How times have changed. Barely a month ago Wisconsin Governor Scott
Walker’s presidential campaign was on fire.
He was near the top of national polls for Republican contenders, doing
well in New Hampshire, and leading in Iowa.
Then Trump happened and now Walker’s campaign is flickering, ready to
flame out. Even his faulted firewall in
Iowa is gone. So what to do? If you are a Republican in Wisconsin running
for president do what makes the most sense–go to Democratic Minnesota to
rekindle your fire. And so he did that
recently, seeking to revive his presidential fortunes, hoping for some national
media attention in Minnesota while Trump and the other
Whether making Minnesota his new firewall will revive his
presidential hopes or demonstrate how desperate he is, only time will
tell. Yet his visit underscores a
broader and more interesting question–Is Minnesota a swing state open to
possible Republican pick up in the 2016 election? The short answer is no.
Minnesota is perhaps the most reliable Democratic
presidential state since 1972. Back then
it went for Nixon over McGovern, and it has been reliably Democrat since then,
even voting for Walter Mondale in the 1984 Ronald Reagan blowout where the
Democrats only won this state and the District of Columbia. Yet for years Republicans have hoped the
Minnesota would flip presidentially.
They look to state races where Republican governors and US Senators have
won. A state with often an equal number
of Republican and Democrat US House members, and a state legislature that has
flipped party control several times since 1998.
Additionally, Minnesota is a great source of money for Republican
fundraising. Given all that, of course
the state should be prime to go Republican.
Such thinking prompted the location in 2008 of the
Republican National Convention to be held in St Paul. But the convention did no good. In 2004, after John Kerry won Minnesota by
3.5% over George Bush in the former’s losing presidential campaign, in 2008
Barack Obama bested John McCain by 10.24%.
Holding the RNC in Minnesota actually led Republicans to do worse. In addition, 2012 prompted Republicans Tim
Pawlenty and Michele Bachmann that their successes in Minnesota could launch a
presidential campaign. That worked
well. And even in 2012 Mitt Romney made
Minnesota one of the few states where candidates campaigned during the general
elections, again to no avail. Minnesota
does not look flipable, at least for the near future.
Stacey Hunter Hecht of Bethel University and I will have
out in October a new book Presidential Swing States: Why Ten Only Matter. We examine a real simply question: Why is it
that the presidential race is effectively over in 40 states and why is it that
only ten swing states really are the site of serious competition in
presidential races. We seek to
understand the phenomena of what it means to be a swing state, looking at
patterns in presidential voting in elections since 1988. When such an examination is done, there is no
surprise that states such as Ohio and Florida are at the top of the list as
strong swingers, with our neighbors Iowa and Wisconsin weaker swingers. But why?
What makes a state a swinger and does Minnesota share any of those
characteristics?
State states have many factors that are idiosyncratic,
such as Iowa’s caucuses, New Hampshire’s first primary–both create energized
and highly mobilized and competitive political parties. But more generally, swing states are those
with states that have major party enrollments that are close, with a large and
fluid set of independent swing voters.
Swing states also appear to have many diverse regions in the state which
allow for the major parties to establish political bases, and these states have
parties have been competitive in local and non-statewide races.
So far all of this does describe Minnesota, yet what
excludes Minnesota from the swing state category is ideology. By that swing states are those where the
political ideology of the median voter in the state is close to the ideology of
the median voter nationally. More
importantly, swings are states where the presidential candidate of the
Republican Party is to the right of the
median state voter, or the Democratic candidate too far to the left. One also needs to look at how the ideology
and candidates produced by the national parties compare to the ideology of the
state parties.
What has happened since 1972 is that the Minnesota DFL
enjoy a small but still significant lead in party registration in the state
which benefit them during presidential cycles.
Second, the state is generally more liberal ideologically than the rest
of the nation. Three, the Republican
presidential candidates have generally been further to the right than the
median in Minnesota. Put simply, the DFL
has a bigger presidential base to mobilize and the national Republican Party
nominates candidates further to the right that the average swing voter in
Minnesota. Together, such a strategy is
a sure loser.
Demographics and ideology might change Minnesota in the
future, but at least for 2016 the prospects of a Republican flip are slim. The GOP appears determined to nominate a
candidate who will be far more conservative than the average Minnesotan. Yes
perhaps the Democrats might pick a bad candidate and change the dynamics, but
baring that and several other possibilities, even if Scott Walker is successful
in making this state his new firewall to revive his campaign, a Republican
saying they won over Minnesota is probably not going to get them far in winning
over the party or in winning the general election.
Proud to be a Liberal Minnesotan!
ReplyDelete