|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 03, 2020, 10:03:30 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: Virginiá)
  2024 will be the realigning election of our lifetimes
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: 2024 will be the realigning election of our lifetimes  (Read 5324 times)
Non Swing Voter
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,257


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 12, 2017, 04:33:34 pm »
« edited: March 28, 2017, 01:40:36 pm by Virginia »

[removed by request]
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2017, 04:37:15 pm »

No. Wait until 2030s.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2017, 04:41:13 pm »

Also, why would the GOP moderate on immigration? Suicide?
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2017, 05:00:43 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:42:17 pm by Virginia »


2024 will be the age generation tipping point where millennials and later are undoubtedly the biggest generation to vote.

Remember, people who are slightly older than millennials - those who are around 35-45 now - are almost as liberal as millennials on social issues.  So you couple them with the millennial generation and you have a very clear majority of the electorate.

-Meaningless statistic. What are you expecting? 1896-type coalitional realignment, 1932-type ideological realignment, or 60s chaos?
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administrator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,156
Ukraine


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2017, 05:02:25 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:42:28 pm by Virginia »

2024 will be the age generation tipping point where millennials and later are undoubtedly the biggest generation to vote.

Remember, people who are slightly older than millennials - those who are around 35-45 now - are almost as liberal as millennials on social issues.  So you couple them with the millennial generation and you have a very clear majority of the electorate.

By 2024 EHarding will have perfected a game-changing invention to keep the GOP in power: reanimate the dead and usher them to the voting booths in November. I hear the undead are severely conservative nationalists.

[insert Illinois dead voter joke by EHarding]
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2017, 05:04:06 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:42:37 pm by Virginia »

Also, why would the GOP moderate on immigration? Suicide?

Because there will be too much political power in swing states with large hispanic populations by then...  particularly Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona... and maybe Texas...

Republicans will need to fight for some of these states unless they make up ground somewhere else... and the upper midwest is not enough if they lose Florida and Arizona.

-Why would the GOP want to give Hispanics more power in that case? In any case,


and FL has trended R three out of the past four elections.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administrator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,156
Ukraine


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2017, 05:07:22 pm »

Why would Democrats be perpetually losing Pennsylvania and Michigan again?
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2017, 05:08:39 pm »

2024 will be the age generation tipping point where millennials and later are undoubtedly the biggest generation to vote.

Remember, people who are slightly older than millennials - those who are around 35-45 now - are almost as liberal as millennials on social issues.  So you couple them with the millennial generation and you have a very clear majority of the electorate.

By 2024 EHarding will have perfected a game-changing invention to keep the GOP in power: reanimate the dead and usher them to the voting booths in November. I hear the undead are severely conservative nationalists.

[insert Illinois dead voter joke by EHarding]

-Nope. It's called Making America Great Again.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2017, 05:09:45 pm »

Why would Democrats be perpetually losing Pennsylvania and Michigan again?

-GOP going full Party of McKinley protectionist.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2017, 05:13:10 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:42:57 pm by Virginia »

Why would Democrats be perpetually losing Pennsylvania and Michigan again?

-GOP going full Party of McKinley protectionist.

That's going to turn off millennial and post-millenial Philly area swing voters.

-Two words: Obama, NAFTA
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2017, 05:14:50 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:44:05 pm by Virginia »

Also, why would the GOP moderate on immigration? Suicide?

Because there will be too much political power in swing states with large hispanic populations by then...  particularly Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona... and maybe Texas...

Republicans will need to fight for some of these states unless they make up ground somewhere else... and the upper midwest is not enough if they lose Florida and Arizona.

-Why would the GOP want to give Hispanics more power in that case? In any case,


and FL has trended R three out of the past four elections.

actually, I probably should have also noted that I think by 2024 Georgia will be lean democrat.  If you look at the 2016 vote by age group, the GOP is heavily relying on older voters there... the generational shift there will be more pronounced than in most states.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2017, 05:17:33 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:44:19 pm by Virginia »

Why would Democrats be perpetually losing Pennsylvania and Michigan again?

-GOP going full Party of McKinley protectionist.

That's going to turn off millennial and post-millenial Philly area swing voters.

