The Sun Belt might not go blue long-term

[jkmillion]

This was pretty much the point I got from the 2022 midterms. Democrats performed really well in the Rust Belt/Midwest in Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. However, they didn't do good in the Sun Belt at all.

Warnock barely won against an insanely unpopular challenger with the incumbency advantage. Beto and Abrams came nowhere close to winning. Democrats got blown out in Florida and couldn't keep North Carolina within 3% despite a strong candidate. Even in 2021, the Democrats underperformed in Virginia.

I think one of the biggest problems is that people think Wisconsin is going to vote like 10% red in the future. I think that is wrong. The elections clearly point towards college-educated people in the suburbs trending blue and conservative minorities trending Republican.

Texas might never go blue and Georgia might actually vote more Republican in the 2030s than in the 2020 election.

Like, once the Democrats starts to lose their grip on minorities, I struggle to find where the Democrats can find voters to replace minority losses in the Sun Belt, especially since a lot of the swingable voters have already switched by now.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

This seems like a strange take. It is fair to be skeptical of Florida and Texas, for example, but those are not the entirety of the "sunbelt." Your thread title would have more merit if you changed it to something like "Florida and Texas might not go blue long-term."

But other states like CO and VA are safely Dem on the Federal level. Sure, under the right circumstances they may elect a Republican governor or state legislature, but that does not make them any more federally competitive than states like Louisiana and Kentucky, which have Democratic governors (or MA and MD, which recently had Republican governors).

The national Dem party did not invest in NC, so I think the takeaway for most people is that if they had, perhaps NC-SEN may have been winnable.

As for Georgia, the idea of Dems winning a Senate seat there would have been basically unthinkable as recently as 5 or so years ago.

I also note that you conspicuously make zero reference whatsoever of Arizona in your post.

And finally:

Georgia might actually vote more Republican in the 2030s than in the 2020 election.

What exactly makes you think that is even plausible? What are the electoral trends that are driving Georgia, of all states, to trend R? Beyond the flippant platitude that "anything can happen" and that a decade or more is a long time in politics (which is true), there is nothing in particular to support that.

[Kamala's side hoe]

This was pretty much the point I got from the 2022 midterms. Democrats performed really well in the Rust Belt/Midwest in Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota. However, they didn't do good in the Sun Belt at all.

I heard on the 538 post-midterm podcast episode that inflation has been worse in the Sunbelt (SoCal, Metro Phoenix, Las Vegas, DFW, Atlanta, etc) than in the Frost Belt. Wonder if that was a factor this year, it'd definitely explain the SoCal House races.

[Liminal Trans Girl]

I wouldn't write Texas off, Beto in 2022 only did slightly worse than Biden. In some counties there are a lot of people that are more supportive of "woke" things. IMO, Texas is still where its at in 2020, or even possibly slightly better.

[TDAS04]

Democrats performed well in Arizona, which is definitely a Sun Belt state.

I do, however, agree that Wisconsin’s Republican trends are hyped, and that the Frost Belt still holds plenty of hope for Democrats.  Midwestern whites still aren’t as right wing as Southern whites.

[Agonized-Statism]

I heard on the 538 post-midterm podcast episode that inflation has been worse in the Sunbelt (SoCal, Metro Phoenix, Las Vegas, DFW, Atlanta, etc) than in the Frost Belt. Wonder if that was a factor this year, it'd definitely explain the SoCal House races.

That, and a reaction to the lockdown in Sun Belt states dependent on the tourism and hospitality industry and recreational service work like Nevada, may have obscured trends imo.

[Hope For A New Era]

I heard on the 538 post-midterm podcast episode that inflation has been worse in the Sunbelt (SoCal, Metro Phoenix, Las Vegas, DFW, Atlanta, etc) than in the Frost Belt. Wonder if that was a factor this year, it'd definitely explain the SoCal House races.

That, and a reaction to the lockdown in Sun Belt states dependent on the tourism and hospitality industry and recreational service work like Nevada, may have obscured trends imo.

Nevada in particular is also notable for having the third-highest gas prices in the country during the week before Election Day, behind only California and Hawaii. Oregon wasn't far behind either.

[S019]

I wouldn't write Texas off, Beto in 2022 only did slightly worse than Biden. In some counties there are a lot of people that are more supportive of "woke" things. IMO, Texas is still where its at in 2020, or even possibly slightly better.

