Look at the “facts,” Ross urges us:
Where the Clinton-era Democrats still tried to win working class whites outright, the Obama-era Democrats mostly just used scorched-earth campaigning to try to minimize the G.O.P.’s margin and/or keep these voters on the sidelines. Where the pre-Obama party still made room for immigration skeptics and coal-country populists, the Obama-era Democrats have pushed in policy directions calculated to alienate many of the swing voters who cast ballots for Byron Dorgan in the past, or Joe Manchin or Mark Pryor in the present. Where the pre-Obama party spoke the language of “safe, legal and rare” on abortion and basically set gun control aside as a losing issue, the Obama Democrats have mostly dropped the “rare” part and, post-Newtown, taken up the gun-control cause anew. And so on.
It’s very true that in 1992 Bill Clinton received a large chunk of the working class white vote, which he actively courted, but then lost by 1) passing gun control legislation, 2) passing NAFTA, and 3) fighting aggressively for unrestricted access to abortion. The Obama administration strenuously avoided the least mention of gun control, to the extent that the NRA feared that its very reason for existence would disappear, which is why it worked so wildly to create the fraudulent “Fast and Furious” scandal, which was nothing more than a tale of bureaucratic incompetence and backbiting worked up into a grand conspiracy. Obama’s liberal base exploded in rage over the Sandy Hook murders, which is why the administration backed a meaningless package of reforms, that would not have had the least impact on “gun rights,” but which the NRA managed to squelch anyway, as proof of its omnipotence.
As for the rest, it’s very true* that the Democratic Party has continued on a “top bottom” policy arc that largely benefits the lower class (largely minority) and gratifies the upper middle. In addition, ObamaCare infuriated seniors, who are disproportionately white and disproportionately “non college” (because the country was whiter in the old days, and fewer people went to college). They saw Obama taking away their benefits and giving them to a melting pot of multi-ethnic deadbeats. The Democrats never realized how limited the appeal of universal coverage would be. Now they’re learning. But failing to cater to the interests of a voting group is not the same thing as trying to prevent that group from voting.
Afterwords
As I say, Ross isn’t all bad. He’s even willing to stick up, a little, for “controversial” author Reza Aslan. Yes, the guy did overstate his credentials, did write an unoriginal book that he’s trying to pass off a work of brilliant originality and significance—an aggressive self-promoter, definitely—but so what? Other authors, with better credentials, have written worse books! And Aslan, in his book, is even willing to acknowledge that there’s evidence that contradicts his thesis! It’s almost as if Ross has a bit of a soft spot for aggressive self-promoters!
*I guess I already said that.
