Talk Elections

()
I might have missed a few counties that were over 60% McCain, but I doubt those will change much anyway since they are mostly rural, and wouldn't become suburbs.

You're convinced it'll flip that soon?

It won't flip that soon, sadly. Republicans will learn their lesson about alienating Hispanics this fall. Hispanics will vote ~70% Obama, and the 2016 nominee will at least try to get >35% of them.

Also, the day the Democratic party drops the workers for affluent suburbia is the day I leave the party to form the American Labor Party.

No, but I am saying if it will flip by 2020 that's how the map will look. If it flips after that the map will be different.

I'll be cheering you on.

No way in hell Collin County, TX will flip in 2016, maybe 2020 though.

I have a feeling Denton County will be blue county sooner or later.

according to the exit polls...

Just as a reminder, in 2008, McCain got 35% of Hispanics in Texas and they were 20% of voters (Cornyn actually got 36%).  It was closer to 38% for Perry in 2010, who got similar numbers to McCain overall, and undoubtedly higher down the ballot, as those politicians got better numbers. 

There were very little gaps between whites in age, sex or whatever (we're talking 69-30 McCain 18-29 yr olds v. 78-20 McCain 65+olds)

Sure, Hispanic voting turnout in Texas is laughable, but if they keep voting at the 35% level (in theory), they would probably need to get up to 35% (or 35% in combination with Asians) of the total voters to flip the state, at minimum.

So, what would we be looking at - 15-20 years at earliest?  Of course, the Democratic party both locally and nationally, has been ignoring Texas Hispanics, making the same silly assumptions I see above.  And in the past 15 years, we've gone from Republicans regularly getting 20%-25% of the Hispanic vote in Texas, to getting 35%-40% regularly.

2016 is under the assumption that Schweitzer is the nominee btw. He should get 3-5% bump among the whites compared to Obama. Also democratic party would probably try to flip Texas by increasing minority turnout. 2020 is among other candidates.

In the next 15 years it will go back to 20%-25% by the way things are going.

Didn't that day occur like 20 years ago?

America no longer looks like this:
()
but more like this:
()
Democratic party left the labor interests since WW2.

But really, does nobody want to project what a democratic win will look like in Texas under short term political climate?

You do realize Texas Hispanics are much more conservative than in many other states right? Perry got 40% of them to vote for him in 2010. Plus just look at how many Texas Republican officeholders are Hispanic. Cruz for instance is likely to to be the next senator from the state. Just because a plurality of the state is likely going to be Hispanic by the next census doesn't mean that it's going to be friendly ground for Democrats.

That view is of a very wealthy suburb, based on those houses. We need a party who sticks up for the common man, not a party of wishy-washy neoliberals.

1. Texas Hispanics are more likely to be Protestant (40-45% of them are) and conservative than any other states, yes but those are still very small portion of the TX Hispanic population. They are actually farily Democratic compared to the GOP leaning Cuban Americans in FL.

2. He only got 40% yes, but Obama and White still got 60-65% of them in 08 and 10 respectively, so they still have a bloc with them in the state, and it's expected to grow not shrink as some of you are thinking.

3. Dewherst is more likely to win and become the next TX Senator than Cruz is.

4. That's too early to tell, but nothing in the near future is suggesting TX will stay red or that the Hispanics in TX will all become red. The Hispanics in TX are of similar stock as the Hispanics in NV and CA, and neither is going to vote differently anytime soon.

It is rather difficult to make that type of projection for the simple reason that Democrats haven't won a statewide race since 1994 and haven't gotten over 46% in any statewide race since 1998.

And that's a right shame.

A lot of those "wishy-washy neoliberals" in the suburbs are the common man.

Do you know what neoliberalism is?

Yes, I do. What I'm saying is that people shouldn't assume suburbanites are neo-liberals and not the "common man". That's far from the truth, especially after the Housing crash.

I wasn't talking about everyone with a house who lives near a city. I'm talking about affluent (Beverly Hills, Palm Beach, etc) suburbia.

And what's to say they know what neoliberalism is?