It seems that every election cycle brings with it a new “it” voter — that segment of the voting population that supposedly “decides” the election and that, in the eyes of the punditry, will determine who holds power in this country for the rest of human history, or at least until the next election creates a new “it” voter.? In 1996 and 2000, soccer moms were the “it” group.? In 2002, it was NASCAR dads and security moms.? In 2004, the values voter became the deciding factor.? Just who then is the “it” voter of 2006?

Put simply, 2006 saw the return of the Perot voter: economically populist, socially moderate voters with highly nationalist tendencies.? Had the Democrats not courted candidates who fit this mold in a number of high profile races, Republicans would almost certainly control the Senate right now if not the House.? Democratic candidates like Webb, McCaskill, Casey, and Tester all won by appealing to this specific group of voters who found themselves once again disenchanted?with a Republican Party led by a president named Bush.?

Because this voting bloc will almost certainly be labeled the “key” to 2008 for the next two years (until 2008 actually occurs and we discover that an entirely different voting bloc was actually key), it’s probably a worthwhile effort to dissect the positions of our new “it” voter based on inferences from the 2006 election results.

First, on social issues, this group appears to be moderate, or libertarian, or tempermentally conservative, depending on your label preference.? That is to say that Tuesday’s results showed a very strong trend towards a rejection of governmental attempts to impact the culture one way or the other.? Voters told the social left to shove it in a number of states by passing amendments that preclude judicial introduction of same sex marriage into their states.? Similarly, these same voters rejected the social right on abortion and stem cell research.? Like Perot, these voters basically have no use for a government that attempts to modify the culture.? That’s why I call them socially tempermentally conservative — they want the culture?free of?government and resist governmental attempts to change it.

On economics and foreign policy, there are also hints of Perot.? Voters selected Democratic candidates who value balanced budgets over low taxes (still not sure why we can’t have both) and who are vehemently opposed to Iraq.? It’s a Buchananism of the left: economic populism,?hands off?the culture,?and the shunning of foreign adventures.? My guess is this group is also anti-free trade and strongly opposed to the president’s immigration plan.? Again, Perotism rises?14 years later to defeat another guy named Bush.

The new Democratic majority has these voters to thank for its ascendancy.? Without their votes in the industrial north, west, and?midwest, Republicans would still be in charge.? And the Democratic leadership, which forgot long ago how to manage a diverse coalition, will now have to keep the Kos kids from going for the jugular of voters whose views on social change and immigration they find reprehensible.? This gives Republicans a real shot at winning these voters back if the Boxerites take over the party the way they did after these same Perot types voted Democrat back in 1992 and watched as the party veered to the far left.? Whatever the case, Perot has indeed had the last laugh, as this particular type of swing voter is the new “it” voter in American politics, for better or worse.