-Two words: Obama, NAFTA

I'm not sure what you're getting at... my point was that if the Republican party continues down a protectionist route it will hurt them in wealthy Philly burbs that like NAFTA-like policies.  

-Obama got killed there due to his anti-NAFTA stance, don't you remember? Also was a disaster for the Dems among millenials. ;-)
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administrator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,156
Ukraine


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 12, 2017, 05:17:43 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:45:26 pm by Virginia »

That's going to turn off millennial and post-millenial Philly area swing voters.

At any rate, 2024 is generally when I have considered it a cut-off time for the GOP - where if they haven't made significant progress with either generation z and minorities, that even the more generous numbers just don't add up for them. Democratic performance among Millennials is very consistent and very deep, and future generations are only getting more diverse. In the end, Democrats will likely be pulling in much larger margins among <50 age group than Republicans will among the >50 group. However, I think the change will probably mean more in Congress/state legislatures than the electoral college, it's still hard to tell what happens when the GOP base becomes a distinct minority on that level.

And this will have been a long time coming too. The GOP has had their time - for like 2 generations now. That some people think that will last forever in the face of a clearly changing political landscape is beyond me.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2017, 05:19:15 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:45:41 pm by Virginia »

Also, why would the GOP moderate on immigration? Suicide?

Because there will be too much political power in swing states with large hispanic populations by then...  particularly Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona... and maybe Texas...

Republicans will need to fight for some of these states unless they make up ground somewhere else... and the upper midwest is not enough if they lose Florida and Arizona.

-Why would the GOP want to give Hispanics more power in that case? In any case,


and FL has trended R three out of the past four elections.

actually, I probably should have also noted that I think by 2024 Georgia will be lean democrat.  If you look at the 2016 vote by age group, the GOP is heavily relying on older voters there... the generational shift there will be more pronounced than in most states.


That second map is kind of bizarre, why would Democrats be losing Nevada in that scenario.  If they are winning Arizona they are surely winning Nevada.

-Look at the trends. Trump did much better than Mitt in Clark, much worse in Maricopa.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2017, 05:19:53 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:45:51 pm by Virginia »

Thinking about this further... what pains me the absolute most in all of these scenarios is that undoubtedly Florida will continue to be the most watched swing state for the next 5 elections.  

-Yup.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,804


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 12, 2017, 05:23:40 pm »

There absolutely will be a realignment definitely. I wrote an entire timeline about it so I won't go into it here. But yeah I expect a 1896/1932 realignment towards the Dems.

And Harding save it. I don't respond to racists.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 12, 2017, 05:39:17 pm »
« Edited: March 28, 2017, 01:46:13 pm by Virginia »

That's going to turn off millennial and post-millenial Philly area swing voters.

At any rate, 2024 is generally when I have considered it a cut-off time for the GOP - where if they haven't made significant progress with either generation z and minorities, that even the more generous numbers just don't add up for them. Democratic performance among Millennials is very consistent and very deep, and future generations are only getting more diverse. In the end, Democrats will likely be pulling in much larger margins among <50 age group than Republicans will among the >50 group. However, I think the change will probably mean more in Congress/state legislatures than the electoral college, it's still hard to tell what happens when the GOP base becomes a distinct minority on that level.

And this will have been a long time coming too. The GOP has had their time - for like 2 generations now. That some people think that will last forever in the face of a clearly changing political landscape is beyond me.

I think the gerrymandering of 2010 was the worst thing the Republicans could have done because it has falsely emboldened them... they've basically pushed their agenda in the opposite direction of the changing American electorate thinking they would be able to continually get away with it.  But it's obviously going to catch up with them.  

At the same time their takeover hasn't done much to push the conservative agenda... they've gotten almost no-where on abortion in the last 10 years and gay marriage was legalized.  At best, they will now be able to crack down on immigration a bit more.

-What is the U.S. state with the lowest total fertility rate?
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 12, 2017, 05:40:01 pm »

There absolutely will be a realignment definitely. I wrote an entire timeline about it so I won't go into it here. But yeah I expect a 1896/1932 realignment towards the Dems.

