‘Revenge of the Wal-Mart Voters’

June 29, 2006

You’ve no doubt heard about the trendy demographic sub-groups that political scientists get excited about. We’ve seen NASCAR Dads, soccer moms, office-park dads, security moms, wired workers, freelance evangelicals, and others.

[tag]Ryan Sager[/tag], who is a conservative Republican, wrote a fascinating item this week about a sub-group I hadn’t heard much about: “[tag]Wal-Mart[/tag] [tag]Voters[/tag].”

I’ve heard that [tag]Costco[/tag] shoppers vote Democratic while Wal-Mart shoppers vote GOP, but Sager cites a Zogby poll that highlighted a noticable partisan divide: 85% of frequent Wal-Mart shoppers voted for Bush — and 88% of people who never shop there voted for Kerry.

But the Wal-Mart gap is in flux. Earlier this month, [tag]Bush[/tag]’s approval rating among Wal-Mart voters dropped to just 35% — “compared to a 45 percent positive rating from born-again Christians, 49 percent from NASCAR fans, and 54 percent from self-identified conservatives.” For that matter, 51% of Wal-Mart voters agreed with the statement that it’s “time for the Democrats to take over and run” Congress.

Apparently, it has the GOP a little worried.

Live by Wal-Mart. Die by Wal-Mart. That could be the fate of the [tag]Republican Party[/tag] this November if millions of government-loving voters suddenly abandon the [tag]GOP[/tag] and return to their natural home in the [tag]Democratic Party[/tag].

The worst-case scenario for conservatives, however — that’s red-blooded, small-government conservatives, in case you were wondering — would be if the Republican Party bent over backward to convince these voters to stick around.

What’s Wal-Mart got to do with anything? Not a whole lot, except as a symbol of a particular type of voter: largely Southern, rural, lower-middle-class, female, socially conservative — not big fans of tax cuts, but huge fans of government programs.

In other words, a libertarian conservative’s worst nightmare.

As Sager sees it, these Wal-Mart voters don’t really fit in the GOP anyway. He makes a compelling case that they’re on their way out and Republicans shouldn’t even try to stop them.

Ever since the Gingrich revolution went off course and the GOP took a beating for instigating the government shutdowns of 1995 and 1996, the Republican Party has been trying to prove to jittery low-to-moderate income voters that it’s not all that anti-government. Instead, it’s hoped to hold these voters’ loyalty by pressing their cultural hot buttons — gay marriage, flag burning, gay flag burning, married gays burning flags — and, after 9/11, making the (entirely reasonable) case that the Democrats are not to be trusted on national security.

But this year, voters are fed up with the war in Iraq, and other than that they’re focused on the economy, immigration, health care and gas prices. None of this cuts in favor of the GOP with the Wal-Mart set. Wal-Mart voters are giving Democrats a 6-point edge as to who’s better equipped to handle foreign policy, an 18 percent edge on health care and a 25 percent edge on gas prices (the parties are dead-even among Wal-Mart voters on the economy and immigration). What’s more, moral values hardly rate as an issue this year, for any voting bloc.

What do these Wal-Mart-style voters want? According to a Pew Forum study, they support a higher minimum wage and guaranteed access to health care. And they’re not persuaded by an anti-government pitch. Hmm.

Sager suggests the [tag]Republicans[/tag] find a new way to woo these voters to stay in the tent, but he doesn’t make any specific recommendations. I can’t say I blame him — if “married gays burning flags” is off the table and Wal-Mart voters are anxious to vote on pocketbook issues, it’s hard to imagine what the GOP has to offer anyway.

I hate to get my hopes up yet again. But if voters are focusing on real issues instead of these stupid cultural crap issues then maybe I can start to feel good about this country again because once again it will be governed by grown-ups.

  • My guess is that the previous data was spurious: the GOP was never that popular with the “average” Wal-Mart shopper.

    Here in Minnesota, Wal-Mart attracts a ton of immigrants and other low income workers in the Twin Cities. There aren’t many W-Ms in our small towns yet, but it’s easy to guess it’s where the migrant farm workers go–and we have a lot of them–along with the folks who aren’t all that well-established with the town’s long-standing businesses and don’t care if they’re putting Bob and Betty out of business. That would make the state-wide average Wal-Marter kind of foreign-born, a little poor, and socially disengaged. Why would that composite like BushCo even slightly?

