Is the GOP Doomed?

[Northwest Slobovia]

This thread has got some real comedians.

Gotta figure out how to save these posts for posterity because I don't think NS will be around in 2045.

You'll see, you'll all see...

Sarcasm aside, the Republicans will likely get locked out of the white house within the next few election cycles, with congress following soon afterward, barring drastic changes in policy.

*Ding!* We have a winnah! In political terms, 2050 is a long way off, more than enough time for either or both parties to make big policy changes.

The parties' hands might even be forced. The fragmentation of either party or the rise of a new one, while unlikely, could easily cause radical changes in the parties' policies we see today. Major global events (major wars, side effects of major natural catastrophes, etc) could also precipitate abrupt policy shifts. Changes in voting laws, such as states adopting ranked-choice/instant run-off schemes, might also have the same effect, though I'd expect that would be more gradual, changing as the state laws do (with the caveat that a big state doing it might cause an avalanche of other states following).

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

*Ding!* We have a winnah! In political terms, 2050 is a long way off, more than enough time for either or both parties to make big policy changes.

The parties' hands might even be forced. The fragmentation of either party or the rise of a new one, while unlikely, could easily cause radical changes in the parties' policies we see today. Major global events (major wars, side effects of major natural catastrophes, etc) could also precipitate abrupt policy shifts. Changes in voting laws, such as states adopting ranked-choice/instant run-off schemes, might also have the same effect, though I'd expect that would be more gradual, changing as the state laws do (with the caveat that a big state doing it might cause an avalanche of other states following).

I agree, it's hard to make predictions that far into the future. I was talking about the next few election cycles, though, and I find it hard to believe that the Republicans will be able to radically change positions without alienating their core supporters.

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

When whites are a minority, there are a number of possibilities:

1. We become a Brazil-tier country, with a corrupt, nominally right-wing, minority white* elite class ruling over an even more corrupt and violent PoC underclass, that just manages to keep the country together through aggressive policing in areas of economic importance and voter suppression.

2. South Africa - the PoC majority uses their numerical strength to seek retribution against white Americans, whether through the ballot box or otherwise.

3. Break up of the United States

*Probably includes Jews and wealthy Asians

Yep... So, unfortunately, it seems that number 3 is the best option.

Based on my observation based-studies of around 50 Gen Zers, I say that they at least generally swing to the left more than the previous generations. 46 identified as centre-left, left-wing or far-left, and the rest identified as far-right. 30 of the 46 identified as anti-capitalist. That's right - 60% of the people surveyed identified as anti-capitalist. Assuming a margin of error of 20%, that's a range of 40-80%. Not specific, yes, but still a very dangerous percentage. It's a stark warning of what is ahead. A socialist revolution might be in the future of the world. BIg claim, yes, but the polls from the millenials already back my results.

That is disheartening. Are you affiliated with an actual research project or are these just your personally recorded observations?
If the latter I would be interested to know what area, social class, etc. the observed Gen Z-ers were from.

Personal record. Whilst it was not in the US (it was in Wales), I believe it still harkens true. The social class was generally lower class, with only 2 of the respondents having an upper-class background. The area itself is generally left-leaning, but not to that extent. All surveyed were white, which makes things even worse.

[Luna Amore]

This thread has got some real comedians.

Gotta figure out how to save these posts for posterity because I don't think NS will be around in 2045.

No forecast shows a sea level rise of 200 feet by 2045. Not even close.

Quoting a number that ludicrously high is just bad scaremongering.

[Kaystein]

What do you make of it, NSG?

You're forgetting the big bad variable that by 2045, our sea levels are going to have risen by about 200 centimeters, global agriculture is going to be devastated, death by starvation will be common thing in many parts of the world, and everybody is going to be way more fucking hostile to each other in general than today. Whatever form the republican party is in the future, will hold a very large percentage of the popular vote because nationalism will be a thing; Americans will not want to share limited resources with complete foreigners that have little or nothing to contribute in kind.

I edited and expanded upon my previous post, since some people don't seem to know what the fuck google is. (Never mind that posting here is about as interesting and useful as watching a lawn grow. Fighting to keep my eyes from becoming glazed over.)

