Future direction of the parties

[Person Man]

Where do the parties go if Trump is successful, a failure, or something in between? Is there a general change in tone or how a particular party does politics? Do they look at different states? Different people? Will they drop certain issues, double down on others or try to start new issues or resurrect old ones? Trump, whether he succeeds or fails could and already has made a big splash.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Automation and the phasing out of nonrenewables are both factors that will remain constant and will shake up politics and coalitions in the United States and elsewhere. These are much more difficult to pinpoint (especially automation) but they’re gonna be huge driving forces in both coalition and policy shifts by the Parties.

The emerging multiracial and more community oriented millennial generation will also shift politics to the left to some degree. Climate change, lgbt rights, and an acceptable level of direct government involvement in the economy will likely be accepted views of both Parties by the 2040’s if the trends with this generation continues.

Trump is a harbinger of different things and what will remain of his affect on the GOP afterwards will be interesting to see. Fair trade will likely be a staple of GOP governance. Given the shift of millennials heading to the sunbelt, the Midwest will be key to any Republican victory in the near and mid-future. There’s also already precedent for this with Bush’s steel tariffs.

Social security and Medicare will not be reformed with conservative principles in mind. This is a longer term trend that predated Trump and damaged Bush in 2005/2006. Ronald Reagan never attempted stringent cuts to social security or Medicare as President; especially after his boondoggled 1976 campaign. The increasing reliance on non-college educated white voters + the greying of America both suggest that this’ll be commonplace compromise among Republican politicians.

In short I’m gonna guess that the Democratic Party doubles down on both the emerging Obama electorate + D trending college educated whites while also trying to maintain as many of those midwestern white voters into the fold. The Republicans will eventually be forced to run candidates with the hard edges of their platform removed in the 2020’s-2040. They’ll court what remains of the Bush-Trump coalition and add a segment of centrist minded voters whenever possible.

By 2044-2060 you’ll probably see major coalition shifts that’ll make today’s politics look peculiar to any young political junkie alive in this time. Automation, the loss of nonrenewables, and demographic change will all contribute to this greatly.

You summed it up pretty nicely. I agree.

[支持核绿派 (Greens4Nuclear)]

I posted a thread on the NationStates forums on this topic, which was itself inspired by the maps and predictions I've seen on here. I also think AN63093's theory has a lot of merit.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Automation and the phasing out of nonrenewables are both factors that will remain constant and will shake up politics and coalitions in the United States and elsewhere. These are much more difficult to pinpoint (especially automation) but they’re gonna be huge driving forces in both coalition and policy shifts by the Parties.

The emerging multiracial and more community oriented millennial generation will also shift politics to the left to some degree. Climate change, lgbt rights, and an acceptable level of direct government involvement in the economy will likely be accepted views of both Parties by the 2040’s if the trends with this generation continues.

Trump is a harbinger of different things and what will remain of his affect on the GOP afterwards will be interesting to see. Fair trade will likely be a staple of GOP governance. Given the shift of millennials heading to the sunbelt, the Midwest will be key to any Republican victory in the near and mid-future. There’s also already precedent for this with Bush’s steel tariffs.

Social security and Medicare will not be reformed with conservative principles in mind. This is a longer term trend that predated Trump and damaged Bush in 2005/2006. Ronald Reagan never attempted stringent cuts to social security or Medicare as President; especially after his boondoggled 1976 campaign. The increasing reliance on non-college educated white voters + the greying of America both suggest that this’ll be commonplace compromise among Republican politicians.

In short I’m gonna guess that the Democratic Party doubles down on both the emerging Obama electorate + D trending college educated whites while also trying to maintain as many of those midwestern white voters into the fold. The Republicans will eventually be forced to run candidates with the hard edges of their platform removed in the 2020’s-2040. They’ll court what remains of the Bush-Trump coalition and add a segment of centrist minded voters whenever possible.

By 2044-2060 you’ll probably see major coalition shifts that’ll make today’s politics look peculiar to any young political junkie alive in this time. Automation, the loss of nonrenewables, and demographic change will all contribute to this greatly.

You summed it up pretty nicely. I agree.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Y2K leaders of Democrats are Tim Ryan, Joe Kennedy, Gillibrand, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris. One will win in 2020, because Sanders is a liability and Biden is an old guard. With a secular Congress, they will reform immigration, 401K for SSA and Puerto Rico statehood. All by reforming fillibuster. All that Obama wanted to do.

[Skill and Chance]

Couple additional thoughts here:

1. If Trump's positions on tariffs/trade restrictions become the GOP mainstream, they will eventually start picking up environmentalist votes as the overlap between the fair trade movement and the green movement is significant.  On the other hand, more energy/commodities producing areas would start giving Dems a 2nd look.

