Colleague in this panel to discuss my new book how americas Political Parties change and how they dont first a word how we will proceed today we have with us amy walters you see her regularly on the news hour and a host of the take away with amy walter like many of you i read a lot of political commentary she is always fair and doesnt follow the pack she digs into election related data the cofounder of echelon inside the most innovative and interesting of polling and intelligence firms as a pioneer in the Digital World from 17 years ago stating a change how the Republican Party can adapt if you dont read the friday roundup of interesting stories you should sign up for it visiting fellow in senior election analyst for real clear politics has an mba just finished our masters in statistics and now for his phd in Political Science as a coauthor of one of the additions of the almanac of politics that Michael Brown introduced to the world in 1971 with americas individual entry of the idiosyncrasies of the 535 people in congress is classified of the almanac before interviewing providing a rich detailed and goodhearted each of the panelists will speak for eight minutes i want to make sure we have time for all of your questions right now thank you for all your help to put this event together just a few weeks ago writing a column one of the worlds most successful parties speculating as so many before have done on the death of the conservative party in england on our shores Stan Greenberg founded the Republican Party in the book entitled gop rip before the 2016 election many obituaries were published in the death literature it is onesided you dont have to go very far back to find the same of the demise of the Democratic Party after the george w. Bush election. What seems to be the death of the genre is slim but very substantial volume looking at the longevity of the two Political Parties with a deep historical knowledge and perspective and actually all 435 Congressional Districts and is covered politics from all angles and author of deep research and thought to explain politics and country today with a detailed understanding of contemporary politics we will have a discussion the floor is yours. Thank you very much for your kind words and thank you to the members of the panel who have come forward by three of the smartest people of the next generation those who are willing to come and discuss my book. As you mention i have been studying this for a long period of time now the almanac from which came out november 1971 that was even before the impeachment of Richard Nixon that was a long time ago. So my political memory goes back to detroit that was once americas boomtown the election of 54 which was pivotal so to know that the voting was at the Detroit Public School and this was a key race between the republican incumbent and the democratic nominee this one see that she campaigned in a trailer and that was the beginning of 40 years of democratic parties in the house of representatives with the middle income district and with those 18 districts. This was a long time ago. I was inspired in part living through the demise of our Political Parties and what fascinates me is these Political Parties are very old so in 1832 to elect jackson to sustain the charter of the United States that the Oldest Political Party in the world the Republican Party was founded 1854 to get rid to end slavery of the new territories. And both of those were successful with a dozen years of achieving those policy goals so the Republican Party is the third oldest party with the British Conservative Party that they made reference by working in his biography of a conservative party in 1846 i suggest they will win a 58 vote party if there is ever another general election in the house of commons. So having achieved their early goals to still be operating 165 years after their founding and in a time when america has grown from a nation of 20 million to 320 Million People we dont have many institutions aside from churches going back that far so i wanted to make the point that is true for some fundamental reasons there are some structural factors in the system that favors a twoparty system the singlemember district which is not in the constitutional statute with a congressional and legislative elections but there is something fundamentally more at stake and causative of the longevity and the persistence of these two parties we have seen the parties change their positions over a variety of issues they have adapted to Innovative Technologies new leaders the democrats started off as the forgiving party them by the seventies or eighties they switched positions and with donald trump as president they could be in the process of shifting positions once again the Democratic Party in the 19th century was limited government attempted to favor local option and happy to tolerate slavery and segregation of the south the Republican Party was more of a federal government party. So they have changed and adapted but at the same time there has been a basic personality character of each of the parties that are unchanging 185 or 165 years which accounts for their longevity and their resilience the Republican Party is concentrated around the core constituency seen as typical americans but never a majority the composition has changed over time but it continues from the yankee protestants to white. Christians today but that setting up the constituency has continued the Democratic Party has been a coalition of out groups regarded by themselves and others is not typical americans but when united make up a majority. Andrew Jacksons Party was of southern rights and Roman Catholic immigrants a good combination if you keep them separate. The democrats took 103 ballots to nominate a candidate for president that those of the kkk were in a fight there. Todays Democratic Party is a coalition of an usually religious black americans and secular liberals that will Work Together to impeach donald trump so when it comes to beto orourke with those taxis options for churches that dont reform samesex marriage they will disagree between the two groups and these characters help to explain their longevity. That has been important in a nation that has always been diverse you will always hear a lot of commentary that says the last three or 12 years we have become a diverse country. Weve always been a diverse country the british colonies were diverse in the Founding Fathers recognize they created a constitution that retained power in the states providing for freedom of religion but that there will