How do Republicans win California now?

[catographer]

The GOP came within 10 pts of winning statewide races only as recently as 2014 (Controller and Sec of State). Those were races between a strong, moderate-ish Republican and a typical liberal Democrat.

For the GOP to win statewide in the near future, they'll need to replicate having a strong moderate candidate, someone who is seen as inoffensive and different from the national party. That's the key: the State GOP needs to differentiate itself from the national party as much as possible in order to stay competitive, because the Trump brand is toxic in California. Then with the right candidate, they need to probably get lucky and have a bad Democrat run against them. Regardless, they'll need to run a strong campaign, run up margins in urban SoCal and keep the Bay Area and LA closer than usual. Perhaps run up margins in rural North and East too.

[x-Guy]

I believe California will go red one day. However, I don't see such a thing happening until state to state immigration favors the republicans in their favor. Its only a matter of time once democrats move out of California due to their various issues in their current state.

[Cokeland Saxton]

They don't. Lol.

[TheSaint250]

Nominate candidates more liberal on social issues (pro-choice, pro-LGBT rights, pro-amnesty, etc.) and emphasize fiscal responsibility.

Also, cut ties to the national party

[Cokeland Saxton]

Nominate candidates more liberal on social issues (pro-choice, pro-LGBT rights, pro-amnesty, etc.) and emphasize fiscal responsibility.

Also, cut ties to the national party

Wow. Savage.

[Nyvin]

I believe California will go red one day. However, I don't see such a thing happening until state to state immigration favors the republicans in their favor. Its only a matter of time once democrats move out of California due to their various issues in their current state.

What?

[SNJ1985]

By becoming a leftist party.

[RINO Tom]

By becoming a leftist party.

I'm sure your definition of such a term would match up with a very small portion of the American people.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

By becoming a leftist party.

I'm sure your definition of such a term would match up with a very small portion of the American people.

His definition of a leftist is probably anyone to the left of Reagan.

[All Along The Watchtower]

They don't.

[Nyssus]

It would require some sort of realignment, wherein the Republican Party becomes socially moderate, liberal on immigration, and center-right on economics.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Wait for the complete socioeconomic assimilation of Hispanic immigrants á la Italian, Irish, and Polish voters.

I don't think Hispanic citizens are too happy with the GOP's current rhetoric on immigration either.

[Beet]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think Hispanic citizens are too happy with the GOP's current rhetoric on immigration either.

Neither were any of the groups I mentioned (or Germans or east Asians for that matter). All became Republican-leaning groups at some point, with east Asians having left the coalition in the Obama years. The Republican party has always ranged from somewhat nativist to extremely nativist and has never been widely supported by immigrant communities.

All of these groups (again, with the exception of Asian-Americans, who largely shifted because of anti-communism) came around when they were no longer seen as minorities but rather a subset of the majority. Hispanic immigration follows very similar cultural patterns to especially Italian immigration (association with crime, Catholicism, ethnolinguistic enclaves, low-skill labor, etc.) and I predict that we will see a similar level of assimilation within the next century. I wrote a paper on the subject.

Obviously that doesn't mean Hispanic Californians will necessarily make the state Republican (see Massachusetts), but it's the best hope Republicans have. They simply can't reverse the demographics – they have to wait until the demographics don't matter as much.

The other longshot I prefer not to hope for is naval war in the South China Sea and an ensuing increase in security interests (which traditionally attract Republican voters) in California ports. An underrated part of the party's collapse in the state is the end of the Cold War and the evacuation of defense contractors from Southern CA, especially San Diego. Reversing that trend would be a step toward parity.

Also, take the emoji out of your name. It makes you impossible to quote.
[/quote]

Italian, Irish and Polish are all European, whereas Hispanics are a mix of European and Amerindian. That suggests they may end up more like Asians. Besides the moral horror of starting a war to win votes, I don't think California voters think what happens to some island on the South China Sea affects their security. Virginia is heavily militarized and trending Democratic.

Why don't the GOP ever think of non-terrible solutions to their problems? One solution for you guys would simply be to eject racism from the party and try to propose good policies for California's problems. Is that possibility really so terrifying to consider?

