Will the US become permanently Democrat-controlled?

[Northwest Slobovia]

Speaking as a historian...this has happened before. Our party system, based on the fact electoral reform is such a big issue, might well schism into a multi-party system. If that happens, which I feel is likely/also want it badly so our electoral maps look like disco raves

All it would take would be for two or three of the ten most populous states to switch to any replacement for FPTP, and the House will be changed beyond recognition. Current simple committee seat division schemes based on the ins and the outs would have to be redone, and votes for Speaker become more interesting than majority party vs minority party. (Since if no party holds a majority, there will be horse-trading.)

it'll probably split like so:
1. The social-democrats (roughly Yang to Warren)
2. The centrists (every other candidate in the Democratic race)
The democrats might stick together, but the republicans will more than likely split into
3. The moderate conservatives (Republicans before all the chaos happened)
4. The jettisoned alt-right borderline-if-not-outright-fascist loony section of the party.
Alternatively 1 and 4 could split off from a merged 2 and 3.

Either is reasonable, I think, based on the current political climate. There could also be a Green Party distinct from 1 or 2, and aChristian party or parties distinct from any of them, like German politics.

[Arthenius]

No. The two parties continually shift, and always have. In '64, people predicted the total destruction of the GOP, in '80 the wholesale destruction of the Dems, and people in 2016 really did think that the Dems would keep winning just about every election until the end of time.

There are always shifts in public opinion, party beliefs and stances, etc etc. The Democratic Party and Republican Party would both look utterly foreign to observers from, say, the 1970s. As the demographics, public opinions, and overall attitudes of the average American continue to change, the two parties will likely follow suit.

The only other foreseeable option (provided the two parties, specifically the GOP don't evolve) is that the US slowly evolves into a more multi-party state, but I find that rather implausible for the near future.

The demographic makeup has shifted more dramatic starting with 1965's immigration act. America (along with the rest of the west) were still relatively white demographics until the last 3-4 decades. The non-white immigrants who are now having an average higher number of children to replace whites/natively westerners.

Demographics are destiny:
https://bumpreveal.com/blogs/statistics ... sa-by-race

[Ngelmish]

They need three seats. Assuming Alabama is lost, Dems should look to target those four states. And this is in the scenario if the Dems win the presidency.

I was operating under the idea that Alabama was a lost seat. Therefore requiring five seats.

Four, if they net the presidency.

[San Lumen]

No. The two parties continually shift, and always have. In '64, people predicted the total destruction of the GOP, in '80 the wholesale destruction of the Dems, and people in 2016 really did think that the Dems would keep winning just about every election until the end of time.

There are always shifts in public opinion, party beliefs and stances, etc etc. The Democratic Party and Republican Party would both look utterly foreign to observers from, say, the 1970s. As the demographics, public opinions, and overall attitudes of the average American continue to change, the two parties will likely follow suit.

The only other foreseeable option (provided the two parties, specifically the GOP don't evolve) is that the US slowly evolves into a more multi-party state, but I find that rather implausible for the near future.

The demographic makeup has shifted more dramatic starting with 1965's immigration act. America (along with the rest of the west) were still relatively white demographics until the last 3-4 decades. The non-white immigrants who are now having an average higher number of children to replace whites/natively westerners.

Demographics are destiny:
https://bumpreveal.com/blogs/statistics ... sa-by-race

I dont see why that's a bad thing

[Telconi]

The demographic makeup has shifted more dramatic starting with 1965's immigration act. America (along with the rest of the west) were still relatively white demographics until the last 3-4 decades. The non-white immigrants who are now having an average higher number of children to replace whites/natively westerners.

Demographics are destiny:
https://bumpreveal.com/blogs/statistics ... sa-by-race

I dont see why that's a bad thing

The irony of this is you yourself push the stereotypes involved.

[Ard al Islam]

Its not just that, its a bit more complex

Generally, it will be a result of mass sexual decadence, curruption(in politics and religion), abandondment of religion and family values.

How then was the Egyptian empire the longest lasting (by far) in human history?

It wasn't.

[Phoenicaea]

No. Politics is still going to be shifting like it always has.

mh, yes best answer. furtherly, if you see american politics in tv would say it has got growing obsession with etnicities, which u.s. english is race.

i don t think so, i don t believe tv mirrors real daily politics (in tv you have got the fews having their saying).

reason for me of this tv, apart begin again of old trust cartels devastating public debate for their shatty interests, is profound.

people has got the feeling that politics is society, and then, i see the reason why people talks about immigrantion.

i m favourable to most of immigrants (in my country, i m not american) neither. and still, i use reason.

politics is not society, come on guys, even most of you are wealthy, we have to make effort, politics is noble sophisticated thing.

[Valrifell]

If the Republicans do quietly die (which is unlikely given their base of support is still yuge), then what we'd get is like a year or two of another Era of Good Feelings before the Democrats splinter into a moderate and leftist camp.

The good news is the overton window would be corrected, so that's fun.

[Nakena]

If the Republicans do quietly die (which is unlikely given their base of support is still yuge), then what we'd get is like a year or two of another Era of Good Feelings before the Democrats splinter into a moderate and leftist camp.