    If you’re talkin’ about typical rural white lower middle class voters, though, and not just in the south…well, there’s your 21st century GOP: people who are not very engaged in the future of their community, fearful of authority, anxious for their future, nervous around anyone not like them, feeling a little inferior, losing their children–who think their parents are dorks–and overall angry. Especially angry. It’s why anger is the currency of right wing talk radio, which blankets America’s rural areas.

  • Unless we get rid of the voting machines, nothing will change in November.

  • In a way, the Wal*Mart voters used to be a core Dem constituency – People who had to rub 2 pennies together to make the ends meet. The GOP had successfully pried most of these people to their camp with the moral wedges. But as I’ll say till I’m blue in the face, those only work when all else is working reasonablly.
    My decidedly unscientific characterization of the Wally World voter is this:
    They care about their country, but don’t like politics. They follow the political headlines, but not the complete story (Why they are so ripe for wedgies – they respond to emotional arguments, because they don’t follow the facts closely enough for intellectual arguments) They are less educated, but have a strong belief in ‘fairness’. They are not stupid, but there’s only so much they can keep up with.

    One thing is for certain, they know when their being screwed. They know it now. I’d say they are ripe for our picking with the right message. With these voters, I suspect John Edwards’ ‘Two Americas’ populist rhetoric would work wonders.

  • Is there a disconnect that the “typical Wal-Mart shopper” is focused on health care?

  • I hate to say it, but Wal-Martians around here couldn’t find their asses with both hands, much less a voting booth.

  • I’m sure that all of the Bush supporters that used to shop at Wal-Mart are just doing so dandy in this booming economy that they no longer have to shop there. They’ve all moved on to more expensive pastures with brand names and debt spending.

    Seriously, though, if these foolish sots who put Bush into the Oval Office for two terms are ready to finally wise-up, they can’t start by stopping their reckless spending and not shopping at Wal-Mart altogether.

    Fiscal responsibility starts at home first. Let’s set a good example for the Government.

  • Re: comment #2

    Pat Robertson’s Tennis Shoe raises some interesting points, I believe.

  • Wal Mart voters were incurious.
    They looked for the price cut but didn’t see the con job that cost them healh insurance, a pension, and a living wage.
    Republican blue collar were incurious.
    They looked for the cross and flag but didn’t see the con job that cost them health insurance, a pension, and a living wage.

    High gas prices, loss of quality jobs, loss of life in Iraq, etc. are awakening angry curiosity .

    Dems would do well to play “quality of life in decline” themes like a broken record. George may not be curious, but his base is starting to question.

  • Wal Mart could be a thorn in the side of the GOP if they try to heist the election. I mean, look at all the wonderful toys available—tiki torches…pitchforks…chain-saws…just what the good doctor ordered for when the peasants finally revolt against Versailles-on-the-Potomac….

  • Guilty as Charge: I shop at Wal-Mart for the prices. That fact doesn’t make me a Bush sycophant.

  • I shop at WalMart regularly. Our town (rural western VA) is too small for us to have a Costco, so I can’t be politically correct and fiscally responsible *both*. And I’m not the only “leftie” shopping there, either; that’s where I heard the little post-Nov ’04 ditty (the one that ended “… I’ll hug your elephant and you can kiss my ass”) first.

  • I have boycotted Wal-Mart for years; first on matters of taste, then as a matter of conscience. It would truly amaze me if Wal-Mart voters jumped ship from President Bush. I hope I am wrong–but these people have voted against their own interests out of some sense of the GOP/Bush’s “Jesiosity” for a long, long time now. A hard habit to break–just like saving twenty-five cents on cheap Chinese plastic stuff in a box store where you can beat your kids and suck on a can of Sam’s sugar soda.

  • Pat Robertson’s Tennis Shoe and JoeW and some others have a pretty good analysis going, but I would add one, important word, resentment.

    “Anger” does not quite encompass what the lower middle class, white voter experiences in his alienation from government and politics. Resentment is closer to the truth, and, properly appreciated, accounts for more of the perverse dynamics of the loyalty of lower middle class whites to the Republican Party, as well as the means that Republicans use to maintain their bond with the dittoheads.