Anyway, with the resurgence in nationalism and inevitable growing scarcity in resources because all of the problems in the world will blow up around the same time (because of course they fucking will'; humanity sucks like that), resources wars will also be a thing. So if the GOP/republican party retains a fragment of it's current identity/ideals, it's definitely going to be more nationalist which is going to attract a lot of people in turn when the time comes and SHTF.

No forecast shows a sea level rise of 200 feet by 2045. Not even close.

Quoting a number that ludicrously high is just bad scaremongering.

Centimeters. Not feet. (My error.)

[Borovan entered the region as he]

A lot of the arguments about how the GOP is doomed because of America's changing demographics often doesn't take into account how much the voting patterns of individual demographics can shift. The changing voting patterns of White and Asian voters in US politics are good examples of this. In 2016, 58% of White voters voted for the Republican candidate, Trump. In contrast, about two decades prior in 1996, White voters were more evenly split between the Democrats and Republicans, with 43% voting for Clinton and 46% voting for Dole. Within that time, White voters shifted from being evenly split between the two parties to a voting bloc where a firm majority supports the Republicans.

During this same time, Asian-American voters shifted in the opposite direction. Asian-Americans used to be a firmly Republican voting bloc. In 1992, 55% of Asian voters supported George Bush Senior, who received only 37% of the overall popular vote. Now, Asian-Americans are famously a firmly Democrat-supporting demographic, with 65% voting for Hillary Clinton in 2016, who received only 48% of the overall popular vote.

All in all, we shouldn't assume that how racial groups vote today will remain the same in future, and therefore extrapolate from there that America becoming majority-minority means the Republicans are 'doomed' given their low support amongst non-white voters. Things can change. In fact, as demographics change I suspect we may end up seeing White-Americans shift towards supporting the GOP in larger majorities than at present, similar to how the overwhelming-majority of non-white voters support one party over the other.

I think some of those changes were from how popular Reagan is. The economy was done bad during Carter and Reagan was credited with boosting the economy during the 80s. Clinton though managed to achieve half support from being southern and the no taxes lie from bush. But I don't think minorities will possibly change voting patterns significantly because of culture, economic and educational background and how they're raised.

America is gonna become a majority minority America is still gonna be mostly white, just not Anglo white. Most hispanics are white on the census and genetically are mostly European in heritage, so America will still probably be over 60% caucasian, and I believe by this point in time most Americans will view Hispanics as white ethnics skin to Italians or Irish people. Asian Americans will be the next largest group and I doubt they will be voting very far left considering their traditional values. African Americans will still constitute about 13% of the population. Demographics alone cannot predict the voting trend of Americans but if you ask me, I think our party system in general is fracturing at the seams and both parties face destruction from within and without

Well, no. In all of the statistics I referenced Hispanics are counted separately from whites, and aren’t just going to magically assimilate into white European culture. I expect they will maintain a distinct culture and voting habits. Asian Americans have voted consistently Democrat, so the data disagrees with you on that one.

The Irish were brown until they were white
The Italians were brown until they were white
The poles were brown until they were white
The Greeks were brown until they were white
The Jews were brown until they were white
Guess what's probably gonna happen with hispanics? Theylll probably integrate into white America like every other group of Caucasian immigrants before them. Already second generation Hispanic Americans are becoming assimilated into america, so I predict by generation 5 their Hispanic identity will be akin to being Irish american.

As for the Asian americans, you think they'll keep voting Democratic but it only takes one other race riot in LA to change that.

That's assuming Hispanics achieve upward mobility. You need mobility for assimilation not just culture and language acquired. Even if they're assimilated Republicans cant easily win elections, they are still likely to have different voting attitudes than whites.

[Northwest Slobovia]

*Ding!* We have a winnah! In political terms, 2050 is a long way off, more than enough time for either or both parties to make big policy changes.

The parties' hands might even be forced. The fragmentation of either party or the rise of a new one, while unlikely, could easily cause radical changes in the parties' policies we see today. Major global events (major wars, side effects of major natural catastrophes, etc) could also precipitate abrupt policy shifts. Changes in voting laws, such as states adopting ranked-choice/instant run-off schemes, might also have the same effect, though I'd expect that would be more gradual, changing as the state laws do (with the caveat that a big state doing it might cause an avalanche of other states following).

