|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 14, 2020, 11:03:52 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: VirginiŠ)
  Is Texas becoming a battleground state a sign the 6th party system is over
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Is Texas becoming a battleground state a sign the 6th party system is over  (Read 1389 times)
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Politician
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,158


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 24, 2020, 03:49:30 am »

Throughout the 6th party system(1980-Present) Texas has been a solidly Republican state(with the exception of 1992) and in many ways symbolized the dominance of the Republicans in the Mountain West, South West, and South East since Texas in many ways is where all three regions met.

With TX becoming a battleground state it not only marks an end to the era of Solid R status in Texas you see states such as VA , CO , NM be solidly D, and  NV, AZ, GA leaning Democratic it pretty much marks the end of the 6th party system.


Logged
Anarcho-Statism
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 733
Korea, Democratic People's Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -5.81, S: 1.22

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 24, 2020, 09:20:49 am »
« Edited: July 24, 2020, 09:41:54 am by Anarcho-Statism »

Not until it actually flips. The election of Trump despite incredible odds pointed to a continuation of institutional strength for the Republicans in 2016, although similar to how Carter's Evangelism and deregulation was a far cry from the New Dealer ideology that started his alignment, Trump ran on a break from Reagan Era neoliberalism. Trump isn't the disease, but a symptom of the Reagan Era in decay. To realign, the social conservative-business conservative Fusionism that has dominated the Republicans' coalition since Reagan will have to be broken decisively, and the Democrats will have to secure their big tent politics. I don't know if Biden is the one to maintain a paradoxical coalition of minorities, progressives, and business conservatives. You can only run on "we're not them" for so long, especially after Trump is gone and a Democrat has the presidency. The spotlight will be on them and their ability or inability to please everyone.
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,870
Italy


Political Matrix
E: -5.03, S: -1.57

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2020, 09:59:26 am »

I am not even sure that the Sixth Party System started in 1980.
Logged
EastOfEden
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 615


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 25, 2020, 07:52:18 am »
« Edited: July 31, 2020, 09:05:11 am by EastOfEden »

Yes. We are experiencing a transition at the moment. Trump = Carter, Biden = Reagan.

So it should go like:
Biden
his VP
a moderate Republican
a more progressive Democrat
a more "different" Republican (this is where we see the first hint of a new cycle coming, like Nixon or Obama)
a weird Democrat who messes it all up
beginning of a new cycle with something entirely new (presumably a Republican with a new ideology, but who knows?)
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,450
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 25, 2020, 03:45:40 pm »

Dominant Parties in a given area tend to beget their own demise over time. Whether this be through alienation of the out groups that aren't part of the power dynamic, but grow over time to overthrow said power group, or the alienation of a previous component of said power dynamic that thus causes them to drift to the other side.

I don't think any map alignment or regional differential in the EC map is permanent long term.
Logged
Roll Roons
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,146
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 25, 2020, 04:02:42 pm »
« Edited: July 25, 2020, 04:11:28 pm by Roll Roons »

Dominant Parties in a given area tend to beget their own demise over time. Whether this be through alienation of the out groups that aren't part of the power dynamic, but grow over time to overthrow said power group, or the alienation of a previous component of said power dynamic that thus causes them to drift to the other side.

I don't think any map alignment or regional differential in the EC map is permanent long term.

To some extent, you can see this at the state level, where governors from the majority party go too far and the backlash causes voters to elect someone from the minority party. Larry Hogan and Laura Kelly got elected in part because voters Maryland Democrats and Kansas Republicans went too far and needed to be kept in check.

In general, one-party dominance is unhealthy for a state's political culture. It breeds corruption, causes inertia and allows extreme candidates to get elected. Republicans should be able to compete in New York, and Democrats should be able to compete in Oklahoma, let alone Ohio (seriously, how are Democrats there so weak at the state level? It's been a presidential swing state for a century).
Logged
Non Swing Voter
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,159


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2020, 10:01:17 pm »

The GOP has been a very fragile national party for a while now, hence why they rarely win the popular vote.  They are basically bolstered by the fact that the South is racially polarized so they had been winning a lot of populous states (GA, VA, NC, FL, etc. and now TX) by very small margins.  The problem is that if the demographics change enough then they are on the other side of it (VA, soon TX).  If Texas, Georgia and Arizona flip and start giving Democrats tiny margins, then there aren't enough swing states that make up for that.
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Politician
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,158


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2020, 10:55:45 pm »

The GOP has been a very fragile national party for a while now, hence why they rarely win the popular vote.  They are basically bolstered by the fact that the South is racially polarized so they had been winning a lot of populous states (GA, VA, NC, FL, etc. and now TX) by very small margins.  The problem is that if the demographics change enough then they are on the other side of it (VA, soon TX).  If Texas, Georgia and Arizona flip and start giving Democrats tiny margins, then there aren't enough swing states that make up for that.


