Which is a more accurate statement?

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Pick one.

[RaphaelDLG]

It's not going to be quite as electorally successful for much longer because of age, but is probably here to stay, and I don't think there's like, some ironclad Democratic majority, though millennials coming of age will make things easier for Democrats, certainly.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

It's not going to be quite as electorally successful for much longer because of age, but is probably here to stay, and I don't think there's like, some ironclad Democratic majority, though millennials coming of age will make things easier for Democrats, certainly.

I think Millennials and post-Millennials will be bringing a completely new set of values to both parties. These generations are much more secular, and many will be inheriting the Republican Party and pulling it in a direction in which climate denial, intelligent design in schools, school vouchers for religious schools, and anti-lgbt policy simply won't fly.  It will probably always be the party of less government, so the battlegrounds will be things like healthcare (not if we fix it, but how), funding for education, that sort of thing.

America is not in any danger of becoming a one-party state.  The parties will gradually realign themselves to fit new demographics.  This is a good thing.

[TML]

As Michael Moore put it in 2016, this is the last stand of the angry white man.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Wow, the Democratic arrogance and denial is strong with this forum.

After red waves in 2010 and 2014, and then the un-electable Trump storming the Rust Belt, you'd think maybe Democrats would learn the lesson that a changing electorate isn't going to magically save them from needing to appeal to middle America.

I don't think Trumpism is the new normal, but that's certainly a more accurate statement than it somehow being a last gasp of a dying party.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Slightly agree more with the former but I think both statements have a decent amount of validity. Generational turnover hurts Republicans (even white millennials that are heavily college educated aren’t interested in them). But the strong emphasis on immigration and trade will likely stick with the GOP. These are issues that have historically defined them for well over a century. If anything you can argue that it was the globalist Reagan-Bush philosophy of the GOP that was the aberration; not Trump.

"Trump is a true paleoconservative" should be an Atlas meme. Because it's kinda accurate. Also "GOP 2018 == Reform 2000."

Somewhere Patsy Buchanan is smiling.

[darklordoftech]

It's the desparation of those who are on the loosing side of history.

[J. J.]

Wow, the Democratic arrogance and denial is strong with this forum.

After red waves in 2010 and 2014, and then the un-electable Trump storming the Rust Belt, you'd think maybe Democrats would learn the lesson that a changing electorate isn't going to magically save them from needing to appeal to middle America.

I don't think Trumpism is the new normal, but that's certainly a more accurate statement than it somehow being a last gasp of a dying party.

You are correct, especially as the question is phrased:

"It's a last ditch effort to cobble something together, and will get rekt by the #EmergingDemocraticMajority"

The Republican establishment accepted Trump kicking, screaming, and trying desperately to oust him after he won the nomination.  GHW Bush endorsed Hillary.

[Camaro33]

Both are accurate.

Until the democratic party loses its elitist, coastal living, 'America has never been great' perceptions, expect rural areas in so called "flyover country" to trend even more Republican over time. These voters won't go to the other side. Sure, a populist left candidate might swing these voters and areas slightly in one election, but long term expect the divides between rural (or white) and "middle" (or white) America to continue. Trump is a last stand today, because it was the most recent election. Future politicians likely won't be so far-fetched and polarizing however, so future elections of Republicans may appear to be less of a "last stand" although the left will always portray a conservative victory as such. So much for "racism".

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Republicans will probably transition into a broader populist movement, so i guess the Trump direction is a stay... I just think the establishment is increasingly losing ground with Republican voters, and they might even vote for Democrats in the future... I think Trump caused a re-alignment of the parties, and Democrats will probably become more of market liberals while Republicans will transition into a socially right-wing but economically left-wing / centre-left party, which is almost unthinkable right now, but i can see it happening. Some kind of American Worker's Party, but a big tent in which many beliefs will have a place. And they'll probably advocate some kind of issues like lowering taxes / smaller government, but also social security for the people who have worked in their life (pensioner's right, veteran's right, tuition fees, affordable healthcare for people who've worked in their life). Not socialist, far from. But some kind of populist American Worker's Party... similar to far-right / right-wing populist movements in Europe with socially conservative fractions, while Democrats will mostly be liberal with an increasing left-wing / far-left fraction.

Also, republicans will become even more tough on immigration, while democrats will be very liberal on immigration. There will be a lot of polarizing on the issue of immigration and increasing islamitization, and i think this will be a key issue in the upcoming decade.

[Cassandra]

Though it may not be electorally viable a few election cycles from now, this form of hard-right politics is here to stay. The only question to my mind is whether these politics are replaced peacefully due to demographics, or if this is just a stage in a march towards a white nationalist insurgency.