Which party should be more worried about their long term geopolitical trajectory?

[ProgressiveModerate]

These threads have been made before but haven't seen one for quite a while so worth discussing - may also bump it post-2024 if some new things emerge that may affect people's responses.

Here are the main arguments I see for both sides:

For Democrats:

Democrats are increasingly trading the multi-racial working class coalition of the Obama years for a coalition more based around the elite and college educated. At face value, some may argue this is a good trade because college grads are generally high turnout voters - however this doesn't negate the fact only ~1/3rd of adults over 18 in the US have college attainment. Additionally, college grads aren't exactly concentrated in the most effective way when it comes to electoral power - they tend to be concentrated in already D-leaning communities in D-leaning metro areas in D-leaning states.

Also, shedding support with non-white voters isn't great as they become an increasingly larger share of the electorate - these were those voters that were supposed to give Democrats this permanent national majority that obviously never materialized, and now could start causing problems in deep blue states where Dems rely heavily on non-white voters (i.e. NY, IL, NJ, ect)

Another problem for Democrats long term is the Senate - currently, Democrats need to sweep nearly every Senate race in competitive states to have a fighting chance of narrow control. In 2020, Biden only won 25 states despite winning by nearly 5% nationally, and many of those wins were very marginal (GA, AZ, WI, PA, NV, MI). Remember in 2016 too Trump won a 60% supermajority worth of states despite losing the popular vote. While there are some states potentially on the horizon for Democrats, they're either other larger states (NC, TX) or still quite a ways from being federally competitive under normal circumstances (KS, UT).

Generally, western society has had declining levels of social trust which isn't necessarily great for a party that is increasingly seen as the establishment party of high trust voters.

For Republicans:

In general, the areas that are growing are areas where Republicans are losing ground. Amongst most of the current swing states, the fastest growing areas are already Democratic strongholds only getting bluer (Madison in WI, Raliegh/Durham in NC, SEPA in PA, metro Atlanta in GA, ect). On the flip side, most of the fastest shrinking areas tend to be rural communities where Republicans rack up their votes.

In the long term, this could make Texas a liability for the GOP - the fastest growing part is super-liberal Austin and the stagnant/shrinking areas are almost exclusively deep red rurals. It becomes very very difficult for Republicans to win the electoral college without Texas.

Another problem for Republicans is their increasing alienation of college educated voters. While college educated voters are still in the minority, they are the most reliable voters, especially in midterms and other off elections. If the only elections Republicans do well in are in Presidential years, it could really hurt them at Congressional and State Level; remember in most states things are up in midterms.

Another underrated problem for Republicans is increasingly poor political geography at the Congressional and State legislative levels in most states. Recent Dem gains have been disproportionately concentrated in swingy suburban areas meaning a ton of communities have flipped from outright R-leaning to D-leaning in a relatively short period of time. On the flip side, most of the recent GOP gains have been concentrated in communities are are still super safe D or already safe R. In states like Texas this means Democrats win precincts worth a majority of the population even when they lose by double-digits statewide and even the most extreme GOP State House gerrymander barely pushes the median seat to the right of the state.

An additional note on geography - as Republicans continue to generally decline in urban metro areas, it means a higher share of people will live in cities/towns/counties controlled by Democrats because of how rural counties are broken up more granularly - rural Democrats will at least be able to retain some representation in the remaining rurals they win but urban Republicans basically won't have any political power unless they can win the city/county as a whole.

Also while the GOP has gained with non-white voters, the fact is they still lose non-white voters overall and that'll likely remain true for at least another decade (and probably longer). Non-white voters are a growing share of the electorate nearly everywhere in the Country, so in many cases these GOP gains in margin aren't actually enough to offset the Dem gains in raw vote margin from growth. In Georgia 2020 for instance, Biden did a bit worse with black voters than Obama but black voters making up a higher share of the electorate easily cancelled that out and helped Biden win.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I think it's going to depend on where the parties end up when Trump finally isn't a candidate anymore...if ever. We'll get a better idea the next time both parties nominate someone new.

[Spectator]

I’m not sure how stable these new coalitions will be. A significant amount of Trump’s appeal with minorities and some working class whites seems to only apply to him and not to other Republicans. 2021 is the only good year Republicans have had in the nearly decade that Trump has been on the scene and not on a ballot.

