The Emerging Democratic Majority

This was a GREAT book if you wanted to learn about political trends over the last 50 years. I often wondered why African Americans voted some Democratic in such high numbers? This book (and others I have read since) discusses how the South turned Republican when politicians such as Barry Goldwater turned against the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act of the 1960's. That is when blacks moved in the Democratic aisle. Ronald Reagan effectively used those racial politics to win the South in the 1980's. Keep in mind the recent comments of former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott. Remember, Lott also made similiar comments when Reagan began his presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi. Get this book. This is a fun and delightful book for all political persuasions.

Take heart, progressives, underlying trends do not favor Bush and the Republicans! That is the optimistic message of this thoughtful piece of political analysis. Of course Bush was not elected by a majority of the electorate, and the mid-term surprise was mainly due to "The War," which Rove & Bush have milked and manipulated for all it's worth. That the Democrats need a better and stronger position on The War is clear enough, a point that is avoided by Judis & Teixeira. But their focus is on demographics -- categories of voters that favor Democrats are growing, and if Democrats are smart, they can count on a strong and growing electoral majority in years ahead. At the largest level, the argument is that "political realignment" is about to occur. The Republican Progressives achieved realignment in 1900 with the defeat of the Populist agrarian movement. Democrats came out on top in the FDR realignment. Republicans achieved another realignment with Reagan. (This is the argument, though it makes me wonder how scientific the concept of political realignment is.) Clinton is seen as transitional, along with Bush, and a true realignment in favor of the Democrats is predicted some time in the next decade, if not in 2004 then in 2008. Why? Basically the growth of a post-industrial information economy and the gender equality and cultural liberalism that comes with it. Just as the seemingly strong Populist movement was the expression of the shrinking population of farmers, the current social conservative movement is strongest in rural areas and small towns and cities, the "Red" part of the map, which is losing population to the big information-economy "ideopolises" of the Blue, Democratic, parts of the country. Working women, minorities, and professionals are all growing as a proportion of the population, and will continue to favor Democrats at the polls. That is the guts of Judis & Teixera's argument, and they back it up with meticulous state-by-state analysis of demography and voting trends. They advocate "progressive centrism," basically systematizing Clinton's "triangulation" which won him a smashing victory in 1996. This is the one disheartening aspect of the book. Just looking at the numbers, it seems the Democrats can win if they confidently rally around a centrist position, similar to what Blair has done with "New Labor" in the U.K. Democratic centrism is preferable to Republican centrism on critical issues such as Supreme Court appointments, protection of the environment, and a Fair Deal for the poor -- a "hand up, not a hand out" as a labor movement slogan puts it. But I wonder if the activists of the Democratic base can get enthusiastic enough about these differences to turn out for the candidates? In other words, further thinking is going to be required in order to develop a powerful program and slogans to motivate the real people who are just statistics in this structural analysis. I think Judis, Teixeira, and any

I bought this book yesterday and have nearly completed it in a day. I have found it fascinating, both for its brief review of history and its presentation of changing demographic and social trends. The authors also give a fine overview of the Republican policies and ideologies that are keeping them far outside of the mainstream today and could very well spell the end of conservative rule as the nation moves towards the "progressive center." Current Republican policies such as anti-abortion, anti-ERA, anti-gay are discussed, as our the GOP's slavery to theire "base" of religious right extremists who advocate school vouchers, giving tax dollars to big religions for social services, fighting to teach creationism over evolution, oppoosition to stem cell research except in the most limited fashion, their devotion to deregulation policies, corporate welfare programs, tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, and a seemingly oblvious disregard for America's increasing concern over the enviroment, to name a few. The authors agrue that "today Americans want goverment to play an active and reasonable role in American life, guarnateeing a reasonal level of economic security, preserving and strenthening social security and medicare , rather than privatizing them. They want to exploit new biotechnologies and computer technologies. They do not want science held hostage to a religious or ideological agenda." These are many of the reasons why I myself, who voted for Reagan and the first Bush, have voted Democratic in the last 10 years. In this book the authors cite the democgraphic and political shifts state by state, region by region. As someone who considers herself part of this progressive center, I can only hope that every prediction in this book comes true, and we soon have a strong, healthy Democratic majority in this country. This book sticks to the facts--there is no name-calling or derogatory comments. It is factual info, but surprisingly easy to read and absorb. Highly recommend this book if you're interested in future trends or even how we got where we are today.

With a great deal of insight and nearly zero partisan rhetoric, Judis and Teixeira (how DO you pronounce that?) offer an easy to read political primer about how social and economic cycles fit in with political cycles. Many political events that were mysterious to me were clearly explained, drawing on historical precedent right up through Election 2000. I found myself convinced that the authors know what is going to happen next in American politics.The conclusion: the Democratic party will emerge as a new majority by the end of the decade. The Republicans may or may not retain the House this year, and GWB may or may not win re-election in 2004. The authors don't pretend to be fortune tellers; instead they chart trends based on comprehensive analysis.The text backs up its logic with lots of figures, sometimes charted. Part of the book goes state by state for key states and regions, sometimes down to the county level to show what has been (and will be) happening. Each and every explanation made sense to me, without being too tedious to follow.The only negative thing I can say is to echo something Joe Conason mentioned in Salon. The authors completely ignore the mainstream media bias against Gore in Election 2000. However, since that really isn't the topic of this book it doesn't take away from the five stars I give it.

With George W. Bush riding high in the opinion polls (for the moment, at least) and the Democrats struggling to establish a solid majority in either house of Congress this fall, the title of this book alone is likely to make some Republicans write it off as wishful thinking. They do so at their own peril. Just as the Democrats' 1964 across-the-board landslide proved to be the beginning of the end of the New Deal coalition, Judis and Teixeira argue that George W. Bush's (near-) victory and the narrow survival of the Republican majority in Congress in 2000 will soon be recognized as the last gasp of 1980s laissez-faire conservatism. Of course, partisans of all stripes love to believe that such a watershed in their favor is always just around the bend, but Judis and Teixeira do make a remarkably solid, evenhanded case for their prediction.The many analogies they draw between the 1960s and the current political climate are probably self-evident to most political junkies already. In both eras, the party in power overestimated its own popularity and the durability of its voting base, and suffered from a growing rift between moderates and those on the far left or right within its ranks. Much as Watergate provided the Democrats with a brief respite from their impending years in the wilderness, the Clinton scandals and Al Gore's somewhat inept response to them have enabled the Republicans to remain in power beyond the scope of their current voting base.Judis and Teixeira argue that that base has already been showing signs of fragmentation for a decade and will inevitably continue to do so; and they provide a detailed demographic and geographical analysis for their argument. As the Republicans continue to alienate most minority groups, the Democrats' already significant advantage among nonwhite voters will only improve (a process that has been exacerbated rather than eased by the Bush administration's response to September 11, they argue). Among whites, the longstanding Republican advantage is past its peak and began to crack as early as 1992. Judis and Teixeira predict that in the coming decade, these trends have the potential to leave the Republicans with a hardcore support base on the all-important Electoral College map nearly as small as that held by the Democrats in the 1980s, concentrated in the Deep South and upper Rockies. Judis and Teixeira provide predictions for all 50 states, ranging from thumbnail sketches to pages-long analyses depending on the size and degree of change in each state. Although no one is likely to agree with all of their predictions (I don't), the breadth and detail of the study is fascinating regardless of your political allegiance.Although the authors' political persuasion is unmistakable, there is very little analysis of issues to be found in the book. Instead, they stick to analyzing the parties' respective positions on the hottest issues of the era. Their bluntness in addressing the mistakes and cynical moves