Have the Democrats lost the White vote forever?

[Hindsight was 2020]

The dems will win the white majority when the millennials are in the 30s-50s range

[Virginiá]

Democrats said the demographic changes would be catastrophic for Republicans and look what happened!

The lesson here is not that those changes won't be increasingly more damaging for the GOP, it's that it will take longer than people thought.

Demographic changes won't end the GOP because political parties adjust to the times they are in.

The GOP isn't going to be like this forever, and while no one can say never, it's 99% unlikely either party is going to "end." However, the GOP didn't adjust. They more or less doubled down. It just so happened that that strategy was sufficient for this election.

So it's not a question about 'ending' - to me, it's more about a question of how long the GOP will find itself out of power down the road when the check comes due for their current strategy/behavior? I haven't seen anything new really that contradicts my own view that your party is in for a generational/demographic reckoning eventually. I'm pretty sure, though, that whenever the dam does break, it'll probably take decades to regain your footing and adapt, just like it took Democrats decades, and Republicans generations before, and so on.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Still haven't seen why Democrats need to win the white vote.  2016 election results...

Virginia: Trump wins 59% of white vote, loses state.
New York: Trump wins 51% of white vote, loses state.
Colorado: Trump wins white vote 47-45%, loses state.
Nevada: Trump wins 56% of white vote, loses state.
etc. etc.

So as seen above, Democrats can easily win states without even coming close to getting a majority of the white vote...

It is only a matter of time before other states become in danger for the GOP unless they start winning more of the minority vote.  Focusing on Democrats having to win more votes of a shrinking share of the population rather than focusing on how Republicans need to win more votes of a growing population is absurd.

-Elections are won based on the relative size of the demographics, not their growth rate.

[SCNCmod]

No.. But Dems are certainly hurting with the Rural Vote.

[/]

Democrats really need to start winning the popular vote by three points instead of only two.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Democrats really need to start winning the popular vote by three points instead of only two.

We need more IMMUGRUNTS!

[RINO Tom]

Guys, there is no shame in admitting you are part of my army.

[RINO Tom]

Guys, there is no shame in admitting you are part of my army.

army of millennial snowflakes?  Can we send you guys to Syria?  

I've never heard of this term snowflake, but I will certainly research it in my free time tomorrow (my job I don't have doesn't make me work on Saturdays).  I will likely spend my Monday (again, I won't be at any job, because I'm not an educated, six-figure Democrat) patching together an insignia for my army in the design of a snowflake.  Soon it will be everyone's avatar (because we're all me).

[/]

flame war

[RINO Tom]

Guys, there is no shame in admitting you are part of my army.

army of millennial snowflakes?  Can we send you guys to Syria?  

I've never heard of this term snowflake, but I will certainly research it in my free time tomorrow (my job I don't have doesn't make me work on Saturdays).  I will likely spend my Monday (again, I won't be at any job, because I'm not an educated, six-figure Democrat) patching together an insignia for my army in the design of a snowflake.  Soon it will be everyone's avatar (because we're all me).

And I will pay for your Obamacare.

Well golly, seeing as you are a member of the party responsible, seems only fair, no?

[RINO Tom]

Guys, there is no shame in admitting you are part of my army.

army of millennial snowflakes?  Can we send you guys to Syria?  

I've never heard of this term snowflake, but I will certainly research it in my free time tomorrow (my job I don't have doesn't make me work on Saturdays).  I will likely spend my Monday (again, I won't be at any job, because I'm not an educated, six-figure Democrat) patching together an insignia for my army in the design of a snowflake.  Soon it will be everyone's avatar (because we're all me).

And I will pay for your Obamacare.

Well golly, seeing as you are a member of the party responsible, seems only fair, no?

One of the few major issues I disagree with Democrats on.  I would love to have Obamacare completely repealed, except for one single provision.

Maybe if you keep voting for Democrats, they'll all just change their minds on healthcare (after you email them alerting them of The Realignment™)!

[RINO Tom]

Tom RINO went quiet because he had to get ready for dinner, where he will mooch off of his parents.  He will apologize only if you promise to continue to call him Tom RINO and never by his username.

[SCNCmod]

Older Rural whites, maybe...

But I think Dems win whites under 30.... Which would indicate... at the moment- the future white majority is with Dems.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Older Rural whites, maybe...

But I think Dems win whites under 30.... Which would indicate... at the moment- the future white majority is with Dems.

Trump and Romney both won white 18-29s.

[RINO Tom]

Best part is it's well known here I voted for Clinton, LMFAO.

[RINO Tom]

Best part is it's well known here I voted for Clinton, LMFAO.

I really could care less who you voted for.  Lets just quash the beef.  I really don't want either of us to discuss each other anymore... deal?  I'd rather just read the political threads without having to get into it with you in every topic... sound good?  lets just agree to disagree and not respond to each other going forward.. how about that?

