Two Guesses

[J. J.]

What's the other most likely possibility you see besides this?

The converse.  McCain wins and, in terms of the GOP, the more "theocratic" elements are discredited.  The role of government decreases.

[Albus Dumbledore]

What would this look like in detail? I've got a clear picture of the more statism scenario but not the other one.

[Person Man]

I am thinking that he, a socially moderate (marginally in favor of secularism, civil liberties and civil rights) conservative, thinks that if McCain is a succesful politician and administrator, that the religious right's influence will decline and that the American political climate will shift to that of which is seen in the non-mormon west. This means that the country will probably continue its current conservative consensus, but probably deal with issues like "killing babies", cloning, public religious instruction, racial issues,  "homos" and "dope" in a more matter-of-fact, open to comprimise and objective manner. Basically, he thinks that the Post-McCain America will be one of a centrist social consensus that rests on top of our conservative economic consensus.

However, if McCain fu cks up, and becomes the next George H. W. Bush, we could see the unraveling of the current conservative consensus. What this could mean is that the U.S. becomes more like what Britian and Germany is today....socially and economically pragmatic.

[Albus Dumbledore]

I don't know where people are getting this idea of the US going social democratic from. Leftism is dying in the west and America was merely the first place the social democratic conensus broke. When it comes apart in Europe it'll be a far worse backlash than here in the United States. We merely got 2-3 decades of reaganite asshattery but Europe could at worst see fascist and theocratic revivalism but more realistically see current statist/internal security/PC-enforcing measures used to suppress liberals/seculars/leftists. This has deeper consequences besides a change in who holds the whip hand. America will be a different place but Europe will be VERY different.

What's causing these trends across the Euro-Atlantic world? Simple demographics. The native europeans are decreasingly tolerant of multiculturalism, Islam and their elites. We already see increasing paranoid backlashes from them. for the US it's simple, the aging of the most idealistic/utopian/leftist(I say leftist as in wannabe social dem) part of the population combined with largescale latin immigration changing the US from being a white protestant nation.

IMO, Europe will see far more political change than the US will. In the US we'll probably see more federalism/less government intervention in social issues from either left/right(catholic conservatives believe in traditional values but not in social engineering and the left is dying off) but more on economic issues(catholics(actual catholics not the current crop of white ethnic de facto liberal protestant) hold... differing beliefs on welfare than protestants combined with an increasing populist trend in the evangelical sections of the nation). Europe on the other hand changes much more socially and becomes much more authoritarian socially. Think J.J.'s far right scenario for the likely changes to happen in Europe combined with Boss Tweed's observation in the thread on american culture of mild white nationalism popping up.

[Person Man]

So, the United States will basically become like Wyoming or Colorado...maybe with UHC. Social issues will probably be dealt wth pragmatically and taxes will be low.

While Europe will become a mixture of Utah and Gattica.

Does this mean that our civilization is dying, changing or what? ...and if we are dying, will there be a reanasance?

[J. J.]

I am thinking that he, a socially moderate (marginally in favor of secularism, civil liberties and civil rights) conservative, thinks that if McCain is a succesful politician and administrator, that the religious right's influence will decline and that the American political climate will shift to that of which is seen in the non-mormon west.

No, you've missed it.

For probably the last 28 years, these statements have arguably been true.

Democrats:  We can only achieve national office with the solid support of urban Black voters.

Republicans:  We can only achieve national office with the solid support of the religious right.

In 2008, there is the possibly that the Democratic candidate will get that solid support and not win and the possibility that the Republican will win without that solid support.  If that happens, in 2012, any Democratic can say to urban Black voters, "You cannot deliver."  The Republican can say to the religious right, "I don't need you."  It forces both parties to move away from the extremes and move toward the center.  It ends both coalitions.

It really doesn't make a difference with the type of job McCain would do if elected.  He could be the next Reagan, and this change will still occur. 

[Person Man]

Okay, now you are being more specific. What would these two new parties look like? Without you going into detail, I can see somewhere between Mark Pryor's and Bill Clinton's Democratic Party and Alan Simpson's and Bob Dole's Republican Party...or simply that the culture war will end in an uneasy truce.

[Albus Dumbledore]

You want what I see as likely coalitions in the long run after the transition completes in the next few decades?

Democrats become the party of the good government types-perotistas-gypsy moths-suburban fiscal cons/semilibertarians-centrists-blue dogs. Basically we have a mostly secular center-right democratic party. Socially it tends to be secular/states-rights/security conservative with a large amount of federalism on social issues. The culture of the party's base is quite plutocratic/elite/yuppie.

The GOP, as the final stage of it's evolution ends up a populist lefty christian democratic party. Think an economic agenda that's a mix of catholic corporatism/populism/pro-labor reforms. The social agenda is reformist, lefty social justice christianity. Think the unitarian, other liberal denominations and more liber. It's got liberal social policies but culturally this party is the party of the working class/populists.

[J. J.]

Okay, now you are being more specific. What would these two new parties look like? Without you going into detail, I can see somewhere between Mark Pryor's and Bill Clinton's Democratic Party and Alan Simpson's and Bob Dole's Republican Party...or simply that the culture war will end in an uneasy truce.

I'm simply talking about what effect a McCain win might have on the two parties, i.e. the ending of the old coalitions.  What the new ones will look like requires a crystal ball.

[Albus Dumbledore]

So J.J. Any comments on the potential coalitions I see forming?

[J. J.]

So J.J. Any comments on the potential coalitions I see forming?

Only that it hasn't started yet.  I do not know what direction it will take, one that there is the very real possibility that both parties will no longer have the same coalition.

