If Texas flips it may set of a beginning of a totally new realignment of the map

[Matty]

Why you guys assume ethnic groups can't change voting habits is bizarre. Literally every single group in America besides the jews has oscillated from one party to the other.

Democrats far left plunge on fringe social issues is not going to sit well with hispanics eventually.

[Matty]

posters here are overrating how loyal suburbs will be to dems in a post-trump political world.

suburbs are still generally conservative compared to cities and liberal areas.

Look at how bad the dems did in suburbs in the midterms of 2010 and 2014. And Obama didn't do very well in many suburbs either.

[Matty]

Fyi most the swing from 2012 to 2018 is white suburbans and not minority. In fact minority swing probably hurt.

yep.


TEXAS TRENDED R IN 2012

If a dem in 2020 or beyond does something that pisses off the suburbs, texas will swing back to the GOP.

[Matty]

Fyi most the swing from 2012 to 2018 is white suburbans and not minority. In fact minority swing probably hurt.

yep.


TEXAS TRENDED R IN 2012

If a dem in 2020 or beyond does something that pisses off the suburbs, texas will swing back to the GOP.

Well yeah. Backlashes to the party in power are common. Dems made gains in Appalachia in 2018 but no one serious besides Politician thinks that means Democrats will continue making gains there. Doesn’t mean they’ll return to the old GOP margins in those place or anywhere near it.

Here's the difference.

appalachia has swung R because they dislike the democratic party's increasingly liberal platform.

the sunbelt suburbs have swung D in the age of trump because they dislike trump.

That is a big difference imo.

What changed between 2014 and 2016 that made the sunbelt suburbs more liberal?

Rural areas were trending R way before trump.

suburbs weren't really trending D before trump. A whole slew of suburban counties trended R in 2012 and 2014.

[Matty]

It’s just so hard to me to buy the idea that demographics are destiny when this country has been getting browner in every election since the 90s and there really isn’t any evidence that there is some trend of a drop in gop support

The 2016 result should have blown up the hypothesis, imo. It’s like the blue wall crap

It relies on the assumption that margins among groups stays constant. It just isn’t true. There has never been a time in our history when a party had a lock on the presidency due to some exogenous factor.

Harry enten likes to make this point in his podcast: the 2014 electorate was as diverse as the 2008 Electorate, and if turnout was identical to 2008, the gop still would have won 2014 by 4 points.

[Matty]

Realignments happen under the cover of landslide victories. OK, it is possible that after 24 years the map of a Republican victory of 1953 looks very similar from the map of a Republican victory of 1928, but the map of 1992 is very different from that of 1976. Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter are very similar in ideology and come from similar parts of the country... yet Bill Clinton could not win Mississippi or Texas.

Should a Democratic nominee for President win Texas in 2020, then that nominee is getting 400 or so electoral votes, more than any Democratic nominee for President since LBJ blew out Barry Goldwater.

Republicans can hope that the Democrat who defeats Trump will get ensnared in another Great Depression that gets people begging for a Christian and Corporate state...   

Here’s my view summed up:

70% of Americans are not democrats

70% of Americans are not republicans

He or she who wins the middle wins the election

This is why parties can rebound. The middle gets fed up and wants change.

[Matty]

It’s just so hard to me to buy the idea that demographics are destiny when this country has been getting browner in every election since the 90s and there really isn’t any evidence that there is some trend of a drop in gop support

The 2016 result should have blown up the hypothesis, imo. It’s like the blue wall crap

It relies on the assumption that margins among groups stays constant. It just isn’t true. There has never been a time in our history when a party had a lock on the presidency due to some exogenous factor.

Harry enten likes to make this point in his podcast: the 2014 electorate was as diverse as the 2008 Electorate, and if turnout was identical to 2008, the gop still would have won 2014 by 4 points.

Then why haven't CO and VA come back? It isn't because of Hispanics, it is because of secular whites displacing Evangelical Whites.

Why did Trump find a path of lesser resistance through the rust belt compared to the Bush path of winning VA/CO/NV?  2016 confirms this, not rejects it. It rejects the blue wall yes, but the blue wall was shallow "Democrats have always won x, Trump cannot possibly win it". And also, "Republicans have maxed out among whites in the Midwest, they want higher incomes and unions above that point and thus they cannot possibly gain more". Trump won populist Midwest whites via protectionist appeals. This allowed him to juice non-college white vote to 65%-29% Republican (more than Reagan got with this group) and flip the rust belt even while under-performing Romney with college educated whites.

2014 was not the same electorate as 2008. Top line racial states might have been the same, but it was not the same electorate. Yes, the GOP would have still won 2014 with 2008 turnout, but Gardner would have lost, Gillespie would not have come so close and Kasich would not have got 64%, nor would Sandoval have reached 70%.

Margins among groups don't stay constant, that is precisely my point. Whites will not remain at their inflated levels once the Baby Boomers and Silents are gone. Will whites remain Republican? Yes! Will younger whites become more Republican then they are now? Yes. The important point is, will they be as Republican as whites are currently? No And this why GA and TX are going to turn blue, unless Republicans can somehow walk and chew gum at the same time and begin to peel off minorities.

Trump was a bad fit for co. VA is gone due to one thing: growth of the DV suburbs

I think CO would have gone republican with Rubio or kasich as nominee.