not be a federal government established you can have them in the states while virginia got rid of the religious establishment they knew about the religious wars of europe and the United States was religiously diverse and they provided a framework in which we could do that in my proposition is the two parties one always on the core constituency the others of selected out groups gives a large majority of voters in an always diverse country economically or religiously ethnically and racially a choice that has accounted for that persistence it is something thats fundamental about the United States not necessarily transferable to other countries and that the two Political Parties which like to excoriate each other which are both excoriated from the radio callin shows that i hear, nonetheless they have performed over time. Im asked why havent we seen third parties emerge we have ross perot in 1982 and then again in 1896 and the Third Party Using his celebrity as a person and then for a few months he could be competitive with clinton and george h. W. Bush in the general election pulling donald traut may have taken a lesson from that with the reality tv that if you wanted to be president maybe he be better to seek a nomination of one of the two parties rather than an independent as ross perot had done 24 years before that we have had a case of that i suspect nobody in this room remembers the election of 1912. [laughter] but i do see judge williams is laughing. In 1912 it was the era articulate america had the progressive ideas the Progressive Party ended up with a candidate named Theodore Roosevelt who had the highest percentage of the popular vote of any president just ate years before. So they had a celebrity candidate with Proven Ability on Foreign Affairs highly competent candidate the Progressive Party ran candidates in the Congressional District in 1912 in the 1914 election it look like the third party was emerging what happened and then the Progressive Party in 1918 in scandinavia so Theodore Roosevelt is the oddson favorite to win the nomination in 1820 if he had not died at age 60 well short of the lifespan of the current candidates he might have ended up as the fourth term of roosevelt rather than his fifth cousin he considered inferior but thats a pretty good test case for thirdparty and it worked both parties have shown the resilience after devastating defeats those of us who grew up reading american political history are familiar with the republicans defeat when unemployment was 25 percent Franklin Roosevelts democrats one smashing victories and 3234 and 36 to the point there were fewer than 100 republicans left in the house of representatives of people were predicting the demise of the Republican Party that story is told vividly by new deal historians who are terrific writers its a familiar story but yet the republicans come back and by 1940 its my contention the republicans would have one in 1840 on that election minus the domestic issues when it wouldve been a likely outcome instead you have stalin seizing control and the election was decided and that unnerved Franklin Roosevelt but then to go back on domestic issues the democrats had a devastating defeat partly because most historians dont want to talk about the devastating defeat after eight years of the Woodrow Wilson administration but policies proved to be unpopular he had negative job ratings after he had a stroke nobody knew except wilson mrs. Wilson and his doctor you had americans continue to be involved in military action from 1919 and huge inflation and recession and an influenza epidemic with today that lethality would have resulted in about 3 Million Deaths in the United States it was devastating not only with 34 percent of the popular vote four years later it was 27 percent to the democrats held onto the south but not even all states and yes they did make progress even though people would predict they might not last to unite a Coalition Party they had some assistance from the Great Depression in 1932 but the evidences that absent that the democrats would remain competitive with the various candidates like joseph from the south and they did come back. The Democratic Party and Republican Party had both shown resilience to trump what seems to be a devastating defeat they recover. Today of course we are faced with polarized partisan parity they are about the same size. They are competitive in elections beginning in the nineties we were told they have a lock on the presidency with the internal majorities in the house of representatives then you have so baby boomers named bill clinton and gingrich come along now democrats win more elections than republicans but they have been much closer than the nomination of the house or the presidency. So we have a lot of discord and a lot of negative feelings looking past some of the controversies history tells us we will continue to have the democratic and republican parties around for a long time it could take time to adjust to the political marketplace its not without the market failures but its one that has continued to work overtime so in conclusion to go back to the 19 fifties there were academics that said our party system isnt very rational have all these republicans and conservative democrats its more rational to have one clearly liberal and conservative party they thought they would win most of the time but they genuinely believe this and i have chapters in this book about the disappearance of the liberal republicans and conservative democrats. Today their prayers have been answered as the political pundits and scientist think its just terrible you just cant go pleasing academics there is other things i will leave for my colleagues for the commentary thank you for your attention. [applause] that was a wonderful introduction to the book now we will turn to the successor generation for your comments. Thank you this reminded me to bring me back to our country it is still an essential history and you brought to life this extra life of democracy has shaped the life of elections in the 19h and 20th century religious and ethnic and racial diversity as well but Ethnic Diversity being something the definition which has changed over time. Certainly we have elections and swings of elections so now that looks different but that fundamental principle i do fear we are losing that in the electorate we are headed to a National Political culture urban versus rural to perfectly sorted parties with very little complexity that maybe still a little less in that portion then we had in the past that hopefully