2. There is similar potential for Dems to split the Evangelical vote in the next generation, particularly those who emphasize monogamy above other social issues.  When the tables were turned, this is arguably what cost Gore the South in 2000. 

3. If a Bernie-minded Dem gets into the WH with a Dem congress, the current trends to the left with college grads and to the right with non-college grads will reverse.  If not, they will continue.  The chances of  a Conor Lamb or JBE type Dem on social issues sneaking past a divided field in a 2020's Dem primary and passing universal health care/basic income/etc are significant.  In that scenario, where the Dem with a Bernie-like platform on economic issues is also a relative social conservative, the reversal would be even more dramatic.

4.  Trump will likely get increasingly annoyed with Gorsuch and put more populist judges with broader views of government power in any future SCOTUS vacancies.  Roberts also seems cautious about doing anything too radical if he becomes the new swing vote and would likely disappoint hardcore conservatives. Courts will be less of a political flashpoint going forward, which probably benefits the left.

5.  Republicans really need Democrats to win back some power before the economy falters so they don't get all the blame.  I suspect Trump secretly knows this and won't go out of his way to save the House this fall.  The Dems who hold the balance in a narrow majority will be from "Trumpy" enough districts to make deals with him and force them through.

In the short run, the low-hanging fruit for Dems to rebuild are rural/small city college grads.  Which strategy they use to appeal to them will determine most of this. 

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Immigration Reform doesn't have to be amnesty. But, building wall and security and allowing PR into statehood is a compromise.

[dw93]

It depends on what happens in 2020. Does Trump win or lose, and who do the Democrats nominate? How big or small is the margin of victory or Defeat?

[支持核绿派 (Greens4Nuclear)]

Couple additional thoughts here:

1. If Trump's positions on tariffs/trade restrictions become the GOP mainstream, they will eventually start picking up environmentalist votes as the overlap between the fair trade movement and the green movement is significant.  On the other hand, more energy/commodities producing areas would start giving Dems a 2nd look.

2. There is similar potential for Dems to split the Evangelical vote in the next generation, particularly those who emphasize monogamy above other social issues.  When the tables were turned, this is arguably what cost Gore the South in 2000. 

3. If a Bernie-minded Dem gets into the WH with a Dem congress, the current trends to the left with college grads and to the right with non-college grads will reverse.  If not, they will continue.  The chances of  a Conor Lamb or JBE type Dem on social issues sneaking past a divided field in a 2020's Dem primary and passing universal health care/basic income/etc are significant.  In that scenario, where the Dem with a Bernie-like platform on economic issues is also a relative social conservative, the reversal would be even more dramatic.

4.  Trump will likely get increasingly annoyed with Gorsuch and put more populist judges with broader views of government power in any future SCOTUS vacancies.  Roberts also seems cautious about doing anything too radical if he becomes the new swing vote and would likely disappoint hardcore conservatives. Courts will be less of a political flashpoint going forward, which probably benefits the left.

5.  Republicans really need Democrats to win back some power before the economy falters so they don't get all the blame.  I suspect Trump secretly knows this and won't go out of his way to save the House this fall.  The Dems who hold the balance in a narrow majority will be from "Trumpy" enough districts to make deals with him and force them through.

In the short run, the low-hanging fruit for Dems to rebuild are rural/small city college grads.  Which strategy they use to appeal to them will determine most of this. 

Any additional thoughts on 4) in light of Kennedy's retirement?

[Zaybay]

I think the parties will take this route in the future:

As 2024 and 2028 come to a close, the Republican Party is in a dire strait. They have lost Texas and have basically been locked out of the presidency forever. To couple that, the house has been lost for a decade now. The only thing they have left is the senate, and even then, the Democrats have many senators in the remenets of Republican territory. The Republican party is forced to change, and so it becomes more socially liberal, and instead uses its economic conservatism as its main selling point. This attracts the suburbs, but leaves the rural areas in the dust. The Democrats, in a move similarly to what the Republicans did in the 1960s-1990s, allow these voters to come into their party, creating two new parties never before seen. So what are the differences?

1. Social Issues: The Republicans are now just as Liberal on social values as Democrats are, possibly even more Liberal. Social Issues fade into the background of politics and a new front emerges for the parties to duke it out on.

2. Economics: These new Democrats would see Bernie Sanders as a moderate. Thanks to the loss of the suburbs and the gains in rural areas, the Democrats have gone Left Wing on economics, farther than ever before. The Republicans, on the other hand, have moved slightly left on economics but are still conservative on the issue.

