The Dems need an autopsy -- they are now a completely regional party.

[Dr. Arch]

The future I see for the Democratic Party

Northeast Coast

West Coast

With Maine, New Hampshire and Oregon as toss ups

[img]

You gotta be kidding, lol

[America Needs R'hllor]

Lol. Notice how Republicans are getting all smug and confident, just like many Democrats were confident the Republican Party has no future in August. Just that Republicans seem to fully ignore facts.

[hopper]

Democrats consistently win more votes than Republicans.  Their votes are just less spread out.  As time goes on and demographics change, Democrats will win by wider and wider margins overall, and though their vote is more concentrated, it will eventually spread out just as it did from DC to VA/MD, which has made those two states Lean/Safe Dem.  This will happen in Georgia, Arizona, and Texas.  Democrats have a mortal lock on the Northeast and West Coast, so all they need to do is wait for more states to turn based on demographic changes... as has already happened in the Southwest + Virginia. 

I wouldn't bank on demographics for the future. Even Trump managed to change the GOP on the Presidential Level from a bunch of stodgy country-clubbers to a party with some populist flair!

[Sumner 1868]

Democrats consistently win more votes than Republicans.  Their votes are just less spread out.  As time goes on and demographics change, Democrats will win by wider and wider margins overall, and though their vote is more concentrated, it will eventually spread out just as it did from DC to VA/MD, which has made those two states Lean/Safe Dem.  This will happen in Georgia, Arizona, and Texas.  Democrats have a mortal lock on the Northeast and West Coast, so all they need to do is wait for more states to turn based on demographic changes... as has already happened in the Southwest + Virginia. 

I wouldn't bank on demographics for the future. Even Trump managed to change the GOP on the Presidential Level from a bunch of stodgy country-clubbers to a party with some populist flair!

"Populist flair" was also used by Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush.

[Xing]

The Democrats do need an autopsy....

But so do the Republicans. They're now tied to a demagogue, and he'll be a 5,000 lb. weight on their backs in 2018, and many voters could be quickly turned off by the Republican Party once they start holding them accountable for the status quo. The trend in states like AZ, GA, and TX has to be scary to Republicans, since if those states leave the Republican fold, winning the entire Midwest won't be enough for them.

[Fuzzy Bear]

If you told me that the Democrats won the Popular Presidential vote and gained seats in the House and Senate, I'd think they'd have had an OK night. 

They lost 2 Senate seats they could have won (PA and WI), but in reality, McGinty wasn't that strong a candidate, and Feingold had already lost to Johnson.  Feingold lost in the Tommy Thompson tradition; he was seen as a has-been.  Toomey was a solid incumbent and Johnson was a better candidate than he was made out to be.  As for other possibilities, Burr, Rubio, and Portman were all in far better shape than they were expected to be.  (In FL, Patrick Murphy really did turn out to be a poor candidate, the Dems would have done better to nominate a bomb-thrower like Grayson.)

What happened was that the GOP moved to the middle.  Political moderates now have a home in the GOP, while they've been shoved out of the Democratic Party.  And the Democrats don't seem to have a clue about this.  If you're a pro-life union member, which party will you support?  If you're for greater aid to education but skittish on Obamacare, which party will you support?  If you're pro-choice, but you don't buy into expansion of the welfare state, who will you support?  Think about it; which way will these people fall once it comes down to that "binary choice"?

The GOP became the party that decided that half a loaf is better than none at all.  Half a Republican is better than no Republican at all.  At least for the White House.  Because half a Democrat (Jimmy Carter) became a full-fledged Democrat for re-election (although his party didn't recognize this in time).  How the Democrats will win majorities without backing away from their leftish positions (and, especially, their cultural leftism) is beyond me.  They'll be stuck with the liberal enclaves, but the Silent Majority that had voted for them in recent years will stay with the GOP. 

[Gabagool102]

The future I see for the Democratic Party

Northeast Coast

West Coast

With Maine, New Hampshire and Oregon as toss ups

New Mexico is lost for the REPS. Connecticut, Minnesota and Rhode Island should be the focus of the R's. I still can't believe that the Don won a county in RI.