It's noteworthy that despite doing better than Trump 2016, Abbott did worse than him in the Dallas suburbs. Democratic turnout in Texas was also awful, but unless the big metros just stall, the TXGOP is going to have a big problem on their hands very soon.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

I wouldn't write Texas off, Beto in 2022 only did slightly worse than Biden. In some counties there are a lot of people that are more supportive of "woke" things. IMO, Texas is still where its at in 2020, or even possibly slightly better.

It's noteworthy that despite doing better than Trump 2016, Abbott did worse than him in the Dallas suburbs. Democratic turnout in Texas was also awful, but unless the big metros just stall, the TXGOP is going to have a big problem on their hands very soon.

He managed to do better than Trump 2016 in the Houston and El Paso area though. Also Jefferson county (Beaumont) went big for Abbott. It even voted against Bush in 2004! Not to mention the RGV with Abbott improving there compared to Trump 2016 (but less than 2020). DFW and Austin isn't enough for them to carry the state. They need all hands on deck from every metro area.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I wouldn't write Texas off, Beto in 2022 only did slightly worse than Biden. In some counties there are a lot of people that are more supportive of "woke" things. IMO, Texas is still where its at in 2020, or even possibly slightly better.

It's noteworthy that despite doing better than Trump 2016, Abbott did worse than him in the Dallas suburbs. Democratic turnout in Texas was also awful, but unless the big metros just stall, the TXGOP is going to have a big problem on their hands very soon.

He managed to do better than Trump 2016 in the Houston and El Paso area though. Also Jefferson county (Beaumont) went big for Abbott. It even voted against Bush in 2004! Not to mention the RGV with Abbott improving there compared to Trump 2016 (but less than 2020). DFW and Austin isn't enough for them to carry the state. They need all hands on deck from every metro area.

Jefferson County has Deep South racial-political dynamics. It just had enough Blacks to make Ds reliably win it. In the long run, it seems the Black % is slowly going down, so the D floor in the county is also going down. The other issue at hand here is that Beaumont is a city reliant on fossil fuel industries; the Houston metro in general is kind of a fossil fuel region, but if Rs are seen as protecting the fossil fuel industry, that could make the difference in swaying swing voters in this part of the state.

[Skill and Chance]

I wouldn't write Texas off, Beto in 2022 only did slightly worse than Biden. In some counties there are a lot of people that are more supportive of "woke" things. IMO, Texas is still where its at in 2020, or even possibly slightly better.

It's noteworthy that despite doing better than Trump 2016, Abbott did worse than him in the Dallas suburbs. Democratic turnout in Texas was also awful, but unless the big metros just stall, the TXGOP is going to have a big problem on their hands very soon.

He managed to do better than Trump 2016 in the Houston and El Paso area though. Also Jefferson county (Beaumont) went big for Abbott. It even voted against Bush in 2004! Not to mention the RGV with Abbott improving there compared to Trump 2016 (but less than 2020). DFW and Austin isn't enough for them to carry the state. They need all hands on deck from every metro area.

Jefferson County has Deep South racial-political dynamics. It just had enough Blacks to make Ds reliably win it. In the long run, it seems the Black % is slowly going down, so the D floor in the county is also going down. The other issue at hand here is that Beaumont is a city reliant on fossil fuel industries; the Houston metro in general is kind of a fossil fuel region, but if Rs are seen as protecting the fossil fuel industry, that could make the difference in swaying swing voters in this part of the state.

This.  I don't think the small cities will be decisive.  2022 suggests that there simply aren't enough outlying votes left (or single issue oil voters in Harris) for R's to flip to save them if/when Collin and Denton go the way of Cobb and Gwinnett. 

[NOVA Green]

I wouldn't write Texas off, Beto in 2022 only did slightly worse than Biden. In some counties there are a lot of people that are more supportive of "woke" things. IMO, Texas is still where its at in 2020, or even possibly slightly better.



It's noteworthy that despite doing better than Trump 2016, Abbott did worse than him in the Dallas suburbs. Democratic turnout in Texas was also awful, but unless the big metros just stall, the TXGOP is going to have a big problem on their hands very soon.

He managed to do better than Trump 2016 in the Houston and El Paso area though. Also Jefferson county (Beaumont) went big for Abbott. It even voted against Bush in 2004! Not to mention the RGV with Abbott improving there compared to Trump 2016 (but less than 2020). DFW and Austin isn't enough for them to carry the state. They need all hands on deck from every metro area.

