Talk Elections

What would happen in such a world, say in year 2040, if unemployment is 25% and the dem incumbent is scandal-ridden?

Would he/she simply choose to not run and another dem will win?

I think Trump will be the last Trumpian GOP President ever, because demographics make it harder and harder with each passing year for someone who is vocally anti-immigration to be elected.

The GOP will rebrand and moderate eventually, after being in the wilderness long enough. they aren't going anywhere.

Is there anybody who actually, unironically believes this?

Millenials voted D by 30 in 2018

Yeah, I know. I'm a staunch proponent of the oft-maligned "demographics is destiny" theory because we are currently observing one of the largest generational divides over politics in our nation's history, and the trends are severely bleak for Republicans. But you specifically referenced people who think there won't ever be a GOP president again after Trump.

Republicans are definitely setting themselves up to be the undisputed minority party on a national scale for an extended period of time in the not too distant future because of this, and Trump will accelerate those trends if the GOP fails to break away from his toxic mold as soon as he leaves office. That happens sometimes in America, with one party being far more dominant than the other, sometimes for several decades on end. But it doesn't stay that way forever. Eventually, the out-party accepts the changes that have occurred and readjusts, and then a new paradigm shift occurs that rescrambles the political landscape.

That's what's going to likely happen to Republicans as the political baton gets passed from the Boomers to younger generations, especially as the Millenials become the most dominant political cohort. Republicans will get locked out of power, will eventually readjust after several cycles, will become competitive on the national stage again, and then a new set of political issues will displace the old fault lines and the coalitions shift.

Anybody who thinks that there will never be another GOP president after Trump is a fool. If the GOP managed to survive extinction during the New Deal era, this is certainly not going to extinguish them. A Trumpian GOP, on the other hand, likely has a limited shelf life. It is possible that the GOP won't ever have another president in our lifetimes that adheres to his style due to how untenable it is to the emerging demographic trends and cultural shifts that are occurring within the nation.

Why would a millennial vote for a “rebranded gop” rather than stick with the dems?

Of course, there will be a GOP president after Trump because they will just cheat. I fully expect Republicans will just go full blown undemocratic.

This is a bit hysterical.


Democrats survived the civil war, Republicans survived the Great Depression and Watergate, etc. at some point the right Republican will come along win with a coalition that's quite different from Trump's 2016 coalition. no cheating required.

Why would that be the case?  Anti-immigration has existed as an ideology in this country since the founding.  It is literally one of the few issues that has been with us in almost its same form every single year this country has been in existence.  The degree to which it dominates the political landscape waxes and wanes through the years, and the particular ethnic groups it focuses on changes, but it's always been with us.  It survived waves of immigration just as big, or bigger, than the current one, and yet it's still here.  So I don't see any particular reason to think it'll just vanish one day, which appears to be just mostly wishful thinking on your part.

Now it could be true that in the future it will not be as focused on Hispanics, and Mexico in particular, but anti immigration will always exist, and there will 100% be a president in the future some time that is anti-immigration.

Now as to the OP, obviously Trump won't be the last Republican; the more interesting question is what form the GOP takes in the future.  It could be a Trumpist form, a return to Buckley-style movement conservatism, or maybe a yet-to-be-revealed third form.  The middle option of those is the least likely IMO.

The reactionary right-wing populism of Trump is on borrowed time, but a more traditional GOP like the one we see in the UK or Canada could succeed in the future.

See, these are the types of posts we DIDN'T used to have on Atlas ... pre-2012 Atlas looks more and more like a golden age each passing day. :(


As for what the GOP base will be focused on in, say 60-70 years ... I am not sure.  However, I will bet the beach house that the next successful GOP "realignment" will be exactly what the folks currently what Trump hate, haha: a rather measured, Burkean conservative response to a Democratic Party that had a bit too much power and overplayed its hand.  Eisenhower-esque.

Thats exactly what the UK Tories have become, the GOP is far more competent than they are at the moment and less populist as well.

