolling up a
record margin of victory for a contested Senate race in their state.
There is no disputing that the election of 2004 was a Republican triumph. But by historical
standards, it was a tenuous one, notable less for the depth of the victory than for the deeplyetched lines that separated the Democratic and Republican parts of the country.
130
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
III. A Sharply Divided Map: The Battle of the Bases
One way to look at the national political map is as a tale of two sectors, much different in
geographic size but roughly equal in electoral muscle.
One is a Republican-oriented L-shaped sector that includes the South, the Plains states and
the Mountain West (plus Alaska). Expansive in land mass, it includes the heart of rural America
and the bulk of the fast-growing Sun Belt. The L takes in 26 states with 232 electoral votes (up
nine from 2000).
The Democratic-oriented sector is bicoastal, combining the Northeast and the Pacific West
(including Hawaii). More urban than the L, it encompasses 16 states with 199 electoral votes
(down four from 2000).
The only part of the country that doesn’t fit into either sector is the industrial Midwest. With
eight states and 107 electoral votes (down five from 2000), it is the one region that is
competitive these days in presidential voting.
This geographic alignment has been in the making for several decades. From 1968 through
1988, Republicans won the White House five of six times—scoring landslide victories (at least
40 states and 400 electoral votes) with Nixon in 1972, Reagan in 1980 and 1984, and George
Bush in 1988. Republicans not only dominated the L during this period but also picked up many
states in the Democrats’ domain. The magnitude of GOP presidential victories in the 1970s and
1980s spawned talk of a Republican “lock” on the Electoral College.
Four Eras in Presidential Voting, 1932-2004
From the eve of the Civil War until the start of the Depression, Republicans dominated presidential voting and
the Democrats elected only two presidents, Grover Cleveland and Woodrow Wilson. Since then, there have
been four different eras. One was strongly Democratic, another strongly Republican. The other two have been
transitional, with neither party dominant. That includes the present, in which the nation is divided into two
nearly equal parts: the Republican L and the Democratic strongholds on both coasts.
Electoral Eras
Democratic New Deal (1932-48)
Postwar Transitional (1952-64)
Republican Lock (1968-88)
Era of the L (1992-2004)
Elections Won
Reps. Dems.
0
2
5
2
5
2
1
2
Popular Vote for Era
Reps.
Dems.
Others
43%
50%
53%
45%
Note: Because of rounding, percentages do not always add to 100.
131
55%
50%
43%
47%
2%
1%
4%
8%
Average Electoral Vote
Per Election
Reps.
Dems. Others
87
293
417
221
436
238
113
317
8
4
8
1
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
But in the 1990s, Democrat Bill Clinton reversed the equation, just as Jimmy Carter had in
1976. Both Southerners, they had enough crossover appeal to make inroads into the Republican
L, with Carter winning throughout the South and Clinton carrying much of the border South and
parts of the Mountain West.
For many years, the disparity in voting patterns between the two sectors had been limited to
presidential elections, since Democrats dominated congressional voting all across the country.
That changed, however, in 1994, when a Republican tidal wave that swept the GOP into control
on Capitol Hill came rolling out of the L. Now the regions vote roughly the same way for
Congress as for president.
Democratic Cities vs. Republican Countryside
When historians look back at this period, it is likely they will view the elections of 2000 and
2004 as a matched set. If anything, both parties last fall dug deeper into their bases of support
than ever before and tied up some of the loose ends from four years earlier.
In 2000, Bush won all but one state (New Mexico) in the Republican L. In 2004, he captured
New Mexico and swept all 232 electoral votes at stake within the GOP sector.
In 2000, Al Gore won all but two states (New Hampshire and West Virginia) in the
Democrats’ bicoastal base. In 2004, Kerry picked off New Hampshire, producing a nearly
unanimous 194-to-5 electoral vote advantage in the Democratic part of the map.
That left the race to be settled in the array of Midwestern battleground states, where, after all
the effort and all the money that was spent, only Iowa switched parties.
Although the final outcome produced an electoral map that was little changed from 2000,
Republicans beefed up their totals in rural America and the fast-growing exurbs. Democrats
responded by pumping up already hefty majorities in a number of large urban centers and by
tightening their grip on many once-Republican suburban counties across the Frost Belt.
Bush’s dominance in rural America is evident in the nationwide tally of counties won. He
carried more than 2,500 counties, a larger number than any presidential candidate had won since
1960 with the exception of two landslide Republican winners—Nixon in 1972, and Reagan in
1984. In 42 states, Bush won more counties than Kerry—usually many, many more.
Typical was Ohio, the prime battleground of the 2004 presidential campaign. Bush won the
state by a narrow 51%-to-49% margin, almost an exact reflection of the nationwide result. But
he carried 72 of Ohio’s 88 counties, most of them with more than 60% of the vote.
132
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Two of Bush’s “landslide” counties in Ohio were Delaware and Warren, exurban counties
outside Columbus and Cincinnati, respectively, that were among the fastest-growing counties in
the country between 2000 and 2004 (Delaware County ranked No. 11, with 30% population
growth; Warren grew 19%). The inflated Republican numbers in these and other exurban
counties around the state, combined with the GOP’s rural strength, was enough to offset the
Democrats’ strong showing in most of Ohio’s leading urban centers.
The 25 Fastest-Growing Counties: A Republican Building Block
Most of the 25 counties that grew fastest between 2000 and 2004 are in the Sun Belt, and most are exurbs—
bustling new bedroom communities that lie beyond a dense inner ring of suburbs. All could be found in the
GOP column in 2004 (and all but two in 2000). While these fast-growing counties offer comparatively small
numbers of votes in comparison with the nation’s most populous counties, they are a growing counterweight in
many states to Democratic urban majorities.
Estimated
Pop. Gain,
2000-04
2004
Population
Estimate
Victory Margins in
Presidential Elections
2004
2000
Rank
County (Nearby City)
1
2
3
4
5
Loudoun Co., Va. (Washington, D.C.)
Flagler Co., Fla. (Jacksonville)
Douglas Co., Colo. (Denver)
Rockwall Co., Texas (Dallas)
Forsyth Co., Ga. (Atlanta)
41.0%
38.5%
35.4%
35.2%
34.0%
239,156
69,005
237,963
58,260
131,865
13,111
1,055
40,990
14,800
38,066
R
R
R
R
R
11,515
1,284
28,931
10,024
21,075
R
D
R
R
R
6
7
8
9
10
Henry Co., Ga. (Atlanta)
Kendall Co., Ill. (Chicago)
Newton Co., Ga. (Atlanta)
Lincoln Co., S.D. (Sioux Falls)
Paulding Co., Ga. (Atlanta)
33.6%
33.0%
31.5%
30.2%
29.7%
159,506
72,548
81,524
31,437
105,936
21,663
7,279
7,156
5,458
21,423
R
R
R
R
R
13,844
5,244
4,424
2,702
10,138
R
R
R
R
R
11
12
13
14
15
Delaware Co., Ohio (Columbus)
Scott Co., Minn. (Minneapolis)
Collin Co., Texas (Dallas)
Osceola Co., Fla. (Orlando)
Williamson Co., Texas (Austin)
29.6%
28.3%
27.7%
27.3%
27.2%
142,503
114,794
627,938
219,544
317,938
26,095
12,097
105,500
4,484
40,167
R
R
R
R
R
19,505
6,451
85,295
1,969
38,450
R
R
R
D
R
16
17
18
19
20
Hamilton Co., Ind. (Indianapolis)
Spencer Co., Ky. (Louisville)
Lyon Co., Nev. (Reno)
Fort Bend Co., Texas (Houston)
Stafford Co., Va. (Washington, D.C.)
26.8%
26.0%
25.3%
24.9%
24.2%
231,760
14,822
43,230
442,620
114,781
51,499
2,846
5,499
24,903
11,292
R
R
R
R
R
38,370
1,596
3,315
25,998
8,135
R
R
R
R
R
21
22
23
24
25
Union Co., N.C. (Charlotte)
Lake Co., Fla. (Orlando)
St. Johns Co., Fla. (Jacksonville)
Spotsylvania Co., Va. (Washington, D.C.)
Placer Co., Calif. (Sacramento)
24.1%
23.9%
23.8%
23.7%
23.6%
153,652
260,788
152,473
111,850
307,004
24,846
26,168
32,797
11,904
40,396
R
R
R
R
R
16,986
13,439
20,044
7,284
27,386
R
R
R
R
R
Aggregate Total
4,442,897
Note: Republican victory margins are noted in bold.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau for estimates of 2004 population and population growth from April 2000 to July 2004
133
591,494 R
416,898 R
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
The Democratic advantage in cities was substantial not just in Ohio but across the country.
Of the 25 most populous counties in the country, Kerry took 16, and his aggregate margin in all
25 was 4 million votes. In vote-rich Los Angeles County alone, the Democratic margin
exceeded 830,000 votes, larger than the Kerry or Bush margin of victory in all but three states.
The 25 Most Populous Counties: A Democratic Building Block
In both 2000 and 2004, Democrats carried 16 of the nation’s 25 most populous counties, winning the group by
about 4 million votes each year. Populous GOP strongholds are concentrated in the Sun Belt, primarily in
Southern California and Bush’s home state of Texas. The major Democratic population centers are more widely
dispersed, ranging from the populous boroughs of New York City on the Atlantic coast to Los Angeles County
on the Pacific.
2004 Population
Estimate
(in millions)
Victory Margins in
Presidential Elections
2004
2000
Rank
County (City)
1
2
3
4
5
Los Angeles Co., Calif.
Cook Co. (Chicago), Ill.
Harris Co. (Houston), Texas
Maricopa Co. (Phoenix), Ariz.
Orange Co., Calif.
9.94
5.33
3.64
3.50
2.99
831,511
842,319
108,858
174,606
222,593
D
D
R
R
R
838,575
746,005
110,892
93,284
149,480
D
D
R
R
R
6
7
8
9
10
San Diego Co., Calif.
Kings Co. (Brooklyn), N.Y.
Miami-Dade Co., Fla.
Dallas Co., Texas
Queens Co., N.Y.
2.93
2.48
2.36
2.29
2.24
69,596
347,824
48,637
9,605
267,881
R
D
D
R
D
38,070
400,863
39,275
47,037
294,915
R
D
D
R
D
11
12
13
14
15
Wayne Co. (Detroit), Mich.
San Bernardino Co., Calif.
Riverside Co., Calif.
King Co. (Seattle), Wash.
Broward Co., Fla.
2.02
1.92
1.87
1.78
1.75
342,297
61,517
93,667
279,335
209,199
D
R
R
D
D
307,393
7,008
29,379
203,529
209,801
D
R
R
D
D
16
17
18
19
20
Santa Clara Co. (San Jose), Calif.
Clark Co. (Las Vegas), Nev.
Tarrant Co. (Fort Worth), Texas
New York Co. (Manhattan), N.Y.
Bexar Co. (San Antonio), Texas
1.69
1.65
1.59
1.56
1.49
177,006
26,430
142,176
419,360
49,722
D
D
R
D
R
143,740
25,168
113,163
369,379
30,455
D
D
R
D
R
21
22
23
24
25
Suffolk Co., N.Y.
Philadelphia Co., Pa.
Middlesex Co., Mass.
Alameda Co. (Oakland), Calif.
Bronx Co., N.Y.