    Resentment is the opposite of admiration; resentment loves a fake and a failure. Democrats are way too earnest in their appeals to this group, way too naive about how their condescension is received and distorted.

    But, I agree with other posters, this group does know that they are being screwed. Democrats can use the theme of betrayal effectively with this group, but whatever is said to this group has to be objectively true — Dem message meisters should be doubly and triply careful of their credibility — just because Republicans can lie with impunity does not mean the same low standard applies to the bearers of a different message.

  • I have boycotted Wal-Mart for years; first on matters of taste, then as a matter of conscience. […]
    […] these people have voted against their own interests out of some sense of the GOP/Bush’s “Jesiosity” for a long, long time now. A hard habit to break–just like saving twenty-five cents on cheap Chinese plastic stuff […]
    Comment by SoonerThought — 6/29/2006 @ 9:21 pm

    If it hadn’t been for Dean’s “seed all 50”, I’d probably be staying home, saving gas, instead of driving to the voting booth and waiting in line to vote. I resent, viscerally, being called “these people” and being written off as a no-count ignoramus on the basis of my place of residence.

    Not all of us can afford to vote in accordance with their superior taste and their comfortably-filled purses; some of us shop at WalMart because we don’t have much choice to do otherwise.

    And, FYI, SoonerThought (“SpokeTooSoon” seems to me to be more appropriate), I do not save $0.25 on “cheap Chinese plastic stuff” by shopping at WalMart — I don’t buy “cheap Chinese plastic stuff” *anywhere* — WalMart or Saks 5thAve (always assuming that the brand name store’s mark up is only $0.25, which I doubt). But I do save $8-10 (not counting gas) on a pair of shoes, if I buy it there (8 miles from home) instead of driving 50miles to the nearest, more upscale store…

    Democrats are in the best position in *years* to come into their own again and retrieve the country. But, they ain’t gonna do it if they speak out of both sides of their mouths at once, same as GOP does. You can’t say you’re standing for us and, at the same time, belittle us to hell an’ gone. The problem is not going to be “turn our vote your way”; the problem is going to be “motivate us *to* vote. Why should we?

    Yours, disgusted in rural western VA,

  • I think libra makes a very valid point. So many of us are of a certain socio-economic ilk around these parts. No to stereotype, but I would hazard a guess that most of us are middle to upper middle class with at least an undergraduate degree (and probably at least 50% have some sort of graduate or professional degree), prefer science to religion, etc.

    I also feel that we, partly because of our backgrounds, but largley due to our animus towards the GOP, tend to not only have, but show contempt for the average Bush voter. And we really need to stop. If anything we should feel sorry for them, especially the undereducated and poor. I know that is a difficult job, one that I fail to do more often than not. But I believe it is in our best interests to quit treating them with such scorn.

    Perhaps we need to keep in mind that if we, or our parents, had made some different choices, we might be one of “them.”

  • This demographic is HUGE. This is middle America and this shift portends a downfall for the right. These are the folks who wave the flag because they feel the flag gives them the opportunity to have more of a life than they have now. I’d say this demographic is disproportionately represented in Iraq because the armed services are a way out of their current predicament.

    These are the folks who ahven’t cared that their cheap Rubbermaid products are no longer made in America and had been outsourced to China because as long as the products were cheap they had a good standard of living.

    My feeling is now that middle America’s standard of living is falling due to high home prices and high energy prices and they’re feeling the squeeze. These are the people that in Colorado are losing their housing in large quantities to ARM interest rates that are going through the roof and are realizing the American dream may be just that — only a dream. The repubs may be killing off the Americans that go for the rah rah things they have been trying to pass lately (flag burning, gay marriage, tax cuts) because to them they are only holding on to images. Lose these guys and you lose the crowd that goes for the slogans. The Repubs are definitly f’ing up.

  • I don’t particularly agree with the initial premise that 85% of frequent WM shoppers voted for Bush. And I find it weird that WM shoppers would be broken out as another subgroup when there are so many WM shoppers in the US now.

    What I do find troubling is how WM has found such a niche in the US and the world to absolutely thrive. In a way we are seeing the end result of an extreme form of capitalism that has captured the world, a capitalism with globalization and maximum return to shareholders written all over it. But with a disquise of benefitting the common man. It would be easy to paint the GOP label on it, but the dems have been just as compliant to the elite interests in setting up the conditions for making this happen.

