The future of the GOP's demographics
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:21:18 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  The future of the GOP's demographics
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Which of these racial/ethnic demographic groups does the GOP have the best chance of gaining ground with within the foreseeable future?
#1
African Americans
#2
Hispanics
#3
Asians
#4
The GOP will not gain ground with any of these
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: The future of the GOP's demographics  (Read 10595 times)
Abraham Reagan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 2.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 26, 2014, 10:36:12 PM »

and what does the GOP need to do/change in order for that to happen?
Logged
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,531
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 26, 2014, 10:59:01 PM »

If the GOP passed a reasonable immigration plan (that would be a no on the mass deportation and fence building) they could get the Hispanic vote to be at least 50-50.  That seems like the most likely group they could win over.

Immigration reform would help with Asian Americans as well but I think the GOP would need to drop their anti-science rhetoric to make any major headway with this group.  Although there are many religiously conservative Asians, large numbers of Asian Americans have no religion or do not subscribe to the ridiculous way that conservatives treat scientific findings.

I have no idea how the GOP could win the black vote.  Slavery, segregation, racially based poverty, and racism are so entrenched in the history of our political parties I just don't see how there will be a major reversal unless there is another major historical upheaval like the Civil War or the Civil Rights Movement.  Republicans don't do themselves any favors by passing voter ID laws and fighting affirmative action but I don't think that simply dropping those issues would help.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2014, 11:20:05 PM »

What Padfoot said -apart from a few token blacks, African Americans are a lost cause for the GOP, and have been since the 1960s (thank Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy for that legacy):

  


Best to focus your outreach on Latinos and Asians.  
Logged
Clarko95 📚💰📈
Clarko95
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,590
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -5.61, S: -1.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: December 26, 2014, 11:40:21 PM »
« Edited: December 26, 2014, 11:53:12 PM by Clarko95 »

If the GOP passed a reasonable immigration plan (that would be a no on the mass deportation and fence building) they could get the Hispanic vote to be at least 50-50.  That seems like the most likely group they could win over.

Yeah, that's why GHW Bush won the Hispanic vote after Reagan's amnesty, right?


No. Hispanics are still rising through the ranks of the poor and working class. They will not vote for the party that marginalizes them economically through gutting government programs that help them up until the majority of them achieves economic security.

I remember someone posted the results of a poll of Hispanics by income, and obviously poor and working class Hispanics gave whopping 75%+ of their vote to the Democrats. Once they broke $50,000, there was a massive drop off as they voted only 51% Dem. However, the majority of Hispanic voters made less than $50K per year, and so you got Obama's 71% of the vote result in 2012.

Voting tends to be less about race and more about economics (though that's merely a rule of thumb to start at, and cultural issues and race can cancel that out, like how blacks of all economic classes vote heavily Democratic, while Asians, who "should" vote Republican based on economics, flipped Democratic from 2000 - 2012).

If the Republican Party wants to win over Hispanic voters, amnesty/immigration reform alone won't be enough. Figuring out a convincing economic message will be the biggest part of any future GOP improvement with Hispanics. GW Bush understood this (it was more than just "tax cuts and deregulation for everyone!), and combined with his foreign policy pitch and targeting more conservative Hispanics, he won 37% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, helping him to lock up Florida, Colorado, and Nevada, while flipping New Mexico.

I voted Asians, based primarily on economic issues alone. They would be the easiest group to flip, however Hispanics would be more rewarding (in terms of the popular vote, as IIRC Asians are slightly more prevalent in swing states than Hispanics are, who are concentrated in safe states). However, to actually win over the group, this would require some serious tone and policy changes, which I think if combined with a favorable environment, could also see vast GOP improvements with Hispanics, whites (breaking 60%?), and "others" as well.

That would probably indicate a big Republican win, but even small gains across the board could prove life or death in Senate, Gubernatorial, and Presidential elections.
Logged
Kraxner
Rookie
**
Posts: 179


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2014, 12:08:30 AM »

Asians.


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/11/04/us/politics/2014-exit-polls.html?_r=1


2014 was the first time since 1992 that the GOP won a majority of asian votes in a house election.
Logged
publicunofficial
angryGreatness
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2014, 01:31:36 PM »

Asians


Hispanics they can maybe get back up to 40% instead of 30%, and any in-roads with blacks would only come if the GOP ripped the Southern Strategy backbone out of their party.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2014, 05:48:47 PM »
« Edited: December 27, 2014, 05:53:43 PM by hopper »

What Padfoot said -apart from a few token blacks, African Americans are a lost cause for the GOP, and have been since the 1960s (thank Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy for that legacy):

 


Best to focus your outreach on Latinos and Asians.  
Black Republican Affiliation in 2012 is the highest since 1960. Wow.


Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2014, 05:56:48 PM »

Asians


Hispanics they can maybe get back up to 40% instead of 30%, and any in-roads with blacks would only come if the GOP ripped the Southern Strategy backbone out of their party.
What Southern Strategy backbone out of the their party? Southern Strategy was like 40-45 years ago.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2014, 06:04:09 PM »

If the GOP passed a reasonable immigration plan (that would be a no on the mass deportation and fence building) they could get the Hispanic vote to be at least 50-50.  That seems like the most likely group they could win over.

Yeah, that's why GHW Bush won the Hispanic vote after Reagan's amnesty, right?


No. Hispanics are still rising through the ranks of the poor and working class. They will not vote for the party that marginalizes them economically through gutting government programs that help them up until the majority of them achieves economic security.

I remember someone posted the results of a poll of Hispanics by income, and obviously poor and working class Hispanics gave whopping 75%+ of their vote to the Democrats. Once they broke $50,000, there was a massive drop off as they voted only 51% Dem. However, the majority of Hispanic voters made less than $50K per year, and so you got Obama's 71% of the vote result in 2012.

Voting tends to be less about race and more about economics (though that's merely a rule of thumb to start at, and cultural issues and race can cancel that out, like how blacks of all economic classes vote heavily Democratic, while Asians, who "should" vote Republican based on economics, flipped Democratic from 2000 - 2012).

If the Republican Party wants to win over Hispanic voters, amnesty/immigration reform alone won't be enough. Figuring out a convincing economic message will be the biggest part of any future GOP improvement with Hispanics. GW Bush understood this (it was more than just "tax cuts and deregulation for everyone!), and combined with his foreign policy pitch and targeting more conservative Hispanics, he won 37% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, helping him to lock up Florida, Colorado, and Nevada, while flipping New Mexico.

I voted Asians, based primarily on economic issues alone. They would be the easiest group to flip, however Hispanics would be more rewarding (in terms of the popular vote, as IIRC Asians are slightly more prevalent in swing states than Hispanics are, who are concentrated in safe states). However, to actually win over the group, this would require some serious tone and policy changes, which I think if combined with a favorable environment, could also see vast GOP improvements with Hispanics, whites (breaking 60%?), and "others" as well.

That would probably indicate a big Republican win, but even small gains across the board could prove life or death in Senate, Gubernatorial, and Presidential elections.

Yeah that's a big problem I have with todays GOP they think any tax cut is a good tax cut. The GOP should refine their platform or rhetoric on tax cuts. To go further make sure the tax cut is growth based and/or revenue neutral.

Asians-Yes their vote matters in Nevada and Virginia.
Logged
publicunofficial
angryGreatness
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,010
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2014, 06:05:40 PM »

Asians


Hispanics they can maybe get back up to 40% instead of 30%, and any in-roads with blacks would only come if the GOP ripped the Southern Strategy backbone out of their party.
What Southern Strategy backbone out of the their party? Southern Strategy was like 40-45 years ago.

It never went away. The GOP still panders to Southern whites, often at the expense of blacks.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2014, 06:10:08 PM »

I picked Hispanics because to win any Presidential Election the party knows they will have to get a sufficient percentage of the Hispanic Vote to win.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2014, 06:11:15 PM »
« Edited: December 27, 2014, 06:12:47 PM by hopper »

Asians


Hispanics they can maybe get back up to 40% instead of 30%, and any in-roads with blacks would only come if the GOP ripped the Southern Strategy backbone out of their party.
What Southern Strategy backbone out of the their party? Southern Strategy was like 40-45 years ago.

It never went away. The GOP still panders to Southern whites, often at the expense of blacks.
That's because of white evangelicals who are social conservatives. That's basically the base of the party and has been for awhile.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: December 27, 2014, 09:08:45 PM »

What Padfoot said -apart from a few token blacks, African Americans are a lost cause for the GOP, and have been since the 1960s (thank Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy for that legacy):

 


Best to focus your outreach on Latinos and Asians. 
First, the Southern strategy was about outreach to suburban, moderate Southerners, not white racists.  And second, the GOP definitely needs to improve black outreach.  We don't need to win the black vote yet, but we need to start chipping away at the Democrats' advantage.
Logged
Padfoot
padfoot714
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,531
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: December 27, 2014, 11:17:25 PM »

What Padfoot said -apart from a few token blacks, African Americans are a lost cause for the GOP, and have been since the 1960s (thank Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy for that legacy):

 


Best to focus your outreach on Latinos and Asians. 
First, the Southern strategy was about outreach to suburban, moderate Southerners, not white racists.  And second, the GOP definitely needs to improve black outreach.  We don't need to win the black vote yet, but we need to start chipping away at the Democrats' advantage.