Alternatively, like you said, Democrats have a huge geography problem, and the only reason they remain competitive in the Senate is because the GOP isn’t exactly filled with the brightest of the bunch when it comes to choosing candidates.

Like Progressive Pessimist said, I don’t think we’ll know until at least 2028. Possibly even longer since 2028 will likely be a reactionary one-off to either of Trump’s or Biden’s second terms and that year might not be the best case study with Trump off the ballot. I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

[Vice President Christian Man]

Neither one at least in the short term. Unless a popular Democrat manages to win in 2028 and maintains their popularity, I can see a period of time where we'll see several one-term presidents. In the long term it's possible that the Republicans narrowly get locked out for an extended period of time due to demographics, but as stubborn as they are, they're not stupid and they'll figure out a way to win the White House in a couple of cycles as Bill Clinton was able to do after the Dems found themselves in a similar situation. Party fatigue is real even if people generally don't like what they're offered.

[wnwnwn]

The parties adapt.

[Alben Barkley]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

[dw93]

I think they should be equally worried at this time. As for who should be more worried long term, it depends on who wins this year as both Trump and Biden are likely to end up in Bush 2008 territory by the end of the 2nd term, thus whichever party is in the position the Republicans were in in 2008 is likely gonna be the one that struggles.

[TML]

[...]
Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

I think this is more the result of many young Obama voters from 2008 sitting out subsequent elections because they felt (1) Obama did not meet their expectations once he got into office, and/or (2) post-Obama Democratic presidential nominees haven't been nearly as inspiring as Obama was on the campaign trail (remember that Allan Lichtman considered Obama charismatic in 2008 but not in 2012, and he did not consider either Hillary or Biden charismatic). While I believe there exist some young voters who went from Obama in 2008 to Trump in 2020, I don't think this group comprises anywhere close to 20% of all Obama 2008 voters in that age group (as exit poll numbers on the surface would seem to suggest).

[Agonized-Statism]

Democrats should still theoretically have time on their side unless Trumpian populism can be built on by another Republican, but they've sure tried their hardest to alienate much of the coalition in the last two decades. I'd think at the end of the day that it'll be a fool's errand to expect the gentrifiers and the gentrified to keep voting together, but then we're also looking at some massive shifts that I can't see Republicans being capable of responding to adequately (global conflict, financial crisis, climate migration surpassing the Great Migrations).

[Spectator]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

Nope its been around 7-9 according to exit polls

[pikachu]

Democrats should still theoretically have time on their side unless Trumpian populism can be built on by another Republican, but they've sure tried their hardest to alienate much of the coalition in the last two decades. I'd think at the end of the day that it'll be a fool's errand to expect the gentrifiers and the gentrified to keep voting together, but then we're also looking at some massive shifts that I can't see Republicans being capable of responding to adequately (global conflict, financial crisis, climate migration surpassing the Great Migrations).

Eh, illogical, contradictory coalitions are inherent to two-party system. The current, seemingly successful Trump strategy of leaning into the racial resentment while simultaneously courting minority voters exemplifies this. Who knows how media will evolve in the future, but it might even be easier than before considering how fractured it is now.

[Spectator]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

Nope its been around 7-9 according to exit polls

No idea what you’re using to cherry pick, but the oldest people who would’ve been eligible to vote for Obama in 2008 for the first time at age 21 would have been 33 in 2020 and 35 in 2022. The exit polls are absolutely brutal for the 30-39 age range. Whitmer won them by 30%. O’Rourke beat Abbott 50-47, and won <30 by over 25%. Mandela Barnes (!) won 30-39 by a 58-41 spread. Warnock by 57-40. Fetterman 60-37. Hassan 65-34. Beasley 56-43. Mark Kelly 59-38. Catherine Masto 60-38. Demings 55-43. Tim Ryan 54-45.

There’s nothing redeeming about these numbers. They’re all brutal. People don’t generally switch their voting habits after their late twenties, historically.

[Samof94]

Neither one at least in the short term. Unless a popular Democrat manages to win in 2028 and maintains their popularity, I can see a period of time where we'll see several one-term presidents. In the long term it's possible that the Republicans narrowly get locked out for an extended period of time due to demographics, but as stubborn as they are, they're not stupid and they'll figure out a way to win the White House in a couple of cycles as Bill Clinton was able to do after the Dems found themselves in a similar situation. Party fatigue is real even if people generally don't like what they're offered.

