[8:29 pm] It's just about half an hour shy of the start of the Vice-Presidential debate. The TV is on, my laptop is open, and I'm ready for "live-typing." What's "live-typing?" My made up word for typing up my thoughts on the debate, and other aspects of American politics (I'm more interested in the latter than the former), without any internet access. I'll get around to posting this some time Friday.

There's more on my mind than just the debate. The Twelve Tribes of American Politics have returned to American politics. First identified by John Green of the Bliss Institute at University of Akron back in 2004, the twelve tribes are helping in sorting out the socio-cultural battleground of American politics. I disagree with Brad's view that the study shows distaste for Jews, Muslims, or blacks; I think a study of, say, Protestants is more enlightening if you can separate out the historically pro-Democratic Black Protestants. One of the strongest arguments for a libertarian wing of the Democratic Party is built around the idea of a "non-Christian coalition" rivaling the Religious Right.

I do not believe that libertarians have to be non-Christian. But over the last eight years (and more), the Religious Right has demonstrated disturbing authoritarian tendencies. Social conservatism may be alienating enough to libertarians, but the Religious Right has developed an unhealthy disregard for federalism, the rule of law, and the very civil liberties forming the foundation of our constitutional government. America is becoming a less Christian nation, which demographically favors the Democratic coalition. But it arguably means that the Religious Right, watching American society pass it by, will redouble their efforts to enact their morals into law and embrace even more extreme positions. Both ideological extremes prefer to nationalize social issues, I'd rather be on the side that pushes for the more tolerant and free position. Except for states where the Religious Right is weak even within the Republican Party (Any state where Romney + McCain + Paul outnumbered Huckabee + Thompson early on, with uncertainty in how to treat Giuliani and states like Utah where Mormons are dominant), there's little opportunity for libertarianism within the Republican Party. But I reserve the judgment to figure out how the Romney v. Huckbeee v. Gingrich battle plays out in 2011/2012.

[8:56 pm] Chris Matthews is on MSNBC. Yes, that's what I'm watching.

The Democratic Party is more than just the party of the non-Christian coalition, it is also the party of the non-white coalition. The 2004 chart demonstrates this divide, but with some interesting exceptions. Black Protestants are more socially conservative than the rest of the party, but they are rather close to the "Spiritual but not religious" group; the "Religious Left" is aligned ideologically with the assortment of non-Christian groups in the party.

[9:02 pm] Debate!

Since 2004, several of the Twelve Tribes have shifted on major issues, such as abortion. Moderate Evangelicals and Convertible Catholics are moving to the left on abortion; Whitebread Protestant, Moderate Evangelicals and Convertible Catholics are also shifting to the right on skepticism about government.

[9:15 pm] Palin is exceeding my expectations. The debate is unbelievably boring. Palin is clearly trying to run to the anti-government right. Good coincidence with the above observation on skepticism about government among key swing groups.

Trends among Catholics and Protestants have been brought up before on this blog. The drift towards the Republican Party among Catholics may be attributed to a decline in moderate and liberal Catholics, which parallels an overall decline among most moderate and liberal Protestant denominations. The Whitebread Protestants were already well to the left on social issues and align relatively well with Mainline Protestants, a group that has been trending Democratic as the culture war continues to unfold.

[9:29 pm] Palin seems oddly curious in talking about herself and her record. If she's part of the reason why McCain has slumped in the polls, is the strategy to focus on rebuilding her image tonight, not defending McCain personally?

Interlude

[9:40 pm] Was the gay marriage segment just fundamentally off? That just didn't pass the smell test. Turning the volume down, this is getting distracting. As far as I've seen, Palin hasn't messed up. Neither has Biden.

