Pennsylvania has been Trending right since 2004

[TheReckoning]

Thoughts?

Could be a part of the new 7th party system

[EastwoodS]

what do you consider to be the 7th?  If 7th started in 1992, it's already ending. 2020 or 2024 will likely end it.

[TheReckoning]

what do you consider to be the 7th?  If 7th started in 1992, it's already ending. 2020 or 2024 will likely end it.

I would say it started in 2008, with the election of Barry. Clinton was pretty conservative, and the 1994 elections proved the Republican dominance of the 6th system wasn’t over.

[EastwoodS]

what do you consider to be the 7th?  If 7th started in 1992, it's already ending. 2020 or 2024 will likely end it.

I would say it started in 2008, with the election of Barry. Clinton was pretty conservative, and the 1994 elections proved the Republican dominance of the 6th system wasn’t over.

« edited: January 02, 2021, 05:37:24 PM by EastwoodS »
1896, as it establishes the Republican party into a relatively conservative/lassie-faire party we can trace its roots back to from today.
1932- this elections solidies the Democratic party into being the big government party of the working man for the next 80 years. The strength of FDRs victories can still be seen in the EC today.
1952- the first cracks in FDRs reliable Democratic coalition
1968- the beginning of a major Republican relalignment we will see for several decades; fully comes to an end in 2008.
1980- surprisingly, I don't consider this to be a realignment, I consider Reagan's electoral dominace to come from the electoral strength of Nixon and the critical mass of Republican big tent ideologies from the early twentieth century. This election and 1984, in my opinion is the last great "hoorah" of the Republican party, as moderates and liberals (whom were once Republicans) increasingly become disgusted with strict social conservativism and turn to the Democrats for new answers. This election is basically a continuation of the same ol' same old (1896-1992/2004).
1992- This election is a MAJOR relalignment, one of which I think we are still in but one that is also ending. This election rebrands Democrats as the moderate, centrist party and gives them new found strength in states never before acehivable to them. Obama's electoral success is credited to Clinton's foundation in the EC, not his own. Obama did not create any new coalition we haven't already seen...
2016- cracks in Clinton's electoral coalition.
2024/2028- any sign of the strength the Democrats have shown is quickly eroding as each successful election cycle they win their winning EC margin continues a linear decline. As the Democratic party aligns itself with more of a European left wing party such as the UK Labour, expect it to perform as such... As the religious rights becomes smaller, and the nation more secular, expect the Republican party to slowly put them behind new groups they will try to attract with more liberal stances on abortion and gay marriage.
Respectfully disagree, look at 1992 to now specifically. Demographics aren't saving Democrats either, that was always a pipe dream. It doesn't matter what Clinton was ideologicaly, it only matters what electoral coalition he formed and how well it stood the test of time among Democrats, and it's been fading for some time now.

[EastwoodS]

However, I will stick to my belief that the last major re-alignment was Clinton's. I maaaybe would have considered Obama's victory to be the Democrats "1968" but that would also mean Biden should have performed like Reagan, Democrats "1980." And they didn't so I consider that to be null and void. This means that the Republican party is only due for their next realignment, I just don't know exactly when. 50% chance it happens in 2024, 80% chance it happens in 2028 ( a new critical mass of voters that may favor the GOP, esp if Democrats barely scrap the EC in 2024), and a 150% chance it happens in 2032.

[TheReckoning]

However, I will stick to my belief that the last major re-alignment was Clinton's. I maaaybe would have considered Obama's victory to be the Democrats "1968" but that would also mean Biden should have performed like Reagan, Democrats "1980." And they didn't so I consider that to be null and void. This means that the Republican party is only due for their next realignment, I just don't know exactly when. 50% chance it happens in 2024, 80% chance it happens in 2028 ( a new critical mass of voters that may favor the GOP, esp if Democrats barely scrap the EC in 2024), and a 150% chance it happens in 2032.

