How will America be in 2050

[Democratic Hawk]

I think Indiana will become more of a tossup...

but that's just me and my optimism

doubtful. it's probably the most static state in terms of politics, has been Republican since it's inception and always has been since.

Illinois is trending TOWARD the Democrats so I don't see how you could put it as a tossup.

I agree with you that Illinois is trending Democrat

As for Indiana being consistently GOP since inception I beg to differ  (though it is, overwhelmingly, a Republican state). Since 1892, it's voted Democrat on five occasions:

1892 - Cleveland
1912 - Wilson
1932 - FDR
1936 - FDR
1964 - LBJ

Several races have been pretty close

However, I don't see Indiana shifting Democrat in years to come (it's a pretty conservative state); however, there is a good chance that Evan Bayh - a native son and Democrat - would win the state if he won the Democratic nomination

Dave

[tarheel-leftist85]

Congress shrinks to 490 members (90 Senators, 400 Representatives).  DC becomes part of Maryland.  US population remains stable from 2035 to 2040 and begins slowly decreasing 0.3%/yr.  Mexican immigration has subsided because the populist govt. cracked down on the problem.  Many remain childless, but most (70-75%) families have 2 kids.

[Jake]

Did we lose 5 states somehow?

[tarheel-leftist85]

Yes, they seceded.  We let them go peacefully.

[WilliamSeward]

Yes, they seceded.  We let them go peacefully.

The North goes Republican again. Wouldn't that be the day? But your electoral vote predictions would be tragic. I don't think the Northeast would lose that many electoral votes.

[tarheel-leftist85]

The only reason the North is (supposedly) Dem. is for social reasons.  If/when democrats become more mainstream and family-oriented (rather than single, urban people as their primary base), the most (if not all) of the south will turn Dem.  When the North no longer has an ally in a ultra-liberal, pacifist Democratic party, they will first trend libertarian (or some variant thereof), then finally seek shelter in the Republican party.  The plains (reamining people that stay in such cold climes) will continue to vote Rep. for one reason or another.  But basically, the North will vote 35-40% Rep., 30-35% Ind., 30% Dem.  It's not that many will be moving from the North per se (as in the plains and MW), but no one will be moving in (even illegally).  When housing becomes affordable sometime thereafter, people may trickle back.  Florida will be (more of a) wasteland with high-crime, cookie-cutter houses, traffic and young people will begin to move out in droves.  Almost the same will be evident in California.  Texas will try to avoid this fate by implementing moratoriums on building, improving education, and revamping the police force (more Walker, Texas rangers!).

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

My best guess....not adjusted for reappointment though. 

[Ronald Reagan]

[Colin]

Might I ask why is South Carolina >30%

[Ronald Reagan]

Might I ask why is South Carolina >30%

It has about an equal amount of a third-party and Democrats.

[socaldem]

Well, I'm kinda late to the discussion, but in response to this:

2004:



1952:



Eh, this shows it's impossible to predict and that the map probably won't look anything like now in 50 years.

I offer another comparison:


1892




1944




The basic outline of the party system is the same with the expansion of Democratic success in the North because of urbanization....

[Adam Griffin]

I can't remember if I've already posted in here or not, but I will give my thoughts on what will happen.

My predictions are based on the assumption that a reverse polarization of the political parties does not happen; i.e.: Republicans voting Democratic and Democrats voting Republican. The main determinant in the future will revolve around what happens with foreign immigration. Our main source of immigration will be from Mexico/Latin America. Immigrants tend to support the Democratic Party over the Republican Party, and since projections cite the hispanic population to be anywhere from 35-50% by 2050, there is a good chance that the Democratic Party will strengthen. Here is my breakdown for each region:

Northeast: The Northeast will continue to be a strong, Democratic base as vast, urban areas have always tended to be in this case. Overtime, however, the political platform in the Northeast will revolve solely around economic issues rather than social issues.