I agree, it's hard to make predictions that far into the future. I was talking about the next few election cycles, though,

In short, by 2045, unless things drastically change, it will become almost statistically impossible for a Republican candidate to win the Presidency.

I rounded that up to 2050 to match the latest date for white people to remain a majority.

and I find it hard to believe that the Republicans will be able to radically change positions without alienating their core supporters.

But let's talk about the next few election cycles. Suppose the Democrats win the Presidency in 2020. Call that a 50-50 bet at this point, since they've barely started their primary campaigns, and reasonablly-possible major events over the next 15 months are unpredictable (Brexit and its consequences, war(s) in the Middle East, deepening trade wars and/or global recession).

There's no way the Senate can change hands in 2020, unless those major events are startling. But by 2022, the Democrats could potentially control the Presidency and the Congress. OK, that's the next two election cycles. What about 2024? Say the Dems are still popular, and the GOP is going nowhere but down in national and state polls. That could easily lead to a 2024 GOP Presidential candidate making a major move towards whatever the political center is then, or otherwise dramatically changing the party. It's not like that hasn't happened recently. (Free trade? What's that?)

[Purgatio]

A lot of the arguments about how the GOP is doomed because of America's changing demographics often doesn't take into account how much the voting patterns of individual demographics can shift. The changing voting patterns of White and Asian voters in US politics are good examples of this. In 2016, 58% of White voters voted for the Republican candidate, Trump. In contrast, about two decades prior in 1996, White voters were more evenly split between the Democrats and Republicans, with 43% voting for Clinton and 46% voting for Dole. Within that time, White voters shifted from being evenly split between the two parties to a voting bloc where a firm majority supports the Republicans.

During this same time, Asian-American voters shifted in the opposite direction. Asian-Americans used to be a firmly Republican voting bloc. In 1992, 55% of Asian voters supported George Bush Senior, who received only 37% of the overall popular vote. Now, Asian-Americans are famously a firmly Democrat-supporting demographic, with 65% voting for Hillary Clinton in 2016, who received only 48% of the overall popular vote.

All in all, we shouldn't assume that how racial groups vote today will remain the same in future, and therefore extrapolate from there that America becoming majority-minority means the Republicans are 'doomed' given their low support amongst non-white voters. Things can change. In fact, as demographics change I suspect we may end up seeing White-Americans shift towards supporting the GOP in larger majorities than at present, similar to how the overwhelming-majority of non-white voters support one party over the other.

I think some of those changes were from how popular Reagan is. The economy was done bad during Carter and Reagan was credited with boosting the economy during the 80s. Clinton though managed to achieve half support from being southern and the no taxes lie from bush. But I don't think minorities will possibly change voting patterns significantly because of culture, economic and educational background and how they're raised.

If you time-travelled back to the 1990s, I doubt most people would have predicted the shifts in voting patterns, with the college-educated migrating to the Democrats and the non-college educated migrating to the Republicans, Whites shifting to the Republicans from being evenly-split and Asians shifting to the Democrats, all in the span of two decades. And if you time-travelled to the 1950s, few would have ever predicted the Southern Strategy and the Democrats' 'loyal South' becoming the Republicans' safe voting territory over many decades. The reality is non-white voters now generally support the Democrats, but we shouldn't be so hasty in assuming that will always be the case. In fact, given all the electoral re-alignments in US political history, it will most certainly not be the case in future.

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

Personal record. Whilst it was not in the US (it was in Wales), I believe it still harkens true. The social class was generally lower class, with only 2 of the respondents having an upper-class background. The area itself is generally left-leaning, but not to that extent. All surveyed were white, which makes things even worse.

Very interesting.

But let's talk about the next few election cycles. Suppose the Democrats win the Presidency in 2020. Call that a 50-50 bet at this point, since they've barely started their primary campaigns, and reasonablly-possible major events over the next 15 months are unpredictable (Brexit and its consequences, war(s) in the Middle East, deepening trade wars and/or global recession).

There's no way the Senate can change hands in 2020, unless those major events are startling. But by 2022, the Democrats could potentially control the Presidency and the Congress. OK, that's the next two election cycles. What about 2024? Say the Dems are still popular, and the GOP is going nowhere but down in national and state polls. That could easily lead to a 2024 GOP Presidential candidate making a major move towards whatever the political center is then, or otherwise dramatically changing the party. It's not like that hasn't happened recently. :P (Free trade? What's that?)

