Is the Republican Party in decline?

[SingingAnalyst]

By the way, I didn’t even get into the nastier things about the GOP I could have said like “May also lose Senate majority in no small part because conspiracy crazed tinfoil hats who believe that JFK Jr. is alive and enlightening them on 4chan have now become the mainstream base of the party, and they will refuse to vote for its candidates in protest of their state officials refusing to participate in a fascist coup.”

Somehow I doubt that "Jonestown style Kool-Aid cult" will turn out to be a long-term strategy for success for a political party.

All valid points-- at least up to a point, as are the points made in your original post. BTW I voted Yes.

I am not entirely sold on the idea that conspiracy theorists et al. are the mainstream of the GOP. True, the GOP as of late has shot itself in the foot, figuratively speaking, for example by failing to come up with a coherent platform for 2020 other than "Four More Years!" (and even that is being too gentle on them). I do think such marginal thinkers (if I can call them that) are attracted to the GOP because they see them as more anti-Establishment than the Democrats, for certain. I would stop a bit short of saying they are the base or mainstream of the party.

The GOP definitely needs to do some soul-searching, and whatever the results are in GA Jan. 5, they will have plenty of time to do it. I hope enough people still care about two-party politics to try to save the party. I offered some ideas in my post "The Future of the GOP" , and a number of commentators (maybe you were one?) said essentially, "do all of the above".

Someone who cares will need to consider the fact that the strongest support for Trump in 2020 (as in 2016) came from precisely those areas that voted most strongly for George Wallace in 1968 and Richard Nixon in 1972-- home to many people who, frankly, are waiting for death or the Second Coming to relieve them of their alienation (if they even are familiar with that word/concept) and misery. Then they will need to put on their rational hats and consider this fact for what it is: an interesting statistic. Maybe someone will study the reasons why certain people are attracted to certain political ideas. Until then, the GOP needs (in my opinion) to put itself forth as a dynamic, flexible yet principled, party which believes, for the most part, in limited government, control at the smallest possible level (state vs. federal; local vs. state) and in the genius of the American people. Donald Trump did none of these things: he won once, but it was a Pyrrhic victory that damaged the party in the short run. Since the GOP has nothing like a Ronald Reagan waiting in the wings, its members will have to improvise.

The GOP may never win the Black vote, the non-Orthodox Jewish vote, the LGBTQ+ vote, etc. at least on the national level-- but they need to find a way to at least be competitive with these important voter subgroups.

[SingingAnalyst]

Only won the popular vote once since 1988.

Lost their House majority.

Has effectively become a personality cult built around one individual who will very likely be dead or in jail within the next few years.

Has shown no ability to get their base out to vote when said individual is not on the ballot.

Has plummeted with white, college-educated and suburban voters (the highest propensity voters).

Electoral college and Senate advantages may be slipping as states like AZ, GA, NC, TX move left.

Base is dying off, party has almost zero appeal to future generations and growing demographics.

Literally doesn't even have a platform anymore.

If we're going to ask this question about the Democratic Party, which just won the presidency against an incumbent who couldn't even get 47% of the vote, why not ask it about a party that you could make a much better case is slowly but surely declining?

Neither party is going anywhere and presidential elections will be hard-fought tossups well into the future. The Democrats are at a serious disadvantage in the Electoral College though which makes it easier for Republicans to win while losing the popular vote and this scenario will likely happen again in the next 20 years. Republicans also need to do better among younger voters in future elections although most people do tend to get more conservative as they age.

That is one of the most remarkable facts of politics, that has persevered as both parties have changed their regional identity over the decades and centuries.

Since the GOP's 1854 founding, all 4 times the PV loser won, it was a Republican that did so while the Democratic candidate won the PV. The times it almost happened-- 1916, 1968, 1976, 2020-- would have gone the same way. Only in 2004 did the Democrat come close to winning without the PV.

I know this post is about the GOP, but perhaps the Democrats need to bone up on their rural strategy-- and maybe pick off MS (as Carter did in 1976) or MT (as Bill Clinton did in 1992) or IN (as Obama did in 2008). Democrats should not take their 2020 win as evidence that they can win going forward without rural votes. Then again, if "it" happens again, either (1) there will be civil disorder, or (2) the EC will be modified or abolished (or both).

As for the GOP, the fact that they did better in faster-growing areas from 1950 to 2010 actually put them at a slight disadvantage (since EV allocation is based on an earlier year's census). Since 2010, it is no longer true that the GOP does best in fast-growing areas; in many cases it's the opposite (look at Georgia vs. Ohio, for example), compounding the Democrats' EC problem even more. Still, the GOP hopefully learned in 2020 that you cannot build a winning strategy solely on appealing to angry, disaffected voters.