Those so called "moderates" we're just better at hiding their racial biases.  The flip of the south from dem to GOP is totally attributable to racial politics and it remains largely so to this day.  The southern strategy first employed by Nixon used racial dog whistles that allowed people to shield their prejudices while still openly talking about inherently racial issues.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,842
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: December 28, 2014, 12:03:41 AM »

The black vote has steadily drifted away from the Republican Party even as the black middle class has grown. Since WWII, the best year for the Republicans getting a share of the black vote was 1956 -- at 39%. That was probably for standing up to Southern segregationists. (Of course few blacks voted in the South, and if they had voted then in large numbers they might have gone more toward Eisenhower in 1956, giving him a 47-state or so landslide).

To give some idea of how the Republicans have failed to win over blacks -- Nixon got 13% of the black vote in his landslide of 1972, and Reagan got only 9% of the black vote in his landslide election of 1984.   
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2014, 01:25:26 PM »

and what does the GOP need to do/change in order for that to happen?

Asians. Stop being anti-intellectual/anti-science and moderate on social issues (just enough to appear rational).
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: December 30, 2014, 02:02:40 PM »
« Edited: December 30, 2014, 02:06:39 PM by hopper »

and what does the GOP need to do/change in order for that to happen?

Asians. Stop being anti-intellectual/anti-science and moderate on social issues (just enough to appear rational).
Dropping the "white Christian nativism" would also be a step in the right direction Tongue
Its not so much white Christian nativism than it is "nativism" Romney won the white vote in all Upper Midwestern States(i.e. The Rust Belt) besides Illinois. Romney won the white vote even in Northeast States like MD, PA, and NJ pretty moderately too by like 12-16 points in those states.

Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: December 30, 2014, 02:23:58 PM »

and what does the GOP need to do/change in order for that to happen?

Asians. Stop being anti-intellectual/anti-science and moderate on social issues (just enough to appear rational).
I do agree with you on the social issues I think the GOP thought about that in between the 2012 and 2014 elections.

I don't think the party is anti-science.

Anti-intellectual-I don't know if you mean the party needs to do a better job of "messaging" I agree with that. The Dems killed the GOP in terms of messaging in 2012.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: December 30, 2014, 02:40:50 PM »

and what does the GOP need to do/change in order for that to happen?

Asians. Stop being anti-intellectual/anti-science and moderate on social issues (just enough to appear rational).

That isn't enough for the GOP to win over Asian voters, of course, but it would allow them to be competitive. For instance, I doubt that Vietnamese or Hmong or Fillipino voters care all that much about the virtues of the sane center-right. After all, they're largely working class.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2015, 12:03:45 AM »

The black vote has steadily drifted away from the Republican Party even as the black middle class has grown. Since WWII, the best year for the Republicans getting a share of the black vote was 1956 -- at 39%. That was probably for standing up to Southern segregationists. (Of course few blacks voted in the South, and if they had voted then in large numbers they might have gone more toward Eisenhower in 1956, giving him a 47-state or so landslide).

To give some idea of how the Republicans have failed to win over blacks -- Nixon got 13% of the black vote in his landslide of 1972, and Reagan got only 9% of the black vote in his landslide election of 1984.   
Romney did win 18% of the black male vote of the 18-29 year old age group but black women of the same age group didn't swing to Romney at all like Black Men of the 18-29 age group did.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,677


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2015, 01:41:19 AM »
« Edited: January 05, 2015, 01:52:32 AM by The Mikado »

I've said before and I'll say again that many people in the category now known as "Hispanics" will be considered "white ethnics" by 2040 or so, as "white" as Greeks or Lebanese or Turks are considered in the US are now. This obviously isn't a universal thing, heavily Native people like Guatemalans and the obviously black Latinos are a different matter, but the day will come when a person whose ancestors have lived in the USA since 1970 who has a name like "Hector Lopez" won't be considered "non-white" in any serious way.

EDIT: Also, the above reflects my view on the prediction of a "minority-majority" USA. The definition of whiteness will expand to include many now considered non-white and the white majority will be "preserved."
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2015, 02:07:01 AM »
« Edited: January 05, 2015, 02:21:35 AM by TheDeadFlagBlues »

I've said before and I'll say again that many people in the category now known as "Hispanics" will be considered "white ethnics" by 2040 or so, as "white" as Greeks or Lebanese or Turks are considered in the US are now. This obviously isn't a universal thing, heavily Native people like Guatemalans and the obviously black Latinos are a different matter, but the day will come when a person whose ancestors have lived in the USA since 1970 who has a name like "Hector Lopez" won't be considered "non-white" in any serious way.

