1. PIVOTAL ELECTIONS IN 2008, 2010, AND 2012 Theda Skocpol USW 31, October 24, 2012

4. ELECTORAL MILESTONES IN 2008 (from Center for the Study of the American Electorate, and a commentary on “Demography and Destiny” by Ronald Brownstein, National Journal 1/10/09.)  Turnout rose to 63% of eligible voters, highest percent since 1960 (64.8%) and third highest turnout since women gained the suffrage in 1920.  Democratic turnout (for House candidates) rose to the highest share (31.6%) since 1964. Democrats gained in every region.  Youth turnout (18-24) increased by 1% over 2004, and activism grew among college students (especially important in “providing sinew for Obama’s extensive grassroots organization”).  Obama’s win was driven by rising black and Latino turnout as well as gains among non-elderly voters across the board. If demographic groups had remained as they were in 1992, McCain would have edged Obama. McCain did best among “culturally conservative working-class whites.”

5. How would the 2008 election have turned out if only rich, only middle- income, or only poor voters had decided the presidency? (Red=McCain; Blue=Obama) Rich = over $150K Middle income = $40-$75K Poor = $0-$20K Source: Andrew Gelman, “How Did the Rich (and the Poor) Vote in 2008?,” post at FiveThirtyEight.com, March 3, 2009.

6. Source: Andrew Gelman, “Religion, Income, and Voting,” post at Fivethirtyeight.com, February 27, 2009.

7. CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN THE 2008 OBAMA CAMPAIGN  Obama campaign invested time and money to build volunteer networks across almost all states. Combined centralized frameworks, online tools, and local team-building. Organizers were initiatlly encouraged to focus on recruiting other organizers.  Fundraising for Obama combined small and large donors, as presidential campaigns have always done. But “because of the way he organized his campaign, Obama was able to go back to the same supporters over and over again for both volunteer assistance and repeat contributions.” Many small contributors became cumulative “mid-range repeaters” as “Obama was able to attract donors “who have not been part of the traditional large- dollar, reception-attending fundraising crowd.” (quotes from “Reality Check,” by the Campaign Finance Institute 11/24/08)  Obama himself did not have to spend as much time as usual courting big donors or attending fundraisers.

10. Historic Democratic Reverses in 2010 Democrats had a net loss of 64 seats in the House of Representatives; 52 incumbents were defeated, and the new 242 member GOP majority is the largest in 64 years. GOP gains were national (reversing the reduction to a regional party in 2008). Republicans gained a net of six seats in the Senate, winning one- third of the Democratic seats at stake. New Senate is 53 D to 47 R. Republicans gained a net of six governors, and now hold 29 governorships, including in major states such as PA, MI, FL, and OH. Republicans gained c. 700 state legislator seats, largest gain since 1966. GOP now has the governor and both houses in 20 states.

11. Why did the anti-Democratic Wave Happen? Sluggish economy; recovery policies thought to be unsuccessful; and sense the country was headed in the wrong direction. Obama approval under 50%. Major laws or votes in 111 th Congress were controversial or unpopular (Affordable Care Act; Cap and Trade bill in House). Republicans more enthusiastic about voting than in 2008, and much more so than Democrats. Size and composition of the electorate changed. Tea Party?

15. What role did the Tea Party play in the 2010 elections, and how does that compare to Obama for America and other organized efforts in 2008?

16. What Can We Expect in November 2012?