1.48
1.47
1.46
1.46
1.37
5,960
412,106
203,047
291,674
227,293
D
D
D
D
D
65,314
348,223
205,129
223,610
229,556
D
D
D
D
D
Aggregate Total
62.26
Note: Republican victory margins are in bold.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau for 2004 population estimates
134
3,999,539 D
4,031,707 D
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In a number of states, the Democrats were successful in making their urban margins pay big
dividends. Kerry won only 15 of 102 counties in Illinois, but with a 655,000-vote lead in Chicago,
he easily carried the state. Kerry won only 15 of 83 counties in Michigan, but with an edge of
nearly 300,000 votes in Detroit, he was able to put Michigan into the Democratic column. And
Kerry won only 13 of 67 counties in Pennsylvania, but with an advantage of more than 410,000
votes in Philadelphia, he was able to carry this Northeastern battleground state as well.
For Democrats, Sometimes The Cities Are Enough
Kerry won seven key states on the strength of the votes he drew in each state’s biggest city or most populous
urban-oriented county.
State (City/County)
Dem. Margin
in Major City (or County)
ILL. – Chicago
MICH. – Detroit
MINN. – Hennepin Co. (Minneapolis)
ORE. – Multnomah Co. (Portland)
PA. – Philadelphia
WASH. – King Co. (Seattle)
WIS. – Milwaukee Co.
655,258
285,915
128,708
161,146
412,106
279,335
117,366
135
Dem. Deficit in
Rest of State
Dem. Statewide
Margin
-109,654
-120,478
-30,389
-84,814
-267,858
-74,028
-105,982
545,604
165,437
98,319
76,332
144,248
205,307
11,384
Statewide
Presidential Vote
5,274,322
4,839,252
2,828,387
1,836,782
5,769,590
2,859,084
2,997,007
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Yet it was not the cities alone that enabled
the Democrats to carry big electoral vote
prizes such as these. Another factor was the
party’s ability in recent years to cut its losses
in suburban counties and in some places even
turn them into an asset.
When Suburbs Come in Different
Shades: The Northern Virginia Example
The red/blue divide is not merely a regional
phenomenon. It can sometimes hit closer to home,
within suburbs. The populous suburbs of Northern
Virginia outside Washington, D.C., are a good
example.
Nowhere was that more evident than in
closely contested Pennsylvania. When
Republicans last carried the Keystone State in
1988, George Bush swept the three populous
suburban counties adjacent to Philadelphia
(Bucks, Delaware and Montgomery) by a
combined margin of more than 150,000 votes.
In 2004, Kerry swept those three suburban
counties by nearly 100,000 votes and won the
state by slightly less than 150,000.
The inner suburbs, Arlington County and Alexandria,
are the most urban in nature, with large minority
populations and increasingly Democratic voting habits.
In the middle is Fairfax County. It straddles the
Washington Beltway and with about 1 million
residents is the most populous jurisdiction in
Virginia. As its population has expanded and grown
more racially diverse, Fairfax County has gradually
come loose from its Republican moorings. In 2004, it
voted Democratic for the first time in a presidential
election since 1964.
In the end, Democrats needed the vote in
the Philadelphia suburbs, plus an expanded
margin in Philadelphia itself—more than
60,000 votes greater than four years earlier—to
compensate for the party’s declining fortunes in
more blue-collar western Pennsylvania.
Beyond Fairfax County are the outer suburbs. The
neighborhoods are newer, the population is
mushrooming, and the political terrain is more
Republican. The two most populous of these
counties—Loudoun and Prince William—are among
the fastest-growing in the nation.
There, in the old coal and steel country,
where ethnic lodges, union halls, and loyalty
to the Democratic Party once went hand in
hand, the party of FDR and JFK no longer
commands the allegiance it once did. In 2004,
Cambria County (Johnstown) went to the
Republican Party for the first time since
Nixon’s landslide victory over George
McGovern in 1972. So did Greene and
Lawrence counties along Pennsylvania’s
western border. And in Allegheny County
(Pittsburgh), the heart of the region, the Kerry
margin last November was down roughly
10,000 votes from Kennedy’s victory margin
in the county almost a half-century earlier.2
The first wave of growth in the outer suburbs tended
to swell the Republican advantage; George H.W.
Bush swept both Loudoun and Prince William
counties in 1988 with two thirds of the vote. But
GOP presidential candidates have drawn nowhere
near that large a share of the vote since then. With
continued growth and increased diversity over the
years since, Democrats have been able to chip into
the Republican advantage in the outer suburbs.
2004 Presidential Vote in
Northern Virginia
Turnout
Bush
Kerry
94,650
61,515
31%
32%
68%
67%
Middle Suburbs
Fairfax Co.
461,379
46%
53%
Outer Suburbs
Prince William Co.
Loudoun Co.
132,063
108,430
53%
56%
46%
44%
Inner Suburbs
Arlington Co.
Alexandria
2 Appendix I offers a sample of voting trends in counties across the country.
136
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
What Is Changing: Blue-Collar Bastions, White-Collar Suburbs
The hemorrhaging of the Democratic blue-collar vote is not limited to Pennsylvania. Once
reliably Democratic West Virginia, with its historic ties to coal mining, has voted Republican in
the last two presidential elections. Bush carried it in 2004 by the decisive margin of 13
percentage points even though its governor, both of its senators and two of its three
representatives in the U.S. House are Democrats.
Meanwhile, St. Joseph County, Ind., which includes the industrial city of South Bend (and is
home to the nation’s most prominent Catholic university, Notre Dame), switched to the
Republicans in 2004.
So did Macomb County outside Detroit. This was the quintessential home of blue-collar
Reagan Democrats in the 1980s, but had returned to the Democratic fold more recently. Last
November, however, it voted Republican in a presidential election for the first time since 1992.
Even Genesee County, Mich., which includes anti-Bush filmmaker Michael Moore’s
economically beleaguered home town of Flint, saw an increase in Bush’s vote share from 35% in
2000 to 39% last fall.
Losing in rural America and winning big in the cities is not a new phenomenon for the
Democrats. In 1960, Kennedy carried only nine counties in Illinois, 13 in Michigan, and 15 in
Pennsylvania. Yet like Kerry, he swept all three states. But Kennedy also drew strong support
from blue-collar towns such as Johnstown and South Bend. It remains to be seen whether the
recent Democratic upswing in established white-collar suburbs can offset the party’s continued
decline in blue-collar factory towns and its lagging fortunes in fast-growing exurbs.
More broadly, the Democrats will face a long-term electoral challenge if the shift in the
population toward the Sun Belt continues at its current pace. One leading demographer, William
Frey of the Brookings Institution, has estimated that if present trends continue, a Republican
running for president after the reapportionment of 2030 would win 17 additional Electoral
College votes just by carrying the same states that Bush carried in 2004. Needless to say,
however, such projections are highly speculative. Not only are the politics subject to change over
time, so too are the demographics.
137
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
IV. Fewer Split Tickets, Less Competition
The 2004 balloting solidified two recent trends in American politics: the transformation of
the once-solid Democratic South into the anchor of the modern Republican Party, and the
decline in highly competitive congressional races to a comparative handful.
Yet in another important respect, the election was a throwback to the presidential contests of
100 years ago, when there was little talk of divided government and there was a high degree of
correlation in partisan voting for president and Congress.
In the first part of the 20th century, only a handful of districts did not vote for the same
party for president and the House of Representatives, whether that was Democratic or
Republican. But by mid-century, as the electorate became more mobile, more independent, and
less wedded to one party or the other, there was a growing tendency of voters to split their
tickets. In the election of 1952—the last one before 2000 in which Republicans won both ends
of Pennsylvania Avenue—nearly 20% of the districts (84 of 435) voted for one party for
president and the other for the House.
Over the last half of the 20th century, split-ticket voting became even more entrenched. In each of
the presidential elections from 1956 through 1996, at least 23% of the nation’s congressional districts
(or at least 100 per election) voted for a presidential candidate of one party and a House candidate of
the other. Occasionally, the number of split-ticket districts surpassed 40%. The result, more often than
not, was divided government, with a Republican president and a Democratic Congress through much
of the 1950s, ’70s and ’80s, and a
Democratic president and a Republican
The Rise and Fall of the Split Ticket
Congress in the mid and late 1990s.
35%
29.9
30%
25%
20%
21.3
19.3
15%
33.3
26.1
32.0
28.5
32.8
34.0
23.0
25.5
19.8
13.6
10% 11.2
5%
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972
1968
1964
1960
1956
1952
0%
1948
Put another way, the two parties
came out of the 2004 election with the
national political map of presidential
and congressional voting in greater
alignment than at any point in a
generation.
40%
1944
But in 2000, the number of splitticket districts fell back to 20%, and in
2004 it plummeted to 14%, with just
59 such districts.
Percentage of Districts
with Split Results1
The Decline of the Split Ticket
45.0
44.1
45%
1 A split congressional district is one that supported one party for president and
the other party for the House. Percentages take into account that the number
of districts varied, totaling 435 for all years except 1944 (367), 1948 (422) and
1960 (437), when the size of the House was temporarily expanded in the wake
of Alaska and Hawaii statehood.
Sources: Vital Statistics on American Politics, 2003-2004 (CQ Press), for
elections from 1944 through 2000; Polidata for 2004 election
138
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
The 2004 election also produced an unusual congruency in the nationwide vote tally for
president and the House of Representatives, with the size of the GOP majorities almost
identical. Through much of the latter half of the 20th century, Republicans had dominated the
balloting for president, while Democrats won big for Congress. In 2000, the popular vote for
president leaned slightly Democratic, while the aggregate House vote leaned slightly
Republican—each by roughly a half million votes.
But in 2004, Republicans enjoyed a similar advantage in both the presidential and
congressional balloting. Bush defeated Kerry in the presidential vote by 2.4 percentage points—
50.7% to 48.3%—and took 53% of the electoral vote. Republicans outpolled the Democrats in
the nationwide House vote by 2.6 percentage points—50.1% to 47.5%—and took 53% of all
House seats.
The Decline in Competition
With the increase in straight-ticket voting has come a decline in competition for
congressional seats. In 2004, 78% of incumbent House members coasted to reelection, drawing
an opponent from the other party but winning with at least 55% of the vote. Another 15% were
elected without any major-party opposition at all. Just 7% won with less than 55% of the total
vote—generally regarded as the benchmark for a competitive race.
All told, only seven House members were beaten in the 2004 general election—four of
them in Texas, the site of a controversial Republican-orchestrated redistricting plan that was
put in place before the election. The two congressional casualties in the 2004 primaries were
also in Texas.
The lack of change in the House in 2004 was no anomaly. It marked the fifth straight
election in which at least 94% of House incumbents seeking another term were able to win
reelection, the longest stretch at least since World War II.
Meanwhile, 2004 was also a banner year for Senate incumbents. As recently as 2000, a half
dozen sitting senators were defeated for reelection. But in 2004, the number of casualties was
down to one, Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota.
For those who prefer elections to be more competitive, the place to look in recent years has
been the nation’s governorships. Of the 36 governorships up in 2002, 20 switched party hands.
So did all four at stake in 2003, and four of the 11 contested in 2004.
139
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
V. Sky-High Turnout in 2004: A Closer Look
If nothing else, the election of 2004 resoundingly proved one thing: People vote when they
feel they have something to vote for—or against.
Roughly one out of every six voters last fall was either a new one or a past voter who had
skipped the opportunity to cast a ballot in the Bush-Gore contest four years earlier. In short, the
number of ballots cast and counted for president in 2004 was 16% greater than in 2000.
To be sure, there have been other elections over the last century that produced an even
greater percentage increase in turnout. In 1920, the first election held after the passage of a
constitutional amendment that gave women the right to vote, turnout was 44% higher than it had
been four years earlier. Turnout in 1928, when Democrat Al Smith became the first Roman
Catholic to win a major party nomination, was more than 25% larger than it had been in the
previous election. So too was the turnout in 1952, when Republican Dwight Eisenhower brought
down the curtain on the Democrats’ 20-year control of the White House.