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

At some point in the 21st century, we will have an extremely unpopular Democratic president who will put all of safe/solid D states in play. Polarization isn’t going to last forever, and I assume we will revert to the mean and get back to having alternating landslides in presidential elections.

Bush's 25% approval rating, extremely unpopular Middle East quagmires, botched Katrina response, and even topping it off with an economic collapse less than 2 months (!) before the election didn't put safe R states into play unless you count Indiana. I don't see it happening.

Obama is a black and a closet Muslim, you see. Those Kerry 2004 counties in the South and in Appalachia didn’t just switch because they suddenly liked Bush’s eight year run and McCain’s promise of another four years of Bushism!

To be fair, these counties mostly swung and trended against Gore and Kerry as well so it could be seen as just the continuation of an existing trend.

[Mail-order President]

Run a centrist candidate that's liberal on immigration and moderate on economics.  Have a really bad democratic nominee (Roy Moore level) as your competition and just MAYBE a republican can win.

This is for Statewide races, by the way.  I think Republicans are screwed on a Presidential level.

[Skill and Chance]

Libertarian tech billionaire vs. radical SJW Dem in a year with a Dem president in office.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Libertarian tech billionaire vs. radical SJW Dem in a year with a Dem president in office.

A "radical SJW dem" would have no problem getting elected in California.

[here2view]

Libertarian tech billionaire vs. radical SJW Dem in a year with a Dem president in office.

Democrat would win easily in California if that was the case. I think you're underestimating how liberal the state is.

[Not a Partisan Hack ( ͡~ ͜ʖ ͡°)]

Republicans make california republican again by successfully seceding with California and creating New California.
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/30c25b7ee6f635c3d2f467d8db52e002620f80f7/c=7-0-1681-946&r=1280x720/local/-/media/2018/01/17/USATODAY/USATODAY/636517883851613604-VPC-DESKTOP-NEW-CALIFORNIA-INDEPENDENCE.jpg

Best thing about it, one of the reasons it wants to secede is because the state is so liberal.

[Pennsylvania Deplorable]

They don't.

Democrats would have to lose it by nominating someone absolutely terrible. Perhaps a large democrat field could put the republican in a runoff against a full fledged La Raza candidate who wants California to leave the Union. That's about the only way.

[RINO Tom]

By winning a LOT more Hispanic votes.  California isn't some DuPage County, IL that voted Republican for a long time and then a few Republicans defecting + a tad more diversity flipped it.  California has fundamentally changed, and does not resemble the state that voted for Bush 41 in 1988 (and not by much!).  This is California's Non-Hispanic White percent by year:

1970: 89.0%
1980: 66.6%
1990: 57.2%
2000: 46.7%
2010: 40.1%

It's gone for quite a while.

[I’m not Stu]

By winning a LOT more Hispanic votes.  California isn't some DuPage County, IL that voted Republican for a long time and then a few Republicans defecting + a tad more diversity flipped it.  California has fundamentally changed, and does not resemble the state that voted for Bush 41 in 1988 (and not by much!).  This is California's Non-Hispanic White percent by year:

1970: 89.0%
1980: 66.6%
1990: 57.2%
2000: 46.7%
2010: 40.1%

It's gone for quite a while.

Winning far more Hispanic votes still wouldn't do it. The majority of non-Hispanic whites now vote Democratic.

[twenty42]

At some point in the 21st century, we will have an extremely unpopular Democratic president who will put all of safe/solid D states in play. Polarization isn’t going to last forever, and I assume we will revert to the mean and get back to having alternating landslides in presidential elections.

Bush's 25% approval rating, extremely unpopular Middle East quagmires, botched Katrina response, and even topping it off with an economic collapse less than 2 months (!) before the election didn't put safe R states into play unless you count Indiana. I don't see it happening.

Um...in addition to IN, Obama also won VA and NC, which had been ruby red states up until 2008. He also nearly flipped MT, which Bush won by 20+ points in the two elections previous. Also, a fact that is lost in the ash heap of history is that McCain actually ran a pretty stellar campaign. It is not remembered as such because of his eventual loss, but he actually did pretty well electorally given the conditions you mentioned. I think a generic candidate would’ve suffered a 1932-1980 style electoral bloodbath, and would have indeed put most Safe R states in play.