3. Automation: The new issue that will grace the US in the future. With the rise of automation comes a problem and solution. The Democrats, who have always been more working class and in support of poorer people, have come out against the idea. They support programs that get people into jobs and welfare programs, along with strict regulation of automation, if not banning it in some states. The Republicans, on the other hand, have embraced automation and its virtues and see it as a blight to solve humanity's problems. They support more automation, and push for it across the nation.

4. The Coalitions: A lot has changed since 2018. The Republican Party, thanks to its change in social values, has gained the suburbs and exurbs of the US. Similarly to the days of Nixon and Reagan, Suburbanites fuel the Rs, along with the traditional small and big business. The Democrats still get support from Urban areas, and now have found their hated enemies in the rural areas as companions instead. The D vote comes mostly from the City and the sticks. These areas, however, are not firmly in either camp, and the margins in each area are a lot smaller than today. Working Class are firmly in the D camp, while professionals are in the R camp. Asians have drifted into the tossup/tilt R category, while Hispanics are in the tilt/lean D category. Blacks are still Strong D and Whites are now split among income and education, with lower income and non-college educated whites supporting the Ds, while Rich and highly educated whites supporting the Rs. Mormons are still in the R camp, but evangelicals have become more and more aligned with the Democrats overtime.

That's just my two cents. If anyone wants to make a map of this scenario, go right ahead.

[Sumner 1868]

Perhaps it's just me, but I think that the contradiction of winning the votes of both the urban poor and the yuppies gentrifying the neighborhood will eventually kill the Democratic machines in the cities - it simply can't last forever. I'm just not sure what it will be replaced with.

[Tekken_Guy]

For the near future, I just see the exacerbation of the current political trends.

[Progressive Pessimist]

For the near future, I just see the exacerbation of the current political trends.

Sadly, you are probably right.

[Thunder98 🇮🇱 🤝 🇵🇸]

For the near future, I just see the exacerbation of the current political trends.

That really sucks for Centrists like me.

[Mr. Smith]

Perhaps it's just me, but I think that the contradiction of winning the votes of both the urban poor and the yuppies gentrifying the neighborhood will eventually kill the Democratic machines in the cities - it simply can't last forever. I'm just not sure what it will be replaced with.

Is it any more contradictory than the Farmer-Labor party? Or the GOP winning the rural vote and the oil/aggie tycoons that profit off the destruction of said rural areas?

Coalitions are contradictory clearly.

[Galaxie]

-snip-

4. The Coalitions: A lot has changed since 2018. The Republican Party, thanks to its change in social values, has gained the suburbs and exurbs of the US. Similarly to the days of Nixon and Reagan, Suburbanites fuel the Rs, along with the traditional small and big business. The Democrats still get support from Urban areas, and now have found their hated enemies in the rural areas as companions instead. The D vote comes mostly from the City and the sticks. These areas, however, are not firmly in either camp, and the margins in each area are a lot smaller than today. Working Class are firmly in the D camp, while professionals are in the R camp. Asians have drifted into the tossup/tilt R category, while Hispanics are in the tilt/lean D category. Blacks are still Strong D and Whites are now split among income and education, with lower income and non-college educated whites supporting the Ds, while Rich and highly educated whites supporting the Rs. Mormons are still in the R camp, but evangelicals have become more and more aligned with the Democrats overtime.

That's just my two cents. If anyone wants to make a map of this scenario, go right ahead.

Really interesting -- made a map with the help of fivethirtyeight's demographic calculator modified to account for this and population shifts. That plus a little discretion on my part makes this:

Super interesting, and reminds me of the Carter/Ford geographic split.

[Galaxie]

Slightly tweaked the numbers -- made Hispanics tilt/lean R, college educated lights slightly less D, and lowered the # of non-college educated whites.

The number of swing states here is NOT an exaggeration. These states were truly right in the middle on the diagram. An era like this would have BIG landslides and a lot of swing.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

Slightly tweaked the numbers -- made Hispanics tilt/lean R, college educated lights slightly less D, and lowered the # of non-college educated whites.

The number of swing states here is NOT an exaggeration. These states were truly right in the middle on the diagram. An era like this would have BIG landslides and a lot of swing.

I wonder how that would look if you adjusted for PPP income.

[RINO Tom]

For the near future, I just see the exacerbation of the current political trends.

That really sucks for Centrists like me.

It's (relatively) easy to predict the "near" future; I think it's foolish to think the "near future" will be similar to the more distant future, though.

[Galaxie]

Follow-up of the second map (as close as I could recreate), but with states coded by lean/likely/safe as well.