I wouldnít say GA , NC and VA pre 2008 were small margins


Logged
Alcibiades
Rookie
**
Posts: 156


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2020, 05:00:10 am »

The GOP has been a very fragile national party for a while now, hence why they rarely win the popular vote.  They are basically bolstered by the fact that the South is racially polarized so they had been winning a lot of populous states (GA, VA, NC, FL, etc. and now TX) by very small margins.  The problem is that if the demographics change enough then they are on the other side of it (VA, soon TX).  If Texas, Georgia and Arizona flip and start giving Democrats tiny margins, then there aren't enough swing states that make up for that.


I wouldnít say GA , NC and VA pre 2008 were small margins




They were all pretty close in the Clinton era, and werenít exactly Bush 43 landslides, although not particularly close either. Basically in the early 2000s the GOP hit a sweet spot in these states where the rural areas had already realigned to the Republicans but they were still strong in the suburbs. This coalition was only fleeting and was never going to hold long-term.
Logged
Tamika Jackson
beeman
Rookie
**
Posts: 92
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2020, 11:59:42 pm »

I don't think Texas becoming a battleground state is so much a testament to the GOP's demise rather a testament to the changing dynamics of the State in terms of the increasing Latino community. We'll see what happens after Trump, yet I would be very surprised if one election leads to a new party, as we're already seeing GOP leaders start to split with Trump as they're reading the polls (e.g.: Latest stimulus negotiations and now the bizarre election delay call).
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Politician
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,158


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 31, 2020, 01:36:53 am »

I don't think Texas becoming a battleground state is so much a testament to the GOP's demise rather a testament to the changing dynamics of the State in terms of the increasing Latino community. We'll see what happens after Trump, yet I would be very surprised if one election leads to a new party, as we're already seeing GOP leaders start to split with Trump as they're reading the polls (e.g.: Latest stimulus negotiations and now the bizarre election delay call).


New party systems donít mean replacement of parties but just very different coalitions and policy goals .


Logged
Laki
Lakigigar
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,403
Belgium


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: -2.96

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 31, 2020, 09:19:54 am »

What the GOP needs to do to stay relevant federally is represent their state or constituence well, move federally to a right wing populist platform similar to their European variant, but become more secular, supporting realistic ways to deal with climate change but not deny it, focus on supporting rural and working class areas and small / local businesses. Making sure economic growth is felt over all regions, not just metropolitian areas and decide controversial issues on a regional level like abortion and death penalty. Let the regions decide. With competent leaders they would keep many states in the red column because many people will never ever vote blue and win the rust belt + mn + nh + me and maybe only lose az and in the long run ga + fl. TX however has potential to rapidly shift in the blue column.
Logged
Laki
Lakigigar
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,403
Belgium


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: -2.96

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 31, 2020, 09:27:54 am »

2020's



2030's

Logged
Everything Was Forever, Until It Was No More
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,410
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 31, 2020, 09:53:31 am »

What the GOP needs to do to stay relevant federally is represent their state or constituence well, move federally to a right wing populist platform similar to their European variant, but become more secular, supporting realistic ways to deal with climate change but not deny it, focus on supporting rural and working class areas and small / local businesses. Making sure economic growth is felt over all regions, not just metropolitian areas and decide controversial issues on a regional level like abortion and death penalty. Let the regions decide. With competent leaders they would keep many states in the red column because many people will never ever vote blue and win the rust belt + mn + nh + me and maybe only lose az and in the long run ga + fl. TX however has potential to rapidly shift in the blue column.

The way they would "deal with climate change" would be to say its better policy to build prepare for instead of trying to prevent it with a few moderates on both sides saying we need to deregulate and subsidize nuclear power and fusion research.
Logged
Tamika Jackson
beeman
Rookie
**
Posts: 92
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 31, 2020, 08:52:00 pm »

I don't think Texas becoming a battleground state is so much a testament to the GOP's demise rather a testament to the changing dynamics of the State in terms of the increasing Latino community. We'll see what happens after Trump, yet I would be very surprised if one election leads to a new party, as we're already seeing GOP leaders start to split with Trump as they're reading the polls (e.g.: Latest stimulus negotiations and now the bizarre election delay call).


New party systems donít mean replacement of parties but just very different coalitions and policy goals .


If you define it that way, I think there may have been more than 6 systems then...
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Politician
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,158


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 31, 2020, 10:07:43 pm »

I don't think Texas becoming a battleground state is so much a testament to the GOP's demise rather a testament to the changing dynamics of the State in terms of the increasing Latino community. We'll see what happens after Trump, yet I would be very surprised if one election leads to a new party, as we're already seeing GOP leaders start to split with Trump as they're reading the polls (e.g.: Latest stimulus negotiations and now the bizarre election delay call).


New party systems donít mean replacement of parties but just very different coalitions and policy goals .


If you define it that way, I think there may have been more than 6 systems then...



Not really these party systems are defined like that


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_system


Look At the US part
Logged
Tamika Jackson
beeman
Rookie
**
Posts: 92
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 01, 2020, 02:43:47 am »

I don't think Texas becoming a battleground state is so much a testament to the GOP's demise rather a testament to the changing dynamics of the State in terms of the increasing Latino community. We'll see what happens after Trump, yet I would be very surprised if one election leads to a new party, as we're already seeing GOP leaders start to split with Trump as they're reading the polls (e.g.: Latest stimulus negotiations and now the bizarre election delay call).