They'll need someone not named trump to "Pull a Clinton"

[OSR stands with Israel]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

Nope its been around 7-9 according to exit polls

No idea what you’re using to cherry pick, but the oldest people who would’ve been eligible to vote for Obama in 2008 for the first time at age 21 would have been 33 in 2020 and 35 in 2022. The exit polls are absolutely brutal for the 30-39 age range. Whitmer won them by 30%. O’Rourke beat Abbott 50-47, and won <30 by over 25%. Mandela Barnes (!) won 30-39 by a 58-41 spread. Warnock by 57-40. Fetterman 60-37. Hassan 65-34. Beasley 56-43. Mark Kelly 59-38. Catherine Masto 60-38. Demings 55-43. Tim Ryan 54-45.

There’s nothing redeeming about these numbers. They’re all brutal. People don’t generally switch their voting habits after their late twenties, historically.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results

Biden only won voted in their 30s by 5 points

[Spectator]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

Nope its been around 7-9 according to exit polls

No idea what you’re using to cherry pick, but the oldest people who would’ve been eligible to vote for Obama in 2008 for the first time at age 21 would have been 33 in 2020 and 35 in 2022. The exit polls are absolutely brutal for the 30-39 age range. Whitmer won them by 30%. O’Rourke beat Abbott 50-47, and won <30 by over 25%. Mandela Barnes (!) won 30-39 by a 58-41 spread. Warnock by 57-40. Fetterman 60-37. Hassan 65-34. Beasley 56-43. Mark Kelly 59-38. Catherine Masto 60-38. Demings 55-43. Tim Ryan 54-45.

There’s nothing redeeming about these numbers. They’re all brutal. People don’t generally switch their voting habits after their late twenties, historically.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results

Biden only won voted in their 30s by 5 points

And the truth is probably somewhere in between, roughly D+15 in the states that matter among the now-26 to 35 year olds that came of age during the Obama years.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

This isn't true. Rather, natural liberals start voting earlier, and natural conservatives get interested enough in politics to vote in their later 20s. There are also significantly more ex-liberals and ex-conservatives because conservatives are better at converting the other side than liberals are.

[Dan the Roman]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

Nope its been around 7-9 according to exit polls

No idea what you’re using to cherry pick, but the oldest people who would’ve been eligible to vote for Obama in 2008 for the first time at age 21 would have been 33 in 2020 and 35 in 2022. The exit polls are absolutely brutal for the 30-39 age range. Whitmer won them by 30%. O’Rourke beat Abbott 50-47, and won <30 by over 25%. Mandela Barnes (!) won 30-39 by a 58-41 spread. Warnock by 57-40. Fetterman 60-37. Hassan 65-34. Beasley 56-43. Mark Kelly 59-38. Catherine Masto 60-38. Demings 55-43. Tim Ryan 54-45.

There’s nothing redeeming about these numbers. They’re all brutal. People don’t generally switch their voting habits after their late twenties, historically.

I think this forum, even more than ET in some ways, is terrible about understanding semi-politically engaged voters, much less generally unengaged ones.

In the real world people here would be shocked by how many millenials who marched against Iraq now associate the Bush/Cheney legacy with the party Cheney supports and which lionizes the family. I mean who has praised the Cheneys? Who condemned Iraq? Who is the party of intervention?

By this I mean that among somewhat engaged voters coming of age in the 2000s it is true they will never forgive Bush or his GOP. But it is not true that won Democrats longterm loyalty. It has made those voters cynical about interventionism generally, including Ukraine.

This is just one example. But partisan cycles move fast, and unless you engage with partisan politics daily between elections, you are much more prone to switching when parties are perceived as switching their positions on major issues.

That is why George P Bush can lose to Ken Paxton 67-33, as you note downballot Rs can do horribly in 2022, yet those same groups can be 10% friendlier to Donald Trump.

I really feel there is a tendency here to treat the entire electorate as if they are highly engaged four year college grads, if not postgraduates. 

