Are Republicans the new infrequent voters? In a new Catalist study, researchers say yes. Big shifts may be coming in both political campaigning and election laws.

Unlike mis-reported “horse race” polls during election season, the Catalist study is public opinion polling done right. Catalist collects comprehensive data from a sample featuring a broad cross-section of Americans. This includes panel data, in which the same people are repeatedly interviewed over time to see how their opinions change. Political campaigns and academics both consider the for-profit firm to be a gold standard for well-collected data.

The Catalist study found that in 2024 Democratic support increased markedly among frequent voters — that is, voters who regularly participate in elections. Support for Trump surged among infrequent voters, including a growing coalition, particularly of men, that was far more diverse than Trump’s traditional base of older, white voters.

Frequent voters could also be called “self sufficient” voters. They do not need much help from campaigns or get out the vote (GOTV) drives, and are less likely to be influenced by either. Frequent voters are more likely to make up their minds on their own, without reference to advertising or candidate appearances and well in advance of the election. They are more likely to be abreast of any changes in election laws, to keep their voter registrations up to date, to go to the right polling place and to have the right documentation (such as state-issued Photo ID), without needing prompts or reminders.

In recent decades, Democrats have invested heavily in GOTV efforts, otherwise known as the “ground game,” particularly in battleground states and districts. These target infrequent voters. In 2024, the Trump campaign countered with more investment of their own in GOTV, and it paid off handsomely. If the Democrats’ base is now made up mostly of self-sufficient, unpersuadable voters, both parties’ strategies will shift. Democrats will have to target infrequent voters more carefully, in order to avoid accidentally mobilizing more Republicans.

Meanwhile, Republicans will increase their investment in the ground game more generally. They face major challenges. This spring, I attended the post-election symposium at the Dole Institute of Politics at KU, where panelists speculated that some voters in battleground states such as Arizona and Wisconsin simply voted for Trump and then left the rest of their ballots blank, enabling Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate to win. This behavior is consistent with infrequent voting, and the election results from these states suggest that the Dole panelists were at least partially correct in both.

What about election laws? For decades, Republicans have backed new laws that may lower turnout among infrequent voters, including Photo ID and proof of citizenship laws, the latter enthusiastically championed by Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach. Since 2020, Republicans have added crackdowns on dropbox and mail-in voting, such as the new Kansas law eliminating the grace period for mail-in ballots.

What if the voters disenfranchised by these crackdowns are now mostly Republicans? Well before 2024, and despite Democrats’ objections, political science research has consistently shown that Photo ID laws have little impact on election results. Photo ID requirements may lower voter turnout by an average of about 2%, but those numbers include roughly equal numbers of Democratic and Republican voters. It is well-documented that these laws are unnecessary; there is no widespread election fraud.

With these recent changes, restrictive laws may hurt Republican vote share. Conspiracy theories notwithstanding, GOP legislators may want to do some serious soul-searching before passing any more voting restrictions.

— Michael Smith is a professor of political science at Emporia State University.