will prove that wrong so i want to talk about that era of the parity that we seem to be stuck in a deadlock with a pattern that despite all the pundit predictions eight years of democratic control followed by republican control you can see you next year if that holds up followed by a tendency for democrats to still have a chance certainly having them control the house with the gingrich revolution that presidency but not consistently control the white house in that time. It clearly demonstrates all the guardrails from the civil rights with conservatives such as the demise of those in the house that are almost all uniformly democratic that eventually with those political conventions and those that were dismantled in the seventies for those that have grown up under the system to be swept away with the gingrich revolution. Ever since then as the efficient market hypothesis that ideological friction and transaction cost has gone away in the partisanship predicts much more clearly than it ever did 93 percent voted for romney in 2012 it with the president ial nominees no say on state voted differently than their senate by then the guardrails. And then we spent time bemoaning the fact that election that saw the republicans. We have had the rebirth with the major factor in american politics nothing like what the russians were saying in the 2016 election in terms of vitriol and partisan hatred so with the growth the broadcast media and the rise of the voice of god to standardize the Media Coverage across the country but still heavily mediated where its hard for the partisan media of today. So that breaks down with the rebirth of partisan media with internet and cable news. I am somewhat pessimistic and that those incentives are such that with the rise of the aoc challenge that they are incentivized. And the members of congress. And those that are amplified by the echo chambers. And with that type of politics to the middle of the 20th century and if those different religions. That cities book more democrat but its not too different than what it is today. But they kind of had the same structure and as a result at the state level was pretty competitive for the most part with the massive democratic upheaval in catholics voting for the president ial nominee. So even so most of the big states were relatively up for grabs in 40 states were competitive in one way or another. Working on the Bush Campaign now the list is no more than ten. So throughout we you have little fish towns scattered throughout the regions now theres one big bill monta would big fishtown. And entire states dominated and that those votes are wasted in the Electoral College. And so for Hillary Clinton to win and as a result much of the rest of the country there actually moving in the opposite direction with this new political alignment for the continued disconnect. But also the character and what we have seen that it may be where those urban areas have moved so far democratic in the 2016 election and now thats reinforced in the 2018 election. And to be least discussed tangentially. And based on the shift of the very large metros in the south and then to behave more like their counterparts in the north less and less regional variations that you can look at the National Statistics with a number of degree holders. There is less distinctiveness about a particular area that is a National Dynamic in microcosm. And two thirds of the swing that explains to help statistics with education of how they voted democratic in the past. With that media revolt against donald trump. But overall the swing in the election very much explained of the whites by education. And to issue positions more correlated over time. And the Obama Administration guided by partisanship but we dont know the cost to trumpet his base continues to move. With a job approval is shrinking with every presidency with the exception of 9 11. The trendline looks pretty flat for job approval and impeachment has not budged a single percentage point. So to conclude and with that ideology with the enterprising political leader to get on board with that. And conservativism that used to mean National Defense and freemarket and America First and controlling illegal immigration and political correctness. And then as a result of that everything falls into line with that. But as a movement to control this ideological definition rather than engineering the demographics of the local differences we see. Just a little aside what is referred to that actually made them responsible you can ask yourself how responsible they are behaving. With a Political Science literature. So theres a few things in life and as a small child i wandered into a wasp nest and then to use respond to Michael Perrone im not a stranger but i am to those who have accidentally forgotten about elections and that is the task today. So what i will do instead is take the parties do adapt over time and with the Cottage Industry because people just want to believe it. And especially on the Progressive Side ideologically getting to around the corner and then that fits into that genre. But the truth is we are really bad at predicting of where they will be because they are so adaptable so to illustrate have asked people to go back in time its now 94 years to have this discussion of demographics so you would take it to the bank the democrats are doomed so recently there was a split between the progressives and the gop and then another in 1924 the two parties combined for 65 percent of the vote. And also look at demographics. As i stand here there are three things to take to the bank the first African Americans will always vote republican to see the first migration north road with republicans standing in the north relatedly the south will always be democratic since the civil war would not change and workingclass whites coming around to the gop coming around the first time in that partys history they had appealed and that democrats are just doomed for that joke as like three more years. [laughter] by 1928 the class would be wrong because they responded by nominating al smith and with that readout. The next thing to go was africanamerican. In 1932. We dont have exit polls but fdr one about 70 percent of the black vote and it really hasnt dipped below that. With the vast majority of the republican vote with the end of the reconstruction so it michael alluded to only one of those changes going from republican to democratic. With those white workingclass voters owe 34 years. But dead wrong. Then as they wrote after that election positive signs of the gop to