[ApatheticAustrian]

there are no permanent majorities in a two-party-state like the US.

if that absurd map above my post becomes reality in even 1 election, the democratic party will change on some stances in a way which will it make competetive again in some other states, even while we atm couldn't say in which ones.


btw....why "autopsies" are nonsense:


The Democrats' postmortem problem
http://theweek.com/articles/662721/democrats-postmortem-problem

[Andy Hine]

Lol at the arrogance of Republicans in general. I don't think most Republcian voters even care about the major issues at hand; they just wanted Trump to beat Hillary. Lets see what the country is like in two years. I think it's pretty obvious that Trump isn't going to bring back a single coal mining job, or a manufacturing job in the Rust Belt. Do people not realize that he outsourced jobs at his own companies?

I accept the results of the election and i'm not mad, but Trump clearly came along at the perfect time and ran against the perfect candidate. Biden or Sanders would have held onto the Rust Belt and won the election in my opinion though.

Oh and by the way, the Rust Belt is full of swing voters; don't assume that it is lost based on the results of one election.

So Republicans, you can be arrogant all you want. Just realize that your arrogance and gloating over beating Hillary Clinton do nothing for your futures or the futures of your children; Trump and the Republicans actually have to put forth a plan and govern. If they don't, well then you can kiss any chance he has of reelection goodbye, and you can also kiss Republican majorities goodbye.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Lol at the arrogance of Republicans in general. I don't think most Republcian voters even care about the major issues at hand; they just wanted Trump to beat Hillary. Lets see what the country is like in two years. I think it's pretty obvious that Trump isn't going to bring back a single coal mining job, or a manufacturing job in the Rust Belt. Do people not realize that he outsourced jobs at his own companies?

I accept the results of the election and i'm not mad, but Trump clearly came along at the perfect time and ran against the perfect candidate. Biden or Sanders would have held onto the Rust Belt and won the election in my opinion though.

Oh and by the way, the Rust Belt is full of swing voters; don't assume that it is lost based on the results of one election.

So Republicans, you can be arrogant all you want. Just realize that your arrogance and gloating over beating Hillary Clinton do nothing for your futures or the futures of your children; Trump and the Republicans actually have to put forth a plan and govern. If they don't, well then you can kiss any chance he has of reelection goodbye, and you can also kiss Republican majorities goodbye.

Trump can, and will, enact policies that will increase jobs in coal and oil.  At a minimum, he will stop the loss of coal jobs, however temporary that may prove to be.

I don't expect him to bring jobs back, at least not immediately.  But I think he can, and will, take action to stop the flow of jobs outside the US. 

[JerryArkansas]

Lol at the arrogance of Republicans in general. I don't think most Republcian voters even care about the major issues at hand; they just wanted Trump to beat Hillary. Lets see what the country is like in two years. I think it's pretty obvious that Trump isn't going to bring back a single coal mining job, or a manufacturing job in the Rust Belt. Do people not realize that he outsourced jobs at his own companies?

I accept the results of the election and i'm not mad, but Trump clearly came along at the perfect time and ran against the perfect candidate. Biden or Sanders would have held onto the Rust Belt and won the election in my opinion though.

Oh and by the way, the Rust Belt is full of swing voters; don't assume that it is lost based on the results of one election.

So Republicans, you can be arrogant all you want. Just realize that your arrogance and gloating over beating Hillary Clinton do nothing for your futures or the futures of your children; Trump and the Republicans actually have to put forth a plan and govern. If they don't, well then you can kiss any chance he has of reelection goodbye, and you can also kiss Republican majorities goodbye.

Trump can, and will, enact policies that will increase jobs in coal and oil.  At a minimum, he will stop the loss of coal jobs, however temporary that may prove to be.

I don't expect him to bring jobs back, at least not immediately.  But I think he can, and will, take action to stop the flow of jobs outside the US. 

So he will allow for mine owners to kill more of their workers in order to keep alive an industry that already is dead?  Good on him and his work to the common man.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Lol at the arrogance of Republicans in general. I don't think most Republcian voters even care about the major issues at hand; they just wanted Trump to beat Hillary. Lets see what the country is like in two years. I think it's pretty obvious that Trump isn't going to bring back a single coal mining job, or a manufacturing job in the Rust Belt. Do people not realize that he outsourced jobs at his own companies?

