The way forward for both parties

[wonky]

No matter what happens tomorrow, Republicans eventually will run up against demographic realities, and if they ever change to meet the pragmatic needs of a minority-majority electorate, the Democratic party will change, too.

From a Politico article:

But Republicans are divided on the way forward. Its base is growing more conservative, nominating and at times electing purists while the country is becoming more center than center-right. Practical-minded party elites want to pass a comprehensive immigration bill, de-emphasize issues like contraception and abortion and move on a major taxes-and-spending deal that includes some method of raising new revenue.

But many rank-and-file Republicans in Congress and grass-roots activists won’t sanction amnesty for undocumented immigrants, are determined to advance restrictions on abortion and have no appetite for any compromise with Democrats on fiscal issues. And that doesn’t even get at the growing cleavage on foreign policy in the GOP between the party’s hawkish wing and the rising voices who prefer a more restrained role abroad.

Of these suggested or potential modifications of the Republican strategy or platform, which (if any) do you think the party will embrace? Which (if any) would prove most effective? Which (if any) would the Democrats have to counter in some way, and what could the Dems do? What will the Dems do independently of what the Republicans do?

(If you’re convinced the Republican party is not getting whiter and older, or that getting whiter and older is not a problem, I guess you can try to make that case, too.)

[adaher]

I think the demographic problem is vastly overrated. Case in point: Alabama. By all rights, Alabama should be a blue state. It has a large minority population. The state is only 67% white. So why does the GOP have a lock on it? Whites vote about 85% Republican.

As the majority race, whites tend to be swing voters. Race does not have much of an effect on their voting habits. If whites become only a plurality or a small majority, they’ll start bloc voting like other groups do, as whites do in Alabama.

That’s the bad future, the future where the US is increasingly Balkanized and where your race is a pretty good predictor of your voting habits. THe better future is one where race is becoming increasingly irrelevant due to integration and a higher percentage of people are of mixed race descent. If 45% of the country is white in 2050 but 90% of the country is at least half-white, it’s hard to predict how that goes.

The third possible outcome is that the definition of white simply expands organically, as it has throughout our history. The demographers predict that by 2050 we’ll be 45% non-Hispanic white. But we’ll still be 75% white! It is very likely that Hernandez, Rodriguez, and Gonzalez will be just as white sounding names as Vechetti, O’Connor, and Wladic, which themselves were not really “white” names 100 years ago. So the country is still 75% white and votes pretty much the way it does today.

But let’s say what liberals hope for is true and minorities control the balance of power in the US due to the white vote being smaller, and being split. Republicans don’t have to change much to fix that. Most of the problems minorities have with Republicans are based on attitudes, not ideology. There is nothing about being non-white that makes one inherently supportive of big government. If Republicans have to change, it’ll be mainly on social issues and immigration. Problem solved.

One thing that will NEVER happen is one party domination. Worst case is that Republicans spend about 12 years in the wilderness at some point(maybe 2020-2032) and realize things have to change.

[bup]

@adaher

Alabama…has a large minority population. The state is only 67% white.

The US population as a whole is 72% white, so that’s not a big difference.

So why does the GOP have a lock on it?

Because voting Republican is highly correlated with lower education? Because they’ve voted Republican since the Civil Rights Act? Voter suppression? Or is the question rhetorical, and you’ve got some reason which ignores that every state in the deep south behaves the same way as Alabama?

As the majority race, whites tend to be swing voters. Race does not have much of an effect on their voting habits. If whites become only a plurality or a small majority, they’ll start bloc voting like other groups do, as whites do in Alabama.

All of these claims are dubious.

And you never answered your rhetorical question.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

I think the Republican Party might be more impacted by their failure to capture the Senate - which they were expected to do and could have done absent bad candidates and campaigns, than by their failure to capture the presidency, which was an uphill battle from the start. This will hopefully lead to a rethinking of the wisdom of nominating Tea Party amateurs.

@adaher

The third possible outcome is that the definition of white simply expands organically, as it has throughout our history. The demographers predict that by 2050 we’ll be 45% non-Hispanic white. But we’ll still be 75% white! It is very likely that Hernandez, Rodriguez, and Gonzalez will be just as white sounding names as Vechetti, O’Connor, and Wladic, which themselves were not really “white” names 100 years ago. So the country is still 75% white and votes pretty much the way it does today.

Problem is welfare and the cycle of dependency. That didn’t exist back when Vechetti et al came here.

But let’s say what liberals hope for is true and minorities control the balance of power in the US due to the white vote being smaller, and being split. Republicans don’t have to change much to fix that. Most of the problems minorities have with Republicans are based on attitudes, not ideology. There is nothing about being non-white that makes one inherently supportive of big government. If Republicans have to change, it’ll be mainly on social issues and immigration. Problem solved.

See above.

What could happen is that the Republican Party fades away and the Democratic Party splits into the right and center wings.

But you’re right that it’s more likely the Repubs will have to move left on certain issues.

[Marley23]

@adaher

It is very likely that Hernandez, Rodriguez, and Gonzalez will be just as white sounding names as Vechetti, O’Connor, and Wladic, which themselves were not really “white” names 100 years ago.

The Republicans have been working pretty hard to alienate those voters. They’re not going to start winning them unless they change their policies.

[tomcar]

3 or 4 parties would help a lot (with run offs.)
I think once UHC is established, and Republicans don’t fight it, the differences between the 2 parties won’t be as big. There will always be stuff to fight over, but peoples base needs will be covered so it wont be as dire.
Of course, it is gonna take a long time for Republicans to be OK with poor people having healthcare.