opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Mark Shields
Mark Shields
20 Sep 2014
Too Rich for My Taste

"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor and could never have … Read More.

13 Sep 2014
Renouncing American Citizenship -- for Profit

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that corporations are people with all the rights of flesh-and-bone … Read More.

6 Sep 2014
Exceptionally Good Luck

After enduring lavish praise while receiving an award before a big Hollywood dinner crowd, Jack Benny … Read More.

Will Republicans Draw Wrong Conclusion From the 2014 Campaign?


If Republicans have become more bullish about their party's prospects for victory Nov. 4, it could be traceable to a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News/Annenberg Public Policy Center poll, which found that Republican-leaning voters are much more highly interested — and therefore likelier to vote — in this year's election than are voters who support the Democrats. Consider this: In the 2012 presidential election, voters between the ages of 18 and 29 were the most Democratic voting bloc by age (60 percent for Barack Obama) in the electorate, whereas voters older than 65 were the most loyal GOP voters (56 percent for Mitt Romney). The poll found that among voters 65 or older, 62 percent of them self-identified as highly interested in the 2014 campaign, whereas among the youngest voters, just 20 percent said they are highly interested in this election.

If real estate is all about location, location, location, then national elections are all about turnout, turnout, turnout, which, as of today, looks favorable for Republicans in 2014. But first, if you would, return with me to the immediate aftermath of the 2012 election, in which the GOP again, for the fifth time in the past six presidential contests, lost the U.S. popular vote.

The Republican National Committee, after a hard-eyed assessment of the party's problems, delivered a blunt postmortem in March 2013, which urged a renewed outreach to female voters and stated, "We need to campaign among Hispanic, black, Asian, and gay Americans and demonstrate that we care about them, too." The Republican autopsy was specific: "We must embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform."

That was logical advice, considering that in 1992, Republican George H.W. Bush (while capturing just 38 percent of the national vote) still won 55 percent of the Asian vote but, by 2012, 73 percent of Asian voters were backing Democrat Barack Obama.

And even though Republican George W. Bush in 2004 won 44 percent of the Latino vote, in 2012 the Democratic president received 71 percent support from Latino voters. In the past 20 years, the share of the national electorate represented by Asian and Latino voters has more than quadrupled, while white voters have dropped from 87 percent of the total down to 72 percent.

Republicans in power, as you may have noticed, did not "embrace and champion comprehensive immigration reform." With overwhelming opposition from Republicans in Congress to equal pay for equal work legislation endorsed by civil rights and women's groups, the GOP's recommended renewed outreach to female voters was not evident.

So if the Republicans do win the upcoming midterms — in which more older white male voters tend to show up than younger and minority voters — then, because the winners do get to write history or to say what an election result really means, the GOP's most conservative partisans will insist that the touchy-feely RNC postmortem was wrong. All you need to do, the argument will go, is to give the voters what we gave them in 2010 (when the GOP picked up 63 House seats) and 2014, unapologetically conservative candidates who offered no yielding either on principles or, heaven forbid, to Obama or Democrats. There's obviously no need for "pandering" to Hispanic, black, Asian or gay voters.

Such thinking and feelings will strengthen that 2016 Republican presidential candidate who condemns political compromise as weakness or even surrender. A 2014 win could well convince Republicans that while the nation continues to change at accelerating velocity (the widespread support for same-sex marriage and the fact that more white Americans, for the first time, died last year than were born), the GOP does not need to change. That would frankly be a 2016 formula for the Republicans to again lose the White House.

To find out more about Mark Shields and read his past columns, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at




2 Comments | Post Comment
Sir;... If the republicans want to campaign among the poor, they should first make it legal to buy votes and have absentee ballots filled out before their eyes, and dropped in the post box. I find it offensive that so much is spent to win an election when perhaps the smallest of sums in the right pockets would help out the poor and the candidates of the rich as well. But here is where the money is:... Our money buys slander that if told about a common citizen, and as likely to affect his honorable perception would justify murder most cruel. With the currency of the political tribe so low, who can complain of a little mud or spit especially when the risk of honor could be worth a fortune in favors? I would advise either side to deny the charges made, or accept them as true; but if false, then dog the money that made them, hunt it to its source and burn it out. Achilles wept for his honor, and for his honor many men died. Cu'chulain killed for his honor at the drop of a dime; and what do your politicians do but meet charge with charge, and let those who can afford the most ears win.
I think the strength of the republican party is in its age and resistence to change, and that will never stand well with those for whom change is a passion much as breathing is a passion to a drowning man. This society needs change. The republicans do promise change, as in: history all over again. Whether this is a reasonable sell to rational and intelligent people remains a mystery. They should take no courage from the fickle nature of the voters. It was a fickle people who hoisted Danton onto the same stage as Louis Le Roi.
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Sun Sep 28, 2014 1:03 AM
Mark, if always makes me cringe when you (or other intelligent people) explain to the GOP how to arrange their presentation to voters to maximize their chances. If it meant any real change in their policies, that would be great. But instead, it just furthers their Fox News/Koch Brothers successful control of the masses. JAS: Your comment today was the most Google-needed one yet. Fun.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Mike Ohr
Sun Sep 28, 2014 10:11 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Mark Shields
Sep. `14
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Walter Williams
Walter E. WilliamsUpdated 1 Oct 2014
Patrick Buchanan
Pat BuchananUpdated 30 Sep 2014
Dennis Prager
Dennis PragerUpdated 30 Sep 2014

5 Sep 2009 Is There an "Obama-Clinton-Doctrine"?

20 Sep 2008 Bias in Favor of Action

14 Feb 2009 Family Values and Baseball