I accept the results of the election and i'm not mad, but Trump clearly came along at the perfect time and ran against the perfect candidate. Biden or Sanders would have held onto the Rust Belt and won the election in my opinion though.

Oh and by the way, the Rust Belt is full of swing voters; don't assume that it is lost based on the results of one election.

So Republicans, you can be arrogant all you want. Just realize that your arrogance and gloating over beating Hillary Clinton do nothing for your futures or the futures of your children; Trump and the Republicans actually have to put forth a plan and govern. If they don't, well then you can kiss any chance he has of reelection goodbye, and you can also kiss Republican majorities goodbye.

Trump can, and will, enact policies that will increase jobs in coal and oil.  At a minimum, he will stop the loss of coal jobs, however temporary that may prove to be.

I don't expect him to bring jobs back, at least not immediately.  But I think he can, and will, take action to stop the flow of jobs outside the US. 

So he will allow for mine owners to kill more of their workers in order to keep alive an industry that already is dead?  Good on him and his work to the common man.

Coal miners know the risks they take.  Their work is high-risk; that's why the pay is good.

I'm not blind to climate change, but the fact, as of now, is that while America (and the World, for that matter) has ALTERNATIVES to fossil fuels, they do not have a SUBSTITUTE for fossil fuels.  Something to think about for folks who elevate environmentalism to the level of a New Age religion.

[JerryArkansas]

Lol at the arrogance of Republicans in general. I don't think most Republcian voters even care about the major issues at hand; they just wanted Trump to beat Hillary. Lets see what the country is like in two years. I think it's pretty obvious that Trump isn't going to bring back a single coal mining job, or a manufacturing job in the Rust Belt. Do people not realize that he outsourced jobs at his own companies?

I accept the results of the election and i'm not mad, but Trump clearly came along at the perfect time and ran against the perfect candidate. Biden or Sanders would have held onto the Rust Belt and won the election in my opinion though.

Oh and by the way, the Rust Belt is full of swing voters; don't assume that it is lost based on the results of one election.

So Republicans, you can be arrogant all you want. Just realize that your arrogance and gloating over beating Hillary Clinton do nothing for your futures or the futures of your children; Trump and the Republicans actually have to put forth a plan and govern. If they don't, well then you can kiss any chance he has of reelection goodbye, and you can also kiss Republican majorities goodbye.

Trump can, and will, enact policies that will increase jobs in coal and oil.  At a minimum, he will stop the loss of coal jobs, however temporary that may prove to be.

I don't expect him to bring jobs back, at least not immediately.  But I think he can, and will, take action to stop the flow of jobs outside the US. 

So he will allow for mine owners to kill more of their workers in order to keep alive an industry that already is dead?  Good on him and his work to the common man.

Coal miners know the risks they take.  Their work is high-risk; that's why the pay is good.

I'm not blind to climate change, but the fact, as of now, is that while America (and the World, for that matter) has ALTERNATIVES to fossil fuels, they do not have a SUBSTITUTE for fossil fuels.  Something to think about for folks who elevate environmentalism to the level of a New Age religion.

You changed the subject.  I am not taking about that.
Also I'm not sure that a lifetime of health destruction is worth the damn money as well.

[hopper]

Democrats consistently win more votes than Republicans.  Their votes are just less spread out.  As time goes on and demographics change, Democrats will win by wider and wider margins overall, and though their vote is more concentrated, it will eventually spread out just as it did from DC to VA/MD, which has made those two states Lean/Safe Dem.  This will happen in Georgia, Arizona, and Texas.  Democrats have a mortal lock on the Northeast and West Coast, so all they need to do is wait for more states to turn based on demographic changes... as has already happened in the Southwest + Virginia. 

I wouldn't bank on demographics for the future. Even Trump managed to change the GOP on the Presidential Level from a bunch of stodgy country-clubbers to a party with some populist flair!

"Populist flair" was also used by Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush.

Nixon-maybe.

Reagan was a Hard-Core Conservative and Bush W. ran on his brand of Republicanism to attract Hispanic Votes. They weren't Populist like Trump is.

