A Suburban Eden Where the Right Rules

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

I also think generational turnover is a significant factor. The grandchildren of a lot of the voters in 1994 have now entered the voting-eligible population and we're not voting 75% R like our grandparents were. It's pretty clear in Atlanta that voters younger than 45, whether they are native born or transplants don't vote anywhere near as R as voters 60+, particularly among the white population.

except that hasn't happened everywhere.

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

No need to put “conservative” in quotes there ... those policies were clearly conservative.

Depends how you define conservative.  If a nominally conservative policy leads to non-conservative outcomes, can it truly be considered conservative?  The implications of a policy matter. 

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

No need to put “conservative” in quotes there ... those policies were clearly conservative.

Depends how you define conservative.  If a nominally conservative policy leads to non-conservative outcomes, can it truly be considered conservative?  The implications of a policy matter. 

Yes.  Young professionals moving to metro areas for “corporate” opportunities aren’t some inherently liberal demographic.  In fact, the types moving to the suburbs of Atlanta in the 1990s would be in their 50s now and are likely Republicans and certainly were then, probably through the early 2000s at least.  It’s OUR fault we aren’t appealing to this type of voter who should naturally favor a conservative party ... the fact we are not anymore does not redefine “conservatism.”

GA has been trending Democratic on the presidential level since well before Trump.  If the electorate of Cobb was the same today as it was in the 1990s, it would be safely Republican.  Secular whites and minorities have long been liberal voting blocs, they simply made up a much smaller share of the electorate back then.  Of course Trump did help accelerate the trend, but considering the 2012 to 2014 swing (or lack thereof) indicated GA was going blue before Trump.   

[Idaho Conservative]

Tom Murphy was playing the long con . The suburbs may have helped the GOP take him out finally but may finally be taking the GOP out

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Murphy_(Georgia_politician)

During his tenure, Murphy was a key figure in Georgia's economic development and throughout statewide politics; and was considered by many to be the best friend Atlanta ever had in the legislature despite his rural residency and upbringing.

He didn't intend for it to happen I'm sure, but certainly his policies took GA to the left.  the GA Dems today are way to the left of the GA Dems back then. 

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

No need to put “conservative” in quotes there ... those policies were clearly conservative.

Depends how you define conservative.  If a nominally conservative policy leads to non-conservative outcomes, can it truly be considered conservative?  The implications of a policy matter. 

Yes.  Young professionals moving to metro areas for “corporate” opportunities aren’t some inherently liberal demographic.  In fact, the types moving to the suburbs of Atlanta in the 1990s would be in their 50s now and are likely Republicans and certainly were then, probably through the early 2000s at least.  It’s OUR fault we aren’t appealing to this type of voter who should naturally favor a conservative party ... the fact we are not anymore does not redefine “conservatism.”

GA has been trending Democratic on the presidential level since well before Trump.  If the electorate of Cobb was the same today as it was in the 1990s, it would be safely Republican.  Secular whites and minorities have long been liberal voting blocs, they simply made up a much smaller share of the electorate back then.  Of course Trump did help accelerate the trend, but considering the 2012 to 2014 swing (or lack thereof) indicated GA was going blue before Trump.   

That’s not the main reason  GA has trended D though , this is why and much of this gain in turnout comes from the Atlanta suburbs



2nd Obama by many accounts did worse in 2012 with GA whites than Kerry did in 2004 yet did almost 10 points better due to this jump plus significantly more Millianials coming of age . The problem for republicans in Georgia is not people coming in but the fact that Millianials are much to the left of the older generations and given that Republicans need 70/71 percent of the white vote to win in Georgia , Millianials and gen z making up more and more of the share of the white vote makes reaching that number much harder .


The solution in Georgia for republicans is to try to improve with African American voters not chase after demographic numbers which are no longer possible

It is people coming in though.  If it was simply a generational thing, every state would be experiencing the same leftward swing.  Yes, there are a variety of factors, but certainly the growth in sprawl is the single biggest one.  The state is pretty much destined to go blue, unless Republicans learn to fight like Dems and actually do what they are accused of doing by the likes of Stacy Abrhams.

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

No need to put “conservative” in quotes there ... those policies were clearly conservative.

Depends how you define conservative.  If a nominally conservative policy leads to non-conservative outcomes, can it truly be considered conservative?  The implications of a policy matter. 

