Richard Dunham in Business Week comments on the current heavy Republican strength in the Southern states:
Behind Republican hegemony is racial and cultural polarization. Many conserative whites see the Democrats as the party of minorites and urban elites who favor gay marriage, gun control, affirmative action, and abortion rights. That's why a good ol' Republican like Haley Barbour was able to win 80% of the white vote and oust Democratic Governor Ronnie Musgrove of Mississippi in November.
Dunham is relaying the current conventional wisdom, which in this case happens to be more-or-less accurate. The Republicans have a heavy advantage in Senate and Congressional seats in the South (including Texas). And Southern Electoral College votes are nearly a "Solid South" for the Republican Presidential candidate, with polls showing only Florida, Arkansas and possibly Tennessee likely to competitive in the Presidential race in 2004.
The Democrats can win the Presidency without the South, especially if they can retain California, which is a huge offsetting bloc of votes. When California was considered a reasonably safe state for Republican Presidential candidates - and it was prior to 1992 - a Democratic Presidential candidate had to pick up some Southern states - at least Texas or Florida - to have a chance at a majority in the Electoral College.
That doesn't mean the Democratic Party or its Presidential nominee can ignore the South in 2004. The national Democratic campaign needs to have a strong presence and an appealing enough Presidential candidate to hold as many competitive seats for the Democrats as possible in Senate and Congressional races.
If I don't get overwhelmed with holiday activities today, I'll post some further thoughts later about the current Republican dominance in the South, which is by no means a permanent condition.
(Cont. in Part 2)
No comments:
Post a Comment