These women who reside in wealthy suburbs are an odd group.
Sometimes they vote on the economy, but their loyalty to the pocketbook only
goes so far.
NOVEMBER 7, 2018 By D.C. McAllister
Suburbs in Northern Virginia, New York, and New Jersey, among
others across the nation, swung for the Democrats in the midterms, securing
their control of the House. College-educated white women in these areas are
being credited for the win, giving credence to the women’s movements that have
dominated the headlines for the past two years. But this is only part of the
story.
These women who reside in wealthy suburbs are an odd group.
Sometimes they vote on the economy, but their loyalty to the pocketbook only
goes so far. If they think their equality is threatened or health care won’t be
available to everyone, they’ll abandon the economy in a heartbeat.
In the 2018 midterms, exit
polling showed that
voters’ main concern was health care—a whopping 40 percent. Immigration came in
second at 23 percent, followed by the economy at 21 percent. Given the
Republicans’ goal to whittle away at Obamacare and the notion that this will
leave people without coverage or access to health care, it’s not surprising
that these women weren’t inspired by the economy to keep the Republican agenda
going.
Another issue that affects how many
women vote is fear of inequality. For two years, activist groups and
politicians beat the drum that the Republicans are threatening women’s rights.
New Supreme Court justices could mean overturning Roe v. Wade. Free birth control might end with changes
in health care. The Me Too movement created an environment of fear that men are
predators, especially those in the Republican Party.
The rhetoric of Trump as sexual deviant in chief filled the pages
of women’s magazines. Protests, pussy hats, celebrities wailing about the
dehumanization of women even as they objectified themselves rained down on
female voters, enlivening their allegiance to equality, even when it’s not
actually being threatened.
These two issues, along with hatred of Trump, drove these women to
vote blue. They despise Trump, and they always have. They voted for Hillary Clinton
in 2016, 51 percent to Trump’s 45 percent. Some were Never-Trumper Republicans
going for other candidates. They are, at the core, elitist. They didn’t like
him then, and they don’t like him now.
Their feelings about Trump negated any objective judgment of his
job performance or recognition that his policies and programs have benefited
them greatly, including a strong economy and greater security for our nation.
Emotionalism won the day.
In 2012, Mitt Romney won this group over Obama by six points because
they had catapulted the economy to the top of their concerns. Many
college-educated wealthy white women weren’t swayed by the war on women
narrative at that time, nor were they concerned about health care as much,
although it was still high on the list. They weren’t too worried; after all,
Romney had instituted government health subsidies in Massachusetts.
Romney also soothed their elitist sensibilities. He was dignified.
Their feelings could take a back seat to objective concerns because those fires
weren’t stoked effectively enough to deter them. This wasn’t true for all women
at that time. Some were swayed by the “binders full of women” attack, but not
all.
This changed both in 2016 when they
supported Clinton and even more significantly in 2018 when they flooded the
polls to usher in a Democratic House majority. As reported by Ronald
Brownstein just before the midterms, “Over two-thirds of
college-educated white women, an unprecedented number, said they planned to
vote Democratic for Congress, according to figures provided by CNN polling
director Jennifer Agiesta.”
But they weren’t the only ones. College-educated suburban white
men who were also offended by Trump’s behavior showed up to kick out
Republicans. “Just over half of college-educated white men preferred Democrats
in the survey,” Brownstein wrote. “That represents a sharp swing from their
usual congressional voting behavior: Democrats haven’t won even 40% percent of
college-educated white men in any congressional election since 2008, according
to exit polls.”
This combination of elitist voters who can go Republican under
some circumstances but will vote Democratic if they’re offended or worried
about inequities made a difference in key suburbs.
Additionally, some of the congressional
districts that had previously been favorable to Republicans because they were
mostly rural—a stronghold for Trump—were redrawn to include wealthy suburbs,
shifting the vote Democratic. As reported by USA Today,
a fifth of the districts now under control of the Democrats had been redrawn in
Pennsylvania.
The changes weren’t trivial: Democrats increased their share of
the vote by an average of 20 percent in the districts they flipped in the
Keystone State. The biggest change came in the 5th congressional district, a
sprawling, mostly rural district in central Pennsylvania. Democrats won an
anemic 33 percent there in 2016. In 2018, with the new boundaries in place,
they won over 65 percent of the vote.
The suburban slaughter in the midterms, therefore, can be
attributed to three things: motivated college-educated white women who put
their fears about women’s issues and health care over economic and national
security; both college-educated white women and men who are personally offended
by Trump’s personality and rhetoric; and redrawing of district lines to include
these groups to curb Republican advantages.
It’s uncertain if Trump can do anything to attract these voters.
Probably not. That ship has likely sailed. The best he can do is shore up his
base for the next election. The rest of us—conservative women in particular,
who don’t vote by feelings and unfounded fears—need to step up. It falls on our
shoulders to educate our suburban sisters about the role of government in their
lives, the dangers of government-run health care, and the lies of feminism
regarding “inequalities” in America.
Denise C. McAllister is a journalist
based in Charlotte, North Carolina, and a senior contributor to The Federalist.
Follow her on Twitter @McAllisterDen.
No comments:
Post a Comment