The Democratic base region in 50 years

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Make your probably baseless bets here, and we'll come back in 2061.

[Miles]

I'll say Southwest (AZ, NM, NV, CO) extending into the West Coast.

[redcommander]

I'll go out on a limb and say they regain the Great Plains by becoming more Populist.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I'll go out on a limb and say they regain the Great Plains by becoming more Populist.

So basically 1896 all over again?

[Talleyrand]

Southeast, Southwest, and West Coast.

[5280]

Maybe something like this?

[redcommander]

I'll go out on a limb and say they regain the Great Plains by becoming more Populist.

So basically 1896 all over again?

Free Silver makes a comeback.

[Antonio the Sixth]

West Coast, closely followed by Northeast and then Southeast.

[All Along The Watchtower]

West Coast and/or New England.

[Del Tachi]

Maybe a little something like this?

The bastions of Democratic support would be the West Coast, Southwest, and the South Coast--with a few Democratic strongholds in the Northeast.

[LastVoter]

Maybe a little something like this?

The bastions of Democratic support would be the West Coast, Southwest, and the South Coast--with a few Democratic strongholds in the Northeast.

This is relatively reasonable. I'd say VT and NY would also be base regions for dems, but SC and MS would still be gop, and FL would be a tossup forever.

[phk]

Who knows

[Lucius Quintus Cincinatus Lamar]

Maybe a little something like this?

The bastions of Democratic support would be the West Coast, Southwest, and the South Coast--with a few Democratic strongholds in the Northeast.

How does MS turn into a Democratic island...same for MT?

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Something like this:

[NY Jew]

green is a toss up

[Del Tachi]

Maybe a little something like this?

The bastions of Democratic support would be the West Coast, Southwest, and the South Coast--with a few Democratic strongholds in the Northeast.

How does MS turn into a Democratic island...same for MT?

By 2061, MS will probably be 52-54% Black. 

In Montana, its all the California transplants taking over the western part of the State that deliever it to the Democrats. 

[Skill and Chance]

green is a toss up

Why does WV go back left and MD move to the center?  Other than that, everything looks logical here.

[izixs]

I'd suspect that the Democratic base will be less a region than a type of community. Its already moving in that direction with most urban centers leaning Democratic as is. I'd expect some differentiation at some point as these becomes the dominate locations of American politics and both parties adjust to reflect this. So having a grouping of states holding towards one party as they currently do will only happen if those states lack major urban centers (like in much of the great plains) in which case the states will probably keep holding in their current patterns until such time as they grow major urban centers.

So in a city dominate US, it comes down to if Republicans can keep some major urban centers under their influence despite trends towards higher density communities drifting dem. To do so will probably require a radical shift in the basic premiss of the Republican party. For the Dems, they pretty much are hitting the right notes presently and their messages resonate well with diverse communities (which tend to come with urbanization).

Already Democrats are dominating a number of states with large portions of the population in major cities (NY, IL, CA, WA, ect). So where are the major urban centers going to be popping up in the next 50 years? If global warming doesn't halt the growth in the south west and Texas, these areas will shift Dem on population concentration alone. The coasts with the exception of AK, AL, MS, and LA will probably keep moving dem as well. I exclude those four because AK is unlikely to develop major urban centers any time soon, AL and MS have limited scope as far as coastal centric development and will probably have state governments that become anti-growth once they see SC getting more liberal over the decades, and similarly with LA but perhaps with an active anti-urbanization push to limit the growth of New Orleans to prevent state wide competitiveness. At best these four states will be swing territory in 50 years.

So that leaves the interior. Colorado is already becoming urban dominated as is Illinois. MI, PA, and OH are borderline at present and depending on how economics works out could drift either way. WV will probably stay very Republican for a good long while as I don't see this urban trend going strong here until greater DC starts to really bleed into the eastern corner of the state in any substantial fashion. KY, TN, and AR will probably stay lean or likely Republican unless major changes happen in the dynamics of the state's growth. The upper midwest will probably tilt right as the young people move to more interesting areas, suppressing urbanization. Same with most the great plains unless latino growth explodes here for some reason. Utah will maybe moderate a bit but it would be Salt Lake City vs everyone else. Wyoming, Idaho, and probably Montana will keep right leaning, though Montana might remain the most even of the group.

Of course if Republicans can figure out how to appeal to all or some urban populations, then things get more complicated. The problems of cities on the east coast will probably be a little different then the problems on the west coast or the gulf coast.

