2016 Outcome & Realignment to Mirror 1976 or 1988?

[Camaro33]

I see the 2016 election as having two potential outcomes with lasting realignments of the national political landscape. If the GOP wins, which I think is less likely, I see the long term effects to mirror the 1976 win for the Dems. The GOP in this case will probably get beat in 2020 and be out for two or three (or more) election cycles.

However, should the Democrats win 2016, I see it as being a more likely outcome to long-term benefit to the Republican party like the position the Dems were in back in 1988. Voter fatigue may set in, coalitions will realign, "new" people will be running for office (reference to Clinton in 1992), and the Republicans will be back to being more of the majority for a longer time period.

What do you think? Is this a likely scenario? Or is demographics destiny?

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Yes, when the establishment kicks Trump out and lose to Hillary, he will come back stronger than ever in 2020 and inspire a generation

[Asian Nazi]

The Democrat and Republican Parties are inherently and structurally different animals.  They do not mirror one another and phenomenons that can occur in one party aren't necessarily replicable in the other.  Bill Clinton was hardly the first modern Democrat to triangulate and throw his base under the bus as an electoral strategy --- that was Carter.  To different degrees, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry all did the same thing, but Clinton was only able to pull it off successfully because 1. the anti-incumbent climate in 1992 and 2. he was a great campaigner.  A modern Republican candidate who attempted to triangulate and distance themself from their base as hard as the Democrats have would flop as hard as a Democrat "Tea Party" would.

Also, I would advise against drawing historical parallels.  America is a totally different country than it was 40 years ago and the process of electioneering is therefore radically different. 

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

The Democrat and Republican Parties are inherently and structurally different animals.  They do not mirror one another and phenomenons that can occur in one party aren't necessarily replicable in the other.  Bill Clinton was hardly the first modern Democrat to triangulate and throw his base under the bus as an electoral strategy --- that was Carter.  To different degrees, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry all did the same thing, but Clinton was only able to pull it off successfully because 1. the anti-incumbent climate in 1992 and 2. he was a great campaigner.  A modern Republican candidate who attempted to triangulate and distance themself from their base as hard as the Democrats have would flop as hard as a Democrat "Tea Party" would.

Also, I would advise against drawing historical parallels.  America is a totally different country than it was 40 years ago and the process of electioneering is therefore radically different. 

Also more important than historic parallels is the recent historical trend of having 8 years of one party followed by 8 years of the other with the exception of 1980 and 1988.

[pbrower2a]

I have made a few maps contrasting elections different in time. When the map shows mostly red and blue, then the partisan voting within the states looks similar (as between 1928 and the two Eisenhower elections). When one sees huge tracts of colors other than blue and red (as between the Eisenhower and Obama elections) one notices that partisan identities of the states have largely flipped.   

If anyone has any doubt that the Presidential Election of 1976 is ancient history for all practical purposes:

Carter 1976, Obama 2008/2012    

Carter 1976, Obama twice  red
Carter 1976, Obama once pink
Carter 1976, Obama never yellow
Ford 1976, Obama twice white
Ford 1976, Obama once light blue
Ford 1976, Obama never blue

....As you can see, Carter lost a raft of states (among them California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, and Maine) that Democratic nominees for President have not lost after 1988, and some states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New Mexico) that Democrats have not LOST in Presidential wins. On the other side, Carter was the last Democrat to win Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, or Texas.

I see the 1976 Presidential election as the last hurrah of the core of the New Deal, with the Democratic nominee depending heavily upon the South for votes and losing heavily in the Far West and Midwest.  

How different is 1976 from 2012? In 1976, Carter won every former Confederate state except Virginia. In 2012, Obama came close to losing every former Confederate state except Virginia.

As polarized as America is in state partisanship, I can rank the most likely parallels for the electoral map:

1. 2012
2. 2000
3. 2004
4. 2008


I don't see how the Democrats win the sorts of states that Bill Clinton win in 1992 and 1996 this time, so 1992 and 1996 are not likely parallels. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have an appreciable chance of winning anything like the 428 electoral votes that the elder Bush won in 1988.

[Sumner 1868]

If anyone has any doubt that the Presidential Election of 1976 is ancient history for all practical purposes:

Carter 1976, Obama 2008/2012   

Carter 1976, Obama twice  red
Carter 1976, Obama once pink
Carter 1976, Obama never yellow
Ford 1976, Obama twice white
Ford 1976, Obama once light blue
Ford 1976, Obama never blue

....As you can see, Carter lost a raft of states (among them California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, and Maine) that Democratic nominees for President have not lost after 1988, and some states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New Mexico) that Democrats have not LOST in Presidential wins. On the other side, Carter was the last Democrat to win Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, or Texas.

I see the 1976 Presidential election as the last hurrah of the core of the New Deal, with the Democratic nominee depending heavily upon the South for votes and losing heavily in the Far West and Midwest. 

How different is 1976 from 2012? In 1976, Carter won every former Confederate state except Virginia. In 2012, Obama came close to losing every former Confederate state except Virginia.

A Republican winning in 2016 is going to win as Dubya did in 2000 or 2004 according to the political map.

Carter came very close in Maine, and fairly close in Oregon, California, and Illinois. He also did reasonably well in Washington and Connecticut. Meanwhile, he greatly under-preformed in the Southern states he won while absolutely tanking the Rockies. So arguably 1976 foreshadowed some of the trends we see today.