New party systems donít mean replacement of parties but just very different coalitions and policy goals .


If you define it that way, I think there may have been more than 6 systems then...



Not really these party systems are defined like that


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_system


Look At the US part

Arguably you could add the rise of the Tea Party to that and then more recently, the alt-Right/Trumpers...
Logged
MR. KAYNE WEST
olawakandi
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 39,822
Jamaica


Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 01, 2020, 04:25:34 am »

TX was fools gold and Trump will win it, it's a pro gun state
Logged
Chad Wolf's minivan rentals
Okthisisnotepic.
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,102


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: August 01, 2020, 06:46:56 am »


This is too optimistic for the GOP, I think the battleground map in 2028 (the far end of the current trends) will look a little something like this.



The blank states are the perennial battlegrounds, although I could see PA or FL leaning R it will still be contested due to their size.  2024 will be the last time GA or AZ are competitive this cycle.  By 2028, some small, depopulating NE states will go into the likely category and could be competitive by the 2030s.  MS, UT and SC will no longer be safe R.
Logged
Laki
Lakigigar
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,403
Belgium


Political Matrix
E: -2.84, S: -2.96

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: August 01, 2020, 07:07:43 am »


This is too optimistic for the GOP, I think the battleground map in 2028 (the far end of the current trends) will look a little something like this.



The blank states are the perennial battlegrounds, although I could see PA or FL leaning R it will still be contested due to their size.  2024 will be the last time GA or AZ are competitive this cycle.  By 2028, some small, depopulating NE states will go into the likely category and could be competitive by the 2030s.  MS, UT and SC will no longer be safe R.
Agreed. I never said PA and FL won't flip however
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,870
Italy


Political Matrix
E: -5.03, S: -1.57

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: August 01, 2020, 08:43:26 am »

I hope someone bumps this thread in 2028 or whereabouts to see how (most likely) horribly wrong the predictions have been - assuming Talk Elections still exists in eight years.
Logged
DabbingSanta
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 725
Canada


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: August 01, 2020, 11:22:33 am »

Honestly, I think there's some pretty sound data which suggests the sixth party system has been over for a while, if you define it as starting in 1968. I like to think of 1968 to 1988 as an "era", and 1992 to present as another era. Others consider 68 to 88 as a "dealignment period" before the sixth era, which started in 1992. The really woke people (and Wikipedia) think the sixth era started in 1968 and still continues today. We might have a better idea in twenty years.
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Politician
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,158


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: August 01, 2020, 11:32:26 am »

Honestly, I think there's some pretty sound data which suggests the sixth party system has been over for a while, if you define it as starting in 1968. I like to think of 1968 to 1988 as an "era", and 1992 to present as another era. Others consider 68 to 88 as a "dealignment period" before the sixth era, which started in 1992. The really woke people (and Wikipedia) think the sixth era started in 1968 and still continues today. We might have a better idea in twenty years.

1968-1980 is like 2008-present a dealigning era But still during that era the political norms and consensus created in the new deal were still there .


The Reagan era pretty much inaugurated a new era which you might call the neoliberal era which was dominant until 2008 , but even  since 2008 it still has been more or less the accepted consensus. Trump in a way like Carter mark a break from the consensus in rhetoric and some policy changes(airline deregulation and tarrifs on China) but overall govern like a new deal democrat/neo liberal republican
Logged
It's Kamala!
Patrick97
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,953
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: August 01, 2020, 03:28:21 pm »

Honestly, I think there's some pretty sound data which suggests the sixth party system has been over for a while, if you define it as starting in 1968. I like to think of 1968 to 1988 as an "era", and 1992 to present as another era. Others consider 68 to 88 as a "dealignment period" before the sixth era, which started in 1992. The really woke people (and Wikipedia) think the sixth era started in 1968 and still continues today. We might have a better idea in twenty years.

I think the period between 1992-1994 is likely when we entered a seventh party system. One based on urban vs rural. As much as people like to talk about 2016 it was really 1992 when Democrat flipped suburban counties like Ventura, Bucks, and Westchester. 1994 was when Republicans started eating in to Democratic rural areas specifically in Appalachia and white voters in the black belt region.
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Politician
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,158


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: August 02, 2020, 06:53:47 pm »

Honestly, I think there's some pretty sound data which suggests the sixth party system has been over for a while, if you define it as starting in 1968. I like to think of 1968 to 1988 as an "era", and 1992 to present as another era. Others consider 68 to 88 as a "dealignment period" before the sixth era, which started in 1992. The really woke people (and Wikipedia) think the sixth era started in 1968 and still continues today. We might have a better idea in twenty years.

I think the period between 1992-1994 is likely when we entered a seventh party system. One based on urban vs rural. As much as people like to talk about 2016 it was really 1992 when Democrat flipped suburban counties like Ventura, Bucks, and Westchester. 1994 was when Republicans started eating in to Democratic rural areas specifically in Appalachia and white voters in the black belt region.

That really didnt happen till 2000.House races in Appalachia in 94 were Democratic




Even look at the seante race in PA in 1994


or VA



Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
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 0.156 seconds with 14 queries.