[Andy Hine]

Lol at the arrogance of Republicans in general. I don't think most Republcian voters even care about the major issues at hand; they just wanted Trump to beat Hillary. Lets see what the country is like in two years. I think it's pretty obvious that Trump isn't going to bring back a single coal mining job, or a manufacturing job in the Rust Belt. Do people not realize that he outsourced jobs at his own companies?

I accept the results of the election and i'm not mad, but Trump clearly came along at the perfect time and ran against the perfect candidate. Biden or Sanders would have held onto the Rust Belt and won the election in my opinion though.

Oh and by the way, the Rust Belt is full of swing voters; don't assume that it is lost based on the results of one election.

So Republicans, you can be arrogant all you want. Just realize that your arrogance and gloating over beating Hillary Clinton do nothing for your futures or the futures of your children; Trump and the Republicans actually have to put forth a plan and govern. If they don't, well then you can kiss any chance he has of reelection goodbye, and you can also kiss Republican majorities goodbye.

Trump can, and will, enact policies that will increase jobs in coal and oil.  At a minimum, he will stop the loss of coal jobs, however temporary that may prove to be.

I don't expect him to bring jobs back, at least not immediately.  But I think he can, and will, take action to stop the flow of jobs outside the US.  

And how does he plan to do that when a majority of the Republicans in congress support these free trade deals he is supposedly against? This isn't like the Apprentice where he can just fire whoever he doesn't like, he actually has to work with congress. My guess is that he won't be this revolutionary that so many of his voters think he will be; he will just blindly follow his cabinet and also congress and it will be business as usual with the middle class and poor getting screwed and the wealthy benefiting from large tax cuts.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Lol at the arrogance of Republicans in general. I don't think most Republcian voters even care about the major issues at hand; they just wanted Trump to beat Hillary. Lets see what the country is like in two years. I think it's pretty obvious that Trump isn't going to bring back a single coal mining job, or a manufacturing job in the Rust Belt. Do people not realize that he outsourced jobs at his own companies?

I accept the results of the election and i'm not mad, but Trump clearly came along at the perfect time and ran against the perfect candidate. Biden or Sanders would have held onto the Rust Belt and won the election in my opinion though.

Oh and by the way, the Rust Belt is full of swing voters; don't assume that it is lost based on the results of one election.

So Republicans, you can be arrogant all you want. Just realize that your arrogance and gloating over beating Hillary Clinton do nothing for your futures or the futures of your children; Trump and the Republicans actually have to put forth a plan and govern. If they don't, well then you can kiss any chance he has of reelection goodbye, and you can also kiss Republican majorities goodbye.

Trump can, and will, enact policies that will increase jobs in coal and oil.  At a minimum, he will stop the loss of coal jobs, however temporary that may prove to be.

I don't expect him to bring jobs back, at least not immediately.  But I think he can, and will, take action to stop the flow of jobs outside the US.  

And how does he plan to do that when a majority of the Republicans in congress support these free trade deals he is supposedly against? This isn't like the Apprentice where he can just fire whoever he doesn't like, he actually has to work with congress. My guess is that he won't be this revolutionary that so many of his voters think he will be; he will just blindly follow his cabinet and also congress and it will be business as usual with the middle class and poor getting screwed and the wealthy benefiting from large tax cuts.

Trump is remaking the GOP in an Eisenhower-Nixon mold.  It will be a center-right party, with an emphasis on the center.  It will be the clear choice for moderates, unless the Democrats change their current tune radically.

What you've been seeing from the GOP in recent years is over.  Trump changed the party by bringing out it's obscured constituency that had less influence than its numbers until this year.  The days of GOP primaries being a matter of deciding who the purest conservative is are O-V-E-R!!!

[pbrower2a]

The future I see for the Democratic Party

Northeast Coast

West Coast

With Maine, New Hampshire and Oregon as toss ups

That suggests a political reality much like China today -- with the non-Communist partners marginalized. The Democrats will be allowed to show that there is some formal, if ineffective opposition.

In any event, if you think Obama was bad, at least he was cautious; he coordinated well with the intelligence agencies and the Armed Forces; he spoke simply but with necessary nuance; he acted without malice; he showed great respect for legal precedents and Constitutional formalities. None of that will be so with Donald Trump. So what are his virtues?

