How long can the republicans not make plays to minorities before they can't win?

[Bidenworth2020]

discuss

I think 2028 will be the last straw. Texas will likely be 35% latino, and NM will likely be majority latino

[DavidB.]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

As long as they can keep suppressing non-GOP votes.

[heatcharger]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

True. Once miscegenation becomes even further mainstream, this country will be 95-100% white again. The GOP will be in good shape once that happens, but it may be a while.

[Indy Texas]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

True. Once miscegenation becomes even further mainstream, this country will be 95-100% white again. The GOP will be in good shape once that happens, but it may be a while.

You forget the way the American conception of race works.

If this were Latin America, you'd have a point, because there, the "white" part is seen as canceling out or "elevating" the other parts.

Whereas here, if a white person and a black person have a child, that child will inevitably be regarded as black. Same story for mixed-race "Eurasian" children.

With Latinos, it depends. Theoretically, if the child's father is white and they have a "white" surname as a result, and they have "passable" features, they won't regard themselves as nonwhite. But it's worth remembering that part of the reason this happens in Texas is that there are just so many Hispanic people to begin with. A half-Hispanic person in Boston or Pennsylvania is going to be perceived as a lot more "different" than they would in San Antonio.

[heatcharger]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

True. Once miscegenation becomes even further mainstream, this country will be 95-100% white again. The GOP will be in good shape once that happens, but it may be a while.

You forget the way the American conception of race works.

If this were Latin America, you'd have a point, because there, the "white" part is seen as canceling out or "elevating" the other parts.

Whereas here, if a white person and a black person have a child, that child will inevitably be regarded as black. Same story for mixed-race "Eurasian" children.

With Latinos, it depends. Theoretically, if the child's father is white and they have a "white" surname as a result, and they have "passable" features, they won't regard themselves as nonwhite. But it's worth remembering that part of the reason this happens in Texas is that there are just so many Hispanic people to begin with. A half-Hispanic person in Boston or Pennsylvania is going to be perceived as a lot more "different" than they would in San Antonio.

I was being facetious, but yeah, I pretty much agree with you. However I would say that the one-drop-rule starts to get a bit tedious once a person is <25% black, because at that point it becomes hard to tell.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

It's hard to see what groups could become "white" in the near future.  It took the combination of several decades of practically no immigration, fighting a war against the genocidal Nazis, and having the godless Communists as our primary boogieman to permit Catholic Euro-Americans to make the transition from  "Other" to "white" in this country.

While Islamaphobia might well take the place of the Red Scare, we're unlikely to see a significant drop in immigration and there isn't an apparent Hitler out there.

[Indy Texas]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

True. Once miscegenation becomes even further mainstream, this country will be 95-100% white again. The GOP will be in good shape once that happens, but it may be a while.

You forget the way the American conception of race works.

If this were Latin America, you'd have a point, because there, the "white" part is seen as canceling out or "elevating" the other parts.

Whereas here, if a white person and a black person have a child, that child will inevitably be regarded as black. Same story for mixed-race "Eurasian" children.

With Latinos, it depends. Theoretically, if the child's father is white and they have a "white" surname as a result, and they have "passable" features, they won't regard themselves as nonwhite. But it's worth remembering that part of the reason this happens in Texas is that there are just so many Hispanic people to begin with. A half-Hispanic person in Boston or Pennsylvania is going to be perceived as a lot more "different" than they would in San Antonio.

I was being facetious, but yeah, I pretty much agree with you. However I would say that the one-drop-rule starts to get a bit tedious once a person is <25% black, because at that point it becomes hard to tell.

In theory, they could "pass" but in practice, they will likely have been raised in a black household/community and identify as black for that reason.

Plenty of African-Americans, if you subjected them to a DNA test, are probably more white than they are black, but that doesn't mean they are ever going to be treated that way by society or that they are interested in discarding their history and culture for sake of checking a box on a form.

[Roronoa D. Law]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

People need to stop comparing Hispanic immigration to the European immigration last century they are not the same. Spain left Latin America before the civil war whatever European ancestry they have is negligible compared to Irish and Italian Americans. Also they are many middle to upper class hispanic communities in America that are strong Democrat. So I don't understand this "becoming white" narrative. I have second generation Hispanic friends who go to college, have parent who went to college, have white collar jobs, live in 2 story homes in Cobb county, so does that mean they white now cause they sure not feeling it. If Republican goal for winning the Hispanic vote is through them willing breeding themselves out then they deserve to die as a party.

[Beet]

What happened to politics based off on ideas? Are future voters going to do a DNA test to see what party they should vote for? What about what’s good for the country? What about patriotism? God I’m old.

[pbrower2a]

Asians and many Hispanics may be becoming 'white', but as with Jews, that may still imply that the anti-intellectualism of the GOP is good for winning them over. We all know about the tradition of South, Southeast, and East Asians (as if Koreans and Indians have much else in common) as top performers in school. The Hispanics who get ahead in life as a group rely heavily upon formal education.

These people may be cultural conservatives, but their expressions of cultural conservatism are very different from the cultural conservatism of white folk of the rural Mountain and Deep South.

Republicans are going to lose most national elections until they abandon the anti-intellectualism that isn;t so much against wayward professors as it is against creative and innovative people.

[Indy Texas]

What happened to politics based off on ideas? Are future voters going to do a DNA test to see what party they should vote for? What about what’s good for the country? What about patriotism? God I’m old.