Jefferson County has Deep South racial-political dynamics. It just had enough Blacks to make Ds reliably win it. In the long run, it seems the Black % is slowly going down, so the D floor in the county is also going down. The other issue at hand here is that Beaumont is a city reliant on fossil fuel industries; the Houston metro in general is kind of a fossil fuel region, but if Rs are seen as protecting the fossil fuel industry, that could make the difference in swaying swing voters in this part of the state.

This.  I don't think the small cities will be decisive.  2022 suggests that there simply aren't enough outlying votes left (or single issue oil voters in Harris) for R's to flip to save them if/when Collin and Denton go the way of Cobb and Gwinnett. 

Would also politely interject as someone who lived in Metro Houston from '12-'16, that DEM numbers in Harris and Fort Bend County likely are not close to peaking, especially with PRES elections coming up in '24 and '28.

Even some significant % changes in Montgomery and Brazoria counties could well swing TX towards DEMs, combined with shifts in Metro DFW, Metro Austin, and Metro SA.

Reality is that Tejas is not simply "fools gold" but rather an extremely complex and large pop state, and combined with massive demographic changes can and should be fought and invested in by the national democratic party.

[Schiff for Senate]

I will say that if nothing else, 2022 has made me much more optimistic about our chances in general in the Rust Belt, and I’m now convinced FL is Safe R. Oh, and candidate quality absolutely matters, too - Kemp was popular, for some reason Abbott is too (let’s be honest even DeathSantis was popular). The Sun Belt state where the GOP nominated sh**t candidates for the biggest races (AZ), they lost those races (worth noting Ducey won the governor’s race by double digits in 2018, a blue wave, even as a Democrat won a Senate seat there for the first time in a while). And candidate quality mattered up in the Rust Belt, too. WI (senate or governor) doesn’t really make a great case of it, but MI-GOV and PA-GOV featured strong Democratic candidates versus trash, poorly funded GOP opponents. In the state where the GOP had a strong, popular incumbent, Ohio, they won by a ridiculous amount (even compared to Trump’s 8 point win, or even Portman’s much larger victory in 2016-SEN, DeWine’s 26 point landslide is very impressive).

[Skill and Chance]

I will say that if nothing else, 2022 has made me much more optimistic about our chances in general in the Rust Belt, and I’m now convinced FL is Safe R. Oh, and candidate quality absolutely matters, too - Kemp was popular, for some reason Abbott is too (let’s be honest even DeathSantis was popular). The Sun Belt state where the GOP nominated sh**t candidates for the biggest races (AZ), they lost those races (worth noting Ducey won the governor’s race by double digits in 2018, a blue wave, even as a Democrat won a Senate seat there for the first time in a while). And candidate quality mattered up in the Rust Belt, too. WI (senate or governor) doesn’t really make a great case of it, but MI-GOV and PA-GOV featured strong Democratic candidates versus trash, poorly funded GOP opponents. In the state where the GOP had a strong, popular incumbent, Ohio, they won by a ridiculous amount (even compared to Trump’s 8 point win, or even Portman’s much larger victory in 2016-SEN, DeWine’s 26 point landslide is very impressive).

I think Wisconsin will still eventually go the way of Ohio, but I'm not at all convinced of that in PA or especially MI any more.   From the past 2 cycles, it also looks like R's have peaked in Appalachia, which is rather surprising. On the other hand, we've seen that it is possible for R's to reach margins with the Deep South white vote that match the D margins with the black vote, and there's some evidence rural black voters are swinging R.  IMO this will be enough to save NC for them and prevent anything seriously competitive in MS or LA down the line, at least at the federal level.

I do think Dems will have a longer term NYC area problem. 

Could see something like this for a Dem win comparable to 2020:

[Schiff for Senate]

I will say that if nothing else, 2022 has made me much more optimistic about our chances in general in the Rust Belt, and I’m now convinced FL is Safe R. Oh, and candidate quality absolutely matters, too - Kemp was popular, for some reason Abbott is too (let’s be honest even DeathSantis was popular). The Sun Belt state where the GOP nominated sh**t candidates for the biggest races (AZ), they lost those races (worth noting Ducey won the governor’s race by double digits in 2018, a blue wave, even as a Democrat won a Senate seat there for the first time in a while). And candidate quality mattered up in the Rust Belt, too. WI (senate or governor) doesn’t really make a great case of it, but MI-GOV and PA-GOV featured strong Democratic candidates versus trash, poorly funded GOP opponents. In the state where the GOP had a strong, popular incumbent, Ohio, they won by a ridiculous amount (even compared to Trump’s 8 point win, or even Portman’s much larger victory in 2016-SEN, DeWine’s 26 point landslide is very impressive).

