Will 2020 be the Emergence of the Democratic Majority/realignment?

[Devils30]

I have two schools of thought on this one.

1)On one hand I can see a massive FDR 1932/Reagan 1980 style win that ushers in a one party dominance for at least a decade.

Under this scenario the Dems would dominate the 2020s. As seen in the 1940s, 1990s these realignments tend to lose steam after a decade and the GOP would undoubtedly make some gains in 2030 and on. You can sort of see this and then around 2030, the AOC wing takes charge and states move around in ways no one can see now. This happened with the religious right and suburbanites in the northeast in the 1990s (see NJ NY CT NH VT), this group just did not take to the christian right at all.

You wonder if AOC/Omar and the illiberal left gains influence in a way that causes some weird state shifts no one could have foreseen in 2020. I would say this wing could be pretty toxic in New England and the suburban Midwest. States that are fairly white like RI, CT could shift right rapidly while Maine, Minnesota become lean R. This wing would likely also be unpopular with Jews, Asians and Hispanics who are 3+ generations American. Places like NJ, NY could be more competitive and it could help GOP hold on in Florida. Georgia would be one of the bluest states in America along with the west coast.

2) On the other hand, some of the Democratic politicians are so culturally elitist and care so little about economic issues that you wonder if they will focus on policing, removing statues while unemployment is 12% and people are fuming. The Dems would flame very very fast + GOP would make big gains in 2022 like 2010 and 1994. The Dems economic relief would be identity politics (for instance, forgiving student loans for mainly only certain minorities and driving white college voters back to the GOP) and accomplish very little.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Yes, the COVID-19 realigned the map, so that a 2008 style election can happen again in 2020 and a 60/40 Senate can be produced. Consumers are tired of the R obstruction and want results

[MillennialModerate]

I have two schools of thought on this one.

1)On one hand I can see a massive FDR 1932/Reagan 1980 style win that ushers in a one party dominance for at least a decade.

Under this scenario the Dems would dominate the 2020s. As seen in the 1940s, 1990s these realignments tend to lose steam after a decade and the GOP would undoubtedly make some gains in 2030 and on. You can sort of see this and then around 2030, the AOC wing takes charge and states move around in ways no one can see now. This happened with the religious right and suburbanites in the northeast in the 1990s (see NJ NY CT NH VT), this group just did not take to the christian right at all.

You wonder if AOC/Omar and the illiberal left gains influence in a way that causes some weird state shifts no one could have foreseen in 2020. I would say this wing could be pretty toxic in New England and the suburban Midwest. States that are fairly white like RI, CT could shift right rapidly while Maine, Minnesota become lean R. This wing would likely also be unpopular with Jews, Asians and Hispanics who are 3+ generations American. Places like NJ, NY could be more competitive and it could help GOP hold on in Florida. Georgia would be one of the bluest states in America along with the west coast.

2) On the other hand, some of the Democratic politicians are so culturally elitist and care so little about economic issues that you wonder if they will focus on policing, removing statues while unemployment is 12% and people are fuming. The Dems would flame very very fast + GOP would make big gains in 2022 like 2010 and 1994. The Dems economic relief would be identity politics (for instance, forgiving student loans for mainly only certain minorities and driving white college voters back to the GOP) and accomplish very little.

I would LOVE if 2020 led into a decade of dominance for more then just the obvious. To me that secures Trumps reputation as a bottom 5 President, Hoover or Carter like

[Devils30]

What do you guys think of my 2030s AOC wing hypothesis? I feel like it’s somewhat realistic

[Hope For A New Era]

If you want to go all-in on the patterns...if you subscribe to the whole 40-year-cycle thing, 2020 is 1980. Just saying.


Also, 1820 and 1920 were both landslides, why not add a third?

[Devils30]

That's the risk for Dems too, they dominate but don't solve economic problems, in 2032 blacks and Hispanics switch sides and join working class whites in an FDR style GOP coalition

[Roll Roons]

What do you guys think of my 2030s AOC wing hypothesis? I feel like it’s somewhat realistic

I'm not sure. The squad all represent very left-wing districts, and with the possible exception of Pressley, aren't really considered part of the Democratic mainstream. The fact that Biden got nominated over Bernie also shows at least for now that the majority of actual Democratic voters don't want to go too far left, even if it may not seem that way on Twitter.

