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.
Who do you think is moving south? Why, yes, it would be that population that is being lost in Ohio, New York and New Jersey, among other northern states. Do you think they will suddenly turn Conservative when they get there? Or maybe just take their liberal views with them and start turning some red states purple?
I notice you said "purple" instead of "blue." That tells me that you're not confident that the South will ever have Democratic representation again, even with North-to-South migration.
Before the midterms, I'll remind you that liberals were giddy that Texas was (purportedly) turning purple. They chose none other than Abortion Barbie Wendy Davis as their standard bearer of newfound Texas liberalism. As you already know, the last election actually validated that it will be a LONG, LONG, LONG, LONG time before TX Democrats move the needle towards purple. LOL
For POTUS, the South is a non factor. They simply keep the GOP around a 38% share of EC votes..over 24 years, with the last census shift of 7 EC votes, the blue shift of Va and NM overwhelmed that.
When will you folks finally acknowledge that the Obama elections were an anomaly? You can't possibly believe that there will be electorate as electrified for a white candidate as there was for the first half-black candidate, right? Mark my words, Hampton Roads and other minority centers sit at home in 2016 relative to 2008 and 2016. Black is the new purple.....when Barack Obama is on the ticket. Good luck with that next time around.
I notice you said "purple" instead of "blue." That tells me that you're not confident that the South will ever have Democratic representation again, even with North-to-South migration.
Before the midterms, I'll remind you that liberals were giddy that Texas was (purportedly) turning purple. They chose none other than Abortion Barbie Wendy Davis as their standard bearer of newfound Texas liberalism. As you already know, the last election actually validated that it will be a LONG, LONG, LONG, LONG time before TX Democrats move the needle towards purple. LOL
Ms Davis did, however, win the Bum Steer of the Year Award from Texas Monthly, which made me chuckle when I read it.
"But did anyone think that Davis, after all the national exposure and all the money that flowed into her coffers, would be throttled so badly by Republican Greg Abbott in her race to become governor? In the end, she lost by more percentage points than Tony Sanchez did in 2002.
And she won 270,499 fewer votes than Bill White did in 2010 in his doomed effort against Perry. It’s not that the Democrats underperformed. It’s that the [Democratic] party that hasn’t won a statewide race since 1994 actually dug itself an even deeper hole!"
When will you folks finally acknowledge that the Obama elections were an anomaly? You can't possibly believe that there will be electorate as electrified for a white candidate as there was for the first half-black candidate, right? Mark my words, Hampton Roads and other minority centers sit at home in 2016 relative to 2008 and 2016. Black is the new purple.....when Barack Obama is on the ticket. Good luck with that next time around.
...yea, because that's exactly what happened in 2004 when the Bush-Supreme Court told Florida voters to **** off and handed him the election.
Well, well. The nation’s population grew 9.7 percent to 308,745,538 in the 2010 Census, with the fastest gains coming in the South and West. Ohio, New York and New Jersey [dems] are among the states that will lose seats in Congress because of the shift.
States including Texas, Florida and Arizona are witnessing a fresh inflow of people from within the U.S. and beyond the nation’s borders and will benefit from more representation in Washington.
I hope the dems take the advice to "ignore" us......
Ohio is actually relatively mixed, and has some hard core right wing areas. Furthermore, there are plenty Democrat of places that are still growing (the West Coast), as well as the fact that in the long therm, it looks as though they are beginning to win the favor of some swing states, VA, CO (Yes Colorado, I imagine that as Denver grows, the state will stay blue leaning, unlike the past election where just the rwnjs were the ones who were actually motivated to go vote). Furthermore, considering that Cubans in Florida become more liberal with almost every election, I wont be surprised if Florida slowly turns blue over time).
Lastly, to conclude, the Northeast is actually not doing nearly as poorly as people think (especially compared with the Rustbelt), and Liberal urbanites will remain a relatively strong force in the Northeast, for the foreseeable future.
I notice you said "purple" instead of "blue." That tells me that you're not confident that the South will ever have Democratic representation again, even with North-to-South migration.
Ohio is actually relatively mixed, and has some hard core right wing areas. Furthermore, there are plenty Democrat of places that are still growing (the West Coast), as well as the fact that in the long therm, it looks as though they are beginning to win the favor of some swing states, VA, CO (Yes Colorado, I imagine that as Denver grows, the state will stay blue leaning, unlike the past election where just the rwnjs were the ones who were actually motivated to go vote). Furthermore, considering that Cubans in Florida become more liberal with almost every election, I wont be surprised if Florida slowly turns blue over time).
Lastly, to conclude, the Northeast is actually not doing nearly as poorly as people think (especially compared with the Rustbelt), and Liberal urbanites will remain a relatively strong force in the Northeast, for the foreseeable future.
Why do you believe that only rwnj's were motivated to vote in Colorado? The left had every opportunity and motive to vote. If they didn't, that is on them.
The dems don't need the south to win general elections but can't win back the house without it. Obama got dominated in the Deep South and he won going away.
They do when it eats to much into there disposable income.
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.