The Democrats have been able to paint themselves as the Party of Progress whilst the GOP is despised as the Party of Conservatism and Tradition. The next Dem president and a Dem Congress will only make things harder for the Republicans in 2024 and potentially 2028.

I doubt the Republicans will be able to rebrand themselves and present an inspiring moderate candidate by 2024.

[Northwest Slobovia]

I think some of those changes were from how popular Reagan is. The economy was done bad during Carter and Reagan was credited with boosting the economy during the 80s. Clinton though managed to achieve half support from being southern and the no taxes lie from bush. But I don't think minorities will possibly change voting patterns significantly because of culture, economic and educational background and how they're raised.

If you time-travelled back to the 1990s, I doubt most people would have predicted the shifts in voting patterns, with the college-educated migrating to the Democrats and the non-college educated migrating to the Republicans,

Actually, that's when the "smart set" voting Democratic started to become a major topic. That showed up in the after-election polling from both of Bill Clinton's campaigns.

And if you time-travelled to the 1950s, few would have ever predicted the Southern Strategy and the Democrats' 'loyal South' becoming the Republicans' safe voting territory over many decades. starting with the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

FTFY Anybody who could have predicted that in the 1950s would either be a complete sociological genius, or a certifiable prophet.

The reality is non-white voters now generally support the Democrats, but we shouldn't be so hasty in assuming that will always be the case. In fact, given all the electoral re-alignments in US political history, it will most certainly not be the case in future.

Otherwise, yes, you are correct.

[Myrensis]

No, but they are more likely to favor economic leftism* and social justice stuff.

*The current fracture in the Democratic Party over progressivism and moderate liberalism has largely been a racial divide, with white Democrats and Jews seeming to favor the moderates and PoCs seeming to favor the progressives.

Which is a sign of minority racial voting blocs breaking down.

What outreach could the GOP do? On the economic front, they'd have to be leftists (non-starter for most conservatives, although some economic nationalist/populism could be somewhat appealing to them.

On the social front? Forget about it. These people are not social conservatives.

> Hispanics aren't social conservatives...

> It was the Hispanic branch of my family the flipped their shit about one of our relatives coming out of the closet and are hyper-religious.

> That moment when you realize that more than half of hispanics in the US are Catholics, and Hispanic Catholics are more likely to be very religious than non-Hispanic Catholics by the statistics.

The only thing keeping Hispanics in the Democratic Coalition is race-baiting and the illegal immigration issue which isn't gonna last.

Yet a referendum to allow same sex marriage passed in Maryland in 2012. The state has the highest percentage of African Americans of any state outside the Deep South.

African Americans only make up about 30% of our population in Maryland. Whites make up 56%.

Republicans have been bleating about Hispanics and even blacks being 'natural conservatives' for years...and yet they still vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

It usually boils down to "Look! They agree with us on issues A, B, and C! We could totally make huge gains with them any time...all we'd have to do is jettison our base and our positions on issues D thru Z! Easy!"

[Northwest Slobovia]

Personal record. Whilst it was not in the US (it was in Wales), I believe it still harkens true. The social class was generally lower class, with only 2 of the respondents having an upper-class background. The area itself is generally left-leaning, but not to that extent. All surveyed were white, which makes things even worse.

Very interesting.

But let's talk about the next few election cycles. Suppose the Democrats win the Presidency in 2020. Call that a 50-50 bet at this point, since they've barely started their primary campaigns, and reasonablly-possible major events over the next 15 months are unpredictable (Brexit and its consequences, war(s) in the Middle East, deepening trade wars and/or global recession).

There's no way the Senate can change hands in 2020, unless those major events are startling. But by 2022, the Democrats could potentially control the Presidency and the Congress. OK, that's the next two election cycles. What about 2024? Say the Dems are still popular, and the GOP is going nowhere but down in national and state polls. That could easily lead to a 2024 GOP Presidential candidate making a major move towards whatever the political center is then, or otherwise dramatically changing the party. It's not like that hasn't happened recently. (Free trade? What's that?)

The Democrats have been able to paint themselves as the Party of Progress whilst the GOP is despised as the Party of Conservatism and Tradition. The next Dem president and a Dem Congress will only make things harder for the Republicans in 2024 and potentially 2028.