The issue is alienation. Right now young voters are divided between a generally satisfied elite which is ultra democratic and a wider group which is alienated from both parties which is much more prone to swinging wildly if they vote. This group despises George Bush, hates the Iraq War, but unlike the engaged elite, is much more skeptical on Ukraine(and Israel regardless of party), dosent trust any institutions(academia, media, corporate America, politicians) and probably is apt to both be ultra covid lockdown skeptics, extremely pro-choice, and pro-lgbt but vulnerable to messaging on Trans issues which targets the medical industry as profit seeking and untrustworthy postcovid. They don't trust Trump, see him as a crook, but see the #resistance stuff as cringe, dislike the Clintons(probably backed Bernie) and are likely dismissive of Russia stuff.

On a policy level that is a group which after Dobbs facing GOP candidates insisting the election was stolen and promising chaos in 2024 were going to back Democrats heavily in 2022. It is also a group which Biden is a uniquely bad candidate for, and far weaker than generic Democrat because on almost every major issue he has positioned himself as the defender of an establishment they hate.

Biden is the candidate of intervention in Ukraine without end, but no plan to end Gaza.

Biden is the candidate of the institutions are sound.

Biden is the candidate of bipartisanship between Clinton's, Bushes, and Cheneys.

That is why I think we should not be dismissive of what the polls are saying and results in 2020/2022 say. That this group will be D+15 downballot and D+6 on Biden/Trump.

[Spectator]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

Nope its been around 7-9 according to exit polls

No idea what you’re using to cherry pick, but the oldest people who would’ve been eligible to vote for Obama in 2008 for the first time at age 21 would have been 33 in 2020 and 35 in 2022. The exit polls are absolutely brutal for the 30-39 age range. Whitmer won them by 30%. O’Rourke beat Abbott 50-47, and won <30 by over 25%. Mandela Barnes (!) won 30-39 by a 58-41 spread. Warnock by 57-40. Fetterman 60-37. Hassan 65-34. Beasley 56-43. Mark Kelly 59-38. Catherine Masto 60-38. Demings 55-43. Tim Ryan 54-45.

There’s nothing redeeming about these numbers. They’re all brutal. People don’t generally switch their voting habits after their late twenties, historically.

I think this forum, even more than ET in some ways, is terrible about understanding semi-politically engaged voters, much less generally unengaged ones.

In the real world people here would be shocked by how many millenials who marched against Iraq now associate the Bush/Cheney legacy with the party Cheney supports and which lionizes the family. I mean who has praised the Cheneys? Who condemned Iraq? Who is the party of intervention?

By this I mean that among somewhat engaged voters coming of age in the 2000s it is true they will never forgive Bush or his GOP. But it is not true that won Democrats longterm loyalty. It has made those voters cynical about interventionism generally, including Ukraine.

This is just one example. But partisan cycles move fast, and unless you engage with partisan politics daily between elections, you are much more prone to switching when parties are perceived as switching their positions on major issues.

That is why George P Bush can lose to Ken Paxton 67-33, as you note downballot Rs can do horribly in 2022, yet those same groups can be 10% friendlier to Donald Trump.

I really feel there is a tendency here to treat the entire electorate as if they are highly engaged four year college grads, if not postgraduates.  

The issue is alienation. Right now young voters are divided between a generally satisfied elite which is ultra democratic and a wider group which is alienated from both parties which is much more prone to swinging wildly if they vote. This group despises George Bush, hates the Iraq War, but unlike the engaged elite, is much more skeptical on Ukraine(and Israel regardless of party), dosent trust any institutions(academia, media, corporate America, politicians) and probably is apt to both be ultra covid lockdown skeptics, extremely pro-choice, and pro-lgbt but vulnerable to messaging on Trans issues which targets the medical industry as profit seeking and untrustworthy postcovid. They don't trust Trump, see him as a crook, but see the #resistance stuff as cringe, dislike the Clintons(probably backed Bernie) and are likely dismissive of Russia stuff.

On a policy level that is a group which after Dobbs facing GOP candidates insisting the election was stolen and promising chaos in 2024 were going to back Democrats heavily in 2022. It is also a group which Biden is a uniquely bad candidate for, and far weaker than generic Democrat because on almost every major issue he has positioned himself as the defender of an establishment they hate.

Biden is the candidate of intervention in Ukraine without end, but no plan to end Gaza.

Biden is the candidate of the institutions are sound.