    I shop at WM occassionally, often for the lowest price. What strikes me is the gloom that I feel in the place, the lack of spirit or a show of defeat written into the faces of many of the the customers. And perhaps the spirit of many places has already been broken before WM has entered the territory, the spirit that accompanies the global race to the bottom when people have lost all sense of having any control over their lives in the tacky strip roads of America.

    One other note. Seems like I remember WM waving the “made in America” label when it first gained a foothold in the US. This is particularly ironic now considering that WM would not exist were it not for the cheap labor in China and the huge amounts of capital that the US borrows from China to help make this bargain work.

    Those flag decals won’t get you into WM anymore.

  • Y’all are missing the point… “Walmart voter” is a culturalidentification, regardless of where they actually shop. I’m guessing it roughly corresponds to the blue-collar voters Reagan stole from the Dems – you knew they had to come home eventually.

  • Democrats are way too earnest in their appeals to this group, way too naive about how their condescension is received and distorted.

    But, I agree with other posters, this group does know that they are being screwed. Democrats can use the theme of betrayal effectively with this group, but whatever is said to this group has to be objectively true — Dem message meisters should be doubly and triply careful of their credibility

    Bruce Wilder is right on the money, which is why the Democrats have to go in a different direction in ’08, away from previous perceptions. Hillary Clinton won’t effectively speak to these people; neither will John Kerry or Al Gore. All can be painted with a past of Ivy League condescension; the dominant Kennedy-New England wing of the party is today as tired as the midwestern Humphrey progressives were in the late sixties. Someone like John Edwards would probably best resonate with this crucial voter bloc.

    But are the party bosses and wonks willing to embrace populism, a word that to them is anathema to the coastal elite meritocracy they’ve stood for all these decades? Sadly, I fear not.

  • Wal-Mart sucks so much ass it ain’t even funny. Target isn’t much better, but the products they have last twice as long and don’t cost that much more. And Costco rules — I take The Boy there during lunch time and let him load up on the free samples.

    Now, as far as who votes for who …

    I have a variation of this shirt that I wear quite often. One day, we were just walking by the Wal-Mart (on our way the pet store) and at least a half dozen people said something to me — and none of it positive. One guy called me an asshole, another called me a traitor, and one gal even spit in my direction. Seriously … it was kind of scary.

    But when I wear it to Costco, someone almost always asks me where I got it, and I get many a thumbs up. Sure, I get a few dirty looks, but most of the response is quite positive.

    A very unscientific study to be sure, but I’m 100% honest here — there is a difference between who shops at what store.

  • re:17

    Hi Libra,

    Hope you don’t take the comments posted here as a representation of the modern Democratic Party. I doubt most of them have been to a party meeting in their life. We need and want the suport of people like you.

    As for the comments here about WM, I think they reflect the two sides of Wal-Mart:
    In much of the rural south, WM has been the only choice for years and use to have good products for great prices.
    In many urban areas, WM has only just arrived and is at the bottom of retail food chain. People who shop there are going for the price, even though the goods reflect that cheapness.

  • First, many people who resent Wal-Mart resent them for the fact that their relentless drive to the bottom of the pricing ladder often forces their suppliers to shut down American plants and move their production overseas because that’s the only way to make it cheap enough to satisfy the Bentonville Mafia. When they go to Bentonville for the Wal-Mart dog and pony show the Wal-Mart executives will actively encourage them to eliminate American jobs and move their plants to China. People who refuse in order to protect the quality of their products will not be carried in Wal-Mart. Remember when they used to brag about products made in the U.S.A.? No more.

    That having been said what every Democrat running for office should be pointing out is that the overwhelming majority of laws passed while Republicans have controlled the government completely benefit the wealthy and in spite of Republican arguments it isn’t helping the middle class. While many Americans have fantasies (Let’s be honest that’s all they are for 99.9999% of the populace.) of either becoming wealthy or seeing their children become wealthy don’t they hope that they’d be more responsible with their wealth than most of the current crop? That they wouldn’t forget about the people left on the bottom of the system?

    • Comments are closed.