Largest Percentage Increases in Election Turnouts
Election
Increase from
Previous
Type of
Election
Election
1920
1928
Up 44.4%
Up 26.5%
Change
Status quo
1952
Up 26.1%
Change
1916
2004
1896
1936
1992
1960
1908
Up 23.2%
Up 16.0%
Up 15.2%
Up 14.8%
Up 14.0%
Up 11.0%
Up 10.1%
Status quo
Status quo
Change
Status quo
Change
Change
Status quo
Factors in Increase
Flood of new voters as franchise is extended to women for first time
Strong religious overtones as Democrat Al Smith becomes first Roman Catholic to
win major party nomination
Time for a change: Ike’s victory ends 20 years of Democratic White
House control
Wilson narrowly reelected as nation debates entry into World War I
Bush leadership in age of terrorists spurs high-stakes battle
First McKinley-Bryan contest puts stamp on a new Republican era
FDR landslide affirms New Deal and new Democratic majority
Perot’s independent candidacy produces lively three-way race
Kennedy-Nixon contest features first televised debates
Taft ratified as Teddy Roosevelt’s choice as successor
Note: Table goes back to the McKinley-Bryan election of 1896. Before then, the number of states in the union was growing rapidly, skewing the percentage
increases.
140
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
But in two significant ways, the large turnout increase in 2004 was different from the
increases in previous high-turnout elections.
First, both parties in 2004 benefited from the expanded turnout. The increase was not one-sided,
as has been the case in many other elections with big turnout increases. President Bush picked up
nearly 11.6 million votes from his first run in 2000, but Kerry drew 8 million more than Gore.
Second, the election of 2004 did not produce a vote for change. The elections of 1920 and
1952 resulted in a switch in party control of the White House, as did those in 1960 and 1992—
the other two elections in the last half century in which the number of ballots cast was 10%
higher than it had been four years earlier.
As a result, the 2004 election gets lumped into a class with 1928 and 1936 as one of three
elections since the end of World War I in which the president’s party maintained control of the
White House in the face of a huge increase in voters. Last year’s campaign was similar to that of
1928 in its strong religious overtones—triggered in 1928 by Smith’s Catholicism and in 2004 by
an array of moral issues such as gay marriage and stem cell research. It was also similar to the
election of 1936 in that voters were called upon to make a judgment about assertive presidential
leadership in a time of national trauma—in 1936, Franklin Roosevelt’s response to the
Depression; in 2004, Bush’s response to 9/11.
Turnout Up Everywhere
In every state, the number of Democratic and Republican presidential votes cast last
November was greater than it had been in 2000. In more than two thirds of the states, Bush
picked up more additional votes than Kerry. In roughly one third of the states, Bush gained at
least twice as many additional votes. Most of the states where the turnout increase was heavily
Republican were in GOP territory, with seven in the South alone. But Bush also won twice as
many additional votes as Kerry in five states in the Democratic Northeast, a region where the
GOP was once quite competitive but had been losing ground for decades.
There were also a dozen states where the Democrats did the better job of finding new
voters—a disparate array clustered in upper New England, the upper Midwest, the Mountain
West and the Pacific Northwest. Kerry was able to expand Gore’s margin of victory from 2000
in six states scattered across the nation’s northern tier: Maine, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont,
Washington and Wisconsin (plus the District of Columbia). In five other states, Kerry lost but
reduced the Democratic deficit from 2000. Four of the states were in the Mountain West
(Alaska, Colorado, Montana and Nevada); the other was Ohio. And in one state, New Hampshire,
Kerry was able to gain enough additional votes to shift the electoral votes from the Republican
to the Democratic column.
141
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In no small part, Kerry’s inroads in these states reflected the Democrats’ success at attracting
voters who had supported the third-party candidacy of Ralph Nader in 2000. As the Green Party
nominee that year, Nader had drawn at least 5% of the vote in most of those states. Nationally,
Democrats succeeded in making Nader a non-factor in 2004, as his vote collapsed from nearly 3
million in 2000 to less than 500,000 last November.
The five states that posted the highest rates of voter participation last November—
Minnesota, Maine, Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Oregon—all voted for Kerry. These states
all have a long tradition of high turnouts. On the other hand, 15 of the 16 states with the
lowest turnout rates among eligible citizens in 2004 voted for Bush. Most of those states are
in the South and Southwest.
The number of votes cast jumped 24% in the Mountain West, nearly 20% in the Plains states,
and 19% in the South—three regions that together comprise the Republican L. By contrast, the
turnout increase was more modest in the Democratic strongholds of the Pacific West and
Northeast, where it was up 14% and 12%, respectively, from 2000. In the nation’s prime
battleground, the industrial Midwest, the number of voters grew 15%, roughly the national rate.
Wind at the GOP’s Back
Republican turnout gains were due in no small part to an effective mobilization effort that in
the end drew kudos even from the Democrats. But the Republicans also had the wind at their
back in terms of lively ballot contests, increased ease of voting, and high population growth—all
skewed to states on the GOP side of the map.
In the eight states with highly competitive Senate contests, the number of votes cast was up
nearly 22% from 2000. All eight states were carried by Bush in 2004.
In the 11 states that set up polling locations to accommodate early voting, the number of
ballots cast jumped 21.5% from 2000. Ten of the states went for Bush last fall.
In the 15 states where there was an estimated population growth of at least 5% from April
2000 to July 2004, turnout grew 19%. Bush won 10 of these high-growth states.
In the 11 states with measures to ban gay marriage on the ballot, turnout was up 18%. Nine
of the states voted for Bush, although as noted earlier this issue was less of a factor than it was
first believed to be.
In the 24 states permitting no-excuse absentee voting, turnout was up 17.5%. Eighteen of the
states backed Bush.
142
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
Dissecting the 2004 Increase in Turnout
% Increase
in Vote
2000-04
Increase in Vote
by Party 2000-04
Republicans
Democrats
States Won
Bush Kerry
Ratio of Additional
Republican Votes to
Additional Democratic Votes
NATIONAL
16.0%
31
19
11,585,454
8,036,104
1.44
Red and Blue America
Red America (Bush states)
Blue America (Kerry states)
18.9%
13.2%
31
0
0
19
6,899,716
4,685,738
4,054,206
3,981,898
1.70
1.18
Parts of Country
Mountain West
Plains States
South
Industrial Midwest
Pacific West
Northeast
23.9%
19.5%
19.1%
15.0%
14.3%
12.3%
9
4
13
4
0
1
0
0
0
4
4
11
1,037,779
256,759
4,391,495
2,291,389
1,348,027
2,260,005
832,566
104,473
2,210,139
2,010,538
1,396,074
1,482,314
1.25
2.46
1.99
1.14
0.97
1.52
Miscellaneous Factors
Key Senate Races1
Battlegrounds2
High Population Growth3
Gay Marriage Ban4
Gubernatorial Races5
None of the Above6
21.6%
19.8%
19.3%
18.4%
15.9%
11.4%
8
6
10
9
7
5
0
5
5
2
4
9
2,206,407
3,512,738
5,144,955
2,338,627
1,402,512
2,719,803
1,419,197
3,155,408
3,959,183
1,633,732
996,604
2,016,046
1.55
1.11
1.30
1.43
1.41
1.35
Ease of Voting
Early Voting7
Mail-only Balloting (Oregon)
No-excuse Absentees8
Election-day Registration9
None of the Above10
21.5%
19.7%
17.5%
15.9%
14.4%
10
0
18
2
11
1
1
6
4
10
3,376,637
153,254
4,318,081
671,120
5,423,568
2,228,046
222,821
3,329,015
727,075
4,132,049
1.52
0.69
1.30
0.92
1.31
For an identification of the Bush and Kerry states, as well as those that comprise the Mountain West, Plains States, South, Industrial Midwest, Pacific West and
Northeast, see the state-by-state presidential election tables on Pages 158-9.
1 Key Senate races: Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota
2 Battlegrounds: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
3 High population growth: Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, Utah,
Virginia, Washington
4 Gay marriage bans: Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Utah
5 Gubernatorial races: Delaware, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia
6 States with none of the above factors spurring turnout: Alabama, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New
Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Wyoming (also D.C.)
7 States with early voting: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas
8 No-excuse absentees: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming
9 Election-day registration: Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Wyoming
10 States where no ease-of-voting factors apply: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia (also D.C.)
143
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
In the 11 states with gubernatorial races, turnout was up 16%. Seven of the states were won
by Bush.
More than Population Growth
Not surprisingly, there was a correlation between population growth and turnout increase.
Seven of the top 10 states in population growth from 2000 to 2004 were also among the top 10
in the rate of increase in the number of ballots cast.
But the correlation was hardly perfect. In South Dakota, there was a 23% jump in voter
turnout, triggered in large part by the high-profile challenge to Daschle. Even though South
Dakota was in the bottom third of the states in population growth from 2000 to 2004, it had the
sixth-largest turnout increase in the country last November.
In the prime battleground state of Ohio, nearly 20% more votes were cast in 2004 than four
years earlier, placing the Buckeye state 11th nationally in turnout increase although it ranked
48th in population growth from 2000 to 2004.
The attention lavished on battleground states such as Ohio tended to lift turnout in them. All
of the battlegrounds posted a turnout increase from 2000 above the national rate of 16% except
for a quartet in the Midwest—Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin.
But it is worth noting that in all 50 states, the rate of increase in the number of voters who
turned out to cast ballots in 2004 exceeded the rate of population growth. Put in national terms,
while the country grew by 4.3% from 2000 to 2004, the number of voters who turned out to cast
ballots increased by nearly four times that number.
144
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
VI. Tensions in the Political Landscape
Two competing trends are at play in modern American politics. On the one hand, voters have
been showing increased partisanship. Democratic margins have gone up in the cities, Republican
margins in the countryside; and both parties have strengthened their regional bases. In addition,
straight-ticket voting in recent years has produced a more congruent presidential-congressional
map than at any time since World War II.
Party Registration Trends:
The Rise of the Independents
■ Dems.
60%
Percentage of
Registered Voters
On the other hand, voters have
not been shy about showing their
disgruntlement with the two major
parties. In terms of voter
registration, there has been a steady
growth in the number of voters who
do not identify with either party,
with the number increasing from
16% in 1987 to 25% in 2004 in the
27 states where voters registered by
party throughout this period.
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
51
■ Reps.
48
44
34
33
16
■ Others
33
17
42
23
33
25
0%
Fall 1987 Summer 1992 Fall 2000
Fall 2004
There has also been, in the past
Note: Not all states register voters by party. The 27 that did throughout the period
decade, a tension between change and
1987 to 2004 were Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware,
Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
continuity. In the 1990s, voters found
Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North
Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, West Virginia and
all sorts of ways to shake up the status
Wyoming. D.C. also has party registration but is not included in the totals.
quo. Democrats won back-to-back
presidential elections for the first time
in 30 years; Republicans won both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years. And
independent and third-party candidates made a significant impact. Led by Ross Perot, they drew
20% of the vote in 1992 and 10% in 1996—the first back-to-back elections since the eve of the
Civil War in which the percentage of third-party presidential votes reached double digits.
Independent and third-party candidates did even better in some states, capturing governorships in
the 1990s in Alaska, Connecticut, Maine and Minnesota.
But since the turn of the new century, electoral politics have settled into a more stable pattern.
With the political environment growing more partisan and more polarized, both parties have dug
in and nurtured their bases. Both Democrats and Republicans viewed the 2004 election as a highstakes battle in a sober, post-9/11 world, a judgment with which most voters seemed to concur.