be had and again it was a very astute observation young boomers waiting to come into the electorate and some democratic that 18 through 24 population. And with that election through general ford things suddenly look good for the republicans and in 2008 the book came out predicting after the election of obama republicans to be in the wilderness 40 years two years later they had the best Midterm Election of any parties since 1938. The truth is that the parties of resilience to identify on the ground and respond. That the voters are often better than the people who run the parties. From a fellow aei scholar with that horrible environment for republicans both party voters to what the party elders wanted. It was a great opportunity we will elect more progressive candidates. Especially those that were really scared he would blow the election. But at the same time the republicans nominated the most moderate candidate they had running and in doing so by going with someone with john mccain. That the biggest example is that i was convinced and i think a lot of people up here and marco rubio may have done better than to flip some of the upper midwestern states. Certainly something i did not see but other primary voter saw. By offtopic shifting gears it is an interesting observation in this book and then to predict elections for the economic models. But it goes back to the 19 sixties. And they dont have very good polling and aching them on Economic Data that they rely on is sparse but before that elections like 19 oh eight were republicans held onto power handily. That election doesnt fit that mold or 1876 they dont fit that mold so one of the observations the book has is that for most of the time that had been collected the majority has a living memory of the Great Depression and the world war ii that followed it. This is like the lightbulb in the head. The models havent been as good recently with the polarization saying it doesnt move but what if it was the fact that all of these models were really measuring American History and as it passes from our collective memory that they are about to fail that is something that keeps me up at night and that is the astute observation from the book. Remember we used to work right next door to each other so i very good memories of the National Journal in the olden days. Reading it cover to cover and what made it come alive as we drive anywhere in this country i tell them what Congressional District we are driving through as we are in the car. [laughter] even someone whos not obsessed with politics within each of the chapters that michael wrote one incredibly interesting thing that understanding that part of the country to cover the house exclusively i love covering the house is much more interesting and in part because of the texture and then put it all together. And i learned more about america more than any other experience covering politics because they brought that regional wisdom for what that party was i have a great image to be mown i keep stealing text from you because this what made politics so much find that within the party a different way of conservativism and liberalism and you bring that to washington. I remember explicitly having the interview with two Democratic Candidates and one was outside jackson mississippi with the commissioner and what i asked what his issue was what hes running on he said fourlane highways. Thats it. [laughter] we need to go to jackson for jobs we can do it if the roads are bad. And to be fair i had a hard time understanding him. It is just peter infrastructure and then on those other issues but to be supportive of gun rights and social issues. Okay. Fine. But literally the next minute from suburban portland oregon. And then boarded medical school and dropped out and then was a software attorney from suburban portland. And with that information superhighway it was all about free trade and how to impact the economy. With a very different agenda to bring to washington so now mostly the candidates may be reasonably different but with those constituencies and the issues and its not just the east coast and west coast and everybody in between but this is more the kind of place that you live which feels really different than other times to be geographically polarized we have always found a way to be divided in the North South Division and now driven by density whether that is dallas, denver, Orange County california, you are more likely to be voting democratic. And then to be voting republican. Because of the metroplex and that new information economy. And with those rural areas Energy Extraction the agenda of those two americas and then to have representatives of those models working together. And then to create and agenda. And to explain how we got to this place of polarization and not just even pure ideology and that is my worldview in washington at least that is fine for me as a constituent i dont need to understand the economic or cultural views with different parts of the country but the political system should be able to balance that. Overall talking about the parties i agree with everybody appear and their ability to transform and stay relevant. But the Political Parties are dead but partisanship is alive. So the way that i see that the campaign operators are influenced what the party does. They determine who will be the nominee. Primaries allow who. Lee said this is great this is important we dont want to have close doors to determine into the offices we will let the people decide they are the most liberal the turnout in primaries is ridiculously low with a 5 percent turnout so those that are elected to congress with those districts that are red or blue and those that happen to be that is more moderate bites and temperament. For those that are the most vested they are no longer the gatekeepers for money. Its hard to raise money to have the party behind you. They close as many doors as they wanted open. And the softmoney band. As the outside parties i remember explicitly reit leading with the Party Campaign person to coordinate with campaigns. This is not your race to lose. This is the democratic seat is not your seat. I will determine if you lose that or not i will spend money there how we as a party want to spend money because it is our seat. Now Bernie Sanders has raised more money and has more cash on hand they and joe biden the former Vice President he is not raising money with the party apparatus. Hes not a democrat either but thats a good point. And michael made this point i would argue there is a thirdparty president his