Biden pulled the largest margin for a Democrat since the realignment of 2008, and I’m predicting he’s gonna do better in 2024. The fact of the matter is that this Party system is extremely polarized so you’re not going to get the landslides of the 5th and 6th.

The 1992 election was no more of a realignment than the 2000 election.

[EastwoodS]

However, I will stick to my belief that the last major re-alignment was Clinton's. I maaaybe would have considered Obama's victory to be the Democrats "1968" but that would also mean Biden should have performed like Reagan, Democrats "1980." And they didn't so I consider that to be null and void. This means that the Republican party is only due for their next realignment, I just don't know exactly when. 50% chance it happens in 2024, 80% chance it happens in 2028 ( a new critical mass of voters that may favor the GOP, esp if Democrats barely scrap the EC in 2024), and a 150% chance it happens in 2032.

Biden pulled the largest margin for a Democrat since the realignment of 2008, and I’m predicting he’s gonna do better in 2024. The fact of the matter is that this Party system is extremely polarized so you’re not going to get the landslides of the 5th and 6th.

The 1992 election was no more of a realignment than the 2000 election.
That was bc Trump was a historically bad pick for the PV, if he doesn't run again that will expose how weak Democrats are, esp with Harris. Don't expect the cornavirus to just dissappear and save Democrats either. There's more of a critical mass of voters long term favoring the GOP, imo.

[Catalyst138]

I don’t get the idea that all party systems have to happen in the same way, and there has to be a “1968” or a “1980” or whatever.

[Sir Mohamed]

2004 is arbitrarily point in time. Obama has done exceptionally well in the Midwest and Rust Belt in 2008 and 2012. PA was much closer in 2000 and 2004. The state now just has returned to a tossup state with a slight D-lean. Mr. Trump managed to overcome this lean in 2016 because he tapped into dissatisfaction and faced an opponent who apparently was a bad fit for the region. We'll have to see what happens in 2024 and beyond, particularly with a non-Trump GOP nominee.

Secondly, PA had 2 GOP senators in 2004, which is no longer the case since 2007. Meanwhile, the governorship was traded every 8 years since the 1-term limit was repealed in the 1970s, with the exception of 2014, in which a GOP gov was defeated after a single term.

Midwestern states like OH and IA have indeed moved right in recent years (though OH was always R-leaning), but PA has just returned to normal after Obama.

[TheReckoning]

2004 is arbitrarily point in time. Obama has done exceptionally well in the Midwest and Rust Belt in 2008 and 2012. PA was much closer in 2000 and 2004. The state now just has returned to a tossup state with a slight D-lean. Mr. Trump managed to overcome this lean in 2016 because he tapped into dissatisfaction and faced an opponent who apparently was a bad fit for the region. We'll have to see what happens in 2024 and beyond, particularly with a non-Trump GOP nominee.

Secondly, PA had 2 GOP senators in 2004, which is no longer the case since 2007. Meanwhile, the governorship was traded every 8 years since the 1-term limit was repealed in the 1970s, with the exception of 2014, in which a GOP gov was defeated after a single term.

Midwestern states like OH and IA have indeed moved right in recent years (though OH was always R-leaning), but PA has just returned to normal after Obama.

Pennsylvania has a less-D PVI in 2008 than 2004.

[SevenEleven]

2004 is arbitrarily point in time. Obama has done exceptionally well in the Midwest and Rust Belt in 2008 and 2012. PA was much closer in 2000 and 2004. The state now just has returned to a tossup state with a slight D-lean. Mr. Trump managed to overcome this lean in 2016 because he tapped into dissatisfaction and faced an opponent who apparently was a bad fit for the region. We'll have to see what happens in 2024 and beyond, particularly with a non-Trump GOP nominee.

Secondly, PA had 2 GOP senators in 2004, which is no longer the case since 2007. Meanwhile, the governorship was traded every 8 years since the 1-term limit was repealed in the 1970s, with the exception of 2014, in which a GOP gov was defeated after a single term.