They saw little need for third parties or independent candidates; the two major parties sufficed.
145
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote
What does the future hold? Will voters continue to opt for the static landscape of the present,
with gains and losses measured incrementally as in trench warfare? Or will they opt for change,
as they did in the 1990s, making the present stability the real aberration? As always, the answers
are just one election away.
146
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
How The Counties Vote: A National Sampler of Democratic Strongholds
MAJOR URBAN CENTERS
Cities are the cornerstone of the Democratic coalition, and in 2004 many trended more Democratic than ever.
Across the Frost Belt and on the Pacific Coast, large urban counties provided Democrats with several statewide
margins of victory. In the South and Mountain West, Republicans managed to win some of the urban counties. The
list that follows is a geographically diverse sampling of urban centers across the country listed according to the
Democratic share of the total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
Frost Belt Urban Centers
Detroit, Mich.1
Washington, D.C.1
Baltimore, Md.1
Chicago, Ill.
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo.1
Boston, Mass.
New York City, N.Y.
Cuyahoga Co. (Cleveland), Ohio
Milwaukee Co., Wis.
Hennepin Co. (Minneapolis), Minn.
Allegheny Co. (Pittsburgh), Pa.
Erie Co. (Buffalo), N.Y.
Franklin Co. (Columbus), Ohio
Marion Co. (Indianapolis), Ind.
6%
9%
17%
18%
19%
19%
21%
24%
33%
37%
39%
42%
41%
45%
49%
94%
89%
82%
81%
80%
80%
77%
75%
67%
62%
59%
57%
56%
54%
51%
+1%
0%
+3%
+1%
+1%
-1%
+2%
+6%
-1%
0%
0%
+2%
+4%
-3%
-1%
0%
+4%
-1%
+1%
0%
+3%
+6%
-3%
+4%
+4%
+6%
+1%
0%
+6%
+3%
Detroit 82% African American–more D than D.C.
Highest Dem. presidential vote share ever in D.C.
64% African American
Dems. win here by more than 650,000 votes
Dem. margin exceeds 410,000 in ’04
51% African American
Dem. share up in Kerry’s home town
Reps. gain a bit in prime site of 9/11 attacks
Dem. margin grows by 60,000 from ’00
Critical to narrow Dem. wins in Wis. in ’00 and ’04
Dem. margin up nearly 50,000 from ’00
Dems. losing some ground in western Pa.
Reps. gain some ground in western N.Y.
Once Rep., trending Dem. of late
Switched to Dems. in ’04
Southern Urban Centers
Orleans Parish (New Orleans), La.1
Fulton Co. (Atlanta), Ga.
Hinds Co. (Jackson), Miss.1
Shelby Co. (Memphis), Tenn.
Pulaski Co. (Little Rock), Ark.
Davidson Co. (Nashville), Tenn.
Miami-Dade Co. (Miami), Fla.2
Mecklenburg Co (Charlotte), N.C.
Jefferson Co. (Louisville), Ky.
Orange Co. (Orlando), Fla.
Dallas Co., Texas
Jefferson Co. (Birmingham), Ala.
Harris Co (Houston), Texas
Bexar County (San Antonio), Texas2
Oklahoma Co. (Oklahoma City), Okla.
22%
40%
40%
42%
44%
45%
47%
48%
49%
50%
50%
54%
55%
55%
64%
77%
59%
59%
58%
55%
55%
53%
52%
50%
50%
49%
45%
45%
44%
36%
0%
0%
-3%
0%
0%
+4%
0%
-3%
+1%
+2%
-2%
+4%
+1%
+3%
+2%
+2%
+2%
+6%
+1%
+1%
-3%
0%
+3%
+1%
0%
+4%
-2%
+2%
-1%
-1%
67% African American–highest urban county
Atlanta not enough to help Dems. in Ga.
Trending Dem. as black population grows
Memphis, Nashville give a Tenn. beachhead
Clinton’s home base stays in Dem. column
Dems. lose some ground without Gore on ballot
57% Hispanic–tipped Dem. in recent years
Switched to Dems. in ’04
In Dem. column since ’92
A former Rep. stronghold, now even
Dems. gained some ground here in ’04
Last voted Dem. in 1952
Biggest city in W.’s home state
54% Hispanic–backed Clinton twice
Growing more Rep.
1 County or city with a black majority
2 County with a Hispanic majority
Note: This table and those that follow take an expansive view of counties to include election districts in Alaska, parishes in Louisiana, independent cities in Virginia,
and cities such as Baltimore, Md., and St. Louis, Mo., which are separate jurisdictions within their states.
147
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Western Urban Centers
San Francisco, Calif.
Alameda Co. (Oakland), Calif.
Multnomah Co. (Portland), Ore.
Denver, Colo.
King Co. (Seattle), Wash.
Los Angeles Co., Calif.
Pima Co. (Tucson), Ariz.
Clark Co. (Las Vegas), Nev.
Bernalillo Co. (Albuquerque), N.M.
Honolulu Co, Hawaii
San Diego Co., Calif.
Maricopa Co. (Phoenix), Ariz.
Salt Lake Co. (Salt Lake City), Utah
15%
23%
27%
29%
34%
36%
47%
47%
47%
48%
53%
57%
60%
83%
75%
72%
70%
65%
63%
53%
52%
52%
51%
46%
42%
38%
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
-1%
-1%
-1%
-2%
-1%
+3%
+3%
+2%
+1%
+9%
+3%
+4%
+4%
+8%
+6%
+8%
+8%
+5%
0%
+1%
0%
+3%
-3%
+1%
-1%
+3%
148
Comments
Have Reps. reached bottom?
Dem. trend in Bay Area continues
Dems. win by more than 160,000 votes in ’04
Dem. margin approaches 100,000 votes
Dem. margin almost 280,000 votes
Dem. margin exceeds 800,000 votes
Has voted Dem. since ’92
Cast nearly two thirds of all Nev. ballots in ’04
Casts one third of all N.M. ballots
Rep. upsurge here one reason Hawaii tighter in ’04
Reps. mounting a comeback in much of S. Calif.
Reps. gaining in fast-growing corner of Sun Belt
No Dem. trend here
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
COUNTIES WHERE MINORITIES PREDOMINATE
Minority groups—African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans—remain critical parts of the Democratic
coalition. President Bush, though, made modest inroads among all three groups in 2004, posting his most consistent
gains among Hispanics. No county is comprised totally of one racial or ethnic group, but the sampling below paints
a general picture of the voting proclivities of these three groups, with the counties listed according to the
Democratic share of the total vote in the 2004 election. Minority population figures are based on the 2000 Census,
which showed that no county in the country yet had an Asian majority.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
African-American Majority
Macon Co. (Tuskegee), Ala.
Jefferson Co., Miss.
Petersburg, Va.
Hancock Co., Ga.
Allendale Co., S.C.
Gadsden Co., Fla.
Phillips Co., Ark.
Bertie Co., N.C.
Washington Co. (Greenville), Miss.
East Carroll, La.
17%
18%
19%
23%
27%
30%
36%
38%
39%
40%
83%
81%
81%
77%
71%
70%
64%
62%
59%
58%
+4%
+1%
0%
+2%
-2%
-3%
+2%
+3%
-1%
+1%
-4%
0%
+2%
-2%
+1%
+4%
-1%
-3%
+2%
+1%
Hispanic Majority
Starr Co., Texas
Costilla Co., Colo.
Mora Co., N.M.
Rio Arriba Co., N.M.
Santa Cruz, Ariz.
Webb Co. (Laredo), Texas*
El Paso Co., Texas*
Imperial Co., Calif.
Doña Ana Co. (Las Cruces), N.M.*
26%
32%
33%
34%
40%
43%
43%
46%
48%
74%
67%
66%
65%
59%
57%
56%
52%
51%
+4% -3%
+2% +3%
+2%
0%
+5% -3%
+2%
0%
+1% -1%
+4% -2%
+3% -1%
+2%
0%
98% Hispanic–highest percentage in nation
68% Hispanic–highest in Colo.
82% Hispanic–highest outside Texas
73% Hispanic
81% Hispanic–highest in Ariz.
94% Hispanic–along Mexican border
78% Hispanic–highest for urban center its size
72% Hispanic–highest in Calif.
63% Hispanic–2nd most populous county in N.M.
Native American Majority
Shannon Co., S.D.
Menominee Co., Wis.
Sioux Co., N.D.
Apache Co., Ariz.
McKinley Co., N.M.
Big Horn Co., Mont.
Thurston Co., Neb.
San Juan Co., Utah
13%
17%
28%
35%
36%
47%
48%
60%
85%
83%
71%
65%
63%
51%
51%
39%
0% -1%
-1% +6%
+2% +1%
+4% -2%
+4% -1%
+7% -5%
-2% +6%
+3%
0%
94% Native American–highest percentage in nation
87% Native American–highest in Wis.
85% Native American–highest in N.D.
77% Native American–highest in Ariz.
75% Native American–highest in N.M.
60% Native American–site of legendary battle
52% Native American–highest in Neb.
56% Native American–highest in Utah
* Hispanic-majority county with significant urban centers
149
85% African American–2nd highest share in nation
87% African American–highest in nation
79% African American–highest in Va.
78% African American–highest in Ga.
71% African American–highest in S.C.
57% African American–highest in Fla.
59% African American–highest in Ark.
62% African American–highest in N.C.
65% African American–in heart of Delta
67% African American–ties for highest in La.
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
ACADEMIC INFLUENCE
Over the last generation, academic communities have anchored the most liberal part of the Democratic coalition,
particularly in places with a prestigious private college or a public university with a strong liberal arts emphasis.
Democrats scored double-digit percentage gains in 2004 in some of these communities as they effectively
consolidated the 2000 Nader vote that had exceeded 10% in many of them. Republicans tend to run better in
counties with state universities, many of which originated with an agricultural emphasis. The sampling of counties
below is arranged according to the Democratic share of the total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
Private Colleges
Cambridge, Mass. (Harvard, M.I.T.)
Northampton, Mass. (Smith)
Hanover, N.H. (Dartmouth)
Tompkins Co., N.Y. (Cornell)
Rice Co., Minn. (Carleton, St. Olaf)
13%
18%
22%
33%
45%
85%
80%
77%
64%
53%
0%
-1%
-8%
0%
+3%
+13%
+18%
+13%
+10%
+3%
Nader drew 14% in ’00–not a factor in ’04
Nader 19% last time
Most liberal town in N.H.
Not always Dem.–opposed FDR all 4 times he ran
Paul Wellstone taught at Carleton
Public Universities
Amherst, Mass. (U. of Massachusetts)1
Mansfield, Conn. (U. of Connecticut)
Charlottesville, Va. (U. of Virginia)
Durham, N.H. (U. of New Hampshire)
Boulder Co., Colo. (U. of Colorado)
Dane Co., Wis. (U. of Wisconsin)
Johnson Co., Iowa (U. of Iowa)
Washtenaw Co., Mich. (U. of Michigan)
Clarke Co., Ga. (U. of Georgia)
Lane Co., Ore. (U. of Oregon)
Douglas Co., Kan. (U. of Kansas)
Travis Co., Texas (U. of Texas)
Alachua Co., Fla. (U. of Florida)
Ulster Co., N.Y. (SUNY-New Paltz)
Monroe Co., Ind. (Indiana U.)
Missoula Co., Mont. (U. of Montana)
Champaign Co., Ill. (U. of Illinois)
Boone Co., Mo. (U. of Missouri)
Centre Co., Pa. (Penn State U.)