If the key swing groups in American politics are moving to the left on social issues and the right on economic issues, you wouldn't know it from tonight's debate. But you may well see it in the election, which has put traditionally red state like Indiana, Virginia, and even North Carolina in play. In the long run, a Democratic Party increasingly "beholden" to non-Christians who embrace social and religious pluralism, facing an electoral battleground with libertarian-leaning swing voters, is an ideal scenario for libertarians, regardless of party affiliation. Although given that all three groups demonstrate moderate religious beliefs and practices, it may be necessary for Democrats to find a way to pitch both libertarian-leaning policies with a values message that can accommodate religious voters. Now wouldn't that be something.

Once the dust settles from this election, I see a handful of major trends. A sharp swing of Latinos, both Catholic and Protestant but the big story will be Latino Protestants, away from the Republican Party and to the Democratic Party. Except for foreign policy, Latino Protestants have not demonstrated a sudden change in their ideology. They have, however, shown a sharp change in their partisan affiliation, despite the nomination of John McCain. It seems that two years of xenophobic grandstanding by Tom Tancredo and the like has made a major impact on Latino voting happens, squandering the work of Republican strategists like Karl Rove. The story (or at least one story) from the liberal blogosphere post-election day will be the consolidation of the non-white coalition by Barack Obama. Victories in New Mexico, Colorado, and maybe even Nevada will play into this narrative.

[10:12 pm] I turned up the volume in time to hear Palin give a shout out to schoolteachers. Ugh.

Another trend, one that I am probably more alone in giving voice to, will be among white Christians. Depending on how you slice up the electorate based on exit polls, I believe that Barack Obama will do better among segments like "white Evangelicals" than John Kerry, a kernel for press stories talking about John McCain's inability to shore up support with the base.

[10:34 pm] Long interlude, but David Gregory just said "Senator Palin." Isn't that a gaffe? I haven't been a fan of him for a while.

If Republicans take the shift among Latinos as "given" and fail to challenge it because their base is so strongly xenophobic on immigrantion and cultural pluralism, they'll have to give up on Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico. To have long term electoral viability, they'll have to find a way to flip the blue states in the Midwest (Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota) and regaining the edge in the rest of the Rust Belt (Indiana, Ohio) and the Upper South (Virginia, North Carolina). Even if Obama fails to win in the latter four, his strength in such traditionally red states (Indiana?!) is concerning for any Republican political strategist. And the key groups in those states? Moderate Evangelicals, Catholics, and Mainline Protestants.

Another sign of the difficulty facing libertarians in the Republican Party is the battlefield the GOP faces. On the one hand, the party could give up its subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) racism and xenophobia and appeal to America's socially conservative, but economically liberal, racial minorities through an emphasis on cultural concerns. Libertarians like those at this blog would welcome giving up the old paleo-strategy of appealing to racial fears, but dislike a focus on, say, opposing equal rights for all American and rolling back the right to privacy and reproductive choice.

Or, the Republican Party could focus on the more libertarian leaning swing groups of Moderate Evangelicals, Catholics, and Mainline Protestants. While this would produce policy, both social and economic, that may please libertarians, it would probably mean that the party fails to challenge its base by dropping its pandering on racial divisions. Ron Paul's discomforting juggling act of pandering to the base on xenophobia and appealing to swing voters on the Iraq War would actually be the best case scenario, in this case.

With the demographic trends favoring the Democratic Party's base, their long term electoral strategy is more favorable to libertarians--as noted above. I think that it is worth reinforcing. Every day it is becoming easier for Democrats to stand up and defend social freedom, civil liberties, and a responsible foreign policy. Four years, eight years of Barack Obama as President will carefully guide the nation towards that direction. With Democrats locking down the non-Christian and non-white coalition, they'll be focusing on the libertarian-leaning swing voters. And with them moving to the left on social issues, the focus will be on appealing to them on economic issues--where they are moving to the right (as defined by the anti-government position, not the statist Republican Party).

But maybe I'm a little idealistic and overly optimistic.

[8:53 am] Morning after. It seems like Biden won according to the polls, but I get the sense that the media is trying to convince everyone that Palin won. Thank you media.