538: Maybe Trump Didn’t Remake The Political Map (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 23, 2024, 02:46:25 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  538: Maybe Trump Didn’t Remake The Political Map (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 538: Maybe Trump Didn’t Remake The Political Map  (Read 2839 times)
Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself
omegascarlet
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,028


« on: July 01, 2017, 12:59:19 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some parts of the article you seem to have missed. And trends tend to not manifest downballot as quickly. The republicans didn't suddenly control the south after 1964. They mostly dominated it upballot, but they had to slowly whittle away democratic dominance. It took 46 years for democrats to lose their ability to win downballot while republicans crushed higher up in the south, and even now there's still Manchin and Justice. Similar story for democrats in much of the suburban northeast. RI had a republican senator as recently as 2006.
Logged
Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself
omegascarlet
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,028


« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2017, 05:49:29 PM »

^ By that logic we'd be waiting decades for the sunbelt to become competitive; so your analogy is incredibly faulty to begin with. Which Republican demographic group has Trump given the middle finger to the way LBJ did to white southerners when he signed the VRA and CRA into law? It cannot be Hispanics or millennials since neither of these groups have ever voted for a Republican. Is it upscale suburban Republicans? Because these voters are perfectly content so far with Trump abandoning his populist economic rhetoric (something they did not like about him) and pursuing tax cuts, deregulation, etc.

And don't try and argue that these voters are somehow less racist and less bigoted because they're wealthy or more cosmopolitan. They typically live in the most cookie cutter white flight suburbs imaginable for a reason. They're also just as likely as their lower income counterparts to be socially conservative which is why even here in this coastal republican suburb there's a church every 5 feet.

Nobody is denying that the sunbelt is trending D (because of minority and millennial growth; not some BS fantasy of upscale republicans voting Democrat down-ballot), but the special election results thus far have demonstrated that the rust belt has more short term potential than the sunbelt. That was the crux of the article and you seemed to have conveniently ignored that entirely. Do you have some kind of agenda to push? Or do you just seriously despise the idea of Democrats reaching out to working class white voters?

... Most people outside of the populist left perceive trump as a populist, like it or not. Most of the gains are among (formerly) R-leaning independents, not actual registered republicans. Short term electoral results show that the sunbelt has not yet trended as far downballot as 2016 would indicate, not that the rust belt has trended more democratic. AZ-02, TX-23, CA-10, 25 and 29(your own district is one of the narrowest Clinton gains IIRC), FL-26 and 27, VA-10, CO-6, etc provide top tier pickup opportunities right now. the rust belt has... A potential gerrymander breakdown in MI, some suburban seats in PA and MN, and IA 1/3. Only a few of those look as good as the plethora of sun belt districts I laid out.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.034 seconds with 12 queries.