Biden is the candidate of bipartisanship between Clinton's, Bushes, and Cheneys.

That is why I think we should not be dismissive of what the polls are saying and results in 2020/2022 say. That this group will be D+15 downballot and D+6 on Biden/Trump.

I can agree with a lot of this. There is a lot of nuance here, and you articulate well why these voters in their late 20’s-30’s tended to vote Dem in heavy margins in the major 2022 races but why Biden seems to be struggling to hit those same levels (despite leading with this group). My main point is that the GOP cannot afford these voters continuing to vote around even the Biden-level margins, let alone the 2022 margins. Voters don’t tend to change their voting habits after they’ve voted in ~2 elections.

I think a lot of people assume we’ll be at a 50-50 stasis in our national politics in perpetuity since that’s basically all we’ve known since the 1990’s, but that’s not historically been the case. There have been long dry spells for both parties at the federal and state level, and I don’t see why that cannot happen again. This typically came when one party lost a generation and continued to dominate with them, such as the New Deal Dems and the Yankee Republicans.

The thing that is giving the GOP a lifeline is the Democrats pushing Hispanics away and the fact that more Republicans are having kids than Democrats at a growing disparity.

[Person Man]

Neither one at least in the short term. Unless a popular Democrat manages to win in 2028 and maintains their popularity, I can see a period of time where we'll see several one-term presidents. In the long term it's possible that the Republicans narrowly get locked out for an extended period of time due to demographics, but as stubborn as they are, they're not stupid and they'll figure out a way to win the White House in a couple of cycles as Bill Clinton was able to do after the Dems found themselves in a similar situation. Party fatigue is real even if people generally don't like what they're offered.

They'll need someone not named trump to "Pull a Clinton"

What would a Republican "Sista Soulja" moment even look like? Are they even capable of it?

[Person Man]

I take a cynical view that Trump being the face of the party among the people that came of age for the last 12+ years is going to leave that chunk of voters voting Dem for the rest of their lives.

Uh yeah, zero doubt about that. I already said I would never vote for a Republican after coming of age under George W. Bush. Trump just cemented that. Can’t imagine what I would have thought as a teenager becoming politically aware/active for the first time during his presidency.

I mean the GOP hasnt done as bad with young voters since 2020 as they did in 2008 and 2012. Low bar but still.

Also young voters from 2008 have moved drastically towards the GOP since then (Dems only win voters in their 30s by high single digits now)

People that came of age in 2008-2016 have stabilized around D+15, which isn’t sustainable when the Boomers start dying off. The GOP will need to adapt, but it will probably take something significant like Texas becoming a purple state to cause a wake-up.

Nope its been around 7-9 according to exit polls

No idea what you’re using to cherry pick, but the oldest people who would’ve been eligible to vote for Obama in 2008 for the first time at age 21 would have been 33 in 2020 and 35 in 2022. The exit polls are absolutely brutal for the 30-39 age range. Whitmer won them by 30%. O’Rourke beat Abbott 50-47, and won <30 by over 25%. Mandela Barnes (!) won 30-39 by a 58-41 spread. Warnock by 57-40. Fetterman 60-37. Hassan 65-34. Beasley 56-43. Mark Kelly 59-38. Catherine Masto 60-38. Demings 55-43. Tim Ryan 54-45.

There’s nothing redeeming about these numbers. They’re all brutal. People don’t generally switch their voting habits after their late twenties, historically.

I think this forum, even more than ET in some ways, is terrible about understanding semi-politically engaged voters, much less generally unengaged ones.

In the real world people here would be shocked by how many millenials who marched against Iraq now associate the Bush/Cheney legacy with the party Cheney supports and which lionizes the family. I mean who has praised the Cheneys? Who condemned Iraq? Who is the party of intervention?

By this I mean that among somewhat engaged voters coming of age in the 2000s it is true they will never forgive Bush or his GOP. But it is not true that won Democrats longterm loyalty. It has made those voters cynical about interventionism generally, including Ukraine.

This is just one example. But partisan cycles move fast, and unless you engage with partisan politics daily between elections, you are much more prone to switching when parties are perceived as switching their positions on major issues.

That is why George P Bush can lose to Ken Paxton 67-33, as you note downballot Rs can do horribly in 2022, yet those same groups can be 10% friendlier to Donald Trump.