[Albus Dumbledore]

The fact that Huckabee was even considered shows the GOP's move towards populism plus the increasing power of blue dogs in the dems are IMO signs of it.

[J. J.]

The fact that Huckabee was even considered shows the GOP's move towards populism plus the increasing power of blue dogs in the dems are IMO signs of it.

Actually, Huckabee would show precisely the opposite.  And the Blue dogs are all but dead in the Democratic Caucus.  They were much more powerful in the late '70's and early '80.

[Person Man]

Though, if the urban vote doesn't work for the dems, I do see a shift of the democrats to suburban seculars and mainline protestants in the West and Midwest. Hell, I could see the GOP going after that vote, too if the fundies can be forgotten. This would mean that an economically conservative, socially center-left consensus could be met by both parties. Think of the politics of the 1950s.

[J. J.]

Though, if the urban vote doesn't work for the dems, I do see a shift of the democrats to suburban seculars and mainline protestants in the West and Midwest. Hell, I could see the GOP going after that vote, too if the fundies can be forgotten. This would mean that an economically conservative, socially center-left consensus could be met by both parties. Think of the politics of the 1950s.

I don't agree that this is what will result, but you could see the collapse of the extremist wings of both parties.

[Person Man]

Though, if the urban vote doesn't work for the dems, I do see a shift of the democrats to suburban seculars and mainline protestants in the West and Midwest. Hell, I could see the GOP going after that vote, too if the fundies can be forgotten. This would mean that an economically conservative, socially center-left consensus could be met by both parties. Think of the politics of the 1950s.

I don't agree that this is what will result, but you could see the collapse of the extremist wings of both parties.

I wouldn't quite see that as a real change out of the Age of Reagan, though. I mean, just because social democrats had more power than day-by-day pragmatists by the 60s, didn't mean that the New Deal was over yet.

[Smid]

Perhaps the decline of the Blue Dogs within the Democrats could see their exodus to the Republicans, leading to a more populist Republican party. This increase in dominance of social conservatives could see the more socially moderate Republicans shifting to the Democrats - leading to a populist Republican party facing off against a more libertarian Democratic party?

[Person Man]

Perhaps the decline of the Blue Dogs within the Democrats could see their exodus to the Republicans, leading to a more populist Republican party. This increase in dominance of social conservatives could see the more socially moderate Republicans shifting to the Democrats - leading to a populist Republican party facing off against a more libertarian Democratic party?

That's a possibility....a bit generic though. We will see. Perhaps if Roe was finally done-in?

[Albus Dumbledore]

Democrats have been lurching to the right hence my predictions of them eventually ending up a secular moderate conservative party with a libertarian wing. Also, Roe V. Wade will never be done in and serious restrictions on abortion will never be enacted. The right isn't stupid and won't do anything to endanger it's ability to get out the vote.

[Person Man]

Democrats have been lurching to the right hence my predictions of them eventually ending up a secular moderate conservative party with a libertarian wing. Also, Roe V. Wade will never be done in and serious restrictions on abortion will never be enacted. The right isn't stupid and won't do anything to endanger it's ability to get out the vote.

I guessing we will know within a year from now, if McCain wins, whether the right will make irrelevant or stop the enforcement of Roe v. Wade. The republicans are only one vote away vote doing just this. That vote that is preventing this is 89 yeas old. I believe that he will retire next year due to a widened senate majority that in theory, will not allow the allowance of abortion bans. However, McCain's and the Sen. Leahy's behavior will give us a clue to what will happen. Will McCain yeild to the senate or will Leahy yield to the 40 year republican "mandate"? ...and even after that, will Kennedy finally be pursuaded by Roberts to let Roe go and how will the new nominee REALLY vote?   

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Why would the right kill one of their get out the vote causes by banning/seriously restricting abortion?

[Lunar]

Why would the right kill one of their get out the vote causes by banning/seriously restricting abortion?

Eliminating Roe v. Wade

1) Would be done by justices who have legitimate concerns about the Constitution and limited concerns about GOTV efforts.
2) Would be done by justices who oppose Roe v. Wade as a public litmus test against them so that Republicans appear effective.  McCain often promises to appoint justices in line with this thinking.
3) Would cause the issue to bombshell as every state legislature and maybe Congress considers to what extent to limit abortion.  It's not like overturning Roe v. Wade makes abortion illegal, it just makes it legislatively debatable.

[Person Man]

Why would the right kill one of their get out the vote causes by banning/seriously restricting abortion?

Eliminating Roe v. Wade

1) Would be done by justices who have legitimate concerns about the Constitution and limited concerns about GOTV efforts.
2) Would be done by justices who oppose Roe v. Wade as a public litmus test against them so that Republicans appear effective.  McCain often promises to appoint justices in line with this thinking.
3) Would cause the issue to bombshell as every state legislature and maybe Congress considers to what extent to limit abortion.  It's not like overturning Roe v. Wade makes abortion illegal, it just makes it legislatively debatable.

Yes, but that will bring 5, 10 or even 20 years of political chaos to this country and only lord knows whether it will end in a bang or a whimper.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Eliminating Roe V. Wade would cause a social liberal backlash to the point where I'd be considered far right(as in how we'd see someone like Tancredo/Peroutka)..

[J. J.]

Eliminating Roe V. Wade would cause a social liberal backlash to the point where I'd be considered far right(as in how we'd see someone like Tancredo/Peroutka)..

I could actually see that, if McCain looses.

I think that a Obama loss is a victory for the center of both parties, very long term.