The GOP panders to racists and bigots. That is bad for our country and contradicts our values.

That's not a "DNA test." It's called being a decent person.

[Dr. MB]

discuss

I think 2028 will be the last straw. Texas will likely be 35% latino, and NM will likely be majority latino

Already, Texas is 39% Latino compared to 42.6% Non Hispanic White, and New Mexico is 48.5%, compared to 38.1% Non-Hispanic White.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

People thought that Hillary couldn't possibly do worse with white men than Obama did. They were wrong.

[Rookie Yinzer]

2032.

I suspect the Midwest will be stronger for the GOP (sans Illinois) and the Sun Belt will be more favorable for Democrats. The election will come down to places like Texas, Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina. Running up the angry white male vote won’t be enough by this point.

[Kingpoleon]

I seriously hope for the end of political-racial polarization in this country. Until this happens, we have no solution to long-term racism, societal bias, or hope for building an inclusive society. When divisions between races are lessened, society will benefit. An adoption of culture based on shared ideas, not heritage, and a society based upon ideological diversity is what we must hope for to survive. Until such time as we, the world, can accomplish this, we may as well be counted uncivilized savages. Alliances between people based upon shared ideas, not that of heritage, origins, birthplace, or any other such factor, will, I hope, be the way things are.

I apologize for going off-topic, but we, as a people, have major racial problems that need to be addressed from a societal viewpoint rather than a political viewpoint.

[IceSpear]

As long as they can keep winning new white converts by running white identity politics/racial grievance campaigns. So indefinitely. It failed in Virginia, but that was just one election. It'll take a sustained pattern of losses before they rethink their strategy.

[HillGoose]

This assumes that in, say, 2035, we will consider the same people to be "minorities" as now. That's a big assumption. In the past, groups "became" white. I don't see why this is not going to happen now.

True. Once miscegenation becomes even further mainstream, this country will be 95-100% white again. The GOP will be in good shape once that happens, but it may be a while.

miscegenation? do you mean interracial marriage?

I'm a Republican and of the 8 women I've dated in my life, less than half were white. 3 black, 1 middle eastern, 1 Asian.

Republicans aren't racist, unlike Ron Paul "libertarians" or whatever

[HillGoose]

I find it funny that fedora guys complain about interracial marriage tho, it's like "dude no woman will ever want you so why do you care?"

[TheSaint250]

The GOP needs to do much more outreach now. They need to attract minorities on common issues. As many have pointed out, it'll be too late within the next few elections.

A possibility is following the 2013 Christie model? He did win ⅓ of the Hispanic vote

[Badger]

Ask me after the 2020 redistricting. Depending on how it shakes out, it might seriously be as soon as 2022.

Expecting future. GOP candidates to pull an inside straight in the Electoral College like Trump did isn't very realistic.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

It's hard to know exactly when, but they have to do so eventually. An electoral future where whites vote almost unanimously R while minorities vote almost unanimously D would likely eventually end up something like this:

Which is a Dem Win, 292-246

[Adam Griffin]

In 2000, the Democrat got 48.4% of the PV; in 2016, 48.0%.

For all the talk of demographic shifts, Democrats nationally have lost one white vote for every non-white vote gained over the past 20 years - and white voters are much more reliable where it often counts (midterms, low-turnout affairs, etc) and more ideally distributed for state legislative, congressional and presidential elections. Not a damn bit of net gain for Democrats over two decades, and in fact, arguably the Democrats have lost a lot in terms of electoral prowess.

The real question is "how low can the white vote go for Democrats/how long can Democrats continue to lose white voters?". As long as there is an equal and opposite reaction/1:1 ratio in terms of gains and losses, the side of the coin that is more reliable and optimally-spread throughout the country is the more important factor from an electoral standpoint - especially in a nation where more than two-thirds of the voters are on one side of that coin to boot.

So this question really should be framed with focus on the Democrats rather than the Republicans.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I mean it is possible to run on Trumpist style "IM ANGRY"  messages and win minorities. Best seen, in North America at least, in Toronto (of all places) with Rob Ford, who won pretty impressive margins with minorities by focusing his drug induced rage at effete urban liberals.

One answer for the GOP is to study up on ethnic cleavages in the old world and find a way to break-up voter blocs. The classic one at the moment is trying to pivot towards BJP-friendly members of the Hindu diaspora to make inroads in Asian voters. Not a particularly honourable solution, but politics is a dirty game.

The other idea is that racism in its American form will start to crumble away and be replaced with the far more common colourism, which would allow inroads into certain Hispanic communities. Especially the "integrated" ones - I imagine many Hispanics down the line, especially considering the rate they marry out of the community, will see their Hispanic identity as akin to Irish-Americans.

I highly doubt the GOP will ever penetrate African Americans in the foreseeable future without something really weird happening to the party system.

[Beet]

What happened to politics based off on ideas? Are future voters going to do a DNA test to see what party they should vote for? What about what’s good for the country? What about patriotism? God I’m old.

The GOP panders to racists and bigots. That is bad for our country and contradicts our values.

That's not a "DNA test." It's called being a decent person.

And ethnonationalist politics will only make racism and bigotry grow ever more. If you are opposed to these things, it is better for both parties to count as their base significant numbers of people who identify as minorities, whatever the particular combination.