Whitman Co., Wash. (Washington State)
Albany Co., Wyo. (U. of Wyoming)
Oktibbeha Co., Miss. (Miss. State)
Lee Co., Ala. (Auburn)
Payne Co., Okla. (Oklahoma State)
Brazos Co., Texas (Texas A & M)
13%
25%
27%
29%
32%
33%
35%
36%
40%
40%
41%
42%
43%
43%
45%
46%
48%
50%
52%
52%
54%
56%
63%
66%
69%
84%
72%
72%
70%
66%
66%
64%
64%
58%
58%
57%
56%
56%
54%
53%
51%
50%
50%
48%
46%
43%
43%
36%
34%
30%
-1%
+1%
-4%
0%
-4%
0%
+1%
-1%
-1%
0%
-2%
-5%
+3%
0%
-2%
0%
+2%
+2%
-1%
-3%
-1%
+2%
+4%
+5%
-1%
+24%
+9%
+13%
+8%
+16%
+5%
+5%
+4%
+6%
+6%
+11%
+14%
+1%
+6%
+10%
+14%
+3%
+1%
+5%
+6%
+7%
0%
-2%
-3%
+3%
Nader drew 25% in ’00, less than 1% in ’04
Votes like other New England college towns
Liberal beachhead in the Old Dominion
Nearly as Dem. as Ivy League Hanover
Voted for Reagan in ’80 and ’84
Ike last Rep. to carry Dane Co.
Madison (Wis.) of the Plains?
Gerald Ford’s alma mater not very red
Trending left as state trends right
Last voted Rep. in 1980
One of lone Dem. beachheads in state
Bush’s home while governor; went to Dems. in ’04
Reps. not strong in this part of Fla.
Mayor performed same-sex marriages in ’04
Switched to Dems. in ’04
Switched to Dems. after giving Nader 15% in ’00
Rural surroundings temper academic vote
Switched to Reps. in ’04
Legendary Joe Paterno a friend of Bush family
Voted twice for Clinton but often Rep. otherwise
Nader drew 7% on write-ins in ’00
University anchors this Rep.-oriented county
Last voted Dem. in 1960
GOP loyalty matches Cleveland Co. (U. of Okla.)
A&M’s military heritage adds to Rep. proclivities
1 Also home of Amherst College and Hampshire College
150
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
LIBERAL RESORTS AND ARTISTS’ COLONIES
Liberal resorts and artists’ colonies vote much like academic communities. They tended to give Nader a
disproportionately large share of the vote in 2000, then consolidated behind Kerry in 2004 to produce Democratic
margins that were often much bigger than they had been four years earlier. The sampling of counties below is
arranged according to the Democratic share of the total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+3%
0%
Provincetown, Mass.
San Miguel Co. (Telluride), Colo.
Santa Fe Co., N.M.
Pitkin Co. (Aspen), Colo.
Mendocino Co., Calif.
Blaine Co. (Sun Valley), Idaho
Hood River Co., Ore.
Teton Co. (Jackson), Wyo.
Monroe Co. (Key West), Fla.
12%
27%
28%
30%
34%
40%
42%
45%
49%
87%
72%
71%
68%
64%
59%
57%
53%
50%
0%
-5%
0%
-3%
-2%
-5%
-2%
-7%
+2%
+7%
+23%
+6%
+15%
+15%
+12%
+9%
+14%
+1%
151
Comments
Reps. endangered species on tip of Cape Cod
Residents vote Dem. between trips down slopes
Nader took 7% in ’00
Nader pulled 13% in ’00
Nader drew 15% in ’00
Lone Idaho county Dems. carry these days
Windsurfers’ paradise in this part of Oregon
Switched in ’04–lone Wyo. county to vote Dem.
Last Rep. it backed was Bush Sr. in ’88
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
How The Counties Vote: A National Sampler of Republican Strongholds
Just as the cities are the basic building blocks for the Democrats, rural and small-town America are the starting point
for Republicans in fashioning presidential election victories. Republicans swept roughly 80% of the nation’s counties
in 2004, a total that is not particularly unusual since the GOP has won more counties than the Democrats in every
presidential election since 1980—usually many more. But the landslide majorities that Bush posted in 2004 in
hundreds of rural counties helped provide him with the votes to win a second term. “Mountain Republican” counties
are broken out into a separate category; in many cases they are historically Republican counties in the South that
were in the GOP column long before it was fashionable in their states to vote Republican. Following is a
geographically diverse sampling of rural counties listed in each category according to the Republican share of the
total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Rural Heartland
Madison Co., Idaho
Arthur Co., Neb.
Fulton Co., Pa.
Neshoba Co., Miss.
Huntington Co., Ind.
Cape Girardeau Co., Mo.
Winn Parish, La.
Green Lake Co., Wis.
Davison Co. (Mitchell), S.D.
Lee Co. (Dixon), Ill.
Marion Co., Ohio
Madison Co., Iowa
92%
90%
76%
75%
74%
69%
67%
64%
62%
59%
59%
57%
7%
9%
24%
25%
25%
31%
32%
35%
36%
40%
41%
42%
+ 3%
+ 4%
+ 5%
+ 4%
+ 5%
+ 3%
+ 4%
+ 4%
+ 3%
+ 3%
+ 4%
+ 4%
-2%
-1%
-4%
-3%
-3%
-1%
-3%
-1%
-3%
-1%
-1%
-2%
Mountain Republican (Appalachian and Ozark)
Jackson Co., Ky.
84% 15%
81% 19%
Grant Co., W.Va.
78% 22%
Winston Co., Ala.
74% 25%
Rockingham Co., Va.
73% 26%
Garrett Co., Md.
Mitchell Co., N.C.
73% 27%
72% 28%
Johnson Co., Tenn.
71% 28%
Fannin Co., Ga.
Benton Co., Ark.
68% 31%
0% + 1%
+ 2% -1%
+ 9% -7%
+ 2% + 1%
+ 2% -1%
-3% + 3%
+ 5% -4%
+ 6% -4%
+ 4% -2%
Comments
Becoming more Rep., if that’s possible
4th straight election Dems. fail to draw 10% of vote
Part of Pa.’s Republican ‘T’
Even national pols appear at county fair
Dan Quayle’s roots here
Megadittos–Rush Limbaugh from here
Huey Long’s home parish voting increasingly Rep.
Near Ripon, one of birthplaces of GOP
Home of the Corn Palace and George McGovern
Part of Midwest heartland where Reagan was raised
Home of Warren Harding
Trending back to Reps. after fling with Dems.
Gave Reps. their highest vote share in Ky. in ’04
Historically the top Rep. county in W.Va.
Only Ala. county to back Landon over FDR in ’36
Except for ’64, in GOP column since 1940
Posted top Rep. percentage in Md. in ’00 and ’04
Was top county in N.C. for Bush Sr. in ’88 and ’92
Even Gore lost by margin of 2-to-1 here in ’00
Only county in Ga. to vote against FDR all 4 times
Voted against Clinton in both ’92 and ’96
Special Places in Small-Town America (associated with recent presidential, vice-presidential nominees)
Midland Co., Texas
82% 18%
+ 2% -1%
Rep. stronghold even before W
Russell Co., Kan.
76% 23%
+ 6% -2%
Birthplace of Bob Dole
68% 31%
+ 3% -2%
Includes John Edwards’ birthplace of Seneca
Oconee Co., S.C.
67% 31%
+ 2%
0%
Cheneys from here
Natrona Co. (Casper), Wyo.
+ 3% -3%
Not so Dem. without Clinton on ballot
Hempstead Co. (Hope), Ark.
48% 51%
Gore family’s home base
Smith Co. (Carthage), Tenn.
48% 52% + 15% -15%
152
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
HIGH-GROWTH EXURBS
Republicans are the party of choice in the fast-growing exurbs, newer suburbs often separated by at least one
county from a central city. However, as these exurbs fill in and become more racially diverse, the initial Republican
advantage can be muted. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of exurban counties listed according to the
Republican share of the total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Shelby Co., Ala.
Rockwall Co., Texas
St. Tammany Parish, La.
Hamilton Co., Ind.
De Soto Co., Miss.
Warren Co., Ohio
Douglas Co., Colo.
Gwinnett Co., Ga.
Delaware Co., Ohio
Berkeley Co., W.V.
Sherburne Co., Minn.
McHenry Co., Ill.
Frederick Co., Md.
St. Charles Co., Mo.
Pike Co., Pa.
Dallas Co., Iowa
Pinal Co., Ariz.
Loudoun Co., Va.
Osceola Co., Fla.
80%
79%
75%
74%
72%
72%
67%
66%
66%
63%
61%
60%
60%
59%
58%
58%
57%
56%
53%
19%
21%
25%
25%
27%
28%
33%
34%
34%
36%
38%
39%
39%
41%
40%
42%
42%
44%
47%
+ 4%
+ 1%
+ 4%
0%
+ 1%
+ 2%
+ 2%
+ 2%
0%
+ 4%
+ 6%
+ 1%
+ 2%
+ 3%
+ 4%
+ 4%
+ 9%
0%
+ 5%
-2%
0%
-3%
+ 2%
0%
0%
+ 1%
+ 1%
+ 3%
-2%
-1%
+ 1%
0%
-1%
-2%
-3%
-5%
+ 3%
-4%
153
Comments
One of top Rep. counties in Ala.
35% pop. growth since ’00 (spillover from Dallas)
In Rep. column since ’72
Reps. won by more than 50,000 votes in ’04
Across the line from Memphis
Bush Sr. took 73% in ’88
35% pop. growth since ’00–3rd highest in nation
Pop. growth of nearly 20% since ’00
Reps. expand GOP votes from ’00 by nearly 50%
18% pop. growth since ’00 - highest in Northeast
Helped Jesse Ventura’s ’98 gov. run
Rep. trend has slowed–Bush Sr. won 70% in ’88
Last Dem. to win county was LBJ
Same here
17% pop. growth since ’00
22% pop. growth since ’00
Fastest-growing county in Ariz. since ’00
41% pop. growth since ’00–highest in nation
Overflow from Orlando; switched to Reps. in ’04
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
MILITARY/AEROSPACE INFLUENCE
Long before 9/11, the Iraq War and President Bush’s patriotic reelection campaign, most of the nation’s counties
strongly influenced by a military or aerospace presence were reliable sources of Republican votes. If anything,
GOP margins increased in many of these locales in 2004. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of
counties strongly influenced by a military/aerospace presence. They are listed according to the Republican share
of the total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
El Paso Co. (Colorado Springs), Colo.
Pennington Co. (Ellsworth AFB), S.D.
Escambia Co. (Pensacola), Fla.
Bell Co. (Fort Hood), Texas
Madison Co. (Huntsville), Ala.
Virginia Beach, Va.
Brevard Co. (Cape Canaveral), Fla.
Cumberland Co. (Fort Bragg), N.C.
Groton, Conn. (Naval Submarine Base)
67% 32%
67% 32%
65% 34%
65% 34%
59% 40%
59% 40%
58% 42%
52% 48%
44% 54%
+ 3%
-1%
+ 3%
0%
+ 4%
+ 3%
+ 5%
+ 2%
+ 4%
+ 1%
+ 1%
-1%
+ 1%
-2%
-1%
-3%
-2%
+ 1%
Comments
Reps. win big in evangelical, military stronghold
Anchors strongly Rep. western half of state
Borders Ala., votes like Deep South
A short drive from Crawford
Last voted Dem. in ’76
Dems. last carried in ’64
Hasn’t voted Dem. for president since ’76
Switched to Reps. in ’04
Votes its New England locale
COUNTIES WITH LARGE ELDERLY POPULATIONS
Republicans tend to run well in counties with large clusters of elderly voters (age 65 and up), whether living in Sun
Belt retirement communities or their homes in the rural heartland. Following is a sampling of counties with an
elderly population among the top 40 in the country (according to the 2000 Census), as measured as a percentage of
the county population. The counties are arranged according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004. The
national percentage of elderly voters is 12.4 percent.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Llano Co., Texas
McPherson Co., S.D.