He can get America into deep trouble. He can stop inflation only by suppressing wages as his Corporate buddies want, only for the consumer economy to collapse. See also Herbert Hoover. Failing to pay attention to the Intelligence Services and Armed Forces ensures that he has more chance of a 9/11 or Pearl Harbor-style incident than he has of resolving one (think of Obama resolving 9/11 by delivering a dead Osama bin Laden to Davy Jones' locker). This is Jimmy Carter without the moral compass, and the moral compass is all that Jimmy Carter had. Because he has nothing to say to those who voted against him is "Suck it up, losers!" or something to that effect, he will get people who dislike his policies to street demonstrations and protests on many issues from minority rights to the environment.  

The only way in which Donald Trump or his successor has a chance to win the Presidency in 2020 is if the Republicans succeed in rigging the vote. Basically, if Republicans win in 2020 it will in part be because people fear horrible consequences for opposing the sort of leader whose image is in every living room, bedroom, and kitchen.  

[Bismarck]

What will it take to rouse them from their stupor?

They only have some strength along the Left Coast and the NE.

45% of their House of Rep numbers come from 6 states. CA, OR, WA, NY, MA & IL

Any claim to a mythical popular vote is rooted in one state,... CA

They are facing a bitter fight over who leads the party.

The average age of the current Congressional Dem leadership is 72, the Repubs is 49

Not very broad appeal. Dems are in no position to say that they represent the people as a whole.

And in 2018 they are facing a near death experience.

They should immediately check in to political rehab but I think they are still in their disease, denial stage.

What will it take to rouse them from their stupor?

Democrats need to get rid of the Clinton faction of the party. Their influence should be dead. I have no confidence in Chuck Schumer leading the Senate Democrats.

As for marganilization, the Democratic Party has won the U.S. Popular Vote in 6 of the 7 presidential elections. That is not marganilizing. In fact, two consecutive Republican presidential pickup winners—George W. Bush (2000) and Donald Trump (2016)—failed to win the U.S. Popular Vote.

What the Democratic Party needs to do is become a uniformly, ideologically left wing political party with their policies for not just social but also economical. They are too much like the Republicans on national security and with the military industrial complex. Aligning closely on those issues makes the two major parties indistinguishable—and makes it too easily susceptible for losing party majority in both houses of Congress, to the Republican Party, while on the watch of a Democratic Party U.S. president. (Bill Clinton and Barack Obama lost the House in their Year #02. The two previous Republican U.S. presidents—Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush—waited until Year #06; there were unique circumstances with Bush Jr.)

Please please do this democrats. This is like all the nuts in my party who said Romeny lost because he wasn't conservative enough. Please go into the crazy far left wilderness with Corbyn and the Labour Party and give us our suburban rich folks back.

[Maxwell]

What will it take to rouse them from their stupor?

They only have some strength along the Left Coast and the NE.

45% of their House of Rep numbers come from 6 states. CA, OR, WA, NY, MA & IL

Any claim to a mythical popular vote is rooted in one state,... CA

They are facing a bitter fight over who leads the party.

The average age of the current Congressional Dem leadership is 72, the Repubs is 49

Not very broad appeal. Dems are in no position to say that they represent the people as a whole.

And in 2018 they are facing a near death experience.

They should immediately check in to political rehab but I think they are still in their disease, denial stage.

What will it take to rouse them from their stupor?

Democrats need to get rid of the Clinton faction of the party. Their influence should be dead. I have no confidence in Chuck Schumer leading the Senate Democrats.

As for marganilization, the Democratic Party has won the U.S. Popular Vote in 6 of the 7 presidential elections. That is not marganilizing. In fact, two consecutive Republican presidential pickup winners—George W. Bush (2000) and Donald Trump (2016)—failed to win the U.S. Popular Vote.

What the Democratic Party needs to do is become a uniformly, ideologically left wing political party with their policies for not just social but also economical. They are too much like the Republicans on national security and with the military industrial complex. Aligning closely on those issues makes the two major parties indistinguishable—and makes it too easily susceptible for losing party majority in both houses of Congress, to the Republican Party, while on the watch of a Democratic Party U.S. president. (Bill Clinton and Barack Obama lost the House in their Year #02. The two previous Republican U.S. presidents—Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush—waited until Year #06; there were unique circumstances with Bush Jr.)

