Stanley Greenberg

Stanley B. Greenberg is a founding partner of Greenberg Research and Democracy Corps, and author of America Ascendant: A Revolutionary Nation's Path to Addressing Its Deepest Problems and Leading the 21st Century.

Recent Articles

From Crisis to Working Majority

The story of the Democratic Party crisis begins in Macomb County, north of the Detroit City line -- and in Northeast Philadelphia, Cobb County near Atlanta, California's San Fernando Valley, and numerous other working- and middle-class neighborhoods across the country. These were the homes of loyal Democrats: people who felt at ease in a diverse, bottom-up, majority coalition that used politics and government to advance the interests of working people. But here we find alienated voters today with little good to say about politics or Democrats. I heard those disaffected voices in Macomb County in 1985, when Reagan Democrats told me that the middle-class white guy gets a raw deal today When journalists Peter Brown of the Scripps-Howard newspapers and Thomas Edsall of The Washington Post visited Macomb and other areas last year, they found people even more articulate about busing, taxes and welfare, liberals and flag-burning -- and even more remote from the national Democrats. The...

1991: How We Found -- and Lost -- a Majority

Stanley B. Greenberg's Fall 1991 article, “From Crisis to Working Majority,” was widely considered a key manifesto for the 1992 Clinton campaign. Bob Woodward reported that Bill Clinton said he had read it three times. On the eve of Bill Clinton's announced candidacy for president, I reviewed a wave of provocative books about the “deepening crisis of the Democratic Party.” With Michael Dukakis' hapless campaign as backdrop, the books described a party of taxes and big government, entrapped by special interests, perhaps condemned to a permanent minority status. But wide swaths of middle America, including the Reagan Democrats, were looking for a way back. “A bottom-up Democratic coalition,” I wrote, “can win back its majority if it rediscovers the values and interests of middle-class America; if it fashions a broad-based class politics and critique of the Reagan-Bush era; and if it learns from important recent progressive works a renewed commitment to politics and national purpose.”...

Contesting Values

In his State of the Union address, President Bush told a rapt nation and the assembled government of the United States that our nation faces grave threats and must live up to its "great responsibilities," which include defending the "pillars of our civilization": our "families and schools and religious congregations." What is more, he warned, America can only be strong if we "value the institution of marriage." Citing the threat of activist judges poised to impose gay marriage on a reluctant nation, Bush vowed to "defend the sanctity of marriage." Through these remarks, Bush made clear his desire to put values at the center of the public debate in 2004. The political calculation hardly seems difficult in light of presumed public prejudices. According to national polls, Republicans are preferred to Democrats by a margin of 22 percentage points when it comes to promoting strong moral values (45 percent to 23 percent); it's an advantage that extends to almost all family-related areas,...

"We"--Not "Me"

D istrust of government is down and the public is clearly looking for an expanded governmental role in a vast range of areas related to the September 11 attacks. How else can we explain the big debate on airline safety? The U.S. Senate wants to federalize security workers and the U.S. House wants to subject them to intense regulation independent of the airlines. Federalize or regulate? This is a Democratic dream. But the opportunity for Democrats goes well beyond the public's support for a more expansive government. During the two months following the attacks, my associates and I listened to people in 23 focus groups all across the country. The emerging mood and values in this new period--with a strong emphasis on unity, coming together, community, seriousness of purpose, freedom of choice, and tolerance--reflect the instinctive impulses of Democrats surely more than they do Republicans'. Indeed, the short-term and consumerist perspective inherent in the Republicans' aggressive tax-...

After the Republican Surge

On the heels of a major conservative surge, Republicans have overplayed their political hand and created an opportunity the Democrats can seize.

M ost Democrats have a hard time being optimistic these days, and it's easy to understand why. The 1994 midterm election produced a swing to the Republicans and a new nationalization of politics that undercut Democrats who had survived in Republican districts and states. A review of polling data suggests that a conservative surge was in evidence as early as mid-1993, as ideological conservatives mobilized against the national Democratic government and its agenda. Three groups in particular--evangelical Christians, lower-income voters, and seniors--rushed to the Republicans, shifting the electoral balance against the Democrats. But for those able to see through the smoke of battle, there is reason for hope. The conservative surge was a reaction to the defining first year of the Clinton presidency. This is a different moment, and there is plenty of evidence of emergent disillusion with the Republican agenda, leaving Democrats positioned to reclaim many of the voters lost in 1994...

Pages