Planning on making a TL around this, so don't steal

[morgankingsley]

Oh don't worry, I'm already basically writing world war 3 anyways. You can have this all to yourself

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Modify my earlier statement of the Dems winning FL.  They will appeal to WI, CO, VA as well as MI and NH, votes they need to solidy the presidency

[Zaybay]

Follow-up of the second map (as close as I could recreate), but with states coded by lean/likely/safe as well.

Planning on making a TL around this, so don't steal

Hey...at least give me some credit.

Also, I think its a bit of a problem to rely on just demographics for this scenario, as that can make things a bit hollow. It would add more depth to a timeline if other factors that I put in the scenario, such as geography and income were applied.

For instance MA and NH, I feel personally are wrong. MA is practically 3 cities, Springfield, Worcester and The Great and Powerful Boston. The whites in MA are mostly socially liberal and fiscally moderate, and a lot of college kids live in the state. Not to mention the suburbs, which unlike the WOW suburbs in Wisconsin, are rather an extension of the city. I think it would be a lean/tilt D state. NH, on the other hand, would be in the R camp. The state is practically an exurb of Boston(not to be meant as an insult) and the wealth of the state would make it much more receptive to Conservative economics.
This is my map for a close election with no tossups, in my opinion:


and with tossups:


Just my opinion on how the scenario would shape up. Then again, it is your scenario, so, IDK.

[支持核绿派 (Greens4Nuclear)]

Couple additional thoughts here:

4.  Trump will likely get increasingly annoyed with Gorsuch and put more populist judges with broader views of government power in any future SCOTUS vacancies.  Roberts also seems cautious about doing anything too radical if he becomes the new swing vote and would likely disappoint hardcore conservatives. Courts will be less of a political flashpoint going forward, which probably benefits the left.

5.  Republicans really need Democrats to win back some power before the economy falters so they don't get all the blame.  I suspect Trump secretly knows this and won't go out of his way to save the House this fall.  The Dems who hold the balance in a narrow majority will be from "Trumpy" enough districts to make deals with him and force them through.

In light of recent events I really hope 4 is on point.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Dems will continue to expand the Southwest map and get even more seats as reapportionment approaches.

[支持核绿派 (Greens4Nuclear)]

Couple additional thoughts here:

1. If Trump's positions on tariffs/trade restrictions become the GOP mainstream, they will eventually start picking up environmentalist votes as the overlap between the fair trade movement and the green movement is significant.  On the other hand, more energy/commodities producing areas would start giving Dems a 2nd look.

2. There is similar potential for Dems to split the Evangelical vote in the next generation, particularly those who emphasize monogamy above other social issues.  When the tables were turned, this is arguably what cost Gore the South in 2000. 

3. If a Bernie-minded Dem gets into the WH with a Dem congress, the current trends to the left with college grads and to the right with non-college grads will reverse.  If not, they will continue.  The chances of  a Conor Lamb or JBE type Dem on social issues sneaking past a divided field in a 2020's Dem primary and passing universal health care/basic income/etc are significant.  In that scenario, where the Dem with a Bernie-like platform on economic issues is also a relative social conservative, the reversal would be even more dramatic.

4.  Trump will likely get increasingly annoyed with Gorsuch and put more populist judges with broader views of government power in any future SCOTUS vacancies.  Roberts also seems cautious about doing anything too radical if he becomes the new swing vote and would likely disappoint hardcore conservatives. Courts will be less of a political flashpoint going forward, which probably benefits the left.

5.  Republicans really need Democrats to win back some power before the economy falters so they don't get all the blame.  I suspect Trump secretly knows this and won't go out of his way to save the House this fall.  The Dems who hold the balance in a narrow majority will be from "Trumpy" enough districts to make deals with him and force them through.

In the short run, the low-hanging fruit for Dems to rebuild are rural/small city college grads.  Which strategy they use to appeal to them will determine most of this. 

3, 4, and 5 aged fairly well (3 in the sense that educational realignment would continue- this happened with nonwhite voters) and summarize much of the 2020 Presidential and downballot results.

Old-school African-Americans if the GOP eventually goes full Nationalist and the culture wars continue along nativist-immigrant lines.

The inclusive, libertarian "win everyone over ~$100K family income" GOP coalition that certain posters here desperately want is never going to happen post-Trump.  I agree with your first point, but I would take it a step further.  When the GOP starts gaining with minority groups, it will first be with the most socially conservative black voters, and then with similarly situated Hispanic voters who don't have personal/family ties to immigration (e.g. look how hard northern NM swung to Trump in 2016).  Future Republican gains with minority groups are going to happen along the same lines that Trump's gains with WWC voters happened.

This actually happened with certain Latino groups in 2020, but doesn’t explain most of the R swings we saw in urban CA, FL, and the ACELA corridor.