I doubt the Republicans will be able to rebrand themselves and present an inspiring moderate candidate by 2024.

I guess we'll see. I have great faith in politicians' ability to be slippery weasels if given the slightest opportunity.

A white, center-slightly-rightish Obama type might be able to pull it off. All such a person would need is charisma, a few vague appeals to how things used to be, and national willingness to try something new. Steal a few of whatever the Dems' policy talking points are, talk about improving them, and it's not unreasonable. Say, for example, that Sanders or Warren becomes President, and pushes some sort of universal health care though Congress. Say it works well, but has tons of red tape associated with it (or any other reasonable disadvantage you can think of). So, a GOP candidate talks up reforms that the Dems are unwilling to touch, because it hurts one of their constituencies (legions of bureaucrafts administering the program). That might work.

I'm not saying any of this is likely, just that it's possible.

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

I guess we'll see. I have great faith in politicians' ability to be slippery weasels if given the slightest opportunity.

A white, center-slightly-rightish Obama type might be able to pull it off. All such a person would need is charisma, a few vague appeals to how things used to be, and national willingness to try something new. Steal a few of whatever the Dems' policy talking points are, talk about improving them, and it's not unreasonable. Say, for example, that Sanders or Warren becomes President, and pushes some sort of universal health care though Congress. Say it works well, but has tons of red tape associated with it (or any other reasonable disadvantage you can think of). So, a GOP candidate talks up reforms that the Dems are unwilling to touch, because it hurts one of their constituencies (legions of bureaucrafts administering the program). That might work.

I'm not saying any of this is likely, just that it's possible.

I agree, we'll just have to see. Trump was a surprise, so I suppose that anything can happen.
I don't find it exactly likely that the GOP will bounce back after Trump, though.

[Great Algerstonia]

I'd say the Democrats are more "doomed". I bet that the GOP is going to have more supporters this election then last election, and that's because the Democratic Party is becoming noticeably more progressive. This will lead to moderate voters becoming a bit more reluctant to support them, which means they will turn towards other parties instead. Just my prediction for 2020.

[San Lumen]

I guess we'll see. I have great faith in politicians' ability to be slippery weasels if given the slightest opportunity.

A white, center-slightly-rightish Obama type might be able to pull it off. All such a person would need is charisma, a few vague appeals to how things used to be, and national willingness to try something new. Steal a few of whatever the Dems' policy talking points are, talk about improving them, and it's not unreasonable. Say, for example, that Sanders or Warren becomes President, and pushes some sort of universal health care though Congress. Say it works well, but has tons of red tape associated with it (or any other reasonable disadvantage you can think of). So, a GOP candidate talks up reforms that the Dems are unwilling to touch, because it hurts one of their constituencies (legions of bureaucrafts administering the program). That might work.

I'm not saying any of this is likely, just that it's possible.

I agree, we'll just have to see. Trump was a surprise, so I suppose that anything can happen.
I don't find it exactly likely that the GOP will bounce back after Trump, though.

They will but it will take awhile. If Trump loses next year they will gain seats but I don't think they will gain like did under Obama

[Czechostan]

More likely that their politics will gradually change. Keep in mind that the Dems were founded by pro-slavery, populist, Jacksonian farmers, and look at how much they've changed. Especially since the US is a two-party system, I don't see their collapse as imminent; and if they do fall apart, they will just be replaced with another conservative party.

But look at the data. Two out of the GOP's three wins in the presidential election were because of the electoral college. The party's in need of a face lift if they want to hold onto states like Texas that are tinging purple and win the Rust Belt for the next several elections. The biggest question on my mind is, if Trump wins in 2020, who will be the face of the party in 2024? Where does the party want to go next?

[San Lumen]

More likely that their politics will gradually change. Keep in mind that the Dems were founded by pro-slavery, populist, Jacksonian farmers, and look at how much they've changed. Especially since the US is a two-party system, I don't see their collapse as imminent; and if they do fall apart, they will just be replaced with another conservative party.

But look at the data. Two out of the GOP's three wins in the presidential election were because of the electoral college. The party's in need of a face lift if they want to hold onto states like Texas that are tinging purple and win the Rust Belt for the next several elections. The biggest question on my mind is, if Trump wins in 2020, who will be the face of the party in 2024? Where does the party want to go next?