McIntosh Co., N.D.
La Paz Co., Ariz.
Baxter Co., Ark.
Indian River Co., Fla.
Lancaster Co., Va.
Harding Co., N.M.
Charlotte Co., Fla.
Sarasota Co., Fla.
76%
75%
73%
63%
60%
60%
60%
59%
56%
54%
24%
23%
25%
37%
39%
39%
40%
40%
43%
45%
+ 3%
-1%
0%
+ 6%
+ 3%
+ 2%
-3%
-3%
+ 3%
+ 2%
-1%
+ 3%
+ 4%
-3%
-1%
-1%
+ 4%
+ 4%
-1%
0%
154
Comments
31% age 65 and up–one of highest in Sun Belt
30% age 65 and up–in national top 10
34% age 65 and up–highest outside Fla.
26% age 65 and up–highest in Ariz.
27% age 65 and up–highest in Ark.
29% age 65 and up–highest on Atlantic coast
On Chesapeake Bay–29% age 65 and up, tops in Va.
28% age 65 and up–highest in N.M.
35% age 65 and up–highest in country
Gulf Coast cornerstone of modern Fla. GOP
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
REPUBLICAN RESORTS
Many resort communities with a Democratic bias cater to skiers. But in some resorts geared to retirement, leisure
activities or both, Republicans tend to congregate. Following is a geographically diverse sampling of such counties
listed according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
Taney Co. (Branson), Mo.
Moore Co. (Pinehurst), N.C.
Beaufort Co. (Hilton Head), S.C.
Deschutes Co. (Bend), Ore.
Saratoga Co. (Saratoga Springs), N.Y.
Kennebunkport, Maine
70%
64%
60%
56%
53%
50%
29%
35%
39%
42%
46%
48%
+ 7% -5%
+ 1% -1%
+ 2% -1%
+ 1% + 4%
+ 4%
0%
-4% + 9%
Comments
0%
Las Vegas of the Ozarks
Dems. need more than a mulligan here
Last voted Dem. in ’76
Has roughly doubled in population since 1980
FDR struck out here in his 4 presidential runs
Bush family vacation home less Rep. in ’04
THIRD-PARTY HERITAGE
The two major independent or third-party candidacies of the last half century, those of George Wallace in 1968 and
Ross Perot in 1992, had almost opposite impacts on the electorate. Wallace’s Southern-based candidacy proved to
be a transition stop for many white Democrats on their way to the Republican Party. Perot’s independent candidacy
24 years later, however, does not appear to have had such a dramatic impact. Democrats have made some inroads in
Perot strongholds. But many of his strongest counties were Republican before Perot ran and returned to the GOP
after Perot left the scene. The following samplings of counties are arranged in two sets. Those in the first list were
carried by Perot in 1992; those in the second were dominated by Wallace in 1968. In each case, counties are listed
according to the Republican share of the total vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
48%
NATIONAL
51%
Perot Pockets
Wabaunsee Co., Kan.
Grayson Co., Texas
Storey Co., Nev.
Trinity Co., Calif.
Somerset Co., Maine
San Juan Co., Colo.
70% 28%
69% 30%
58% 40%
55% 43%
48% 50%
44% 52%
Wallace Country
Geneva Co., Ala.
George Co., Miss.
Holmes Co., Fla.
Livingston Parish, La.
Echols Co., Ga.
Hickman Co., Ky.
Cleveland Co., Ark.
79%
78%
77%
77%
76%
60%
58%
20%
22%
22%
22%
23%
40%
42%
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
+ 3%
+ 6% -2%
+ 5% -4%
+ 1% + 3%
-3% + 9%
+ 3% + 2%
-4% + 18%
+ 10%
+ 7%
+ 10%
+ 9%
+ 8%
+ 5%
+ 5%
155
Comments
0%
-9%
-6%
-8%
-8%
-7%
-5%
-3%
Perot’s ’92 win an interlude in Rep. dominance
One of a few Texas counties that Perot won in ’92
Lone Nev. county to vote for Perot in ’92
Only Calif. county to back Perot in ’92
In Dem. column since Perot carried in ’92
40% for Perot in ’92–switched to Dems. in ’04
92% for Wallace in ’68–tops in his home state
Wallace 91% in ’68–tops in Miss.
Wallace 87% in ’68–tops in Fla.
Wallace 81% in ’68–tops in La.
Wallace 83% in ’68–tops in Ga.
For Wallace in ’68, but for Clinton twice
71% for Wallace in ’68–tops in Ark.
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
How The Counties Vote: A Miscellaneous Sampler
MAJOR SUBURBAN COUNTIES
When Republicans dominated presidential voting in much of the 1970s and 1980s, their hegemony in the nation’s
suburbs was a key factor in their success. Yet while they still have the upper hand in much of Sun Belt suburbia, the
balance of power has shifted to the Democrats in many of the vote-rich suburban counties of the Frost Belt.
Following is a geographically diverse sampling of suburban counties across the country, listed according to the
Democratic share of the total vote in the Frost Belt and according to the Republican share in the Sun Belt.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Frost Belt Suburbs
Prince George’s Co., Md.
Montgomery Co., Md.
Westchester Co., N.Y.
Delaware Co., Pa.
Middlesex Co., N.J.
Montgomery Co., Pa.
St. Louis Co., Mo.
Baltimore Co., Md.
Bergen Co., N.J.
Nassau Co., N.Y.
Fairfield Co. Conn.
Bucks Co., Pa.
Suffolk Co., N.Y.
Oakland Co., Mich.
Macomb Co., Mich.
Lake Co., Ill.
DuPage Co., Ill
17%
33%
40%
42%
43%
44%
45%
47%
47%
47%
47%
48%
49%
49%
50%
51%
54%
82%
66%
58%
57%
56%
56%
54%
52%
52%
52%
51%
51%
50%
50%
49%
49%
45%
- 1%
- 1%
+ 3%
0%
+ 7%
0%
- 1%
+ 3%
+ 6%
+ 8%
+ 4%
+ 2%
+ 7%
+ 1%
+ 3%
+ 1%
- 1%
+ 3%
+ 4%
- 1%
+ 3%
- 4%
+ 2%
+ 3%
- 1%
- 3%
- 6%
- 1%
+ 1%
- 4%
+ 1%
- 1%
+ 1%
+ 3%
With changing racial mix, votes like adjacent D.C.
Used to be competitive; last Rep. win was ’84
Rep. suburb that slipped to Dems. during Clinton
A major Philly suburb that used to be solidly GOP
9/11 boosted Reps. throughout NYC area
Once the cornerstone of the Pa. GOP
Dems. gain beachhead in ’burbs
Dems. have won since ’92
Once a major component of GOP victories in N.J.
Long Island suburbs trending back GOP post-9/11
Was reliably Rep. until Clinton
Another Philly ’burb Reps. can no longer rely on
Bush Sr. won 61% here in ’88
Swung narrowly to Dems. of late
Quintessential home of Reagan Dems.; Rep. pickup
Becoming a swing county–Clinton carried in ’96
Still Rep. but tightening
Sun Belt Suburbs
Rankin Co., Miss.
Lexington Co., S.C.
Collin Co., Texas
Cobb Co., Ga.
Jefferson Parish, La.
Orange Co., Calif.
Riverside Co., Calif.
San Bernardino Co., Calif.
Jefferson Co., Colo.
Arapahoe Co., Colo.
Washington Co., Ore.
Fairfax Co., Va.
Contra Costa Co., Calif.
De Kalb Co., Ga.
79%
72%
71%
62%
62%
60%
58%
55%
52%
51%
46%
46%
37%
27%
20%
27%
28%
37%
38%
39%
41%
44%
47%
48%
52%
53%
62%
73%
- 1%
+ 2%
- 2%
+ 2%
+ 3%
+ 4%
+ 6%
+ 7%
+ 1%
0%
0%
- 3%
- 1%
0%
+ 1%
0%
+ 4%
0%
- 2%
- 1%
- 4%
- 4%
+ 4%
+ 4%
+ 4%
+ 6%
+ 4%
+ 2%
Just outside Jackson–turned Rep. in the ’60s
Just outside Columbia–GOP since ’60
Just outside Dallas–LBJ last Dem. it backed
Rep. county was Newt Gingrich’s base
Almost as populous now as nearby New Orleans
GOP reascendant
Voted for Clinton in ’92
Voted for Clinton in both ’92 and ’96
Dems. competitive of late
Same here
4th straight election in Dem. column
First time with Dems. since ’64
Backed Reagan in ’80s
Turning very Dem.; pop. more African American
156
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix I
THE OLD AND NEW ECONOMIES
Places with heavy industry used to be a cornerstone of the Democratic coalition. But those days are fading, in many
cases like the industries themselves. Democrats have been losing their grip in blue-collar strongholds. Some have
already tipped to the Republicans. Others are poised to do so. Democrats have done well of late, however, in
populous high-tech areas, such as California’s Silicon Valley and North Carolina’s Research Triangle. Following is a
geographically diverse sampling of counties in both categories, listed according to the Democratic share of the total
vote in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
Comments
NATIONAL
51%
48%
+ 3%
0%
Heavy Industry Heritage
Fall River, Mass.1
Lowell, Mass.1
Mahoning Co. (Youngstown), Ohio
Lewiston, Maine1
Genesee Co. (Flint), Mich.
Silver Bow Co. (Butte), Mont.
Rock Island Co., Ill.
Wapello Co. (Ottumwa), Iowa
Pueblo Co., Colo.
Beaver Co. (Aliquippa), Pa.
Jefferson Co. (Beaumont), Texas
Waterbury, Conn.1
St. Joseph Co. (South Bend), Ind.
Cambria Co. (Johnstown), Pa.
Calcasieu Parish (Lake Charles), La.
23%
36%
37%
37%
39%
40%
42%
44%
46%
48%
48%
49%
51%
51%
58%
76%
63%
63%
62%
60%
58%
57%
55%
53%
51%
51%
49%
49%
49%
41%
+ 4%
+ 8%
+ 1%
+ 3%
+ 4%
+ 2%
+ 4%
+ 3%
+ 4%
+ 4%
+ 2%
+ 10%
+ 2%
+ 4%
+ 6%
0%
- 2%
+ 2%
+ 1%
- 3%
+ 4%
- 1%
- 1%
- 1%
- 2%
- 1%
- 7%
0%
- 2%
- 5%
Bush makes blue-collar inroads in Kerry’s home state
Old New England mill town still in Dem. column
Eastern anchor of Ohio’s “Rust Belt”
Dems. last under 60% in ’92
Michael Moore country but less anti-Bush in ’04
Reagan couldn’t even win here
Reliably Dem. from Mondale on
Gave Dukakis 65% in ’88
Dems. steadily losing ground
Dems. losing edge in “Deer Hunter” country
Minority, union elements barely enough for Dems.
JFK made election-eve stop here in ’60
Switched to Reps in ’04–Notre Dame here
Switched to Reps. in ’04–Dukakis pulled 60%
Once Dem., voted for Reps. in last two elections
High-Tech Areas
Orange Co. (Research Triangle), N.C.
Santa Clara Co. (Silicon Valley), Calif.
Los Alamos Co., N.M.
