U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-17-2017, 03:02 PM
 
6,964 posts, read 2,485,899 times
Reputation: 3526

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
Sure, I'd agree with that.

But you're saying something completely different than your previous post where you claimed that the GOP, who just took 1,000 elected legislative seats from the DNC over the past 10 years, only had 15 years left of survival.

Not everyone thinks the GOP is "racist and hates immigrants" anymore, because 1) Identity politics has lost its luster over the past 10 years due to Obama playing that card way too often, and 2) It was all lies anyway. People are becoming more educated about the actual history of the DNC, which of course was the party of slavery and the KKK, and 3) The demographics of people who vote GOP are changing. I believe we will see this in 2018, and 2020 with the GOP taking more of the youth vote than in the previous 4-5 POTUS elections, which would be devastating to the DNC which has relied upon the youth vote to win elections in previous years.

I also believe Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania have been lost for the foreseeable future unless Trump and the GOP really **** up the economy. The jobs numbers (whoever may have been the catalyst for them) look very good this year and projections show them being good for the future, and voters will remember that in 2018 and 2020.
10-15 years in which the current GOP coalition has a viable path to the White House.

If the GOP electorate was really changing then you would have a point, but there's no evidence of that. If you study the data for 2016 and compare to previous elections, the GOP is still overly dependent on the blocs of registered voters that are shrinking the most. The share of votes cast by white non-college voters has fallen in every POTUS election but one since 1980. In 2016, Donald Trump won that group by 66%-29% (R+37%). The other shrinking group the the GOP overly depends upon are Christian evangelicals. Trump carried Christian evangelicals by 80%-16% (R+64%) with an estimated evangelical turnout of 85%. A Pew study stated that the average Christian evangelical is 7 years older than the national average. On the surface, that might not see to be a big deal, but actually it is, because when you're dealing with millions of voters it means that within that bloc you have a disproportionate number of older voters. In contrast to those groups, which blocs of voters are growing? (1.) White college graduates carried by Trump by 48% to 45% (R+3) for the weakest R showing among white college grads since 1952, and (2.) Total Minorities carried by Clinton 74% to 21% (D+53%). On average, over the past 20 years, the total white vote drops on average by 2% from one POTUS election to the next. The total minority vote on average increases by 2%. Within the white vote, the non-college vote on average drops by 3% from one POTUS with the white college grad vote increasing by 1%. Those averages are from exit poll data. You get slightly higher total white and white non-college numbers using census data, but the downward trend is consistent using either source. In 2016, with Trump boosting the white non-college vote and a depressed minority turnout, the usual white decline was basically halved, falling from 72% in 2012 to 71% in 2016, instead of the predicted 69% to 70%. The decline can fluctuate, due to turnout, but not completely reversed, due to Father Time.

As far as the Rust Belt is concerned, they are being affected by the same demographic changes effecting the country as a whole. Over the next 4 POTUS cycles, the white non-college vote in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin is projected to drop about 9%. The white non-college and white evangelical blocs in those states are as old as they are everywhere else. With each election, the percentage of the registered vote for white non-college and white evangelical voters will get smaller. As those groups get smaller, to continue to win the GOP will either have to get an ever higher percentage of their vote or broaden their coalition by increasing their percentage of white college or minority or a combination of both. You can't lose voters in blocs voting overwhelmingly for you due to age and just pray that those new voters in the growing sectors don't actually vote. Eventually you must broaden your base. It's not higher math.

Last edited by Bureaucat; 07-17-2017 at 04:19 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-17-2017, 04:47 PM
 
6,964 posts, read 2,485,899 times
Reputation: 3526
[quote=Bureaucat;48869545]10-15 years in which the current GOP coalition has a viable path to the White House.

If the GOP electorate was really changing then you would have a point, but there's no evidence of that. If you study the data for 2016 and compare to previous elections, the GOP is still overly dependent on the blocs of registered voters that are shrinking the most. The share of votes cast by white non-college voters has fallen in every POTUS election but one since 1980. In 2016, Donald Trump won that group by 66%-29% (R+37%). The other shrinking group the the GOP overly depends upon are Christian evangelicals. Trump carried Christian evangelicals by 80%-16% (R+64%) with an estimated evangelical turnout of 85%. A Pew study stated that the average Christian evangelical is 7 years older than the national average. On the surface, that might not see to be a big deal, but actually it is, because when you're dealing with millions of voters it means that within that bloc you have a disproportionate number of older voters. In contrast to those groups, which blocs of voters are growing? (1.) White college graduates carried by Trump by 48% to 45% (R+3) for the weakest R showing among white college grads since 1952, and (2.) Total Minorities carried by Clinton 74% to 21% (D+53%). On average, over the past 20 years, the total white vote drops on average by 2% from one POTUS election to the next. The total minority vote on average increases by 2%. Within the white vote, the non-college vote on average drops by 3% from one POTUS with the white college grad vote increasing by 1%. Those averages are from exit poll data. You get slightly higher total white and white non-college numbers using census data, but the downward trend is consistent using either source. In 2016, with Trump boosting the white non-college vote and a depressed minority turnout, the usual white decline was basically halved, falling from 72% in 2012 to 71% in 2016, instead of the predicted 69% to 70%. The decline can fluctuate, due to turnout, but not completely reversed, due to Father Time.

As far as the Rust Belt is concerned, they are being affected by the same demographic changes effecting the country as a whole. Over the next 4 POTUS cycles, the white non-college vote in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin is projected to drop about 9%. The white non-college and white evangelical blocs in those states are as old as they are everywhere else. With each election, the percentage of the registered vote for white non-college and white evangelical voters will get smaller. As those groups get smaller, to continue to win the GOP will either have to get an ever higher percentage of their vote or broaden their coalition by increasing their percentage of white college or minority or a combination of both. You can't lose voters in blocs voting overwhelmingly for you due to age and just pray that those new voters in the growing sectors don't actually vote. Eventually you must broaden your base. It's not higher math. If the coalition isn't broadened, statistically it will be harder to to win either the national popular vote or the electoral college with the probabilities being close to zeroing out after about 2032.

https://newrepublic.com/article/1388...vanishing-base
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2017, 07:28 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,244 posts, read 11,491,119 times
Reputation: 4305
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaliRestoration View Post
Do fractured parties completely reverse the scope of power in American politics in 8 years?


.
Lets be clear here, the Democrats in 2008 held a larger majority than Republicans ever have in this country. In fact, Democrats have had even larger majorities in both the 1940's and 60's. So no, it hasnt been reversed as you claim.

But you are likely arguing "feelings" rather than numbers, and my answer is yes, a fractured party can do that, your Speaker quit congress because of the factions, or did you forget that ????

Quote:
Not to mention the 4-0 in special elections this year lost by the DNC. But the DNC is just great, unified, and awesome according to you. Ooook
There were more than 4 special elections for congress. Not a single one was considered competitive . None of the districts you are talking about(or the ones you forgot) were less than +8.


That means the party holding the seat has a 8% edge in registered voters there.

You are bragging about winning seats you were supposed to win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2017, 10:51 PM
 
12,639 posts, read 7,297,338 times
Reputation: 7449
Bureaucat's bleating about demographics is so entertaining. He will be bleating about it forever while his failed fringe party continues to lose. I truly enjoy his posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:17 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top