I think Wisconsin will still eventually go the way of Ohio, but I'm not at all convinced of that in PA or especially MI any more.   From the past 2 cycles, it also looks like R's have peaked in Appalachia, which is rather surprising. On the other hand, we've seen that it is possible for R's to reach margins with the Deep South white vote that match the D margins with the black vote, and there's some evidence rural black voters are swinging R.  IMO this will be enough to save NC for them and prevent anything seriously competitive in MS or LA down the line, at least at the federal level.

I do think Dems will have a longer term NYC area problem. 

Could see something like this for a Dem win comparable to 2020:

What about RGV/Hispanic trends in TX? I guarantee that TX is not going blue in 2024 if ANY of WI, PA and NV go red. And if I’m wrong I will eat crow.

[Skill and Chance]

I will say that if nothing else, 2022 has made me much more optimistic about our chances in general in the Rust Belt, and I’m now convinced FL is Safe R. Oh, and candidate quality absolutely matters, too - Kemp was popular, for some reason Abbott is too (let’s be honest even DeathSantis was popular). The Sun Belt state where the GOP nominated sh**t candidates for the biggest races (AZ), they lost those races (worth noting Ducey won the governor’s race by double digits in 2018, a blue wave, even as a Democrat won a Senate seat there for the first time in a while). And candidate quality mattered up in the Rust Belt, too. WI (senate or governor) doesn’t really make a great case of it, but MI-GOV and PA-GOV featured strong Democratic candidates versus trash, poorly funded GOP opponents. In the state where the GOP had a strong, popular incumbent, Ohio, they won by a ridiculous amount (even compared to Trump’s 8 point win, or even Portman’s much larger victory in 2016-SEN, DeWine’s 26 point landslide is very impressive).

I think Wisconsin will still eventually go the way of Ohio, but I'm not at all convinced of that in PA or especially MI any more.   From the past 2 cycles, it also looks like R's have peaked in Appalachia, which is rather surprising. On the other hand, we've seen that it is possible for R's to reach margins with the Deep South white vote that match the D margins with the black vote, and there's some evidence rural black voters are swinging R.  IMO this will be enough to save NC for them and prevent anything seriously competitive in MS or LA down the line, at least at the federal level.

I do think Dems will have a longer term NYC area problem. 

Could see something like this for a Dem win comparable to 2020:

What about RGV/Hispanic trends in TX? I guarantee that TX is not going blue in 2024 if ANY of WI, PA and NV go red. And if I’m wrong I will eat crow.

I don't mean 2024 for this.  R's need Houston (>40% Hispanic) to move meaningfully right to save the state long term.  2022 suggests this will be harder than expected.   

[Kamala's side hoe]

I think Wisconsin will still eventually go the way of Ohio, but I'm not at all convinced of that in PA or especially MI any more.   From the past 2 cycles, it also looks like R's have peaked in Appalachia, which is rather surprising. On the other hand, we've seen that it is possible for R's to reach margins with the Deep South white vote that match the D margins with the black vote, and there's some evidence rural black voters are swinging R.  IMO this will be enough to save NC for them and prevent anything seriously competitive in MS or LA down the line, at least at the federal level.

I do think Dems will have a longer term NYC area problem.  

Could see something like this for a Dem win comparable to 2020:

The bolded parts are consistent with my medium-term trend expectations 4-5 years ago. Don’t think this map is plausible anytime before the 2030s, especially if the D nominee is only getting high 50s % of the vote in CA.

[Alben Barkley]

I like how OP just completely ignored Arizona. Probably because it singlehandedly destroys his narrative. And now that Warnock just did better than any federal statewide Democrat in Georgia since Zel Miller, his prognosis for Georgia doesn't look that great either.

