Exhibit A in why I’m not worried about the future of the GOP, at least not because of demographic changes.
Obama lost 2.4 million young voters between 2008 and 2012. If he loses another 2.4 million over the next four years, we have no worries.
Exhibit B: Looks like we might also get a huge influx of angry young Europeans soon:
Half of young French want to leave France, and many of them for tax reasons. Here’s one angry French youth’s letter to the President:
I don’t want to work all my life in order to pay taxes that will, for the most part, only go to service the 1,900 billion euros of debt that your generation was kind enough to leave as your legacy. If these loans had at least been invested in a plan for the future of the country, if I thought I would profit a little from them, I wouldn’t have any problems repaying them. But they only allowed your generation to live above its means, to secure a generous welfare that I won’t be able to enjoy. In order to make your lives, I would say “cushy”, but I’m afraid that the word offends you.
My work and my taxes will also have to pay your pension that you haven’t bothered to fund, as well as all the health care and welfare costs for all these elderly people who will be, in less than twenty years, the majority in the country. Will this leave me enough money to live well and raise my children?
Time for another round of “Bring me your huddled masses” from the old continent.
In his defense, it’s possible that the alternate reality* that adaher posts from doesn’t have term limits.
*You know, the one where (among other things) Romney’s gonna win because the polls are all wrong and the Republican Party’s southern strategy had nothing to do with race.
Credit where credit is due: clever title man. Very self-referential. I like.
Now assuming you do mean not Obama but the party candidate for Presidentfor the Democratic Party vs the Republican one … a few bits of context for you to consider …
In terms of “youth” voters - more are came out in both 2008 and 2012 than in 2004.
Per your link the Democratic candidate won that demographic by 66 to 32 in 2008 and by only 60 to 37 in the less groundbreaking 2012 election.
That cohort that leant so heavily to the Democratic candidate will not primarily in the youth camp next election - they’ll be populating the next older cohort instead. They’ve bonded to the Democratic side now and that tends to stick somewhat.
I’ll leave your hope of the GOP being saved by angry French youth without comment.
Things change - the election was still close and could have gone another way. Who knows what a few years can bring. But the demographic dynamics are something that the GOP must be conscious of and positioning for.
No question. But in the end, you win based on persuading people to vote for you and by getting them to support your ideology. Changing demographics didn’t move the country towards the GOP in 1980, it was persuasion.
If the GOP could persuade the 60s generation to back them, they can persuade anyone. That was a generation that should have cleaved to the Democrats forever, but it just didn’t happen. The youth of today are even more malleable.
Obama got 2.4 million less youth votes in 2012 mostly because there were just a lot fewer voters in 2012 than in 2008. (Obama got 69.5 million votes in 2008 total, 65.9 million votes in 2012 while Romney managed to get a million more votes than McCain)
As pointed out, the percentage didn’t change that much at all.
Nothing to see here folks, pack it up and head home.
adaher, you have balls for bringing up the skewed polls thing. I got a laugh out of it.
I’m moderately sure you don’t mean it this way, but the message I get from this is that the solution to the GOP’s problem of the shrinking demographic of old racist white men is to import new ones from Europe. Not sure that’s a winning strategy, given how long it takes for new immigrants to become citizens.
Just ask each old white immigrant at the port of entry if he a) is cranky, and b) hates “them”. If he answers in the affirmative, he’s on the fast track to citizenship. Problem solved.
([Very] loosely based on the practice whereby a Cuban emigré is granted automatic asylum the moment he sets foot on US soil. So there is precedent, of a sort.)
(And for the sarcasm impaired, I’m off to fetch a crowbar to free my tongue from my cheek.)
Part of the French guy’s rant in the OP is about how the older generation ran up so much national debt, and now wants to cut social benefits for the younger ones to pay for it. Not sure how **adaher **concluded the GOP can get those votes.
Are you fucking kidding me? In 1980, it was the economy. Over the last forty or so years, the rise of the Republican party has a lot more to do with the political shift in the South of conservative Democrats becoming conservative Republicans than anything other single factor.
You often seem like a smart guy, and it just puzzles me when you throw out downright retarded things like this. Seriously, you think there’s more conservatives today than 30 years ago, because Reagan, Dole, McCain, and Rush convinced people about liberty and low taxes? What deluded bullshit. Here’s another skewed poll for you: the number of people identifying themselves as conservatives or liberals doesn’t change all that much over period of decades.
Not unless the GOP gets to work on serious, realistic immigration reform. Which they won’t. So the angry young Frechmen stay abroad, adaher fails to recruit a new generation of hate-filled, moronic masses for the GOP, and the country moves further to the Left, where it belongs.
'luci, I thought it was “Eat the Rich!” Although my doctor says I’m supposed to cut down on rich foods a bit…