Midwestern states like OH and IA have indeed moved right in recent years (though OH was always R-leaning), but PA has just returned to normal after Obama.

Pennsylvania has a less-D PVI in 2008 than 2004.

PVI is a meaningless metric. PA "trended" left in 2004 despite Bush improving more than Kerry did in the state.

[TheReckoning]

2004 is arbitrarily point in time. Obama has done exceptionally well in the Midwest and Rust Belt in 2008 and 2012. PA was much closer in 2000 and 2004. The state now just has returned to a tossup state with a slight D-lean. Mr. Trump managed to overcome this lean in 2016 because he tapped into dissatisfaction and faced an opponent who apparently was a bad fit for the region. We'll have to see what happens in 2024 and beyond, particularly with a non-Trump GOP nominee.

Secondly, PA had 2 GOP senators in 2004, which is no longer the case since 2007. Meanwhile, the governorship was traded every 8 years since the 1-term limit was repealed in the 1970s, with the exception of 2014, in which a GOP gov was defeated after a single term.

Midwestern states like OH and IA have indeed moved right in recent years (though OH was always R-leaning), but PA has just returned to normal after Obama.

Pennsylvania has a less-D PVI in 2008 than 2004.

PVI is a meaningless metric. PA "trended" left in 2004 despite Bush improving more than Kerry did in the state.

PVI isn’t meaningless. Of course Bush improved in 2004, he had an incumbency advantage. Doesn’t mean the state is trending.

[Neptunium]

2004 is arbitrarily point in time. Obama has done exceptionally well in the Midwest and Rust Belt in 2008 and 2012. PA was much closer in 2000 and 2004. The state now just has returned to a tossup state with a slight D-lean. Mr. Trump managed to overcome this lean in 2016 because he tapped into dissatisfaction and faced an opponent who apparently was a bad fit for the region. We'll have to see what happens in 2024 and beyond, particularly with a non-Trump GOP nominee.

Secondly, PA had 2 GOP senators in 2004, which is no longer the case since 2007. Meanwhile, the governorship was traded every 8 years since the 1-term limit was repealed in the 1970s, with the exception of 2014, in which a GOP gov was defeated after a single term.

Midwestern states like OH and IA have indeed moved right in recent years (though OH was always R-leaning), but PA has just returned to normal after Obama.

Pennsylvania has a less-D PVI in 2008 than 2004.

PVI is a meaningless metric. PA "trended" left in 2004 despite Bush improving more than Kerry did in the state.

Bush improve less than he did in NPV.

This comment show how Dem do wishful-thinking of PA still being blue state even it vote more republican than NPV by 3%. They even lost two state office that year.

[SevenEleven]

2004 is arbitrarily point in time. Obama has done exceptionally well in the Midwest and Rust Belt in 2008 and 2012. PA was much closer in 2000 and 2004. The state now just has returned to a tossup state with a slight D-lean. Mr. Trump managed to overcome this lean in 2016 because he tapped into dissatisfaction and faced an opponent who apparently was a bad fit for the region. We'll have to see what happens in 2024 and beyond, particularly with a non-Trump GOP nominee.

Secondly, PA had 2 GOP senators in 2004, which is no longer the case since 2007. Meanwhile, the governorship was traded every 8 years since the 1-term limit was repealed in the 1970s, with the exception of 2014, in which a GOP gov was defeated after a single term.

Midwestern states like OH and IA have indeed moved right in recent years (though OH was always R-leaning), but PA has just returned to normal after Obama.

Pennsylvania has a less-D PVI in 2008 than 2004.

PVI is a meaningless metric. PA "trended" left in 2004 despite Bush improving more than Kerry did in the state.

Bush improve less than he did in NPV.

This comment show how Dem do wishful-thinking of PA still being blue state even it vote more republican than NPV by 3%. They even lost two state office that year.

Ok, but Bush improving doesn't matter materially. The goal is to win 50%+. Fluctuations compared to other states elasticity or lack thereof are not meaningful.