I really feel there is a tendency here to treat the entire electorate as if they are highly engaged four year college grads, if not postgraduates.  

The issue is alienation. Right now young voters are divided between a generally satisfied elite which is ultra democratic and a wider group which is alienated from both parties which is much more prone to swinging wildly if they vote. This group despises George Bush, hates the Iraq War, but unlike the engaged elite, is much more skeptical on Ukraine(and Israel regardless of party), dosent trust any institutions(academia, media, corporate America, politicians) and probably is apt to both be ultra covid lockdown skeptics, extremely pro-choice, and pro-lgbt but vulnerable to messaging on Trans issues which targets the medical industry as profit seeking and untrustworthy postcovid. They don't trust Trump, see him as a crook, but see the #resistance stuff as cringe, dislike the Clintons(probably backed Bernie) and are likely dismissive of Russia stuff.

On a policy level that is a group which after Dobbs facing GOP candidates insisting the election was stolen and promising chaos in 2024 were going to back Democrats heavily in 2022. It is also a group which Biden is a uniquely bad candidate for, and far weaker than generic Democrat because on almost every major issue he has positioned himself as the defender of an establishment they hate.

Biden is the candidate of intervention in Ukraine without end, but no plan to end Gaza.

Biden is the candidate of the institutions are sound.

Biden is the candidate of bipartisanship between Clinton's, Bushes, and Cheneys.

That is why I think we should not be dismissive of what the polls are saying and results in 2020/2022 say. That this group will be D+15 downballot and D+6 on Biden/Trump.

I can agree with a lot of this. There is a lot of nuance here, and you articulate well why these voters in their late 20’s-30’s tended to vote Dem in heavy margins in the major 2022 races but why Biden seems to be struggling to hit those same levels (despite leading with this group). My main point is that the GOP cannot afford these voters continuing to vote around even the Biden-level margins, let alone the 2022 margins. Voters don’t tend to change their voting habits after they’ve voted in ~2 elections.

I think a lot of people assume we’ll be at a 50-50 stasis in our national politics in perpetuity since that’s basically all we’ve known since the 1990’s, but that’s not historically been the case. There have been long dry spells for both parties at the federal and state level, and I don’t see why that cannot happen again. This typically came when one party lost a generation and continued to dominate with them, such as the New Deal Dems and the Yankee Republicans.

The thing that is giving the GOP a lifeline is the Democrats pushing Hispanics away and the fact that more Republicans are having kids than Democrats at a growing disparity.

You just described half the people I went to college with. Their loyalties are split between Obama/Bernie activism and whatever other things Joe Rogan or Jimmy Dore tell them be obsessed with. They aren't vaccinated. They think masks don't work. Are worried about the social ills of transvestites, "woke", and transgendered children. They think it's pathetic that a lot of women in new media who talk about feminism end up moonlighting as sex workers on OnlyFans.  They think Israel and Ukraine are racist instead of being attacked by racists.  But hey. They are antitheist. They think there should be Medicare for All. They were extremely upset over Dobbs. They really got upset, more than I was, after I had to take a drug test for work after they smoked me up on New Years a few years ago. Still passed the drug test but whatever.  I came on here to complain about how people were getting brain washed by the media but this appears now to be a legit cultural undercurrent.

[Samof94]

Neither one at least in the short term. Unless a popular Democrat manages to win in 2028 and maintains their popularity, I can see a period of time where we'll see several one-term presidents. In the long term it's possible that the Republicans narrowly get locked out for an extended period of time due to demographics, but as stubborn as they are, they're not stupid and they'll figure out a way to win the White House in a couple of cycles as Bill Clinton was able to do after the Dems found themselves in a similar situation. Party fatigue is real even if people generally don't like what they're offered.

They'll need someone not named trump to "Pull a Clinton"

What would a Republican "Sista Soulja" moment even look like? Are they even capable of it?

That isn't what I mean, but more someone who appeals to suburbanites more and is somewhat socially progressive(for a Republican).

[smoltchanov]

Both, but Republicans - more. General vector of transformation of both major political parties in US - to radicalism and even extremism. Far far away from past "big tent", and requiring a complete transformation of US political system. Most likely - i will not see it (i am 67), but without that US will crash in comparatively near future. Political "cancer" went too far....