I don't see much evidence for Skill and Chance's claims either. Wisconsin didn't look like it will go the way of Ohio this year when Ron Johnson barely won it against a weak candidate and Tony Evers was more comfortably re-elected. Not only are Rs not matching black vote D numbers with Deep South whites, they are losing ground with them, especially in Georgia and among young white voters (i.e. the future). There is little to no evidence rural black voters are swinging R; in those majority or near-majority black rural counties that have swung R, it's usually because the counties are becoming whiter. NC is still very much in play for Democrats. There is no real reason to think the NYC area will be a long-term problem for Democrats, considering the city has been solidly Democratic for literally hundreds of years and the only reason Democrats underperformed there this year was low turnout.

The only thing he was right about is that Rs have peaked in Appalachia, but that was pretty apparent already, far from "surprising." What, did he expect there to be Solid South/Kim Jong-un numbers there for the GOP at some point???

[Kamala's side hoe]

I don't see much evidence for Skill and Chance's claims either. Wisconsin didn't look like it will go the way of Ohio this year when Ron Johnson barely won it against a weak candidate and Tony Evers was more comfortably re-elected. Not only are Rs not matching black vote D numbers with Deep South whites, they are losing ground with them, especially in Georgia and among young white voters (i.e. the future). There is little to no evidence rural black voters are swinging R; in those majority or near-majority black rural counties that have swung R, it's usually because the counties are becoming whiter. NC is still very much in play for Democrats. There is no real reason to think the NYC area will be a long-term problem for Democrats, considering the city has been solidly Democratic for literally hundreds of years and the only reason Democrats underperformed there this year was low turnout.

Hot take: Barnes wasn't an especially weak candidate, although we'll have to see how a (non) Milwaukie-based Dem will do in a federal Senate race.

The only racial trend I'm at all confident on is Black voters trending R over the medium/long-term, although you're right in that the R trends we're seeing in some parts of the Black Belt right now have more to do with the local Black population/CVAP decreasing.

Dems will definitely do better in NYS in 2024 and other presidential years, but I don't think this year's lower D turnout in Downstate (or relatively strong R protest vote among nonwhite voters) was a one-off.

[Skill and Chance]

I like how OP just completely ignored Arizona. Probably because it singlehandedly destroys his narrative. And now that Warnock just did better than any federal statewide Democrat in Georgia since Zel Miller, his prognosis for Georgia doesn't look that great either.

I don't see much evidence for Skill and Chance's claims either. Wisconsin didn't look like it will go the way of Ohio this year when Ron Johnson barely won it against a weak candidate and Tony Evers was more comfortably re-elected. Not only are Rs not matching black vote D numbers with Deep South whites, they are losing ground with them, especially in Georgia and among young white voters (i.e. the future). There is little to no evidence rural black voters are swinging R; in those majority or near-majority black rural counties that have swung R, it's usually because the counties are becoming whiter. NC is still very much in play for Democrats. There is no real reason to think the NYC area will be a long-term problem for Democrats, considering the city has been solidly Democratic for literally hundreds of years and the only reason Democrats underperformed there this year was low turnout.

The only thing he was right about is that Rs have peaked in Appalachia, but that was pretty apparent already, far from "surprising." What, did he expect there to be Solid South/Kim Jong-un numbers there for the GOP at some point???

Immediately following Trump's win in 2016, I was expecting Appalachian white vote to get as R as the black vote was D in Obama's elections.  Since then, the libertarian wing of the GOP pushed back against Trump much more successfully than I expected. 

[OSR stands with Israel]

I like how OP just completely ignored Arizona. Probably because it singlehandedly destroys his narrative. And now that Warnock just did better than any federal statewide Democrat in Georgia since Zel Miller, his prognosis for Georgia doesn't look that great either.

I don't see much evidence for Skill and Chance's claims either. Wisconsin didn't look like it will go the way of Ohio this year when Ron Johnson barely won it against a weak candidate and Tony Evers was more comfortably re-elected. Not only are Rs not matching black vote D numbers with Deep South whites, they are losing ground with them, especially in Georgia and among young white voters (i.e. the future). There is little to no evidence rural black voters are swinging R; in those majority or near-majority black rural counties that have swung R, it's usually because the counties are becoming whiter. NC is still very much in play for Democrats. There is no real reason to think the NYC area will be a long-term problem for Democrats, considering the city has been solidly Democratic for literally hundreds of years and the only reason Democrats underperformed there this year was low turnout.

The only thing he was right about is that Rs have peaked in Appalachia, but that was pretty apparent already, far from "surprising." What, did he expect there to be Solid South/Kim Jong-un numbers there for the GOP at some point???

