The Great Migration II: look at these maps

[Recursion]

This isn't particularly about the red/blue break in these two elections; I want instead to point out the electoral college numbers on these maps:

1964



2012



I've frequently accused the party this cycle of re-litigating the 1960s (and I stand by that), but I think the important thing to keep in mind as we head into the 2nd half of the primary season is how much more weight the South and West have now than they did in 1964, because they have received a whole lot of people from the North and East.

[Barack_America]

1. So we should nominate the candidate preferred by states we can't win.

Sounds like a winning strategy.

[Recursion]

2. That's a weird direction to go with that, but if that's how you feel

Except for TX, most of the states we can't win have shrunk. FL and CA are the big gainers in the intervening half-century, and we've shown we can win those two (for that matter they're the lynchpins of our electoral strategy).

[Barack_America]

4. Maybe I don't understand the crux of your OP then.

Aren't you arguing that larger, redder, Southern and Western states are more important than bluer, Northern states?

[Recursion]

5. CA is red to you? Or CO?

Really?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. Maybe we should go with the candidate who carried OH, FL, VA, and NC by double digits.

Last I checked they were the most delegate rich swing states in recent American electoral history.

[Barack_America]

6. Your argument would hold more water if those were all open primaries...

...as it stands, all some of them show is the preference of a minority of voters in those states.

In that respect, polling is a more accurate gauge of true voter preference in those states.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. Last I checked every state I cited but Florida had open or semi-open primaries.

Your argument would hold more water if those were all open primaries...

Last I checked every state I cited but Florida had open or semi-open primaries.

In that respect, polling is a more accurate gauge of true voter preference in those states.

Polling is indicative of results but not dispositive. If it was the latter we could just do without voting altogether.

I would add hasten to add a poll is only as good as the day it was taken on:





Michael Dukakis left our Convention with a seventeen point lead and went on to lose by eight points. *






* Might as well add with 2016 demographics Dukakis wins easily:


http://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/how-groups-voted-1988/

[unblock]

7. most people don't appreciate the significant political impact of air conditioning....

the biggest effects here appear to be gains in ca, az, tx, and fl at the expense of il, oh, pa, and ny.

between air conditioning and the exporting of our industrial belt, the migration seems obvious.

texas is expected to become a swing state due to its demographics trends, hopefully as early as this next census in 2020. we should be in pretty good shape once that happens.

[Recursion]

9. Very good point.

And the day TX goes purple is the end of the GOP as a national party as we know it. Just like if CA went red today.

[unblock]

10. the real question is what will be the fate of the republican party?

any political party that starts seeing consistent, significant losses either shifts to add a new faction or fails entirely, to be replaced by a new political party in its place.

so what new faction exists for the republicans to gain? i'm having a tough time seeing anything but conservative democrats/centrists/dlc-ers.

the only dynamic is see is for a democratic majority to become more liberal, alienating that faction until they bolt for the republican party, which then becomes more moderate while pushing the currently reigning loonies bank to the fringe.

i.e., a major pendulum shift back to what the parties were like before the gingrich/reagan shift.

i know that's a bit of an easy/lazy prediction, but i'm at a loss for how republicans remain viable once the expected demographic shifts kick in.

[Recursion]

11. I see two options

1. The Democratic party keeps edging more centrist and inaugurates another "Era of Good Feelings" which will eventually fracture in ways as unpredictable as the one 200 years ago did

2. The GOP moves left, possibly hard left in some ways, and goes after conservative minorities and moderate whites. In which case I predict a President Huntsman in 2020 or 2024.

[unblock]

12. yes, it's interesting to contemplate how the 2 parties might dance around each other

it's entirely possible that the democratic party moves too far to the right, leaving the republican party with no choice put to pick up the pissed off liberals.

the republican party could end up being the liberal/bigot/religious coalition that the democratic party once was, and the democratic party the business/military party that the republican party once was.

[Recursion]

13. What's the apocryphal Chinese curse?

"Interesting times"

[unblock]

14. well, the more "interesting times" would be if

the republicans resist the demographic changes through force...

... and yet again, the conversation returns to trump....