[The Mikado]

2008 was.

2008 is 1968 to 2020's 1980 in that comparison.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Realignments require policy changes which the opposition initially don't accept, leading to defeats at the ballot box until they do.

What do you think those will be post-2020?

[Roll Roons]

Realignments require policy changes which the opposition initially don't accept, leading to defeats at the ballot box until they do.

What do you think those will be post-2020?

Gay marriage and climate change. Most young Republicans I know either support gay marriage or consider it a settled issue that's not worth fighting. Had it been a primary, Riggleman would have likely won.

The consequences of climate change are also becoming increasingly apparent, and there's definitely more of an impetus to do something about it.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Realignments require policy changes which the opposition initially don't accept, leading to defeats at the ballot box until they do.

What do you think those will be post-2020?

Gay marriage and climate change. Most young Republicans I know either support gay marriage or consider it a settled issue and that's not worth fighting. Had it been a primary, Riggleman would have likely won.

The consequences of climate change are also becoming increasingly apparent, and there's definitely more of an impetus to do something about it.

Republicans have won since gay marriage was implemented and haven't really taken a consistent stand against it (e.g. Trump's campaign didn't make opposition to that a centrepiece). I could see climate change denial becoming a bigger stumbling block to their electoral hopes in time for obvious reasons, but I would expect that sort of opposition to harden around rejection of a particular environmentalist Democratic policy - perhaps a cap-and-trade bill?

[McGarnagle]

I will continue believing in the 40-year cycle until the cycle breaks.

That means, if the cycle holds:

2020 - Biden defeats Trump, Democratic Realignment
2024 - Biden re-elected, or his VP elected
2028 - Biden's VP elected or re-elected
2032 - Republican Victory
2036 - Republican Victory
2040 - Democratic Victory
2044 - Democratic Victory
2048 - Republican Victory
2052 - Republican Victory
2056 - Democratic Victory
2060 - Republican Victory and Realignment

[rhg2052]

I think this is very plausible, and follows the idea of the 40/80 year cycle of party dominance. If that is any indication, we would probably see one term of Biden (I believe that he won't run for reelection in 2024), followed by two terms of his VP (Harris or Warren). During this time, the Trumpian wing of the GOP will retain control of the party, to diminishing returns in electoral success as their ideology only gets older and whiter. Meanwhile, the Biden administration will make progress against the current crises the country is facing, while his successor will implement many of the broader progressive reforms that are currently proposed.

In the late 2020s, the GOP will begin to realign, focusing more on economic populism than regressive social policy. This will lead to a less divisive and more moderate by today's standards nominee who will face off against the current Democratic VP (Buttigieg? Castro?) and win in 2032, as well as reelection in 2036.

2040-2048 will see a new two term Democratic president that emulates the ideals of the Biden-[VP] era.

2048-2056 a Republican president that signifies a new wave of ideology for the GOP

2056-2060 - a Democrat whose Presidency is widely considered to be a disaster, and damages the party brand for the next decade.

[YE]

Moving to the trends board.

[MABA 2020]

The 40 year cycle thing is fun but I don't think the Dems are ready for a realignment yet. The realignment will come when Texas goes blue, thats the final domino that will determine that the GOP cannot win the presidency and force them to change. But Texas isn't ready to go blue yet most likely, plus Biden doesn't exactly strike one as a Reagan type figure, he represents the parties past rather than the parties future. So I don't think 2020 is 1980, more like another 1968.

I like the idea of an on off cycle of Republican/Democratic dominance, but I don't think it should be applied so rigidly. So here's my crazy theory of a Democratic realignment...

Biden wins in 2020 but it's somewhat of a poisoned chalice, the true economic effects of the pandemic are only felt after Biden takes office, he is unable to fix the economy in four years and so the Dems lose the white house just as quickly as they won it in 2024. The next Republican prez is another Trumpian candidate, maybe its even Don Jr. That paves the way for a AOC victory in 2028 with Texas, Georgia, Arizona, North Carolina all going blue. Some might scoff at that but AOC is a much better Reagan comparison than Biden, don't forget Reagan was also a boogyman to the left and considered unelectable. As a final point this would make Bernie this cycles Goldwater.