If I say something that contradicts your ideas or theories but don't quote you (like when I pointed out there was a direct correlation between a higher income and voting Trump, that Trump won suburbs or that Trump won a higher percent of college grads in FL than non-college grads, for example), don't take it as me engaging you then.  I don't agree with your theories about coalitions.  I think they're wrong.  I'm not just gonna not post on the subject.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Still haven't seen why Democrats need to win the white vote.  2016 election results...

Virginia: Trump wins 59% of white vote, loses state.
New York: Trump wins 51% of white vote, loses state.
Colorado: Trump wins white vote 47-45%, loses state.
Nevada: Trump wins 56% of white vote, loses state.
etc. etc.

So as seen above, Democrats can easily win states without even coming close to getting a majority of the white vote...

It is only a matter of time before other states become in danger for the GOP unless they start winning more of the minority vote.  Focusing on Democrats having to win more votes of a shrinking share of the population rather than focusing on how Republicans need to win more votes of a growing population is absurd.

-Elections are won based on the relative size of the demographics, not their growth rate.

Not this again... nobody reasonable disputes the fact that hispanics and other minorities will grow as a relative proportion of the population over the next 20 years.  Stopping immigration now is not going to change that.

-It'll slow the rate of change.

[Virginiá]

literally 4 entire pages of back and forth arguing between 2, but sometimes 3-4 people lol

[RINO Tom]

literally 4 entire pages of back and forth arguing between 2, but sometimes 3-4 people lol

Proud member of The 3-4™.

[The_Doctor]

Notably, the white vote didn't substantially change in margin from Romney to Trump. They were roughly the same 20% (up a little to 21%). The winning Republican candidate barely improved by 1% over the losing GOP candidate of 2012.

The more apt question, is the white vote going to get more Republican? Or have they reached a plateau? (Most likely, a plateau with a upper limit of some 60%). If the white vote has reached a plateau, the GOP is in some considerable trouble.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Still haven't seen why Democrats need to win the white vote.  2016 election results...

Virginia: Trump wins 59% of white vote, loses state.
New York: Trump wins 51% of white vote, loses state.
Colorado: Trump wins white vote 47-45%, loses state.
Nevada: Trump wins 56% of white vote, loses state.
etc. etc.

So as seen above, Democrats can easily win states without even coming close to getting a majority of the white vote...

It is only a matter of time before other states become in danger for the GOP unless they start winning more of the minority vote.  Focusing on Democrats having to win more votes of a shrinking share of the population rather than focusing on how Republicans need to win more votes of a growing population is absurd.

-Elections are won based on the relative size of the demographics, not their growth rate.

Not this again... nobody reasonable disputes the fact that hispanics and other minorities will grow as a relative proportion of the population over the next 20 years.  Stopping immigration now is not going to change that.

-It'll slow the rate of change.

I don't disagree that it will have an impact, but if you look at all the hispanic kids under 18 at this very minute that are going to grow to age of minority, the hispanic vote is still going to massively increase as a proportion of the population.  You at least agree with that right?

-Sure.

[Virginiá]

Notably, the white vote didn't substantially change in margin from Romney to Trump. They were roughly the same 20% (up a little to 21%). The winning Republican candidate barely improved by 1% over the losing GOP candidate of 2012.

The more apt question, is the white vote going to get more Republican? Or have they reached a plateau? (Most likely, a plateau with a upper limit of some 60%). If the white vote has reached a plateau, the GOP is in some considerable trouble.

We might actually be able to start answering that question in Dec 2020 (imo). Republicans can't maintain, let alone increase their share of the white vote without making big inroads with white Millennials, and in 2020 white Mills. will constitute the entire 30-39 age bloc. If the desperate idea that they will naturally trend Rep. as they age or that racial polarization will make them into members of the GOP, then this age group should show stronger GOP support than today's/2012's 18-29 whites did. If that bloc (30-39) shows Democratic support largely similar or the same as 2012/2016, then the GOP's whites-only strategy for the future is a big league loser. This same test would be even more potent for 2024 as the entire 30-44 bloc would be Millennials and gen z voters.

Personally, it's my belief that white Millennials will remain at least somewhat more supportive of Democrats than boomers, and that even if young whites now trend a little Republican 20 years from now, that would still make them only roughly as Republican as whites as a whole were in 2012. That would really be bad for the GOP.

At any rate, I wish people would be more considerate of things like this. Advocating for the GOP to essentially become the party of all/most white people could be bad news for the stability of American society in the future.

There is another reason they are in trouble too... the white vote is shifting...  Republicans are running up bigger margins in rural areas but are weakening in suburbs.  This won't impact many states but it is going to hurt them in house races because their vote will be more concentrated, similar to how Democrats' votes are concentrated in big cities.

If that scenario were to somehow come to be, I wonder how long it would take to start causing problems for the GOP.

[SCNCmod]

Older Rural whites, maybe...

But I think Dems win whites under 30.... Which would indicate... at the moment- the future white majority is with Dems.

Trump and Romney both won white 18-29s.

Maybe I'm thinking of the traditional "youth" vote definition ... which is 18-24s.