How will America be in 2050

[afleitch]

Compare Bill Clinton with George McGovern No point in playing tit for tat (As a fan of Nixon I believe if starting out in politics today he would be a conservative Democrat) I stand by my assertion.

[ilikeverin]

[12th Doctor]

Compare Bill Clinton with George McGovern No point in playing tit for tat (As a fan of Nixon I believe if starting out in politics today he would be a conservative Democrat) I stand by my assertion.

Bill Clinton represents a minor blip on the grand radar of American politics, or at least, his impact on the Democrat party represents a minor blip.  True, at one time, the Clinton's held considerable power in the DNC, but those days are long since over.  Clinton and Dean are tremendously at odds with one another.  Dean is little different from Dukakis, who really is not that much different from Mondale, who really is nto that much different from Carter (except for the "religiousness") who reallt is not that much different from McGovern.  The Democrats can only seem to benift when the times change to favor them and since Kennedy, those times have been very short lived, at least in terms of Presidential politics.

In contrast, in the same time period, the Republicans have gone from Ike to Nixon to Goldwater back to Nixon to Ford to Reagan to Bush to Dole to Dubya.  The represents a major seat change.  However, with the Republicans having drawn at par, those days might end.  Let's face it, the reason Republicans have been so adaptable in the past is because they had to be to win.

As I said, though, things are quite different for the Democrats of today then they were for the Republicans of the 60's, 70's and 80's is that the Republicans won by expanding their margins against larely homogenous groups (i.e. white, upwardly mobile, libertarian minded, anti-Soviets) where as the Democrats have to work on expanding to groups they have lost, or new groups, while not offending the various groups who are already under their belts.  Not an easy task, as these groups are more often than not at odds with one another.

I contend that the Democrats acctually need to lose a few elections in order to come back to power, because that will give them an oppertunity to form a new cooalition that works beteer than the one they have right now.

Of course, the Republcians could always shoot themselves in the foot, but the only way they can really do that is by not taking this oppertunity to reach out and expand their base.  A major scandle will hurt a majority part for an election or two, but the people will eventually forget, or see the scandle as a flaw of a couple of persons, and will go back to voting their leanings.

[Psychic Octopus]

BUMP

Anyone care to make a map, six years later? I'm curious as to what some of you think. Bonus points if you change the electoral votes.

[Mechaman]

America will be discussing the controversial issue of Zerg Rights.

[Miles]

BUMP

Here's attempt at EV apportionment in 2050.



_{Color Key
Pink= Democratic
Blue= Republican
Purple=Swing State}

I'm going to go off on a limb and say that WY and MT each gain 1 district over the next 40 years. NH, RI and ME are all given at-large districts; population growth in those states has been severely lagging.
Otherwise, just a general transfer of votes from the north to the south and west.

[All Along The Watchtower]

In 2050, the Republican Party as we know it today will no longer exist, and the meanings of the words "conservative" and "liberal" will have changed by then, because the Parties will have changed.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Something like that ?

[JacobNC]

I don't think we can assume that the parties will be the same... or that we will even have Democrats and Republicans.  Just look how much the parties have changed over the last fifty years.

I don't think a 2050 America would favor to today's bible-thumping anti-everything Republican Party.  I don't think they would be in favor of the Democrats reckless spending and reluctance to cut that spending, either.  The favored party will be more socially liberal than today's Republican party and more fiscally moderate to conservative than today's Democratic party. 

Today's minorities (Hispanics & Asians) will play a much bigger role in American politics -- politics that may be drastically different than any American politics we see today.

[Horus]

I see the parties as being something like this come 2050...

Dems - Still the leftists party. More to the left than they are now socially. Economically they may have drifted slightly to the right, but it isn't really that evident.

Republicans - Far more libertarian. Party has some social conservatives left but most of them have retired or died. Economically they won't be quite as anti-spending as the tea party, but will be more economically hawkish than todays average GOPer, but the neo-conservative influence will have gone down as well.

[Del Tachi]

I think over the next 30 to 50 years we'll see the parties becoming a little more like this...

Democrats--The Democratic Party will continue to be the “liberal” party of the American political scene.  They will move slowly to the left on economic issues--advocating higher and higher taxation on America’s corporations and the wealthy, more centralized oversight of the health care industry, and a protectionist trade policy.  On social issues I see the Democrats remaining relatively the same, with perhaps a stronger emphasis on homosexual and abortion rights in their national campaigns.  I expect them to move to the left and become more vocal on gun control, an issue many Democrats aren’t comfortable talking about.  The Democrats will hold together a relatively strong coalition of Hispanics, African-Americans, poor, undereducated, non-religious Whites, and young urban professionals.  There regions of strength will be the Northeast (even though they won’t have such a tight hold as they have on it today), the California, the Southwest (with the exception of TX and AZ, who will only “lean Dem”).  They will be highly competitive in the Mid-Atlantic (VA, NC, GA) and Florida.   

Republicans--On the other hand, the Republican Party will remain relatively constant on economic issues--the Tea Party will constitute less and less of their base over the next few years. By 2018, the Tea Party or anything like it WILL NOT EXIST.  They will still be economic conservatives but not fiscal conservatives, if you catch my drift.  They will be more receptive to the “Nanny State” and gladly accept pork-barrel funding for pet projects.  They will be unafraid, outspoken, vehement supporters of corporate interests.  A neoconservative foreign policy will still be the predominant ideology among Republicans concerned with international affairs.  In social issues, expect them to become more “laissez-faire” but not libertarian.  Most Republicans will favor gay marriage, abortion, and other liberal social causes at a personal level--but will tend to oppose federal intervention in those matters, preferring to leave those issues up to state governments.  They will hold together a very, very loose coalition of middle-class and upper-middle-class Whites, rural voters, the “Capitalist Class”, and young suburban professionals.  They will make inroads into the black vote and will win between 45% and 55% of the Asian vote in national elections.  There areas of strength will be the Industrial Midwest (plus maybe PA and NJ), the Great Plains, Mountain West, and the Pacific Northwest.  The South will still be SOLID, minus GA, NC, and VA.       