And Harding save it. I don't respond to racists.

-I don't respond to advocates of WWIII.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administrator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,156
Ukraine


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 12, 2017, 06:14:32 pm »

In terms of tangible benefits from their recent, hard-won majorities, it is little, but also remember that since Reagan the GOP has fundamentally moved the overton window to the right so in general, policy making in this country has taken on a more conservative bent. While many conservatives see Obama's agenda as "outrageously liberal," it really was not in many areas - at least based on what he did/tried to do. If they thought that was bad - they will probably have heart attacks with future unified Democratic governments.

At least the next 2 years (but maybe 4) are going to be where all the GOP's awful work burning down our system for political power comes to fruition. This is their window. If they screw it up and Democrats take back the House (somehow),, then it's over for Trump's presidency. I also believe there is a good chance they lose the presidency in 2020 and, at least imo, that will probably be the end of the conservative era in America - for a time, anyway.

Funny enough, sort of like Virginia Republicans (albeit lesser in severity), since the GOP realigned the country, they haven't really had many years to go "full conservative." Most of the time Democrats have controlled the presidency or one or more chambers of Congress and prevented them from being able to do anything substantial. This is quite a contrast to the New Deal era. Although, then again, I guess everyone's idea of "substantial" varies.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 12, 2017, 06:36:31 pm »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_fertility_rate
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,042
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 12, 2017, 06:39:22 pm »

Protectionism and closed-borders is going to be a ridiculously losing message once Millennials are a sufficiently large proportion of the electorate (I would argue that this has already happened by 2016 and the Electoral College is simply delaying the inevitable), but some of the other issues I'm uncertain of. There is no generational gap that I've seen in abortion issue polling. Most of the GOP has already moderated on gay marriage and the issue is already a massively downplayed one.

Eharding: the second map you post is unlikely to still be a Republican victory after the 2020 redistribution. Much less 2030.

Obama, NAFTA: Protectionism versus free-trade wasn't particularly an issue in 2008, and certainly decided very few votes. The election was fought on other topics.

Fertility rate: New England has the lowest and the Mountain West has the highest, as of 2015. This is  a little immaterial because people born in 2015 aren't going to be eligible to vote until 2033; we're discussing the changes that are more immediate.

Anyway, the idea that the GOP is doomed to die is a ridiculous one (mainly because the US system, as I've brought up numerous times, constantly adjusts so that the two parties are about 50/50), but the idea that a lot of the ideas that the GOP is currently advocating are doomed to die is basically unambiguously true. In a lot of cases (most obviously gay marriage), the process is already clearly underway.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 12, 2017, 06:54:38 pm »

Protectionism and closed-borders is going to be a ridiculously losing message once Millennials are a sufficiently large proportion of the electorate (I would argue that this has already happened by 2016 and the Electoral College is simply delaying the inevitable), but some of the other issues I'm uncertain of. There is no generational gap that I've seen in abortion issue polling. Most of the GOP has already moderated on gay marriage and the issue is already a massively downplayed one.

Eharding: the second map you post is unlikely to still be a Republican victory after the 2020 redistribution. Much less 2030.

Obama, NAFTA: Protectionism versus free-trade wasn't particularly an issue in 2008, and certainly decided very few votes. The election was fought on other topics.

Fertility rate: New England has the lowest and the Mountain West has the highest, as of 2015. This is  a little immaterial because people born in 2015 aren't going to be eligible to vote until 2033; we're discussing the changes that are more immediate.

Anyway, the idea that the GOP is doomed to die is a ridiculous one (mainly because the US system, as I've brought up numerous times, constantly adjusts so that the two parties are about 50/50), but the idea that a lot of the ideas that the GOP is currently advocating are doomed to die is basically unambiguously true. In a lot of cases (most obviously gay marriage), the process is already clearly underway.

-One curious point about McCain's convention speech is its notable anti-protectionism. McCain would surely have won OH had he went full protectionist.

Protectionism will be a good EC strategy for the next decade, closed borders forever.

Party control is random; 50-50 tendencies have only really existed since 2000.