Every party needs to be "populist" rhetorically - this was a big problem with pre-Trump Republicanism ... I'll freely admit that with hindsight - but what hardcore Trumpists assert and I flatly deny is that a mainstream conservative party must adopt policy positions that are designated as "populist" ... which on a lot of economic matters is more or less "left of center" or "redistributionist," both of which the GOP has no business treading into.

They're certainly headed in a undemocratic, authoritarian direction. But minority rule will eventually collapse, and when it does, the GOP will pay dearly for a very long time. And then they'll reorganize around an electoral strategy that isn't predicated on stoking white resentment. Not sure when it'll happen — the example of CA certainly isn't encouraging — but I have to imagine they'll eventually regain their footing.

Eh, between the citizenship question, voter suppression, gerrymandering, the electoral college, and the structure of the senate; they can retain power for plenty of time.

This is the only thing that makes me question the future viability of the GOP. If the Party can successfully maintain minority rule while increasingly embracing white nationalism over an extended period of time, it'll engender immense hostility. So much so that when the demographic levee eventually bursts, there'll be nothing left to grab hold of. In more specific terms, if Trump and his successors manage to harden a ~30% deficit among Millennials and Gen Z voters, then yes, there will come a time when the GOP is no longer a national party.

Don't count on the demographic levee "bursting." Again, as demographics get more hostile to Republicans, they can just continue tweaking the rules to continue winning elections.

There probably will be one after Trump. The idea the country goes full socialist or repealing Obama, isnt right. The political system is set up for checks and balances, as opposite party dominate Congress when 1 dominate Oval Office

2006 : Bush will be the last republican president ever
2008 : Obama has created a permanent democratic majority
2012 : The GOP is doomed unless they pass an amnesty bill
2019 : The GOP will die, Trump will be the last republican president ever and the USA will become a socialist country

I've made this point many times before on Atlas (and been accused of trolling) but I legitimately dont believe that the GOP can exist as a majority political party for much longer and they know it. I think the GOP will slowly become relegated to being a borderline third party behind a Democratic party split between it's ''centrist'' faction vs. a socialist faction that will never really agree on anything and squabble over everything.

I forsee a future where there's an uneasy peace in the Democratic party similar to that which existed during the New Deal days between the Southern faction of the Democratic Party and the rest of the party. The GOP will either die off or fuse with the centrist faction while somewhere down the road (perhaps 5-6 decades from now) the party will split in two.

2006-2018: GOP gains among Millennial and Gen Z voters: ZERO. What do y'all expect is going to happen? That old people won't die, or a ~30% deficit will reverse itself overnight? Nah, you're digging your own grave. Let's not forget that your current bases of power — the EC, the Senate, and the Supreme Court — have no democratic legitimacy.

I don't know what will happen in the future, but the idea that the GOP will become irrelevant and the USA will become a one party country is dumb. Concerning your question, I don't expect liberal millenials to suddenly become conservative but the 30% gap will likely reduce itself over the time, just look at the Generation X, in 2006 these voters who were between 25 and 40 years old favoured Dems by 30, 12 years later these voters (who are now between 37 and 52 years old) favoured dems by a far smaller margin (people between 40 and 49 voted D 52/46). Then you have boomers who are now between 53 and 73 years and who still have between 15 and 35 years to live and who are becoming more R friendly over the time.

Wouldn't the fact that the GOP did, in fact, survive that era tend to provide empirical evidence that your hypothetical won't occur?

Exactly.  People talking about how literally the CURRENT GOP in its EXACT form is going to die out are really not learning from history.  Parties change specifically TO survive.  The GOP survived being blamed for the Great Depression, for God's sake; as the country changes, so will the GOP.  Maybe not in the next 20 or even 30 years (RP McM can get in SO many great online comments in that time frame, so nothing to worry about!), but it WILL change, and it WILL survive.

Yeah, this, rather than never again electing another president, is the plausible worst-case scenario for the GOP.