Please please do this democrats. This is like all the nuts in my party who said Romeny lost because he wasn't conservative enough. Please go into the crazy far left wilderness with Corbyn and the Labour Party and give us our suburban rich folks back.

and then the nuts in your party got a president elected after that - so maybe the Dems are on to something.

[JerryArkansas]

What will it take to rouse them from their stupor?

They only have some strength along the Left Coast and the NE.

45% of their House of Rep numbers come from 6 states. CA, OR, WA, NY, MA & IL

Any claim to a mythical popular vote is rooted in one state,... CA

They are facing a bitter fight over who leads the party.

The average age of the current Congressional Dem leadership is 72, the Repubs is 49

Not very broad appeal. Dems are in no position to say that they represent the people as a whole.

And in 2018 they are facing a near death experience.

They should immediately check in to political rehab but I think they are still in their disease, denial stage.

What will it take to rouse them from their stupor?

Democrats need to get rid of the Clinton faction of the party. Their influence should be dead. I have no confidence in Chuck Schumer leading the Senate Democrats.

As for marganilization, the Democratic Party has won the U.S. Popular Vote in 6 of the 7 presidential elections. That is not marganilizing. In fact, two consecutive Republican presidential pickup winners—George W. Bush (2000) and Donald Trump (2016)—failed to win the U.S. Popular Vote.

What the Democratic Party needs to do is become a uniformly, ideologically left wing political party with their policies for not just social but also economical. They are too much like the Republicans on national security and with the military industrial complex. Aligning closely on those issues makes the two major parties indistinguishable—and makes it too easily susceptible for losing party majority in both houses of Congress, to the Republican Party, while on the watch of a Democratic Party U.S. president. (Bill Clinton and Barack Obama lost the House in their Year #02. The two previous Republican U.S. presidents—Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush—waited until Year #06; there were unique circumstances with Bush Jr.)

Please please do this democrats. This is like all the nuts in my party who said Romeny lost because he wasn't conservative enough. Please go into the crazy far left wilderness with Corbyn and the Labour Party and give us our suburban rich folks back.

Yet your party got a racist elected president, on the back of a outdated system.  You never know.

[Badger]

1) Trump gained less support among Americans.

2) The Republican party is weak on economics beyond taxes.

[Lothal1]

45% of their House of Rep numbers come from 6 states. CA, OR, WA, NY, MA & IL

28% of the house of representatives as a whole (and a higher percentage of the american population) comes from those states. sorry, bud

Sorry, you are incorrect. Here, let me help you.

CA 39 Dems, IL 10 Dems, MA 9 Dems, NY 18 Dems, OR 4 Dems, WA 6 Dems = 86 Dem Reps.

86 is 45% of 194, which is the number of House seats the Dems will have in the next Congress. You are a failing, degenerate, regional party.

total number of representatives from those states: 122
total number of representatives: 435
122 / 435 = 28%

maybe learn to read before spouting off next time ㄟ(ツ)ㄏ

He said 45% of the Democratic congress comes from those states, not total amount. 86/194 is 45%. The figure you put was the entire congress.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

45% of their House of Rep numbers come from 6 states. CA, OR, WA, NY, MA & IL

28% of the house of representatives as a whole (and a higher percentage of the american population) comes from those states. sorry, bud

Sorry, you are incorrect. Here, let me help you.

CA 39 Dems, IL 10 Dems, MA 9 Dems, NY 18 Dems, OR 4 Dems, WA 6 Dems = 86 Dem Reps.

86 is 45% of 194, which is the number of House seats the Dems will have in the next Congress. You are a failing, degenerate, regional party.

total number of representatives from those states: 122
total number of representatives: 435
122 / 435 = 28%

maybe learn to read before spouting off next time ㄟ(ツ)ㄏ

He said 45% of the Democratic congress comes from those states, not total amount. 86/194 is 45%. The figure you put was the entire congress.

and i said why that was irrelevant. good lord, y'alls

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Guys, I know that the Democrats survived the Reconstruction era and Republicans survived the Great Depression, but this time the two party system is actually going to end!

[skoods]

Democrats got more votes you dumb .