The idea of second Trump term is too horrible to think about. It keeps me up at night sometimes

[Risastorstein]

They have gerrymandering on their side, so they probably have a few years/decades to f*ck up the world even more.

[San Lumen]

They have gerrymandering on their side, so they probably have a few years/decades to f*ck up the world even more.

lets not forget there will be redistricting in 2022. Democrats won several key governorships therefore they can't gerrymander all they want.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

The GOP isn't necessarily doomed, it'll probably shift policy-wise in the near-future. These shifts happen in politics. William Jennings Bryan, a politician I'm fond off, would have been aghast at the present-day state of the Democratic party.

[Imperium of Dragonia]

The GOP doesn't rely solely on white people to support it, contrary to what the reactionaries say. It's policies shift with the times, as do all political parties. The Impeachment Party, however, has been hijacked and steered towards a self-destructive path with how it whiplashed itself in 2016. It's values used to mean something to millions but now is catering to just the extremists and the easy to manipulate.

[Saiwania]

The Irish were brown until they were white
The Italians were brown until they were white
The poles were brown until they were white
The Greeks were brown until they were white
The Jews were brown until they were white
Guess what's probably gonna happen with hispanics?...

This is a tired Leftist argument that is very nonsensical in that no one, regardless of what happens in the future- is going to just pretend that Black people for example, are White if objectively speaking: their skin color isn't anywhere close to a lighter tone visually speaking. All of the groups you mention at least have ancestry of European origin which just isn't the case with most Hispanics, unless people are going to count partial ancestry from Spain as being "European enough" to qualify as White. The native American component of Hispanic populations can't just be ignored as if it isn't there.

Additionally, its cherry picking in that back during the 19th and 20th centuries, the global population was far Whiter in terms of percentages than is the case today. The world back then could afford to consider more people to not qualify as White. But with the world's population much darker now as opposed to decades ago, this no longer holds true.

It is clear to most people now that only the people with European ancestry and can pass as White visually speaking, have any legitimate enough claim to being White.

[Alien Overlord]

I Goddamn fucking hope so. Death to the 2 party system.

I recently wrote a paper for a friend regarding the two party system. You can't kill a 2 party system while utilizing first past the post voting. The only way to have a multiparty system is to switch to a system where seats in legislature are distributed proportionally. Or possibly if you utilized STV type voting.

This video elaborates my point somewhat.

[Bear Stearns]

The Irish were brown until they were white
The Italians were brown until they were white
The poles were brown until they were white
The Greeks were brown until they were white
The Jews were brown until they were white
Guess what's probably gonna happen with hispanics?...

This is a tired Leftist argument that is very nonsensical in that no one, regardless of what happens in the future- is going to just pretend that Black people for example, are White if objectively speaking: their skin color isn't anywhere close to a lighter tone visually speaking. All of the groups you mention at least have ancestry of European origin which just isn't the case with most Hispanics, unless people are going to count partial ancestry from Spain as being "European enough" to qualify as White. The native American component of Hispanic populations can't just be ignored as if it isn't there.

Additionally, its cherry picking in that back during the 19th and 20th centuries, the global population was far Whiter in terms of percentages than is the case today. The world back then could afford to consider more people to not qualify as White. But with the world's population much darker now as opposed to decades ago, this no longer holds true.

It is clear to most people now that only the people with European ancestry and can pass as White visually speaking, have any legitimate enough claim to being White.

This is true, since according to leftists, white privilege is based on whether people think you are white, which is based on physical appearance.

[US-SSR]

Unless it starts trying to appeal to the groups that will make up a majority of the US population quite soon, which would mean repudiating things like gerrymandering, voter suppression and foreign collusion, not to mention the Electoral College, yes, yes the GOP is doomed. The time will come when not all the dirty tricks in the world will be able to give it a majority of the popular vote for any office of significance, Federal, state or local. Another reactionary party may arise better suited to electoral life in the US in the 21st Century, or the battleground may shift to a contest between today's limousine liberals and tomorrow's progressives. This may not come in my lifetime but come it will. Without significant and swift change the Republican Party will soon go the way of the Whigs.