But the scary thing for the GOP is that it's a very plausible worst-case scenario given demographics, recent election history, but also political history. The presidency, the House, and the Senate have all been competitive since at least 1994, but it's pretty common historically for one or more of these institutions to be dominated by one party except in the case of wave elections. For example, from 1932 to 1968, Democrats controlled the presidency for 28 of 36 years, and controlled both houses of Congress for 32 of 36 years.

I could also see a scenario similar to the period from 1874 to 1894 where the GOP dominated the Senate and the presidency but Democrats dominated the House. Except in this case, Democrats would dominate the House and the presidency and Republicans would dominate the Senate.

There's probably enough time for one more Republican before the earth is consumed in ecological apocalypse.

Possibly. My reasoning is based on the fact that post-millennial Republicans don't consider themselves all that Conservative. (http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/03/post-millennial-republicans-trend-away-from-conservatism.html) Another example here. (https://nexusmedianews.com/fox-news-is-turning-a-generation-of-republicans-off-the-green-new-deal-1d6196a5ad2f)

The present day GOP is nothing but a combo of racists, religious zealot/nutcases, and true believers of free market Conservatism that was created by historical circumstances that nobody remembers or cares. But this sort of ideology is mostly relegated and propped up by Boomers and older voters. With their political power rapidly declining...the GOP will probably move toward a Phil Scott/Charlie Baker/Larry Hogan RINO type Republicanism which is basically just a dime store Democratic Party.

Another scenario is that the GOP just goes full white power and forever remains the party of angry white grievance but I dont see how this is possible since younger GOP voters dont share their views.

Yeah, this would only happen if those young GOP voters just make their own party to oppose the Dems

One of the reasons the GOP is so extreme today is because they know that demographically they are finished. They will never get minorities to vote for them so they are going all scorched earth against the increasingly diverse electorate whom they don't view as being legitimate because they aren't white/or wont vote for them.

I don't see any future scenario where the GOP remains a relevant political party. Either they go full Trumpism and become a shrinking third party or become dime store Democrats by moderating a la Baker/Hogan/Scott-type ''Republicanism.''

I have never, on this forum or elsewhere, seen anyone unsarcastically and unironically advance the argument that Trump will be the last GOP President ever.

After 2020, the GOP have to rebrand itself, like it did, after Nixon, as the non Kremlin party. Just like Reagan did. However, McCarthy isnt Boehner,  whom had Paul Ryan to help the GOP win back control. Trump was seen as the 3rd term Dubya.


For now, unless CRT Packing is done, the GOP has a generational SCOTUS and Judicial Branch, that keeps SSM and amnesty at arms length, and allows 2nd amendment rights

They will have to start winning over 70 percent of the white vote to be competitive in future elections.

Lol, who thinks that?

I do think that it's very hard to see the US remain a functional democracy and the current Republican party remaining viable.

Future of the GOP for its survival

1. A more moderated form of Trumpism without the Trump (need for a "new right" without a leader who sticks their foot in their mouth and deals with the media bias in a more cordial, smarter way).  This should get the people in the suburbs back on board to a certain extent.  The GOP will become a blue collar party that will hold the midwest while expanding into the northeast/pac nw in the near future if they can nominate an anti establishment centrist who isn't an interventionist neocon who talks smarter paired up with a northeastern republican on the ticket (ex. DeSantis/Sununu 2024).
2. Bring in hispanic voters.  The same/similar policies can be pushed on immigration, as long as the rhetoric is toned down a bit.  A lot of hispanics are anti illegal immigration as well.  More hispanics identify as conservative then liberal, so its definitively doable.
3. Be pro-weed and criminal justice reform.  This is a no brainer, and a good chunk of the GOP has been on the wrong side of history on this issue for too long.  It should net around 5-10% of the black community to vote red, which could keep the midwest in the red column for good.
4. Reject the alt right.  Trump has been doing good with this since Bannon departed, and the GOP must continue to do so strictly off optics.  Ethnonationalism is never the answer.
5. Ban welfare recipients for immigrants/illegals.  This will ensure that less people get hooked on the drug of government assistance, so immigrants that come here will be more open to a market system.