Yes.  Young professionals moving to metro areas for “corporate” opportunities aren’t some inherently liberal demographic.  In fact, the types moving to the suburbs of Atlanta in the 1990s would be in their 50s now and are likely Republicans and certainly were then, probably through the early 2000s at least.  It’s OUR fault we aren’t appealing to this type of voter who should naturally favor a conservative party ... the fact we are not anymore does not redefine “conservatism.”

GA has been trending Democratic on the presidential level since well before Trump.  If the electorate of Cobb was the same today as it was in the 1990s, it would be safely Republican.  Secular whites and minorities have long been liberal voting blocs, they simply made up a much smaller share of the electorate back then.  Of course Trump did help accelerate the trend, but considering the 2012 to 2014 swing (or lack thereof) indicated GA was going blue before Trump.   

That’s not the main reason  GA has trended D though , this is why and much of this gain in turnout comes from the Atlanta suburbs



2nd Obama by many accounts did worse in 2012 with GA whites than Kerry did in 2004 yet did almost 10 points better due to this jump plus significantly more Millianials coming of age . The problem for republicans in Georgia is not people coming in but the fact that Millianials are much to the left of the older generations and given that Republicans need 70/71 percent of the white vote to win in Georgia , Millianials and gen z making up more and more of the share of the white vote makes reaching that number much harder .


The solution in Georgia for republicans is to try to improve with African American voters not chase after demographic numbers which are no longer possible

It is people coming in though.  If it was simply a generational thing, every state would be experiencing the same leftward swing.  Yes, there are a variety of factors, but certainly the growth in sprawl is the single biggest one.  The state is pretty much destined to go blue, unless Republicans learn to fight like Dems and actually do what they are accused of doing by the likes of Stacy Abrhams.

Most other states don’t require Republicans to win the white vote by over 40 points just to win the state , while that is required in Georgia . Trump still won White voters under 30 in Georgia by a  60%-38% margin which by the way is better than they do in most Midwestern states . On the other hand in Ohio Trump won White voters overall 60-39. The fact is Millianials have just made getting over 71-72% of the white vote in Georgia more and more difficult as they make up a larger share of the electorate . So the solution for republicans is Georgia should be try to do better with African Americans not act like we still live 2004.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/georgia/5


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


Also your point about people moving in , the fact is  before 2010 people who used to move  in were overwhelmingly republican. Ted Cruz won Texas votes who moved to Texas but moved before the 2010s with 63% of the vote so saying people moving in is bad isn’t true cause it wasn’t until this past decade when most of these policies were enacted .  One of the reasons Texas became so Republican was the fact that hundreds of thousands of conservative Californians from SoCal moved their following the collapse of the Cold War defense industry

https://www.cnn.com/election/2018/exit-polls/texas/senate

People moving to Texas aren't the same as those moving into GA.  Texas is attracting a lot of conservative transplants, GA has gotten a lot of African Americans from decaying rust belt and northeastern cities.  And yeah, white voters in general are more conservative in the south than the north.  But this trend isn't exactly visible in other deep southern states also dependent on huge margins among white voters.  Also, if what you were saying was true about this mainly being generational, it wouldn't only be in the suburbs.  The suburbs is where the growth has been in the past few decades, and that's where the blue shift has happened.  GA was basically the same as AL demographically in the 70s and 80s.  Growth in the 90s and 21st century is the difference between a tossup and a state that votes R by a 20-30 point margin.

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

Just six months ago I said the same thing to Haley/Ryan and got called a socialist for it.

Objectively it is true, supply side economic policies benefit those areas already growing and leave those not to rot, which generally has benefited the the growth of social liberalism at the expense of social conservatism. It is just one of many ways in which the Republican orthodoxy handed down from the Reagan years by his purported disciples works at cross purposes with itself.

Centrist Populism (left econ/right social) would probably lead to the most culturally conservative outcomes.

[Idaho Conservative]

What happened in Atlanta is the inevitable end result of "conservative" pro business policies. They attracted large corporations which attracted lots of left leaning transplants.  If Cobb had the demographics of 1994, it would still be red. 

Just six months ago I said the same thing to Haley/Ryan and got called a socialist for it.

Objectively it is true, supply side economic policies benefit those areas already growing and leave those not to rot, which generally has benefited the the growth of social liberalism at the expense of social conservatism. It is just one of many ways in which the Republican orthodoxy handed down from the Reagan years by his purported disciples works at cross purposes with itself.

Centrist Populism (left econ/right social) would probably lead to the most culturally conservative outcomes.

Probably. Which is why it's such a terrifying combo.

We love you, pro-growth Republicans .

ofc you'd like Republicans who help you achieve your goals lol