When will be the next realignment election?

[The_Doctor]

I voted 2024. The Reagan era and the string of close elections (since 2000) both come to an end with the election of 2024 which sends a Democrat to the White House to match Democratic majorities in Congress.

There have been (imo) four great realignments. Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Reagan. I think the Reagan era concludes in 2024 (Trump - Pence I don't think can hold together the Reagan coalition past 2024).

Outside chance of 2020 if the Republicans really act incompetent.

[The_Doctor]

The Court will shift blue (Atlas Red) on its own accord under this scenario. The justices know that in that scenario that their legitimacy derives from the public believing in them. It's why the Court went pro-New Deal. They knew that without public support they had no standing to get their rulings enforced.

There's a very important reason Roe wasn't overturned directly and gay marriage made legal. The Court looked at public opinion and made up the legal rationales after.  Kennedy, in particular, is famous for this as is Roberts.

[The_Doctor]

I'm generally a fan of constructionist judges but we cannot ignore the fact that the judiciary rightfully derives their support from the governed's consent, like the other two branches. The judiciary has to balance appropriately reading the Constition with maintaining public support. Everything in our system is based on reading public support for x and y.  We live in Reaganism so our Judiciary feels more free to be more conservative.

I'll respond to the other point later. 

But in general even a liberal Court would be far more constrained than the Democrats would want. They have to operate under the same rules Reaganism set down.

[The_Doctor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump won 46% of the vote and most of his states were Bush states from 2004 + PA, WI, MI + ME's 1 elector. It wasn't a wholesale realignment.

Anyway, FDR definitely led a realignment of the country as a whole away from the Industrial Republicans to the New Deal Democrats.

Reagan's realignment created a brand of conservative voters (the Baby Boomers, Reagan Democrats and suburban & rural Republicans). If you don't believe 1980 wasn't a realignment, look at our politics since 1980 and compare to before. Our Courts are more conservative, Republicans have been in power more, and generally, Reaganism holds in this country.

[The_Doctor]

Yeah the New Deal era lasted 48 years. The Reagan era lasting 40-44 years makes sense. In theory could go on longer but I doubt it given climate change and economic changes.

[The_Doctor]

Yeah the New Deal era lasted 48 years. The Reagan era lasting 40-44 years makes sense. In theory could go on longer but I doubt it given climate change and economic changes.

But, wait: three months ago, Atlas was saying that the Reagan era ended in 2008 with the election of Obama and that we were in the liberal Obama realignment now.  Which is it?

(Partisan realignment eras (as Atlas likes to think of them) are mostly a myth, anyway.

I dunno about them but I never said Obama was a realigning President. The Reagan era didn't end with Obama, as very clearly defined by 2010 and 2014.

I tend to disagree and believe we're in a period of changing alignments from the Reagan Republicans to the Sanders Democrats.

[The_Doctor]

Yeah the New Deal era lasted 48 years. The Reagan era lasting 40-44 years makes sense. In theory could go on longer but I doubt it given climate change and economic changes.

For what it is worth, the Industrial Republican Era lasted 56 years. Reconstruction doesn't count. The Agrian Democrat system lasted 32.

I disagree. The Republican Party won power in 1860 and never really let go until 1932. The intensity of the Republican majority changed over time (becoming bigger at the turn of the century) but didn't essentially change that we were a Republican nation from Lincoln to Hoover (we elected only two Democrats to the White House and Congress was largely pro business and Republican).

The Agrarian Democratic era, same deal. Jefferson inaugurated the system and wiped out the Federalists while Jackson reaffirmed the agrarian Democratic majority.

Tangent: in theory Trump could have been that confirming President to Reagan's Republicans but I am betting more that W. was it.

[The_Doctor]

The other reason for a realigning election in 2024 is probably this. The string of close elections since 2000 probably will come to an end an one party will prevail over the other for a few cycles. For a lot of reasons, the Democrats look like the party that have a bigger coalition and being the out party right now probably gives them the breakthrough they need in 2024.

For a lot of reasons, I don't see the GOP breaking that logjam to win 55-58% of the electorate on a consistent basis.

[The_Doctor]

The other reason for a realigning election in 2024 is probably this. The string of close elections since 2000 probably will come to an end an one party will prevail over the other for a few cycles. For a lot of reasons, the Democrats look like the party that have a bigger coalition and being the out party right now probably gives them the breakthrough they need in 2024.

For a lot of reasons, I don't see the GOP breaking that logjam to win 55-58% of the electorate on a consistent basis.

Yeah, while I've always believed permanent majorities are utter nonsense, we could very well be on the verge of a period of Democratic dominance, starting with the next Democratic President. Their popular vote share is more likely to inch up as Millennials become the plurality of the electorate. I could resemble the inverse of Republicans' dominance in the EC from 1968-1992, with only a major scandal enabling a D to win (but take away the lopsided congressional majorities by the opposite party). Particularly if they turn the Sun Belt into the next Virginia or Colorado (where it votes reliably D, even if narrowly), that's going to heavily outweigh the inroads Republicans make in the Midwest. I agree with you that 2024 is more ripe for the picking on states like Texas and Georgia (particularly after two terms of Trump), but who knows--2020 could exacerbate those long-term trends, just like Trump did in the Midwest this year. The Senate will more or less be a wash, though.

The last line I don't agree. The partisanship of the Congressional Republicans probably mean the Democrats would be the majority in Congress. Remember the '68-92 Democrats often let a lot of the Republican agenda through (especially after 1981) and that's how they kept their majorities. I don't think the Republicans will be capable of behaving in a similar fashion to save their majority.

[The_Doctor]

The other reason for a realigning election in 2024 is probably this. The string of close elections since 2000 probably will come to an end an one party will prevail over the other for a few cycles. For a lot of reasons, the Democrats look like the party that have a bigger coalition and being the out party right now probably gives them the breakthrough they need in 2024.

For a lot of reasons, I don't see the GOP breaking that logjam to win 55-58% of the electorate on a consistent basis.

Yeah, while I've always believed permanent majorities are utter nonsense, we could very well be on the verge of a period of Democratic dominance, starting with the next Democratic President. Their popular vote share is more likely to inch up as Millennials become the plurality of the electorate. I could resemble the inverse of Republicans' dominance in the EC from 1968-1992, with only a major scandal enabling a D to win (but take away the lopsided congressional majorities by the opposite party). Particularly if they turn the Sun Belt into the next Virginia or Colorado (where it votes reliably D, even if narrowly), that's going to heavily outweigh the inroads Republicans make in the Midwest. I agree with you that 2024 is more ripe for the picking on states like Texas and Georgia (particularly after two terms of Trump), but who knows--2020 could exacerbate those long-term trends, just like Trump did in the Midwest this year. The Senate will more or less be a wash, though.

The last line I don't agree. The partisanship of the Congressional Republicans probably mean the Democrats would be the majority in Congress. Remember the '68-92 Democrats often let a lot of the Republican agenda through (especially after 1981) and that's how they kept their majorities. I don't think the Republicans will be capable of behaving in a similar fashion to save their majority.

Do you think the majority was Republican, if you give a reasonable counting and scoring of the votes?

I don't know about 1969-1981 but post-1981 the blue dog conservatives and the Republican Party made up a House majority. The Southern Democrats were about as conservative as a lot of the Republicans. In 1994 the Republicans basically replaced a ton of blue dogs.