The good news is the overton window would be corrected, so that's fun.

Nah fuck the overton window. I'd like to see it a kick that it goes out of the window itself and the house. Because thats the best way to crash and burn this shitshow for good.

[Valrifell]

If the Republicans do quietly die (which is unlikely given their base of support is still yuge), then what we'd get is like a year or two of another Era of Good Feelings before the Democrats splinter into a moderate and leftist camp.

The good news is the overton window would be corrected, so that's fun.

Nah fuck the overton window. I'd like to see it a kick that it goes out of the window itself and the house. Because thats the best way to crash and burn this shitshow for good.

I, too, hope to die horrifically as a civilian casualty in a civil conflict.

Glad we're on the same page

[Nakena]

Nah fuck the overton window. I'd like to see it a kick that it goes out of the window itself and the house. Because thats the best way to crash and burn this shitshow for good.

I, too, hope to die horrifically as a civilian casualty in a civil conflict.

Glad we're on the same page

So you believe a civil war is coming to America, is it that what you say?

Believe it or not, I dislike both sides for my own reasons.

But one, I do loath slightly more.

Thats the difference.

[Valrifell]

I, too, hope to die horrifically as a civilian casualty in a civil conflict.

Glad we're on the same page

So you believe a civil war is coming to America, is it that what you say?

Believe it or not, I dislike both sides for my own reasons.

But one, I do loath slightly more.

Thats the difference.

One doesn't tend to use the phrase "let this shitshow crash and burn for good" without inspiring some kind of violent imagery, you realize.

Your stance is also not nearly as profound or interesting as you might think, and probably describes most people with a small degree of political literacy.

Heck, I'm in the same boat but in the opposite direction, considering I'm a psuedo-bolshevik and not a crypto-fascist.

[Blueflarst]

I don't hate liberalism, I hate the people who oppose freedom, prosperity, and justice. Like Democrats.

Then you're delusional. (Most) Dems (again, with the exception of the powerless Bernie fringe that's going nowhere way too fast) are positively in love with freedom. The party of black and hispanic enfranchisement, homosexual marriage, gender equality, free trade and open borders, among many other things. What among these positions is in opposition to freedom, prosperity, or justice?

Classical liberalism has not relation with pro inmigration policies, gender ideology agenda and free trade.
I would stand up for a liberalism defending the traditions and advacement of society without demolishing their own culture, with protectionism and limited inmigration but the democrat party has only ears for the regressive liberal left.

[Nakena]

One doesn't tend to use the phrase "let this shitshow crash and burn for good" without inspiring some kind of violent imagery, you realize.

Burning ashtray barrels and containers and the lights of police sirens illuminating a dark night in the depths of the city?

Your stance is also not nearly as profound or interesting as you might think, and probably describes most people with a small degree of political literacy.

Depends on how you define political literacy, if its being defined being obedient towards a evidently failed and flawed shit system... while fancing itself as some sort of progressive on the right side of history?

Heck, I'm in the same boat but in the opposite direction, considering I'm a psuedo-bolshevik and not a crypto-fascist.

I'll doubt it.

[Gormwood]

So you believe a civil war is coming to America, is it that what you say?

Believe it or not, I dislike both sides for my own reasons.

But one, I do loath slightly more.

Thats the difference.

One doesn't tend to use the phrase "let this shitshow crash and burn for good" without inspiring some kind of violent imagery, you realize.

Your stance is also not nearly as profound or interesting as you might think, and probably describes most people with a small degree of political literacy.

Heck, I'm in the same boat but in the opposite direction, considering I'm a psuedo-bolshevik and not a crypto-fascist.

Pseudo-Bolshevik Versus Crypto-Fascist. Sounds like a tacky Asylum Direct To Video flick.

[Valrifell]

One doesn't tend to use the phrase "let this shitshow crash and burn for good" without inspiring some kind of violent imagery, you realize.

Burning ashtray barrels and containers and the lights of police sirens illuminating a dark night in the depths of the city?

Your stance is also not nearly as profound or interesting as you might think, and probably describes most people with a small degree of political literacy.

Depends on how you define political literacy, if its being defined being obedient towards a evidently failed and flawed shit system... while fancing itself as some sort of progressive on the right side of history?

Heck, I'm in the same boat but in the opposite direction, considering I'm a psuedo-bolshevik and not a crypto-fascist.

I'll doubt it.

Political literacy in the sense that I have friends who barely have an understanding about what Congress does and hold the same edgy opinions you do. That the system is broken but with a poor understanding as to why and no will to actually try and fix it.

[Valrifell]

One doesn't tend to use the phrase "let this shitshow crash and burn for good" without inspiring some kind of violent imagery, you realize.

Your stance is also not nearly as profound or interesting as you might think, and probably describes most people with a small degree of political literacy.

Heck, I'm in the same boat but in the opposite direction, considering I'm a psuedo-bolshevik and not a crypto-fascist.

Pseudo-Bolshevik Versus Crypto-Fascist. Sounds like a tacky Arena Direct To Video flick.