Southeast: The Southeast will no longer be viewed as one entity politically. Hispanic immigration is already strengthening today in the States of Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee, and will continue to grow over the next 50 years. Combine this with rapid urban growth in these states, and over time these states will eventually lean Democratic over social issues. However, states such as N. & S. Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia will vote Democratic based on economic issues. The "West" Southeast, consisting of Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Missouri, will not incur rapid, drastic demographic nor economic changes, leaving them in the Republican camp.

Midwest: The "North" Midwest will strengthen its Democratic base because of economic issues relating to manufacturing. Social issues will not affect the outcome here, as socially the states are probably as Democratic as they will ever be. The rest of the Midwest, including states like Indiana, Kentucky, Iowa, N. & S. Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas, will strengthen and ultimately become reliable Republican states.

The West: Texas has already incurred massive immigration, and for some reason in Texas, the hispanic population does not vote as Democratic as the rest of the hispanics throughout the U.S. currently. This I do not see changing, and Texas will remain Republican. However, the Southwest and Pacific Northwest will become solidly Democratic socially and economically. The "Inner West" states of Montana, Wyoming, Utah, and Idaho, will experience no real shift in political change.

The map will change according to the amount of foreign immigration that exists in the areas of the next 50 years. More immigration = more liberalism. Less immigration = more conservatism. This is not based on my optimism as a Democrat either; I just foresee our nation taking a vast turn for the left, starting in 10-15 years. However, sometime after 2050, we could see an opposite shift due to the amount of immigration slowing down and the majority of the now native population becoming more conservative in the social and economic departments.

[DanielX]

I'm not so sure if I would agree with you, Adam Griffin. For one thing, either the election is going to focus on economic issues (in which case Republicans do better in the Northeast - at minimum in New Hampshire; also Colorado/Nevada and maybe even Washington - admittedly, the Republicans would probably lose Iowa and Arkansas) or else on social issues (in which case the Republicans do vastly better in the midwest and south).

I think you also overstate the South's swing - Virginia will likely go Democrat in the next few decades, Florida's quite possible due to increasing non-Hispanic immigration - but South Carolina? Even Tennessee is unlikely to go Democrat unless the Dems have a moderate-ward shift (your map would require a centrist Democrat from Georgia be running against a conservative Republican from Maine...).

There might be a leftward tilt in US policy in the coming decades. However, the effect isn't going to be that huge - and if it were, the Republican party would change - or become irrelevant. Which is the same choice the Democrats have now.

[MasterJedi]

Wisconsin will be fully under our control!!! Mwhahahahaha

[MaC]

Communist dictator takes over, holds "free and fair elections".
Some states out west have a little bit more resistance to voting red.  Utah, opposes more than others because of the atheism that comes with communism.  The communists do not like having less than 90% of the vote, but they do little to stop these states because they're too far out of the way.

[12th Doctor]

I can't remember if I've already posted in here or not, but I will give my thoughts on what will happen.

My predictions are based on the assumption that a reverse polarization of the political parties does not happen; i.e.: Republicans voting Democratic and Democrats voting Republican. The main determinant in the future will revolve around what happens with foreign immigration. Our main source of immigration will be from Mexico/Latin America. Immigrants tend to support the Democratic Party over the Republican Party, and since projections cite the hispanic population to be anywhere from 35-50% by 2050, there is a good chance that the Democratic Party will strengthen. Here is my breakdown for each region:

Northeast: The Northeast will continue to be a strong, Democratic base as vast, urban areas have always tended to be in this case. Overtime, however, the political platform in the Northeast will revolve solely around economic issues rather than social issues.

Southeast: The Southeast will no longer be viewed as one entity politically. Hispanic immigration is already strengthening today in the States of Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee, and will continue to grow over the next 50 years. Combine this with rapid urban growth in these states, and over time these states will eventually lean Democratic over social issues. However, states such as N. & S. Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia will vote Democratic based on economic issues. The "West" Southeast, consisting of Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Missouri, will not incur rapid, drastic demographic nor economic changes, leaving them in the Republican camp.

