AdamSmith Posted May 17, 2015 Posted May 17, 2015 The GOP Is Dying Off. Literally. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/the-gop-is-dying-off-literally-118035.html?hp=t3_r#.VVkkqz29LCQ Quote
Members boiworship Posted May 18, 2015 Members Posted May 18, 2015 This is why I tell my republican associates that it's unlikely that there will be a Republican president again, certainly not a white, straight male one. Quote
Members tassojunior Posted May 18, 2015 Members Posted May 18, 2015 If even one or two big blue states controlled by the GOP like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Illinois, etc shift to electoral voting by Congressional district, there may not be another Democratic president for a long time. The popular vote may become much more Democratic but it won't matter, only the electoral vote matters. So far the GOP hasn't pulled this trick because those states like the attention from being close. Also, even without gerrymandering, the House will always be very Republican because of Democratic concentration in dense cities. Quote
AdamSmith Posted May 18, 2015 Author Posted May 18, 2015 Agree -- the article does echo those points about electoral-college math blunting the negative effects for Republicans of this generational shift. Still, speaking as a Democrat -- huzzah! Quote
Members jgoo Posted May 18, 2015 Members Posted May 18, 2015 The article is very narrow in what it is considering. I don't think it is wrong, as presented, and makes sense that an older average aged group will establish a higher hurdle to overcome to replenish its ranks. If one steps back a bit, there may be some broader considerations to think about that certainly can change the picture and influence future elections. First, what are the numbers related to shifting from one party to another over time and as one ages. It would be interesting to see what that happens to the math when one considers that aspect. The second is cyclical nature of politics with favorite parties in and out of power, and identification with that group. The third is the rise of the independents and relative leanings toward one party or another, which also seems to be cyclical and makes one consider some other underlying driver not identified that perhaps makes the age "problem" less significant compared to that shift....that more people are identifying as independent. However it certainly seems that this specific problem is much more significant at this point in time for the Republicans. Beyond that, what is important to consider is the age distribution of the independents and their leanings which will certainly make the difference for future elections . From the graphs below there are some interesting things to be gleemed from some historical polling..... Quote
Members tassojunior Posted May 23, 2015 Members Posted May 23, 2015 Agree -- the article does echo those points about electoral-college math blunting the negative effects for Republicans of this generational shift. Still, speaking as a Democrat -- huzzah! Electoral College electing "blunts" the effect now, but if even one or two blue big states go to electoral votes by Congressional district there may never be another Democratic president. We're talking Pennsylvania or New Jersey or Wisconsin or Illinois where Dems would lose dozens of electoral votes. I don't understand why the GOP hasn't already done this unless swing states just like the attention but eventually I'm sure even Repugs aren't stupid enough to let this slip. Quote
Members MsGuy Posted May 23, 2015 Members Posted May 23, 2015 And if Texas or Florida were to go to a congressional district electoral system, the Republican party would be unlikely to elect another president for quite some time either. A more transparent solution for the Republicans would be to repeal the 14th and 15th Amendments. And in all probability a stiff poll tax alone would do the trick and have the additional advantage of pleasing the flat tax crowd. AdamSmith 1 Quote