I'd watch it.

[Nakena]

Political literacy in the sense that I have friends who barely have an understanding about what Congress does and hold the same edgy opinions you do. That the system is broken but with a poor understanding as to why and no will to actually try and fix it.

You know part of my take from the other thread.

I believe its a mix of system failure and people having unfullfillable expectations and demands from politics given the system in place. One thing leads to another and reinforces each other until the breaking point is reached. The promises given to older Generations didn materialize, and the newer Generations never knew anything else than living amongst the ruins of those shattered dreams. This far eclipses politics, but they are undoubtly a part thereof.

[Valrifell]

Political literacy in the sense that I have friends who barely have an understanding about what Congress does and hold the same edgy opinions you do. That the system is broken but with a poor understanding as to why and no will to actually try and fix it.

You know part of my take from the other thread.

I believe its a mix of system failure and people having unfullfillable expectations and demands from politics given the system in place. One thing leads to another and reinforces each other until the breaking point is reached. The promises given to older Generations didn materialize, and the newer Generations never knew anything else than living amongst the ruins of those shattered dreams. This far eclipses politics, but they are undoubtly a part thereof.

Ah, the sweet broken promises of endless growth promised by late 80s capitalism. Gotta hate Reagan.

But the problem comes when you fail to identify what the "systemic failures" actually are, because leaving it so vague is how one enables strongmen with vague allusions to try and "fix" the problem. You'll note that this was Donald Trump's fundamental election strategy.

"I'll fix what's wrong!" "But what's wrong?" "I'll fix it!"

The Republic, I think, is redeemable. It just requires alterations like we've done before, but that would require a concerted effort and will to do so. But even more fundamental than that we have to get specific as to what we're mad about. Realistically speaking only one faction of one party is aiming at those problems.

[Katganistan]

To answer the OP question, no, it won't be permanently Demoncraticly controlled.

We'll see how strongly the American people react to this shitshow of corruption and cronyism by how many terms they are determined to keep a Republican out of the White House.

[The East Marches II]

You know part of my take from the other thread.

I believe its a mix of system failure and people having unfullfillable expectations and demands from politics given the system in place. One thing leads to another and reinforces each other until the breaking point is reached. The promises given to older Generations didn materialize, and the newer Generations never knew anything else than living amongst the ruins of those shattered dreams. This far eclipses politics, but they are undoubtly a part thereof.

Ah, the sweet broken promises of endless growth promised by late 80s capitalism. Gotta hate Reagan.

But the problem comes when you fail to identify what the "systemic failures" actually are, because leaving it so vague is how one enables strongmen with vague allusions to try and "fix" the problem. You'll note that this was Donald Trump's fundamental election strategy.

"I'll fix what's wrong!" "But what's wrong?" "I'll fix it!"

The Republic, I think, is redeemable. It just requires alterations like we've done before, but that would require a concerted effort and will to do so. But even more fundamental than that we have to get specific as to what we're mad about. Realistically speaking only one faction of one party is aiming at those problems.

It wasn't just Reagan. We might extend our thanks to all the fine fellows uptill the present :^)

Does it bother to admit that more than one side made mistakes? We wouldn't be in such a spot with such levels of disdain for those incharge unless it was a truly system wide failure.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

Then you're delusional. (Most) Dems (again, with the exception of the powerless Bernie fringe that's going nowhere way too fast) are positively in love with freedom. The party of black and hispanic enfranchisement, homosexual marriage, gender equality, free trade and open borders, among many other things. What among these positions is in opposition to freedom, prosperity, or justice?

Classical liberalism has not relation with pro inmigration policies, gender ideology agenda and free trade.
I would stand up for a liberalism defending the traditions and advacement of society without demolishing their own culture, with protectionism and limited inmigration but the democrat party has only ears for the regressive liberal left.

You're not a fucking classical liberal.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

and lol "regressive liberal left"

" the mean Democrat liberals are bad because I watched a YouTube video about how The Last Jedi was a complete cinematic failure which led me to Sargon of Akkad and I am now a LIBERALIST"

[Durius]

They will not. Nothing is permanent in politics. If somehow the Republican Party collapsed, the more conservative Democrats would eventually split. Either way, I don't believe that GOP collapse will happen. In fact, it is way more likely they will start shifting their policies to appease Latinos as they are, after all, mostly white and Christian. Of course, it would take some time and a lot of work for the Republican Party to clean its image among that group, but it's not like there aren't plenty of other groups that Republicans and Latinos can hate together.

[The Galactic Liberal Democracy]

It will take a long time for demographics to shift enough for America to lean towards the current agenda of Democrats and that's if the parties stay intact. We have no way of knowing if Republicans will drop racism or that we'll even have the same parties by the time there are enough blacks, Hispanics, and Asians to tip the votes. Hell, there could be a genocide, however unlikely that is. This is just paranoia. We can't predict the future all that easily. Best case scenario, Congress/the Democrats would split between center right and center left (and maybe just the center too) and the schism would continue the system of democracy. At worst, democracy gets irreversibly fucked up before the popular vote matters.