I don’t know how true this is, but I’ve heard that some people in the Democratic periphery like to predict that Texas will flip every election because they want to be able to fundraise in a state with that many people.
Count me among the skeptics as well. This may be speculative and anecdotal, but it seems to me that each generation of kids exhibit a lower capacity for critical thinking than the one before, perhaps driven in part by the frenetic and short attention span world of Facebook and Twitter they grew up in, and/or Republican fuckery with primary/secondary education.
In turn, this diminishing of their critical thinking skills leaves them more susceptible to conspiracy theories and to being brainwashed by the basal, manufactured fear and outrage pumped out by the right-wing propaganda machine. I fear this could lead to a snowball effect where: Republicans gain control of state governments → continue to suppress education and work with foreign agents to spread disinformation through social media → voters are dumbed down and vote (R) → rinse and repeat, and asahi’s gloom and doom scenarios look frighteningly possible indeed.
Well, sure- but to be fair, the same could be said about the Democrats. For all intents and purposes, Marxism is dead, but I’m sure Democratic leadership is happy to take the votes from those who haven’t got the memo.
Really? I’ve seen exactly the opposite. Critical thinking is almost nonexistent among people without a college education, and uncommon among people with one. But younger people are more and more likely to have gone to college.
I’m not sure “Marxists” ever voted “in huge numbers” for any party in America (apart from the Communist Party USA, and even that is reporting numbers around 5,000-10,000), and they’ve certainly never come close to running the Democratic Party. But the lunatics - and the lunatics that vote them in - are now the driving force of the GOP.
Sure- but I think you’re missing my point. It wasn’t that Marxists are a big voting bloc, it was that there are left-crazies who vote Dem, and the Dems are happy to have their votes, so long as they aren’t in charge.
The difference, I think, is that Dems aren’t actively trying to foster the lunatic positions. Can’t help it if some crazies vote for the party despite best efforts to educate them as to the facts. Republicans, on the other hand…
Demographic changes are real and they’re spectacular!
-
The belief that large numbers of voters become more conservative as they age has been found to have no basis in reality.
-
Young Republicans differ greatly in key areas (social justice, legislation to combat climate change, etc.) from the older, much more Trump- and Fox-loving segment of current conservatism.
New voters of all stripes will contribute mightily to making Trumpism vanish into history. Unless it destroys democracy before current voters can stop it. We’re not out of those woods yet.
Here’s one more thing I keep forgetting to mention. The current voters under, say, 35, are going to repeal the Second Amendment. Long after everyone here has departed the voter rolls.
I may have mentioned this in some other thread, but the fate of the Parti Québécois illustrates that demographics can be destiny, but not in the way that phrase is usually used.
When the PQ started out around 1970, they got massive youth support, to the point that one leader, Parizeau, said that everytime he read the obituary pages, he got hopeful for sovereignty. The old federalists would die off, and the youth separatists would triumph over time.
What has actually happened is that support for sovereignty has gone down amongst youth voters. The 1970 cohort of youth who voted for sovereignty has steadily aged, and still votes for soverignty options, but now they’re the old bloc.
Today’s youth voters are more motivated by things that they see as more relevant: globalism, environmentalism, and so on. The passion that the 1970 cohort had for sovereignty and separation seems to have been a particular feature of that cohort, which had its formative political experience in the Quiet Revolution. They still have that passion, but today’s youth cohort - no so much. (Sovereignty will always be an issue in Quebec; I’m just talking about current voting patterns.)
The lesson drawn from that isn’t that people become more conservative as they age, or that youth are more likely to be radicals. It’s that a particular cohort of voters tends to have their voting patterns set in their teens and twenties, and as a group tend to keep those voting patterns as they age. It doesn’t mean that any political party will inevitably get the youth vote.
This group’s website is up and the signatories named. Some notable inclusions:
um, nobody?
I mean, it’s kind of humorous that Anthony Scaramucci is on there. All told, I recognized maybe 10-12 names out of the list. I’m not a super political insider, so maybe there are some surprising or influential people there, but I’m not seeing it. Michael Steele, perhaps, had a national role in the GOP, so I guess that’s something…
And their call to action is, well, pretty limp:
WHAT’S THE CALL?
A Call for American Renewal is a rallying cry for pragmatists everywhere. Our nation’s future should not be dictated by a single person but by principles that bind us together. That’s why we believe in pushing for the Republican Party to rededicate itself to founding ideals—or else hasten the creation of an alternative.
WHAT’S NEXT?
We cannot stay quiet in the face of rising political extremism. We must stand up and defend our republic. Sign up for updates about how we’re taking action, and join us for our upcoming nationwide town hall on renewing America. Details to follow.
That’s it, huh? And here I thought that MyPillow dude had the GOP fluff market cornered.
Just for the record, that’s a quote from them, not me.
Yes, sorry, I see that’s not clear.
Indeed. I think Beto was not so much strong as much as his opponent is just a Jupiter-sized douchebag - so much so that he repulses even some Republican voters. Cornyn doesn’t have that problem. Cornyn is potentially an heir-apparent to Mitch McConnell. He’s got a lot of political skill. He reads his electorate well at least. I don’t know if anyone has McConnell’s knowledge of procedure and his ability to calculate and massage different wings of a volatile party, but he might give it the ole Texas try at some point
Cite? I find the opposite ot be true.
Agree 100%
The fact that Republicans did good while Trump lost means that plenty of people were voting against Trump and for down ballot Republicans. I’m not sure you can consider that “help”.
Fwiw, younger people have tested far better than olds in delineating between accuracy and bullshit in information to which they’re exposed.
Ted Roosevelt!
According to 538, ticket splitting was minimal during the election (and works both ways). With one exception, every Republican Senator that won did so from a state that Trump also carried (Susan Collins being the exception). Trump isn’t an asset everywhere, but arguably he was in “reddish” states that were thought to be competitive Senate races like NC, TX and IA.