Millennials and post-millennials may not consider themselves conservative, but I don't see how that is relevant to the future; nor do I see how the makeup of the current GOP is relevant.

The problem I have is that you are assuming that demographics change (they will), but that issues will remain static, as if we're going to be debating the same things in 30 years as today.  That seems remarkably unsophisticated, which is especially disappointing coming from you, as I've seem some better posts of yours that eschew the tendency of many people here to concern themselves with solely the conventional wisdom.

If we could freeze time in such a way that the exact issues debated now never change but we could also continue the demographic change of the US, then yes, I would tend to agree that the GOP probably would end up going down one of your routes.  But these types of predictions reminds of the type that we look back at and chuckle at for being so short-sighted, kinda like those old sci-fi stories that for some reason always seemed to assume we'd have flying cars by now, or like the film 2001- at the pace the space race was going during that time, obviously we were going to have space stations on the moon by now, actually almost 18 years ago by now... of course it couldn't be possible that people would just lose all interest in space travel within a decade, now could it?

Humans are tribal by nature- the history of human civilization is of groups forming based on some chracteristic (identity, resource sharing, whatever), and conflicting with other groups that are either different from them or have competing interests.  There will always be people in power and people that do not have it.  There will always be two sides of issues, and there will always be issues that divide us.  What people call a conservative now won't be what people call a conservative in 30 years, but I'm not particularly sure what is so interesting about this other than pointing out the rather obvious fact that the overton window is always moving.

I do not know what the big issue dividing liberals and conservatives will be in 2050, but I do know there will be one and many of the conservatives then will be undoubtedly ranting about how "I didn't leave the Democratic party, they left me."

Now if your point is simply that the GOP's party platform, as it exists now, won't exist in the future.. well, yeah.  OK.  Obviously.  Then again, neither will the Dems' platform.  If this was the only point you were making, then sure- I would agree with it, but I can't say I find anything all that insightful about making this point.

Obviously, the margin will fluctuate with the political climate — a future Democratic president won't hit D+30 running for reelection in a recession. Of course, by that time, she may only need D+10! The issue isn't the existence of the gap, but its magnitude and timing. Basically, at an age in which voting patterns and partisan alignments are established, Millennials entered the electorate and produced a string of results in the D+20 to D+30 range. Assuming the same propensity manifests in 2020, I think there's a large enough sample size to conclude the die is cast. Which is not to say that Republicans will never make inroads with Millennial voters, or even earn majority support in some instances. It just means that the GOP will find itself at a significant, persistent disadvantage for the foreseeable future. Something we really haven't seen since the New Deal/WWII generation.                        


I don't see how you get D+30 for Gen Xers in 2006. In the national/House exits, the youngest cohort, 18-29, was D+22. While that includes some Xers (26-41), it's predominantly Millennials. The next cohort, 30-44, seems more representative of Xers, and it was a relatively modest D+8. The contrast is even clearer in the 2008 exits, where the 30-44 cohort corresponds almost exactly to Gen X (28-43). The margin indicated was D+6 (52%–46%), which mirrors your assessment of the 2018 exits, but differs radically from the lopsided, heavily Millennial 18-29 cohort (D+34).

Regarding voting by age cohort, if one is allowed to compare midterms to Presidential elections, than if we compare the 2006 exit polls to 2016 exit polls and this makes for a good comparison as it is a 10 year timeframe and so it neatly fits in with exit poll age groups, the GOP did make real progress even adjusting for the national margin among the young voters of 2006. In 2006 the GOP lost 18-29 year old voters by 22%, it is likely the margin among 20-29 year olds was 22% as well, 10 years later, 30-39 year old voters, the 20-29 year old voters of 2006 voted dem by 12%, a 10% GOP shift, the GOP only gained 6% in the national vote margin.