EDIT: Also, the above reflects my view on the prediction of a "minority-majority" USA. The definition of whiteness will expand to include many now considered non-white and the white majority will be "preserved."



look at this white man

I've said it before and I'll say it again: many Latino ethnic groups will never assimilate in a manner that integrates them with white identities. Latinos have no desire to be considered white. To a large extent, Latino identity in the US is centered around combating white supremacy. Outside of a common language and a common faith, Mexicans and Puerto Ricans can bond over stories of discrimination. Because the Latino identity was constructed for largely political and economic reasons by Latino elites, I doubt that it's a very durable identity but it has also served as an inoculation against whiteness.  

In order for your scenario to play out, immigration from Latin America would have to slow to a trickle. In that situation, I could see high interracial marriage rates dramatically altering the Latino identity + lack of cultural raw materials, which define ethnic communities, flowing into the country but I think there's a stronger case to be made for the notion of many Asians assimilating into whiteness as being mixed-race Asian becomes more common.
Logged
hopper
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: January 05, 2015, 03:19:27 AM »

I've said before and I'll say again that many people in the category now known as "Hispanics" will be considered "white ethnics" by 2040 or so, as "white" as Greeks or Lebanese or Turks are considered in the US are now. This obviously isn't a universal thing, heavily Native people like Guatemalans and the obviously black Latinos are a different matter, but the day will come when a person whose ancestors have lived in the USA since 1970 who has a name like "Hector Lopez" won't be considered "non-white" in any serious way.

EDIT: Also, the above reflects my view on the prediction of a "minority-majority" USA. The definition of whiteness will expand to include many now considered non-white and the white majority will be "preserved."



look at this white man

I've said it before and I'll say it again: many Latino ethnic groups will never assimilate in a manner that integrates them with white identities. Latinos have no desire to be considered white. To a large extent, Latino identity in the US is centered around combating white supremacy. Outside of a common language and a common faith, Mexicans and Puerto Ricans can bond over stories of discrimination. Because the Latino identity was constructed for largely political and economic reasons by Latino elites, I doubt that it's a very durable identity but it has also served as an inoculation against whiteness.  

In order for your scenario to play out, immigration from Latin America would have to slow to a trickle. In that situation, I could see high interracial marriage rates dramatically altering the Latino identity + lack of cultural raw materials, which define ethnic communities, flowing into the country but I think there's a stronger case to be made for the notion of many Asians assimilating into whiteness as being mixed-race Asian becomes more common.
Well more Latino's are born in the US now than are coming from immigrating from Mexico. Most of the Hispanic Population Boom in the US is from Hispanics of Mexican Descent.

You say the Latino identity is not very durable but Hispanics have no desire to be seen as white. So will Hispanics just be known as "other race" or something like that in 30 more years you think?
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: January 07, 2015, 09:11:40 AM »

What Padfoot said -apart from a few token blacks, African Americans are a lost cause for the GOP, and have been since the 1960s (thank Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy for that legacy):

 


Best to focus your outreach on Latinos and Asians. 
First, the Southern strategy was about outreach to suburban, moderate Southerners, not white racists.  And second, the GOP definitely needs to improve black outreach.  We don't need to win the black vote yet, but we need to start chipping away at the Democrats' advantage.

Those so called "moderates" we're just better at hiding their racial biases.  The flip of the south from dem to GOP is totally attributable to racial politics and it remains largely so to this day.  The southern strategy first employed by Nixon used racial dog whistles that allowed people to shield their prejudices while still openly talking about inherently racial issues.
Could you please provide evidence aside from liberal talking points?
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: January 07, 2015, 09:19:22 AM »
« Edited: January 07, 2015, 09:25:09 AM by RIP Edward Brooke »

What Padfoot said -apart from a few token blacks, African Americans are a lost cause for the GOP, and have been since the 1960s (thank Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon's Southern Strategy for that legacy):

 


Best to focus your outreach on Latinos and Asians. 
First, the Southern strategy was about outreach to suburban, moderate Southerners, not white racists.  And second, the GOP definitely needs to improve black outreach.  We don't need to win the black vote yet, but we need to start chipping away at the Democrats' advantage.

Those so called "moderates" we're just better at hiding their racial biases.  The flip of the south from dem to GOP is totally attributable to racial politics and it remains largely so to this day.  The southern strategy first employed by Nixon used racial dog whistles that allowed people to shield their prejudices while still openly talking about inherently racial issues.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
(http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=1941)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol6RWSqNf7c "They are not racist...they are black and white, native and foreign-born, young and old."

Does this sound like someone who was trying to win support from white racists with dog whistles?
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 0.072 seconds with 14 queries.