Coming Trends In American Politics

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Why would Rhode Island turn Republican?  Is it that socially conservative?  I thought it's similar to Massachusetts.

Rhode Island is very Catholic and very socially conservative. It votes more on economics, and on old party affliation, than on social issues so it is a Democratic state now. If the Republicans became more Populist you would definitely see the Rhode Island move towards the Republican Party.

Rhode Island may be very Catholic, but that really doesn't mean much.  So is Mass., and the Catholics there vote 60% democratic.  There may be some hardcore Catholics there, but socially, so you think a Rhode Islander compares to someone from Alabama or Texas?  Not even close.  RI was Gore's best state and Kerry's 2nd or 3rd largest MOV.  RI is just mini-Mass and always has been, just look at the election results over their history. 

Well what you are not taking into account is the possibility that people in New England, especially Rhode Island, are voting on economic issues instead of social issues like much of the rest of the country is doing. Election results mean very little actually, especially current election results. As it has been said many, many, times before on this board the political parties aren't going to stay the same. A state that maybe voting over 60% Democrat now could be a solid Republican state in 50 years, see South Carolina or, for the reverse trend, Vermont. If you do look at the voting patterns for Rhode Island you can see that before the Democratic party started moving left economically, during the early years of the 20th century, Rhode Island was rather Republican. It then started going Democratic when the Democratic Party became more left-wing economically and also when the Democratic Party put up Catholic candidates. This shows that Rhode Island has continually voted for the party with more left-leaning economics. In this scenario that party would be the new populistic Republican Party. Many people such as yourself seem to think that every election for the rest of American history will look exactly like 2004 which is absolutely not true. 50 years ago the only states that went Democratic in a landslide were the Southern states now it would take a landslide to keep them from going to the Republicans.

I was arguing your comment that RI is very socially conservative, and in two elections where social issues played a big role RI went overwhelmingly democratic (the socially liberal party) both times.  Obviously it can switch, and I know that the electoral map wont look the same in 50 years or even 10 years.  And yes, if the GOP went populist Rhode Island would be closer, but I just don't think it would vote for any party with the GOP's current social stances.     

[Colin]

Well what you are not taking into account is the possibility that people in New England, especially Rhode Island, are voting on economic issues instead of social issues like much of the rest of the country is doing. Election results mean very little actually, especially current election results. As it has been said many, many, times before on this board the political parties aren't going to stay the same. A state that maybe voting over 60% Democrat now could be a solid Republican state in 50 years, see South Carolina or, for the reverse trend, Vermont. If you do look at the voting patterns for Rhode Island you can see that before the Democratic party started moving left economically, during the early years of the 20th century, Rhode Island was rather Republican. It then started going Democratic when the Democratic Party became more left-wing economically and also when the Democratic Party put up Catholic candidates. This shows that Rhode Island has continually voted for the party with more left-leaning economics. In this scenario that party would be the new populistic Republican Party. Many people such as yourself seem to think that every election for the rest of American history will look exactly like 2004 which is absolutely not true. 50 years ago the only states that went Democratic in a landslide were the Southern states now it would take a landslide to keep them from going to the Republicans.

Great post, although methinks it could well be wasted on him.
Btw, I tend to disagree with your general theory as to coming trends in U.S Politics, but it's well thought through and worth a read... which makes a nice change from most threads about "trends"

Why thank you Al. I believe that over the next few years one of the parties will move in a populist direction. Whether that will be the Democrats or the Republicans is yet to be seen. This is itself a playing out of a scenario in which the Republicans move in that direction. Anyway thanks Al I tried to make this alittle different from either the exact copy of 2004 trend forecasts or the nearly random trend predictions that some others have made.

[Gustaf]

I doubt we will see the parties changing positions in such an extreme fashion. I also think that people are over-stating the importance of social issues because of the last election. It's still the economy, stupid. People will continue to vote based on a mixture of social and economic issues.

What I think will happen is that the Republicans will eventually get trouble because the tent they have created is a tad too big. They're keeping it together with nationalist anti-terrorist rethoric. When the concerns over terrorism go down, so will the possiblity of using it for political gain. Because the Republicans have been winning for some time people forget that they are about as out of touch with the American people as the Democrats are (not entirely as much, but roughly). Remember that 48% still voted for Kerry and that all those senators and congressmen you republicans hate got ELECTED. The Republicans could, soon enough, fall into the abyss of nominating an Oklahoma-style conservative because they delude themselves that a majority of the electorate is made up of white conservatives. When Bush goes, it wont necessarily be the case that the GOP will continue to make inroads among Hispanics for instance. They might either abandon Bush populism on economy or take a more hard-line approach to social issues. If this happens things will swing back towards the Democrats.

In the long term, who knows?

[jokerman]

Hispanics and Blacks are both very populist generally.  I have to heavily disagree with this stupid dream that the Democratic Party can build on a moderate libertarian coalition and minorities will go for it.

[Colin]

Hispanics and Blacks are both very populist generally.  I have to heavily disagree with this stupid dream that the Democratic Party can build on a moderate libertarian coalition and minorities will go for it.

I never said that minorities would go for it. I actually expected when I wrote this that minorities would go Republican in this instance.

[jokerman]

Hispanics and Blacks are both very populist generally.  I have to heavily disagree with this stupid dream that the Democratic Party can build on a moderate libertarian coalition and minorities will go for it.

I never said that minorities would go for it. I actually expected when I wrote this that minorities would go Republican in this instance.

Yeah, I know.  I was responding to some of the other comments on this thread and comments about the subject in general.

[Gustaf]

Preston, if you're referring to me I don't think so either...

[OSR stands with Israel]

Wow on the prediction about the GOP

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

Had to look at the date of the post to realize this wasn't a current Atlas hot take.