Among 30-44 year old voters the GOP lost by 8% in 2006, it won by 3% among 40-49 year old voters and 8% among 50-64 year old voters in 2016. Overall the 30-44 cohort of 2006, the core of Gen X shifted about 12% more GOP from 2006 to 2016 larger than the 6% shift in the national margin.

Somewhat ironically, the group with the smallest GOP shift was over 65 voters that went from 49-49 to a 7% GOP win, they shifted only 7% more GOP. This remains true even if you compare 2008 to 2016, not many people know I suspect that Trump did worse than Mccain with voters over 65 which Mccain won by 8% but Trump won by only 7%, Trump also did 4% worse than Romney with voters over 65, voters over the age of 65 seemed to have really disliked Trump in 2016 for some reason compared to other GOP nominees, perhaps his vulgarity tuned them off. 

If you believe in history largely as historical cycles, then this is a consummately dangerous time in America. Such cycles take roughly 80 years to complete, which coincides with the usual extinction of human memory. Lessons that one learned in early childhood include whether to trust institutions or not, whether adults in authority are are competent and trustworthy or not, whether technology is boon or bane, whether experimentation in 'lifestyles' is safe or unsafe --    and whether the Voyage to the Interior is a reasonable exercise, sheer futility or absurdity, demonstrable failure, or a dangerous heresy. Such lessons are subtle but profound. The children who learn such lessons do not forget those fundamentals so long as they live; such are the assumptions that underpin their attitudes and habits for a lifetime.

Go back eighty years and we are between the Hitlerite dismemberment of Czechoslovakia and the Nazi invasion of Poland. Go back eighty years from 1939, and America is splintering on slavery with John Brown's raid (and in short order) such realities as Bleeding Kansas, the secession of South Carolina, and the Confederate attack on Fort Sumter. In 1779, the British colonies from Maine to Georgia have themselves declared independence but have yet to secure it -- or a workable political order even after the departure of British colonial troops. Those prior times were Crisis Eras of American history.

All of those Crises follow or contain some economic panic, whether one around 1770, the Panic of 1857. the Crash of 1929, or the Crash of 2008. Smug certainty about anything other than conventions and basic laws of logic, mathematics, and physics is for fools. Seemingly anything is possible so long as it entails radical, fundamental change.

So far the discord has been political. The Republican Party has become an authoritarian and anti-democratic Party with demagoguery for the masses and cadre discipline for the  Party insiders. Potential directions include:

1. complete entrenchment of power, with the Republican Party rendering the Democratic Party impotent, irrelevant, or illegal. The United States becomes a single-Party system or a nominal two-Party system in which the shares of representation are predetermined with a 60-40 split, with the Democratic Party getting perhaps 40% of House and Senate seats and losing all Presidential elections. That is how things are done in the People's Republic of China. 

2. political failure that discredits it for a while as a potential majority Party. It might revive as an alternative for Democratic dissidents such as people who have no chance in challenging Democratic machines or people with special interests that the Democrats ignore at their peril. That is how the Republican Party went in the 1930s.

3. effective extinction as was the case for the Federalists and Whigs, with the surviving Democratic Party becoming an unwieldy "big tent" party. In such a case, the real political activity is in the primaries that decide who the sure Democratic winner will be in November of an election year.  The surviving Democratic Party in both cases rifted into two Parties soon afterward, one time becoming the Whigs and another the Republican 'Free Soil' Party.  Note that both the Federalists and Whigs vanished in comparatively quiet times in American history.  We are now in a much rowdier time in history in which rancorous polarization is the norm.

4. Business as usual? Such preserves the rancorous division and the inability of the Government to solve any problems. That itself is unstable.
   

This idea is as meaningful as astromancy.

Time is a mental construct by humans to explain the constant alteration of biological bodies. The analogy with water flowing is a fallacy, since a river can be stopped and redirected.

Nothing social can really "repeat".
Rather, many of us imitate what we see instead of thinking of new ideas.

Very wishful thinking from the democrats to think Trump will be the last Republican President. Well probably have someone even more to the right of Trump who will be elected president in 2032 or at the lastest 2036 after 8 to 12 years of Democratic presidents

Millennial D here, and no, I don't think he'll be the last Republican President ever.