Obergefell might be overturned, but I doubt any state is banning SSM again.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,042
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 12, 2017, 07:08:35 pm »

Protectionism and closed-borders is going to be a ridiculously losing message once Millennials are a sufficiently large proportion of the electorate (I would argue that this has already happened by 2016 and the Electoral College is simply delaying the inevitable), but some of the other issues I'm uncertain of. There is no generational gap that I've seen in abortion issue polling. Most of the GOP has already moderated on gay marriage and the issue is already a massively downplayed one.

Eharding: the second map you post is unlikely to still be a Republican victory after the 2020 redistribution. Much less 2030.

Obama, NAFTA: Protectionism versus free-trade wasn't particularly an issue in 2008, and certainly decided very few votes. The election was fought on other topics.

Fertility rate: New England has the lowest and the Mountain West has the highest, as of 2015. This is  a little immaterial because people born in 2015 aren't going to be eligible to vote until 2033; we're discussing the changes that are more immediate.

Anyway, the idea that the GOP is doomed to die is a ridiculous one (mainly because the US system, as I've brought up numerous times, constantly adjusts so that the two parties are about 50/50), but the idea that a lot of the ideas that the GOP is currently advocating are doomed to die is basically unambiguously true. In a lot of cases (most obviously gay marriage), the process is already clearly underway.

-One curious point about McCain's convention speech is its notable anti-protectionism. McCain would surely have won OH had he went full protectionist.

Protectionism will be a good EC strategy for the next decade, closed borders forever.

Party control is random; 50-50 tendencies have only really existed since 2000.

Obergefell might be overturned, but I doubt any state is banning SSM again.

-One curious point about Millennials, especially in Anglophone countries, is basically their staunch support for free-trade, open-borders, and what can be boiled down to "globalism" as such, and their frequent willingness to prioritize these issues. The Brexit referendum in the UK, and perhaps more especially the leadership fight between Jeremy Corbyn and Owen Smith, really demonstrates this (where Smith was able to get young voters on his side by pointing out Corbyn's insufficient opposition to Brexit); so does the extent of the anti-Trump reaction among voters under 45 in the Republican primary, even though they were voting for candidates similar to Mitt Romney, who they had rejected four years earlier. I am fairly confident that Britain will be voting to reenter the EU in 15 years or so, and that there will be a political majority to do so inside the next decade.

-Ohio is not such a protectionist state. Our junior Senator is basically the man responsible for building CAFTA. We responded by giving him two massive, double-digit victories over credible opponents. McCain could not have won Ohio in 2008, because no Republican could've won Ohio in 2008, against Obama or Clinton. Edwards could've lost it, otoh, but the reasons would've been entirely unrelated to free trade/protectionism.

-Protectionism is a platform that cannot win the popular vote in 2016, and can't win the popular vote in either presidential primary. Note that one of Clinton's attacks on Sanders' that really stuck was his support in the 1990s for strong immigration restrictions.

-50/50 tendencies in presidential elections are rare, but for the system as a whole they are common. Before the Clinton/Gingrich Revolution in the early '90s, Republicans had a systemic advantage in presidential elections and Democrats had a systemic advantage in congressional elections. The Clinton/Gingrich Revolution flipped this, and it doesn't seem the paradigm is going away anytime soon.

-Why would Obergefell get overturned? We've had decades of conservative court control without Roe getting overturned, and Roe is a far more controversial decision with far more motivated opponents than Obergefell. Even Trump said in 2016 that he didn't want to see it overturned, and when Cruz tried to emphasize gay marriage as an issue in the presidential primary, there was a backlash (or at least it utterly failed to help). I don't see where the will is coming from to overturn Obergefell.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,949


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 12, 2017, 07:34:17 pm »

Trump would have won Ohio by one to three points in 2008. He might also have lost GA.

Trump's first win was in NH; younger voters there tended to favor Trump and Cruz over Kasich and Bush.

Protectionism is far more an EC strategy than a PV one.

If Trump appoints three Scalia equivalents, Roe and Obergefell are gone.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administrator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,156
Ukraine


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 12, 2017, 07:58:45 pm »

Do you have a link to the thread where you wrote the timeline?

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=251989.0
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines