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.
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
11,974 posts, read 25,378,753 times
Reputation: 12187
Advertisements
Democrats have been banking on demographic change to be the ultimate long term solution to gaining power. But the 'White non Hispanic' population is at by far it's lowest point since the first European settlements took root in the 1600s and yet Democrats are at their lowest level of control in over 100 years.
Looking at the way seats have switched since the mid 1990s you would think it was Democrats facing a declining voter base, not the GOP.
What do you think are the causes and will this change? Will the demographics eventually shift enough to overcome the GOP?
It's because of where those "new minorities" have settled. Clustering in big cities and already-liberal states, along with relatively few in competitive states, means more wasted votes for Democratic candidates. Plus for Hispanics in particular, the fact they've also clustered in the most populated states means that as a group they're underrepresented in the Senate (and to a lesser extent the Electoral College). I don't have a link handy, but I saw a graphic of the progress that women and minorities have made at winning seats in each branch of Congress - women have made comparable progress in both chambers, but minorities have done much better in the House than the Senate (probably largely due to what I said in the last sentence).
Last edited by KellyXY; 06-10-2018 at 01:42 PM..
Reason: Added some statements
It's because of where those "new minorities" have settled. Clustering in big cities and already-liberal states, along with relatively few in competitive states, means more wasted votes for Democratic candidates.
well thats wrong for 2 reasons.
1. Because there are more voters in urban areas than rural, If Philadelphia had voted at the same percentage as the rural areas, Clinton would have won that state
2. Because population growth by race seem to be moving for Democrats in Colorado,Virginia, Arizona,Nevada and Georgia.
Demographic fault lines have changed throughout history. The concept of "non Hispanic white" was not really applicable 100 years ago, when persons of Irish, Italian, or Polish background were considered "minorities" with culture outside the American mainstream. There were hardly any non-white persons in the electorate at all in the pre-Civil Rights era, so the divisions were between different "white" groups.
The demographic changes taking place today won't necessarily help Democrats if either (1) whites become more Republican or (2) minorities become less Democratic, along with (3) nonwhites remaining heavily concentrated in a few large, non-competitive states. It's going to take better turnout among key Democratic groups along with recovering some level of support among older, middle income, blue collar and less urban constituencies for the party to get back into power.
...It's going to take better turnout among key Democratic groups along with recovering some level of support among older, middle income, blue collar and less urban constituencies for the party to get back into power.
Good summary. Non-urban, non-college-educated whites have swung sharply to the Republican side, offsetting potential Democratic gains among minorities. Among the former groups, Democrats are perceived as ineffectual, milquetoast, out of touch and foolish. This means that unless the Republican candidate is completely scandal-ridden or otherwise unacceptable, Republicans have the edge.
The long-term scenario is interesting. Most of what might be considered minority-groups, and especially immigrant minority groups, are socially conservative. Their natural ideological home is the Republican party of the 1980s. As these groups become economically better-established, will they actually start to vote more Republican?
I think there are multiple reasons for this, some of which I'll list out below:
1) Many minority voters are concentrated in blue states, which limits their electoral impact;
2) To the extent that minority voter populations is growing in swing states like FL, it is often being countered by more conservative retirees who are moving to those states;
3) Democrats, via their folly of believing that Obama's impact on increased minority voter turnout was permanent, ramped up their identity politics and attacks on whites (particularly white male "privilege" ), which helped to turn many traditionally Democrat voters in states with high white populations against the party.
A) Republicans get massive amounts of the white vote due to hateful and childish Democrat rhetoric.
B) Hispanics vote in lesser percentages.
C) About half of Hispanics, and a good percentage of Middle Easterners and Mixed-race Americans consider themselves white, frustrating Democrat efforts to pigoenhole us into minority groups that they can whip into a frenzy of grievance.
D) Republicans have been slowly but surely picking off minority votes. Trump did better than Romney, who did better than McCain. During the "red tide" midterms, Hispanics and Asians voted heavily Republican in key areas.
E) Shy Trump/Republican voters. Hard working people of all colors did not appreciate Obama destroying our health care system, and regardless of what they say at the exit polls, and turning against Socialism.
It's because of where those "new minorities" have settled. Clustering in big cities and already-liberal states, along with relatively few in competitive states, means more wasted votes for Democratic candidates. Plus for Hispanics in particular, the fact they've also clustered in the most populated states means that as a group they're underrepresented in the Senate (and to a lesser extent the Electoral College). I don't have a link handy, but I saw a graphic of the progress that women and minorities have made at winning seats in each branch of Congress - women have made comparable progress in both chambers, but minorities have done much better in the House than the Senate (probably largely due to what I said in the last sentence).
BINGO.
the Red Wall states, plus the Rust Belt, are barely changing their demographic composition. In the same period of time, South adds electoral college votes each decade.
Democrats have been banking on demographic change to be the ultimate long term solution to gaining power. But the 'White non Hispanic' population is at by far it's lowest point since the first European settlements took root in the 1600s and yet Democrats are at their lowest level of control in over 100 years.
Looking at the way seats have switched since the mid 1990s you would think it was Democrats facing a declining voter base, not the GOP.
What do you think are the causes and will this change? Will the demographics eventually shift enough to overcome the GOP?
Party affiliations means little. Society has been getting more liberal over the past few decades. Thus, the demographic changes are doing what they've been advertised to do.
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.
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.
), which helped to turn many traditionally Democrat voters in states with high white populations against the party.