name is donald trump. And then was not a traditional republican in every sense of the word he had been many different parties but yet here we are not only does it embrace him with the election and then to have a hold and on the republican side despite the fact with the position that he takes a most everything that he does it with the core values and Bernie Sanders has the same category. And then this is what the controversy was about. And in another era putting a sum on the scale for Hillary Clinton. That that is what we do we support people that are democrats. And then it goes to the other piece. Because of the Party Platform i dont know the last time anybody read that is silly because it doesnt matter but the individuals drive the policy of the parties in technology plays a big role. And under aoc has more influence on the agenda. She had 14000 votes and were talking about more than what she said more than anything else. It is pretty remarkable. But that system within Congress Works the speaker still has control of what gets to the floor. To get into it peoples tv sets instagram Work Computers much more so than nancy pelosi could ever do. Technology has changed the way of institutions that they will have to revolve. And that is less important and that partisanship is more important so to understand the world. To go all the back and forth who tells me the truth cracks is that the democrats cracks i believe that republicans i believe that. And to ask a question would you support that cracks of course. And then another set of people that put the name trumpeted or obama. And i will opinions of that issue changed dramatically. Has nothing to do with the underlying issues. So i am happy to open it up to questions and comments that i agree with michael what do we do in a country that is as polarized as this clicks that we are incredibly resilient and then we find a way it still incredibly uncomfortable and no easy way and where you go on the other side. We only have 15 minutes left. It is political realignment. But if you look at the difference between 2,002,004 president ial election the other 47 stayed the same. We are less than the period of realignment and the key electoral vote which you people anticipated in 2014 that demographic percentage of the area most political actors had forgotten and now there is relevantly litter chain little change between the 19 sixties and seventies from what we see today. We will not stay this way forever but how many are switching from 16 to 2020 . You are not realigning so maybe youre taking that was 55 45 and then they went 60 40 now 70 30. The by the last two were reelected with 51 percent of the vote with the claims we were headed toward a republican natural majority the democratic natural majority. Neither claim so far has been vindicated. There are some underrated big shifts going on underneath the bill bill clinton carried it by 13 points nevada has gone from estate i think the texas shifts are the real deal. But these realignments are not what you learned about in undergrad. Should we draw any inference that the parties themselves are less popular those that say none of the above are increasing in number cracks and then the polling data is pretty clear. And up and down the line. But really they were one party or the other. In some stage you are called an independent and that is that real difference rather than independence. You have a point less willing to identify the party in part with a negative partisanship. And then to say he love the issues in the ideology and i hate the other side. Why republican i dislike republicans a lot of people call themselves independents i dont feel comfortable even if they vote 100 percent of the time with that party because at the core there are problems at the pretty too conservative or too liberal that doesnt mean they are moderate but whatevers going on in the party with a big blob all these different tentacles. There was an analysis of independents and moderates of new more than 2 percent of the american public. M based on your comments reading the first page of the book it looks terrific. I love the discussion you all made about the surprises especially by the academics and that may be the two dough names of the expectations of behavior and predictions of behavior of those expectations as a result does that seem like a fair account cracks and typically the perspective i agree i talk about the political marketplace as well as economic they both have market failures. So to talk about the process and the change of this. In the way districts the sophistication and the result seems to be a willingness to compromise. They had no problems of redistricting. And then terrible that people are choosing and their candidates are choosing their voters. That the Supreme Court seems to be adopting that if you force them to adhere closely to the population guidelines and this includes the independent commissions. And with those political scientist devices. So the party cannot benefit itself so much and then to have numerous examples from the 19 sixties and the seventies and eighties and nineties all of that in anticipation of 2020. So now we are going to a regime one party or the other but the fact is that any party passes overwhelming support in a very dense area is a disadvantage in an equal population of the singlemember district plan no matter how you draw the line the illinois democratic lane. You cannot benefit yourself those are three have other districts those that have with 80 percent. And to the Electoral College so talk about chasing the constitution thats a difficult process. And then of these non dense areas which use to get 44 percent of the votes now you get 20 percent may be they hit the donkey over the head with a two by four you want to win elections with the singlemember district maybe you should go to the place where they are in order to win instead of saying i will tear the temple down because i didnt win this time. So with the lack of third parties how rare that was how much is that related and with the minority. We allow people to win without a majority. Most other democracies require a runoff. Canada we just saw to continue thats more popular than the party that lost they didnt get the right number of seats. It is the beneficiary or the party of the right with the non beneficiary. The Electoral College tends to give us a majority. And to win estates votes. So pretty clearly it has a role to prevent parties from competing this candidates getting 10 percent in the polls i will pick the winner but something is fundamental