Where have all the Republicans gone?

OPINION:

Marketers might call the Republicans’ experience over the past couple of years “brand distress.” And after losing the majority in Congress in the 2006 election, it looks like the party’s fortunes continue to slip. Is the party of Lincoln ready for the Endangered Species list?

Consider these headlines from recent polling reports. About a year ago (May, 2007), Rasmussen Reports found that “[T]he number of people identifying themselves as Republican has fallen to a new low.” Around the same time, the Pew Research Center issued a study headlined, “Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 — Political Landscape More Favorable to Democrats.” Gallup concurred in November 2007 with the banner “Democratic Party’s Image More Positive Than GOP’s.” Last week Rasmussen weighed in again with more bad news: “Partisan Trends: Democrats Retain Huge Advantage in Party ID,” the latest piece of news fit for a “Debbie Downer” riff on “Saturday Night Live.”

Is George Soros secretly manufacturing Democrats at an offshore tax haven? I’m not talking about what accounts for the Republicans’ slide. The Iraq war and the sputtering economy, combined with the fact that most Americans equate the GOP with “running the government,” together explain most of the party’s reputation tribulations. Instead, are independents becoming Democrats? Are Republicans switching parties? Or is the country producing more Democrats through some immaculate partisan conception?

Solid Republicans just jumping ship is an unlikely scenario. Social-science research suggests strong partisans are the most likely to vote, give money, participate in politics generally and least likely to change party. But overall partisan drift can occur. The strength of attachments to a party varies a great deal among citizens.

So, a shift in the strength and direction of partisan identification is a more likely explanation. Typically pollsters ask if the respondent is a Republican, Democrat or Independent. Those who initially respond “Republican” or “Democrat” next get asked if their party attachment is “strong” or “weak.” Independents are asked if they “lean” toward one party or the other. This allows a pollster to classify everyone in the survey along a seven-point continuum: 1. Strong Democrat, 2. Weak Democrat, 3. Independent/Lean Democrat, 4. Independent (no other preference), 5. Independent/Lean Republican, 6. Weak Republican and 7. Strong Republican.

Looking at these party identification numbers in a little more detail sheds some light on the vanishing Republicans. It’s impossible to determine shifts in people’s party preferences unless the pollster interviews the same people at different points in time (something called a panel study). So we’re left to speculate. But looking at the data, here’s a possible explanation.

Comparing the September 2004 and January 2008 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, the seven-point party identification scales look like this.

In Sept. 2004, 21 percent were “Strong Dem”; 7 percent “Weak Dem”; 12 percent “Ind/Lean Dem”; 14 percent “Ind”; 10 percent “Ind/Lean Repub”; 7 percent “Weak Repub”; and 22 percent “Strong Repub.” By Jan. 2008, the figures were 24 percent “Strong Dem”; 7 percent “Weak Dem”; 12 percent “Ind/Lean Dem”; 17 percent “Ind”; 12 percent “Ind/Lean Repub”; 7 percent “Weak Repub”; and “15 percent Strong Repub.”

While there is a small bump in the percent of “Strong Democrats,” it’s not outside the survey’s margin of error, nor are any of the other differences except for one — the “Strong Republican” category. And while we can’t be sure without a panel study, I’ll make an educated guess. Strong Republicans probably still call themselves Republicans but they shifted into to” weak” or even “independent-lean-Republican” territory for a variety of reasons, including the party’s record over the past several years on spending, ethics or the War in Iraq. “Leaners” or even weak partisans may have also shifted toward the “independent” category. What you’re left with is a slightly bigger group in the “true independent” category — voters who could swing either way in this November’s election. Due to their weaker partisan attachments, these voters could also shift again, helping to either build an enduring Democratic majority or contribute to rebuilding the GOP. Partisanship works like a lever with the fulcrum under the “independent” label. Adding a little more weight to the Democratic side causes the less attached partisan to all roll a little away from the Republicans.

And if this theory explaining the state of the electorate in 2008 is right, it’s more than a little ironic that after all the questions about John McCain’s ability to draw support among the GOP faithful earlier in this election cycle, the party will nominate the person best situated to win in this environment and maybe even resurrect the Republican brand by beckoning some of the less attached partisans back.