Immediately following Trump's win in 2016, I was expecting Appalachian white vote to get as R as the black vote was D in Obama's elections.  Since then, the libertarian wing of the GOP pushed back against Trump much more successfully than I expected. 

The Libertarian Wing of the GOP is the part of the GOP that fully embraced Trump though. Just look at how Rand Paul and the Freedom Caucus views Trump compared to the Pre Trump GOP for example and they were the leaders of that wing.

People make the mistake of viewing libertarian as Econ Conservative/Socially liberal because of the political compass but in fact that was not what made up a majority of the libertarian wing of the GOP. The people who made that wing up were mainly people who were defined by:

1. Hating The Bureaucracy/Intelligence Agencies which in the Bush GOP was fully embraced by party leadership

2. Opposing the Neocons in the party who in the Bush years had complete control of the party.


Trump gave them the first two which is why they fully embraced him.

[sting in the rafters]

if/when Collin and Denton go the way of Cobb and Gwinnett. 

Man…. the national capital of high school football a blue county. Hank Hill would drop dead right then and there.

[Kamala's side hoe]

if/when Collin and Denton go the way of Cobb and Gwinnett. 

Man…. the national capital of high school football a blue county. Hank Hill would drop dead right then and there.

Hank Hill is exactly the kind of person who’d be a never-Trumper, regardless of partisanship.

OSR makes a good point on “low-trust”, anti-institution voters btw

[sting in the rafters]

if/when Collin and Denton go the way of Cobb and Gwinnett.  

Man…. the national capital of high school football a blue county. Hank Hill would drop dead right then and there.

Hank Hill is exactly the kind of person who’d be a never-Trumper, regardless of partisanship.

OSR makes a good point on “low-trust”, anti-institution voters btw

1. Agreed given Hank’s orthodoxy (up to and including rejecting Dubya because of his poor handshake) but was being more facetious about Collin County’s now outdated embodiment the God, Guns, and athlete worship (Just look at those stadiums!) synonymous with Arlen.
2. Indeed, though an attempt to quantify the geographic distribution of varying degrees of social trust (and its resulting political implications) deserves more attention than my listless babblings while posting to alleviate the effects of employment-related boredom.

[Kamala's side hoe]

if/when Collin and Denton go the way of Cobb and Gwinnett.  

Man…. the national capital of high school football a blue county. Hank Hill would drop dead right then and there.

Hank Hill is exactly the kind of person who’d be a never-Trumper, regardless of partisanship.

OSR makes a good point on “low-trust”, anti-institution voters btw

1. Agreed given Hank’s orthodoxy (up to and including rejecting Dubya because of his poor handshake) but was being more facetious about Collin County’s now outdated embodiment the God, Guns, and athlete worship (Just look at those stadiums!) synonymous with Arlen.
2. Indeed, though an attempt to quantify the geographic distribution of varying degrees of social trust (and its resulting political implications) deserves more attention than my listless babblings while posting to alleviate the effects of employment-related boredom.

Dale Gribble would a different story altogether.

Considering his original character was a parody of the Illuminati conspiracy theories of the 90s, I think you’re absolutely right. But I could also see Judge not wanting to touch that subject with a 10 foot pole, and Redditors love that show so they’re going to screech tooth and nail that Gribble was somehow the “non-toxic” far right conspiracy theorist, whatever the hell that may be.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/12/23/black-voters-suburban-politics-00074479

Until recently, “suburban voters” was a euphemism for a white middle-class family who left the city to escape congestion and crime, according to Bill Frey, a senior fellow at Brookings Institution and the author of Diversity Explosion: How New Racial Demographics are Remaking America.

He points to the diversification of the suburbs as a major reason why the much-hyped Republican wave expected to sweep the midterms this year turned out to be nothing more than a ripple.

“The young population in the suburbs is much more racially diverse than the older population, and so … those people become a bigger part of the voting population in the suburbs,” Frey said. “Your typical Republican voter is shifting further and further out away from the city and away from the inner suburbs, and that’s why you see rural areas, exurbs outer suburbs, still voting Republican.”

Rep.-elect Wesley Hunt of Texas disagrees. Like James, he’s a Black Republican who won a majority white suburban congressional district in November; like James, he’s bullish on Republicans gaining traction among Black Americans. When the GOP focuses on pocketbook issues, such as high inflation, the economy, gas prices and crime, Hunt said, it’s a universal message that can win over everyone — including Black people in suburbia.