But yeah, lots can happen in 50 years.

[Skill and Chance]

Here are a few scenarios, in order of what I think is most likely for the country over the next 50 years.

1. Energy/climate change is the defining issue of the day.  The Democrats become a socially liberal green party with a libertarian streak.  Their base demographic would be the CO, CT or NOVA of today.  Petroleum ties have pulled Texas back to the right later in the century.

2. The #1 issue is economic inequality.  The Democrats become decidedly more populist and the Republicans more libertarian.  The Democratic base demographic is the OH or SW PA of today.  The northeast becomes very competitive and the southwest stops trending D.

 
3. Immigration is the most important issue. The Democrats define themselves as the defenders of immigrants and immigration rights.  The Southwest becomes a one-party region, and they are on top in FL, but the Rust Belt is long gone and the South stops trending toward them.

[Frodo]

A mix of maps 1 & 3 seems the most likely, IMHO. 

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

1 and 3 are looking to happen if the trends permanently continue (which is possible), while something like Map 2, where the map looks more like it did in the early to middle 20th century, could happen with a shift of party platforms, or even issue emphasis.

If the Moral Majority continues to fade, economic issues will naturally take center stage in the South. If Democrats can then tie blacks and poor whites together, the rest is history. Republicans would counter that by trying to hold on to wealthier Southern whites (so we won't see >90% margins in SC or MS), while running a fiscally conservative platform aimed at suburbia and wealthier rural areas. There would be a focus on monetarist economics, tough-on-crime policies, and probably a more aggressive foreign policy. California, with elements of both groups, would become a swing state, as would Texas, New York, and Illinois. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and Iowa would remain swing states. The Republican base would be, like in the 1960's, in the Mountain West, the Great Plains, and northern New England, while the Democrats would be strongest in the Deep South. Chances are you would have a lot more competitive states as a whole.

[Skill and Chance]

1 and 3 are looking to happen if the trends permanently continue (which is possible), while something like Map 2, where the map looks more like it did in the early to middle 20th century, could happen with a shift of party platforms, or even issue emphasis.

If the Moral Majority continues to fade, economic issues will naturally take center stage in the South. If Democrats can then tie blacks and poor whites together, the rest is history. Republicans would counter that by trying to hold on to wealthier Southern whites (so we won't see >90% margins in SC or MS), while running a fiscally conservative platform aimed at suburbia and wealthier rural areas. There would be a focus on monetarist economics, tough-on-crime policies, and probably a more aggressive foreign policy. California, with elements of both groups, would become a swing state, as would Texas, New York, and Illinois. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and Iowa would remain swing states. The Republican base would be, like in the 1960's, in the Mountain West, the Great Plains, and northern New England, while the Democrats would be strongest in the Deep South. Chances are you would have a lot more competitive states as a whole.

The thing is, the South isn't that poor anymore, and it could be the economic center of the country in 20 years (counting TX as part of the South).  The populist platform won't play as strongly there going forward.  It would get them back on track in Appalachia, but there aren't that many votes there.  I just can't see a scenario where the Democrats have their base in the Deep South.  I can see VA becoming an extension of DC and Charlotte and Raleigh/Durham carrying NC routinely for them, but change happens so slowly in places like MS and AL.  The GOP just reconstructed the MS state house this year!  I could easily see 100 years of GOP control going forward in LA, AL, TN, OK, and AR when they finally flip.  MS should now be all Republicans all the time until the state becomes majority-minority by likely voters, which could be a very long time.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Arkansas is still run by Democrats, if that means anything. Mississippi has a low ceiling for Democrats, but a very high floor for obvious reasons.

As for the whole economic center thing, it'll be more of the Mid-Atlantic (a strip from New York to Charlotte) than the South as a whole. Mississippi, Alabama, and Tennessee aren't getting financial booms any time soon.

[Skill and Chance]

Arkansas is still run by Democrats, if that means anything. Mississippi has a low ceiling for Democrats, but a very high floor for obvious reasons.

As for the whole economic center thing, it'll be more of the Mid-Atlantic (a strip from New York to Charlotte) than the South as a whole. Mississippi, Alabama, and Tennessee aren't getting financial booms any time soon.

I still think the dominant strategy for Democrats in the South is to wait 5-15 years for the socially liberal yuppies with master's degrees to hand them VA, NC and GA (in that order).  Those states are larger and growing much faster. 

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

That will help in the short term, but the moment the GOP drops the socon act is the moment they bolt from the party.