For the sake of the country, I sort of hope it swings back one day. I don't think a DeSantis or Haley administration would be the end of the world, it may be a good thing after 4 years of Biden/Warren/Sanders/Harris.

We are all Y2K voters, outside of the baby boom generation.  The GOP has a serious issue on their hands, Dubya and Trump lost the PVI vote, but managed to win the EC, and Dubya won 2004 narrowly, in winning OH by only 50K voters. The other elections, Democrats won since 1992, the real start of the Y2K period.

Rubio, Cruz, or DeSantis will be the likely nominee in 2024, but still have the PVI problem.  Unless, Dems have a scandal or recession, Rubio will still lose.

In addition, Roberts Crt can add Puerto Rico as a statehood, for 5 additional votes in either 2020 or 2022, where it will be even more problematic for the GOP.

The GOP has survived much worse than Trumpism. Like the Depression and Watergate. They’ll definitely take a hit in the short term but they’ll eventually correct. In say ten years they’ll moderate, start picking off some Latinos, and make inroads with younger people who are kids now. Millennials are their biggest hurdle but that doesn’t mean the post-millennials have to be so D. For all we know, President Generic D could either screw something up terribly or have something terrible happen they get blamed for.

How is someone to the right of Trump going to be elected in 2032 or 2028, when the Republican base is literally dying off?

It will be funny reading this thread in 2032 when there is a Desantis/Hawley administration and liberals are complaining about how Trump was so much better because he was lazy and did not advance a consistent anti-leftist agenda in relation to weakening the liberal elite via using the powers of the executive branch.

Regarding the issue of demographics for the GOP, as long as the GOP can achieve a 60/40/10 split with whites/hispanics/blacks it will win elections going forward for decades. If you take for example what the projected racial makeup of the electorate will be in 2032, 65% white, 15% Hispanic, 12% black and 8% other, with a 60/40/10 split and getting 40% of the 'other vote', the GOP would get 49.4% of the 2 party vote which will likely be sufficient to win an EC majority. If you just project demographic changes out and assume voting patterns stay similar to 2016 with the GOP slightly improving among Hispanics, it won't be until the 2040's that demographic change will cause any issue for the GOP's ability to win national elections.

A delusional fantasy. With the GOP consistently on the wrong side of issues younger voters care about — climate change, income inequality, gay marriage, marijuana — it's absurd to think the party will maintain the same margins among the aforementioned ethnic groups. Just look at the recent exit polls — no R+20 results among younger whites. No, even in predominantly white states — MN included — the exit polls look incredibly ominous for the GOP. People forget, but Republicans didn't used to get curb-stomped by 20-40% by the under-45 demographic. But I foresee a lot more curb-stomping for the DeSantis/Hawley, Racist/Bible-thumper party ;)!  

Trump won whites aged 30-44 by 17%, he won whites aged 45-64 by 28% and whites aged over 65 by 19%. The white voters who are 45-65 today were voting around +15 for the GOP 15 years ago and since have shifted around 13% more Republican. As long as the GOP ensures that as whites aged 30-44 basically Gen X plus early Millennial whites shift more Republican from say +17 to +27 over the next decade, the GOP will maintain its 60-40 margin with whites overall. Whites in their 30's are about as Republican as whites in their 40's and 50's were when they were in their 30's.

I would point out the huge Republican shift among younger whites from 2008-2016 is what has maintained the GOP as a competitive party. White voters in their 20's voted for Obama over Mccain by 10% in 2008. The same cohort of whites, born in 1978-1986, aged 30-38 in 2016 likely voted for Trump by around 15%, since 30-44 whites overall voted for Trump by 17%, I assume whites in early 40's are somewhat more Republican than those in their 30's so a 15% margin for Trump among whites aged 30-38 makes sense, the same whites that voted for Obama by 10% when they were 22-30. That is a 25% shift towards the GOP among whites born in the late 1970's and early 1980's.