Midwest: The "North" Midwest will strengthen its Democratic base because of economic issues relating to manufacturing. Social issues will not affect the outcome here, as socially the states are probably as Democratic as they will ever be. The rest of the Midwest, including states like Indiana, Kentucky, Iowa, N. & S. Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas, will strengthen and ultimately become reliable Republican states.

The West: Texas has already incurred massive immigration, and for some reason in Texas, the hispanic population does not vote as Democratic as the rest of the hispanics throughout the U.S. currently. This I do not see changing, and Texas will remain Republican. However, the Southwest and Pacific Northwest will become solidly Democratic socially and economically. The "Inner West" states of Montana, Wyoming, Utah, and Idaho, will experience no real shift in political change.

The map will change according to the amount of foreign immigration that exists in the areas of the next 50 years. More immigration = more liberalism. Less immigration = more conservatism. This is not based on my optimism as a Democrat either; I just foresee our nation taking a vast turn for the left, starting in 10-15 years. However, sometime after 2050, we could see an opposite shift due to the amount of immigration slowing down and the majority of the now native population becoming more conservative in the social and economic departments.

I don't know how many times I have to tell people this.  The two parties have become cemented fixtures in the development American Politics.  No one party is going to dominate the other in the long term, because, the parties will simply adjust themselves to assure that they can survive.  If the Dems have to become more conservative to survive, then they will, and vice versa for the Republicans.  It a third party starts to rise up, one, or both of the other parties will simply adopt their issues, and they will be squashed.

[tarheel-leftist85]

No one party is going to dominate the other in the long term, because, the parties will simply adjust themselves to assure that they can survive.  If the Dems have to become more conservative to survive, then they will, and vice versa for the Republicans.

IDK...go to dailykos
but the mighty nice Democrats on this forum really do give me hope for a fresh start

[True Democrat]

Might be stretching it a little, but. . .

[PBrunsel]

Might be stretching it a little, but. . .

Yes, you are stretching the thread a little.

[True Democrat]

Might be stretching it a little, but. . .

Yes, you are stretching the thread a little.

Sorry, I'm a computer with Internet Explorer where every time I try to post a map, something messes it up.

[KillerPollo]

Texas and California would adopt spanish as the second official language! everything, including road signs will be in spanish with english subscripts. and speed limits will be posted in Km/h w/ mph as a subscript!

they're gonna be like French w/ quebec in canada

W/ the massive hispanic population, California will now be largely conservative!... texas will be even more then it is today

[ilikeverin]

>90% Red Safe Dem
>60% Red Dem
>30% Red Weak Dem
>30% Blue Weak Rep
>60% Blue Rep
>90% Blue Safe Rep

After the <insertmylastnamehere> Revolution!

[PBrunsel]

Might be stretching it a little, but. . .

Yes, you are stretching the thread a little.

Sorry, I'm a computer with Internet Explorer where every time I try to post a map, something messes it up.

Quite all right. My computer does the same thing.

[afleitch]

The Democrats will 'dominate' this century simply because they are more adaptable to change.

[12th Doctor]

The Democrats will 'dominate' this century simply because they are more adaptable to change.

Compare Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, then tell me that.

Quite the contrary, in fact.  It is the Republicans who can best adapt to change right now.  The Democrats are in a paralous possition right now.  Moving in anyone direction risks alienating a significant part of their base as the base of the Democratic party is essencially four or five different bases who adopt one anothers issues on the gurentee that the others will adopt thiers.  On the other hand, the Republicans seemed to have gained the most from staying in thier present possitions, particularly with the Hispanics.

Until the Democrats can lose a few races and be reborn, they will lack the capacity to be a true majority party.  This is, unless, of course, the Republicans do what I fear they will do and use our recent success to propel into a "New Conservative Century" (ie, getting our asses kicked for being too arrogent and self-assured that our wins will automatically sustain themselves and that a majority of the country agrees with our base).