I think that a socially conservative, major third-party will emerge sometime in the next 20 years.  Comprised of Bible-thumping Christians, they will offer mainly regional candidates who appeal in the Deep South and Deep South only (MS, AL, LA, AR).  In most elections they will win about 5% of the national popular vote.  In some years this party will enjoy a stronger-than-usual showing, maybe even carrying a few Southern states or at least denying any of the other two major parties a clear electoral majority.     

[Yelnoc]

Posting a map is fairly useless but here are some general predictions.  Comments are very appreciated.

NO ELECTORAL COLLEGE.  By 2050, the inherent fallacies in the EC will have come up again, possibly several times.  This piece of electoral reform will open the way for a multi-party system.  Most likely you would see two strong parties, an emerging moderately powerful third party, and three-ish "fourth parties" all about as influential as America's current third parties.

REPUBLICAN PARTY.  By 2050, our WASP leaders will all be long gone, replaced by a more dynamic crop of candidates.  Latinos will make up a good portion, if not a majority, of the social conservative base (which will be much less conservative than the current GOP).  Protestant, Catholic, and Mormon leaders work in harmony to accomplish their conservative goals.  Economic issues will be back at the forefront of political discourse; with peak long past we could see the first world squabbling over rapidly dwindling supplies of oil while efforts to transition to alternate energies are not wholly successful.  The GOP could become the party of economic protectionism and isolationism, building on their mantra of "Drill at home" to include American-mined clean coal and other homegrown alternatives.  Thus they will oppose overseas wars for oil (regardless of the cover reasons).

DEMOCRATIC PARTY.  If the teens, thirties, and forties are years of nearly unbroken Democratic control, similar to the fifties, seventies, and eighties of the 20th century, the Democratic Party could be entering another wilderness period after a long run of power.  The Democratic coalition of the present and near future could be breaking down, losing steam to the emerging third party.  In keeping with the economic scenario above, the Democrats are the likeliest candidate for social centrists, economic free traders foreign interventionists in the mold of Clinton and Obama.

LIBERAL PARTY.  A bit of a cliche, I know; hopefully the next generation will have better naming skills.  If the Democratic coalition is breaking down, following the removal of the electoral coalition (allowing third parties to become viable at the federal level) and the resurgence of the Grand Old Party, a defection of progressives seems quite likely.  The liberals would find their base in the youth vote, higher-educated voters, homosexuals (Gay Marriage will still probably be a new thing at the Federal level), and pragmatic green/libertarian voters.  Socially progressive but open to free trade assuming restrictions to countries with bad or a lack of labor laws and economic protection.

LIBERTARIAN & GREEN PARTIES.  Both of these parties continue to function only at the local level, as their supporters tend to vote Liberal on the national level to make sure their vote counts (America still has a first-past-the-post system even without the Electoral College).  Anarcho-syndicalist and eco-terrorists still find havens in these two parties.

CONSTITUTION PARTY.  Those WASP's unable to handle the new, strong, Republic base migrated here.  Thus the Constitutionalists are slightly stronger than the Libertarian and Green Parties, with at least one elected official on the state level.  They also make a big show out of fiscal austerity measures and balanced budgets, much more than the Republicans and Liberals (balancing the budget has become more of a Democratic plank).

SPACE PARTY.  This is a bit of a wildcard pick.  My thinking is that by the mid 21'st century we will have conducted several missions to Mars and maintain a base(s) on the red planet.  In addition, we might have discovered life on Europa and, by this point, we might even see asteroid mining on a limited scale.  Materials technology could have advanced to the point where space based solar power and space elevators are realistic engineering projects.  With the major parties focused on bread and circus's, a new party is needed to advocate for the deep black sea.

DEMOGRAPHICS.  The US Population will be in the low 400 millions.  A lot of this population growth be immigration, from Latin America and Asia (mostly the Arab world and Southeast Asia).  This will allow the US to avoid the Demographic crunch that the majority of the developed world will face (not, of course, to downplay the Baby Boomer crisis). 

POPULATION DISTRIBUTION:  As the major terminus of immigration from both Asia and Latin America, California will continue to see large growth.  In fact, the whole Southwest will continue to grow at a fast pace.  The Sunbelt will also continue its growth as northerners move down for the cheap housing prices and prime retirement lots, continuing the depopulation of the north.  Unless, of course, America tries to revitalize its economy and grow its production sector, meaning that the north and midwest will hold some of their population.  Another thing that could stop the southern emigration is climate; if the worst case scenario predictions turn out to be correct, frequent devestating hurricanes could make the Gulf Coast an unattractive real estate location.  That shouldn't hurt the east coast south (Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia) but retirees might need to find a new destination.  One outside possibility is the Pacific Northwest.  Beaches (burr, cold) but still beaches, and if things follow my political outline, the Liberal Party (with a substantial economic libertarian wing) could wind up in control of Washington in Oregon, leading to a (at least slight) decrease in housing costs do to lower property taxes.

[Penelope]

I agree with Yelnoc, to a degree. Although I doubt the Electoral College will be entirely out of use. I'd say it'd be more design for a multiparty system. Maybe.