Anderson Co. (Oak Ridge), Tenn.
32% 67%
35% 64%
52% 47%
58% 41%
- 4%
0%
- 3%
+ 7%
+ 4%
+ 3%
+ 6%
- 6%
Liberal beachhead becoming even more Dem.
Hasn’t backed a Rep. since Reagan
Not in Dem. column since ’64
Clinton won twice here but Gore lost in ’00
1 New England breaks down votes by city and town as well as county.
TEST MARKETS
Election after election, the vote is close in the fabled test markets of America. Stark County, Ohio, is included here
because it tends to be a bellwether county in a bellwether state, albeit not in 2004.
2004
Presidential Vote
Bush Kerry
48%
NATIONAL
51%
Peoria Co., Ill.
Montgomery Co. (Dayton), Ohio
Stark Co. (Canton), Ohio
50% 50%
49% 51%
49% 51%
Change,
2000-04
Reps. Dems.
+ 3%
+ 2% - 1%
+ 2% + 1%
0% + 4%
157
Comments
0%
Close, but Dems. carry 4 straight times
Same here
Lone Ohio county to switch to Dems. in ’04
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix II
State-By-State Presidential Winners Since 1960
Elections Won,
1960-2004
Reps. Dems.
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972
1968
1964
1960
7
5
R
R*
D
D
R
R
R
D
R
R
D
D
REPUBLICAN L
South
Alabama
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Louisiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
Oklahoma
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
9
6
9
7
8
7
9
9
11
10
8
8
11
2
5
3
4
4
4
1
3
1
2
4
4
1
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
D
R
D
D
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
D
R
D
D
D
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
D
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
W
W
R
W
R
W
W
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
D
D
R
D
R
R
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
R
D
U
D
R
D
R
D
R
Mountain West
Alaska
Arizona
Colorado
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
Utah
Wyoming
11
11
10
11
10
8
7
11
11
1
1
2
1
2
4
5
1
1
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
D
D
R
R
R
R
D
R
D
D
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
R
R
R
R
D
D
R
R
Plains States
Kansas
Nebraska
North Dakota
South Dakota
11
11
11
11
1
1
1
1
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
D
D
D
R
R
R
R
NATIONAL
158
2. The Electoral Map: Where You Live is How You Vote, Appendix II
Elections Won,
1960-2004
Reps. Dems.
DEMOCRATIC COASTS
Northeast
Connecticut
5
Delaware
5
District of Columbia
0
Maine
6
Maryland
3
Massachusetts
2
New Hampshire
8
New Jersey
6
New York
3
Pennsylvania
4
Rhode Island
2
Vermont
7
West Virginia
4
Pacific West
California
Hawaii
Oregon
Washington
7
2
6
5
PRIME BATTLEGROUND
Industrial Midwest
Illinois
6
Indiana
11
Iowa
7
Michigan
5
Minnesota
1
Missouri
7
Ohio
8
Wisconsin
5
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972
1968
1964
1960
7
7
11
6
9
10
4
6
9
8
10
5
8
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
R
D
R
R
D
R
R
D
R
D
R
D
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
D
R
D
D
R
D
D
R
R
D
D
D
R
D
R
R
D
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
D
D
D
D
R
R
D
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
—
R
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
R
D
5
10
6
7
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
D
D
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
R
R
6
1
5
7
11
5
4
7
D
R
R
D
D
R
R
D
D
R
D
D
D
R
R
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
R
D
R
D
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
D
D
D
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
D
D
R
R
R
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
R
R
D
D
D
R
R
* In 2000 George W. Bush won the electoral vote while Al Gore won the popular vote.
Notes: W = George Wallace, who won five states in 1968 as the candidate of the American Independent Party; U = Unpledged Electors, who prevailed in Mississippi
in 1960. D.C. was first awarded electoral votes in 1964.
159
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
This section is a condensed version of a report, “Hispanics and the 2004 Election:
Population, Electorate and Voters,” by Roberto Suro, Richard Fry and Jeffrey S. Passel of the
Pew Hispanic Center. The Center is dedicated to improving understanding of the diverse
Hispanic population in the United States and to chronicling Latinos’ growing impact on the
nation. It conducts nonpartisan research on Latino trends in demographics, economics,
education, immigration and identity, and its polls and nationwide surveys explore Latino
attitudes on public policy issues as well as their beliefs, values and experiences. A complete
copy of the report and copies of all other publications by the Center are available at
www.pewhispanic.org
Phone: 202.419.3600
Fax: 202.419.3608
www.pewhispanic.org
Director:
Roberto Suro
Associate Director for Research
Rakesh Kochhar
Senior Research Associates:
Richard Fry
Jeffrey S. Passel
Research Associate:
Sonya Tafoya
Project Specialist:
Dulce C. Benavides
Administrative Manager:
Mary Seaborn
Administrative Assistant:
Angela F. Luben
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
I. Overview
Between the elections of 2000 and 2004, Hispanics1 accounted for half of the population
growth in the United States but only one tenth of the increase in the total votes cast.
This difference between overall growth in population and growth at the ballot box is
primarily the result of the two demographic factors that distinguish Latinos from whites and
blacks in the electoral arena: A high percentage of Hispanics are too young to vote or are
ineligible because they are not citizens.
As a result, a population increase of 5.7 million Latinos between 2000 and 2004 yielded
only 2.1 million new eligible voters. In addition, Hispanic voter participation rates lag those of
whites or blacks, so that the number of Hispanic voters increased by just 1.4 million.
The combination of demographic factors and participation rates meant that just 18% of the
total Latino population (adults as well as children, citizens and non-citizens) went to the polls in
2004, compared with 51% of all whites and 39% of all blacks. This gap in size between the
Latino population and the Latino vote has been developing for decades and has widened
considerably in recent years.
Despite these factors, however, the Hispanic population has been growing at such a strong
rate that it still has led to an increase—albeit a small one—in the Hispanic share of the overall
electorate. In November 2004, Hispanics accounted for 6.0% of all votes cast, up from 5.5%
four years earlier. During the same period, the Hispanic share of the population rose from 12.8%
to 14.3%.
1 The terms “Hispanic” and “Latino” are used interchangeably. The terms “white” and “black” refer to non-Hispanics in those racial categories.
163
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
The Growing Divergence between the Hispanic
Population and Hispanic Voters, 1970-2004
Hispanic Voters
Total Hispanic Population
45
41.3
40
35
30
20
7.6
2004
Election
6.2
2000
3.1
4.9
1996
2.6
4.2
1992
2.1
1990
2.1
1988
1970
0
3.7
1984
5
9.1
1980
10
14.6
1976
15
35.3
22.4
25
1972
Millions
This section uses Census Bureau
data to analyze the relationship
between Hispanic population growth
and voting strength. In addition, it
addresses a lingering question about
the extent of Hispanic support for
President George W. Bush last year. An
analysis of 2004 exit poll data in
conjunction with census data suggests
that Bush’s share of the Hispanic vote
was probably closer to 40% than to the
44% widely reported last year by news
organizations that had relied on
national exit poll data.
Source: Hispanic Americans: A Statistical Sourcebook, Pew Hispanic Center
tabulations of 2004 November Current Population Survey, and decennial
censuses for 1970–2000.
The key findings are:
•
Between the 2000 and 2004 elections, the Hispanic population grew by 5.7 million,
accounting for half of the 11.5 million increase in the U.S. population. This growth
was fueled both by immigration and by high birth rates among Latinos already living
in this country.
•
Of those 5.7 million Hispanics added to the U.S. population between the last two
presidential elections, 1.7 million persons or 30% were younger than 18 and thus not
eligible to vote. Another 1.9 million or 33% were adults not eligible to vote because they
were not citizens.
•
As a result of these factors, only 39% of the Latino population was eligible to vote,
compared with 76% of whites and 65% of the black population (chart, next page).
•
Both the number of Latinos registered to vote (9.3 million) and the number of Latinos
who cast ballots (7.6 million) in November 2004 marked increases of political
participation over the 2000 election that were larger than those for any other ethnic or
racial group in percentage terms.
•
However, both registration and turnout rates for Latinos were lower than for whites or
blacks. As a result, only 47% of eligible Hispanics went to the polls compared with 67%
of whites and 60% of blacks. Differences in registration rates explain most of the gaps.
164
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
•
•
•
The combination of demographic
factors and participation rates
meant that only 18% of the Latino
population voted in 2004,
compared with 51% of whites and
39% of blacks.
In November 2004, Hispanics
accounted for 14.3% of the total
population but only 6.0% of the
votes cast. In the previous election,
Hispanics accounted for 12.8% of
the population and 5.5% of the
votes cast.
Eligible Voters as a Share of Total
Population for Major Racial/Ethnic Groups,
2004
■ Adult non-citizens
100%
80%
60%
40%
■ Under 18
27
22
76
34
■ Voting eligible
2
31
4
65
39
20%
0%
Hispanics
White
Black
The large number of Hispanic young
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 November Current
people will eventually add to the
Population Survey
Latino electorate as they reach
voting age. But, if immigration flows continue adding to the number of Latino females
of child-bearing years and Hispanic fertility rates and immigration flows persist at
current levels, even larger numbers of youths will be added each year to the population
not eligible to vote. And, if participation rates remain unchanged, the young people
added to the electorate will register and vote at relatively low levels.
Table 1. Political Participation by Hispanics and Total U.S. Population, 2004
Hispanic
All Persons
Total Population, regardless of age or citizenship status
41,300,000
289,362,000
Not Eligible to Vote–Total
Youths under 18
Adults without U.S. citizenship
25,212,000
14,171,000
11,041,000
92,357,000
73,668,000
18,689,000
Eligible Voters–U.S. citizens age 18 and above
16,088,000
197,005,000
Registered Voters–Adult U.S. citizens registered to vote
9,308,000
142,070,000
Reported Voters–Adult U.S. citizens who reported voting
7,587,000
125,736,000
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 November Current Population Survey. All figures rounded independently
165
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
•
There are significant demographic differences between the total Hispanic population and
the Hispanic electorate. The foreign-born account for 56% of the Latino adult population
but only 28% of 2004 Latino voters. As a result, 27% of Latino adults live in households
where only Spanish is spoken, compared with only 9% of Latino voters.
•
An analysis of census and exit poll data suggests that President Bush took 40% of the
Hispanic vote in 2004 rather than the 44% as originally reported from the major news
media exit poll.
•
Religion appears to be linked to President Bush’s improved showing among Hispanics in
2004 over 2000, when he took 34% of Latino votes. Hispanic Protestants made up a larger
share of the Latino vote last year (32% in 2004 compared with 25% in 2000), and 56% of
these voters supported the president in 2004, compared with 44% in 2000. The president’s
share of the Hispanic Catholic vote remained essentially unchanged between 2000 and 2004.
A Note on the Current Population Survey
This section relies primarily on a supplement of the Current Population Survey (CPS) that
is conducted every November of an election year by the U.S. Census Bureau. The November
supplements ask people whether they were registered to vote and whether they actually voted.
All surveys are subject to discrepancies due to margins of error and other factors. This is
true of the CPS, even though it is a very large survey regularly conducted of the American
public with an average monthly sample of about 140,000 individuals.
Historically, the November election year supplements of the CPS show a larger number
of persons voting than the actual count. This was the case again last year: The November
2004 CPS showed that 125.74 million persons reported voting in the 2004 national election
while the official count of votes in the Federal Register for the 2004 presidential contest was
122.28 million. The discrepancy is 3.5 million votes—about 3 percent of the official count.
The CPS supplement is taken after Election Day and relies on individuals’ self-reporting of
their voting behavior. According to the Census Bureau, the difference between the CPS
numbers and the official count results primarily from two factors: Some people report
having voted when they did not, and some ballots do not get counted for various reasons,
such as being marked improperly by a voter or being misread by a voting machine.
The CPS covers the civilian, non-institutional population resident in the country. It
excludes almost all active-duty military in the United States and abroad, as well as persons
in institutions, including nursing homes and correctional facilities.
166
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
II. Demographic Characteristics of the Hispanic Population and Electorate
The differences between the Hispanic population and the Hispanic electorate are more than
just a matter of size. Latinos who are eligible to vote and those who actually do vote have
distinctly different characteristics from the Latino population as a whole.
The most obvious difference involves nativity. Because so many Latino immigrants are not
eligible to vote, a far greater share of the Hispanic adult population (56%) is foreign-born than
is the case among those who reported voting in 2004 (28%).
Table 2. Characteristics of the Hispanic Adult Population by Voting Eligibility,
November 2004 CPS (percentages)
Eligible Voters
18 & over, non-citizen
All Hispanic Adults
Age
18 to 29
30 to 39
40 to 49
50 to 64
65
31
21
20
18
11
35
32
18
11
4
32
26
19
15
8
Sex
Male
Female
49
51
55
45
51
49
Nativity
Foreign born
Native born
25
75
100
0
56
44
Spanish only spoken in household?
No
Yes
89
11
50
50
73
27
Family income
Under $15,000
$15,000 to 29,999
$30,000 to 49,999
$50,000 to 74,999
$75,000 or more
17
22
26
19
16
24
33
27
10
7
20
27
26
15
12
Education
Less than 9th grade
9th to 12th grade
H.S. graduate or some college
Bachelor’s degree or more
13
16
59
13
39
20
35
7
23
17
49
10
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 November Current Population Survey
167
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
Differences in nativity bring with them differences in language use. Surveys show that virtually
all native-born Latinos speak English fluently while about a third are bilingual and almost none
speak only Spanish. Meanwhile, virtually all of the foreign-born speak Spanish, about a quarter are
bilingual and almost none speak only English.2 The Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey,
from which most of the data in this section are drawn, does not measure bilingualism, but it does
identify people who live in households where only Spanish is spoken. Fewer than 11% of eligible
voters and fewer than 9% of actual voters live in Spanish-only households, compared with 27% of
the entire Hispanic adult population and 50% of adult non-citizens.
Given that the growth of the immigrant population is fed by the arrival of young adults, it is
not surprising that the population as a whole is somewhat younger than the electorate. In the
entire adult population, 58% of Hispanics are younger than 40 compared with 52% of eligible
voters. Two thirds of adult non-citizen Hispanics are under 40.
Hispanic eligible voters are somewhat more affluent than nonvoters. For example, 34% earn
family incomes of more than $50,000 a year, compared with 27% of the Hispanic adult
population as a whole. And the electorate is better educated. Among eligible voters, just 28%
failed to complete high school, compared with 40% of the entire adult population.
2 Pew Hispanic Center & Kaiser Family Foundation. 2002. The 2002 National Survey of Latinos. Washington, D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center.
168
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
III. How Latinos Voted in 2004
Although the CPS does not ask respondents how they voted, it does shed some light on a
lingering question about how Hispanics voted in the 2004 presidential race and suggests that
Latino support for President Bush may have been slightly lower than initially reported.
The uncertainty over the partisan breakdown of the Latino vote last year stems from
questions about whether the Hispanic sample in the national exit poll was in fact representative
of the Hispanic vote. The National Election Pool (NEP) was conducted on behalf of a
consortium of news organizations using a well-established methodology that involves
interviewing voters at a sample of precincts chosen to be representative of all polling places
across the nation. The NEP national exit poll indicated that President Bush had taken 44% of the
Hispanic vote—a 10 percentage point increase over his share in 2000. This 44% figure was
widely reported by news organizations.
In this national poll, which was conducted at 250 precincts designed to be representative of
the nation as a whole, 1,037 respondents identified themselves as Hispanics. At the same time as
the national poll was being conducted on Election Day, the NEP was also conducting 51
individual polls designed to produce results representative in each of the 50 states and the
District of Columbia. These polls were taken at 1,469 precincts at which 4,469 Hispanics were
interviewed. The Pew Hispanic Center has aggregated data from the 51 state polls and weighted
the results to produce results for the nation as a whole. As first noted by Ana Maria Arumi, a
polling specialist then with NBC who offered fresh insights on the exit poll at an event hosted
by the National Association of Hispanic Journalists (NAHJ) on Dec. 2, 2004, the 51 state polls
show that Bush drew 40% of the Hispanic vote rather than the 44% in the national poll.
A comparison of the profiles of Hispanic voters in the national and the combined state polls
offers several clues why the national poll indicated a higher level of Latino support for President
Bush. Compared to the combined sample in the 51 state polls, the national NEP data have fewer
young Latino voters, fewer voters residing in cities with more than 50,000 residents, fewer
women, fewer voters who identified themselves as Democrats and fewer who said they
disapproved of the war in Iraq. All of these characteristics are shared by Hispanics who voted
for Sen. John F. Kerry, the Democratic candidate. The national poll also had more Cuban voters
in the Miami area, a traditionally Republican voting bloc.
169
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
It is impossible to determine definitively whether the national or the 51 state exit polls more
accurately captured Hispanic voter preferences. However, the Latino voter profile in the 51 state
polls more closely matches the CPS on a few important points. For example, the CPS has 27%
of the Hispanic vote coming from California, which is in line with the 26% in the state exit poll
rather than the 21% in the national poll. And both the CPS and the state polls have the male
share of the Hispanic vote at about 46% compared with more than 48% in the national exit poll
(Table 3). The state polls (7.5%) come closer to the CPS finding on the Hispanic share of the
total vote (6.0%) than the national exit poll (8.4%).
Table 3. Characteristics of Hispanic Voters, 51 State Exit Polls 2004 (percentages)
Sex
Male
Female
47
53
Age
18 to 29
30 to 39
40 to 49
50 to 64
65 and over
32
20
22
19
7
Family income
under $15,000
$15,000 to 29,999
$30,000 to 49,999
$50,000 to 74,999
$75,000 or more
10
18
24
22
25
Religion
Protestant/other Christian
Catholic
Jewish
Something else
None
32
55
1
4
8
Political party identification
Democrat
Republican
Independent
49
27
24
Political philosophy
Liberal
Moderate
Conservative
26
45
30
Size of place
City over 50,000
Suburbs
Small city or rural
44
42
14
State
Arizona
California
Florida
Illinois
New Jersey
New York
Texas
Other
3
26
13
5
4
7
17
26
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 Combined State Exit Polls, National Election Pool
170
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
IV. President Bush’s Gains
Among Hispanics
Table 4. Support for Bush Among
Hispanic Voters, 2000 and 2004, from 51
State Exit Polls (percentages)
Whether he received 40% or 44% of the
Hispanic vote last year or something in between,
President Bush improved his showing from 2000
to 2004 among Hispanics by a bigger margin
than he did among the population as a whole.
Data from the combined state exit polls suggest
that religion may have played a role in President
Bush’s greater success with Hispanics. Hispanic
Protestants, who are mostly evangelicals rather
than members of mainline Protestant
denominations, comprised 32% of the Latino
vote in 2004, up from 25% in 2000, according
to the 51 state polls conducted during those
elections.3 In addition, this segment of the
Latino electorate tilted more heavily toward
Bush in 2004, giving him 56% of their votes last
year compared with 44% in 2000. Thus,
Hispanic Protestants were both a growing and
increasingly pro-Republican constituency
between the two elections. Meanwhile, Bush’s
share of the Hispanic Catholic vote held steady
at 33% in the state exit polls.
Aside from his strong support from
Hispanic Protestants, President Bush also
gained some ground among nearly all segments
of the Hispanic vote (Table 4). His share of the
vote increased among female Hispanic voters
and across all age categories and income
groups. He did better among big-city Hispanic
voters. The only Hispanic vote segments of the
Hispanic electorate where his share did not
increase were among Catholics, political
independents, conservatives, and rural voters.
2004
2000
Change
To 2004
All Hispanic Voters
40
34
6
Sex
Male
Female
43
37
39
30
3
7
Age
18 to 29
30 to 39
40 to 49
50 to 64
65 and over
34
40
43
43
45
33
39
33
33
26
1
1
10
10
20
Family income
Under $15,000
$15,000 to 29,999
$30,000 to 49,999
$50,000 to 74,999
$75,000 or more
28
30
37
45
47
26
25
32
40
46
2
6
5
5
0
Religion
Protestant/other Christian
Catholic
56
33
44
33
12
0
Political party identification
Democrat
Republican
Independent
12
90
39
10
84
42
2
6
-3
Political philosophy
Liberal
Moderate
Conservative
17
35
66
12
33
66
5
2
0
Size of place
City over 50,000
Suburbs
Small city or rural
36
43
43
26
38
50
10
4
-8
Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations of 2004 Combined State Exit
Polls, National Election Pool
3 The combined state NEP exit poll data do not reveal whether a voter was a “born-again or evangelical” Christian. The Protestant designation
in the text refers to non-Catholic Christians; that is, it includes Hispanics identifying themselves as Protestant, Mormon/Latter Day Saints and
“other Christian” (excluding Catholic). Pre-election surveys reveal that the bulk of Hispanic non-Catholic Christian registered voters are
evangelical or born-again Christians. Five out of six Hispanic non-Catholic Christian registered voters are evangelical Christians, as opposed
to mainline Protestants (Leal, David L., Matt A. Barreto, Jongho Lee, and Rodolfo A. de la Garza. 2005. “the Latino Vote in the 2004
Election,” Political Science and Politics, January, pages 41-49).
171
3. The Hispanic Vote: Electoral Strength Lags Population Growth
The data from the combined state exit polls also shed some light on the issue of Latino
realignment in political party leanings. Surveys of registered Latino voters typically reveal that
Latinos identify with the Democratic Party over the GOP by at least a two-to-one advantage.4
However, in the 2004 exit poll, the margin was somewhat smaller: 49% of Hispanic voters
identified with the Democrats, 27% with the Republicans, and 24% indicated independent
leanings. Hispanic Democratic affiliation declined from the 2000 election, where the
comparable NEP exit poll data indicate a 55%-to-24% split in favor of Democratic over
Republicans. Whether the decline in the fortunes of the Democrats among Hispanic voters from
2000 to 2004 reflects the relative popularity of President Bush among Hispanic voters or marks
a more permanent shift in Hispanic party loyalties remains an open question.
4 Pew Hispanic Center & Kaiser Family Foundation. 2004. The 2004 National Survey of Latinos: Politics and Civic Participation. Washington,
D.C.: Pew Hispanic Center.
172
About The Pew Research Center
The Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan “fact tank” that provides
information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the
world. It does so by conducting public opinion polling and social science
research; by reporting news and analyzing news coverage, and by holding
forums and briefings. It does not take positions on policy issues. For
more information go to www.pewresearch.org.
The Center’s work is carried out by six projects:
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press
www.people-press.org
Stateline.org
www.Stateline.org
Pew Internet & American Life Project
www.pewinternet.org
Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life
pewforum.org
Pew Hispanic Center
www.pewhispanic.org
Pew Global Attitudes Project
www.pewglobal.org
The Center is a non-profit, tax-exempt corporation which operates under
Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service code. It was established in 2004 as a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a
Philadelphia-based public charity (www.pewtrusts.org).
Pew Research Center
1615 L Street, NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20036-5610
Phone: 202-419-4300 • Fax: 202-419-4349
www.pewresearch.org