I think a one party Democratic America would not be tolerated well, so who do you think will become the “new” other Party once the Republicans are no longer voted for?
My guess is that either the Democrats would become the new face of the right being the neoliberals they are and the Green Party would become the new left, or the Libertarians would replace and/or merge with the remaining conservatives and conservatism will become more Godless.
Why do you think Republicans will go extinct rather than (or before) Democrats?
Republicans currently hold both houses of Congress, 31 governorships, both legislative houses in 24 states and one house in 18 out of the other 26 states.
They won’t go away; they’ll just change.
The current two parties are pretty stable. Yes, you’ll have some interesting pressure from the extremes – Ralph Nader, the Tea Party, assorted Libertarians – but the two core constituencies are both very broad and yet very minimalist. In hyper-simplistic terms, the “Let’s try something new” party and the “Let’s keep doing what we’ve always done” party. Both are necessary.
Parties in a plurality system are very stable. Unless there’s a massive social upheaval, the Republicans will be around for a very long time.
Their ideology will certainly change (as will the Democrats’) but the Republican Party itself will continue to exist barring massive electoral reform converting our system to a multiparty one.
Sure.
Just like the Whigs.
Objection, Your Honor. Assumes facts not in evidence.
Seriously, when will this time when “the Republicans are no longer voted for” happen, and what will bring it about? Are the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson and the Walton heirs and the DeVos family and Art Pope and all those other big-money guys behind the conservative movement all going to see the light one of these days? Will the white working class realize they’ve been played by Fox and Rush and all the rest of those types fanning their resentments against moochers and takers and libruls and blacks and all?
Whatever the disease is that’s gotten into the heads of a good chunk of America, it isn’t going anywhere. And the billionaires who work to continually suck money out of the economy and into their bank accounts will continue to ensure that this is the case.
It’s always possible that in another 20 years, enough of the GOP’s current base will have died off or will be drooling in nursing homes that the party will be somewhat diminished, and it’s always possible that the generations behind them won’t replace them in sufficient numbers to make up the difference. But that’ll just make them a minority party, rather than a disappeared party.
And my bet is that it will take 20 years minimum for that to happen - assuming it happens at all. We don’t know enough about what the political landscape will be then to make predictions. If the past 25 years hasn’t convinced one of how difficult it is to make good political predictions even 10 years ahead, I don’t know what it would take.
♩ “I had ♬ a dream ♩♩♩ A wonderful dream”
But then I awake and look around me
And 5 out of 9 on SCOTUS. (The idea it’s a non-partisan body justnostalgia.)
Nitpick: I think you should revise your counts to clarify treatment of Nebraska’s unicameral legistlure. 
The Democrats started in the 1820s. The Republicans started in the 1850s. Without an overhaul of the system and the Constitution those two parties will remain. I don’t see a third party rising up to replace either. But that doesn’t mean that things won’t change. If you look at the history of both parties, they have both changed dramatically. In 50 years, barring a revolution, there will be the same two parties. But both will have evolved into something different than now.
It ain’t called The Grand OLD Party for nothing.
Of course the math isn’t precise to any degree, but I think it’s fair to assume that more Romney voters than Obama voters have slipped the surly bonds of earth. If it is indeed in the order of 400,000 votes that is significant. The electorate gets less old, less white, less homophobic, less religious, and less rural every election cycle. Republicans can stem the tide a bit with gerrymandering and voter suppression, but in the end the chickens come home to roost. Barring an unacceptable Democrat or an especially charismatic Republican, it’s very difficult for a Republican to get elected president. Fast forward say 20 years, that advantage in state governments will evaporate as well.
This kind of thinking is much of the reason why the GOP isn’t going to disappear. People who don’t think disagreement is a disease, and who recognize that invested money doesn’t disappear out of the economy, need a party to vote for.
Regards,
Shodan
If that happens, the GOP will simply cut to the left.
The two political parties will always position themselves so that roughly half of the voters support each of them. If they see that number dropping, they’ll simply change their ideology. That’s how it’s always worked.
The big difference in the last 100 years versus say, when the Whigs died out, is the degree to which the current two parties are enshrined in state electoral law.
The practical obstacles to creating an *ab initio *third party are ginormous.
So we’ll be left UFN with the current two parties.
They probably won’t change names for simple marketing reasons. Unless one or the other is rocked to its very foundation by scandal. In which case a “re-branding” will occur with a shiny new name to emphasize the break with the past skullduggery.
And over time, each will tack back and forth, fore and aft with public opinion.
If, say the right goes hard over crazy, they’ll eventually lose enough elections to decide on their own to go back the other way. It’s certainly easier for them to change policy than it is for the dissatisfied members to create a fresh party from scratch.
Ditto the left. If they went hard over commie they’d lose enough elections to realize that was a losing strategy. So they’d then tack back towards the center.
If our state-level electoral laws weren’t as rigidly two-party as they are, with the current two parties specifically all but enshrined in the law, then we *might *see meaningful alternate parties start appearing, most likely regional ones. We can certainly watch Britain right now going from essentially (pre-2010) a 2-and-a-quarter-party system to a 6-ish-party-system.
Ordinarily I’d agree with you. But after watching Republicans for the past say 10 years I’m not so sure. The GOP base is hard right and they’re the ones who come out in droves in primaries. The party can’t tack left until the base does and the base seems to get more rigidly entrenched with the passage of time.
In the early 1900s, the Republicans were the more “progressive” party on many issues (although still the party of business) and the party supported by blacks. Democrats favored agriculture and so had major support in rural areas. The parties gradually switched positions on many issues between 1930 and 1970 as well as the segments of the population that supported each. On of the major changes, however, has been the almost total extinction of the “liberal Republican” like Nelson Rockefeller or John Lindsay. Likewise most politicians who in an earlier era might have been conservative Democrats have become Republicans.
This is very logical and probably correct but …
A very big change in recent decades is the bipolarization of political thought in America, caused in part by self-reinforcing groupthink exacerbated by the 'Web. In the past, Dems and Reps were both “big tent” parties and centrists were comfortable in either party. Now, only the least informed voters are ambivalent about their alignment.
With the geriatric Tea Party diminishing in strength, a major rupture in the GOP is unlikely. Instead expect to see a series of jerks to the center as Republicans in bluish states try to appeal to rationalists.
I’ve got nothing against disagreement. But passing laws saying something without a brain is a person (to bring up one for-instance) is just batshit.
Oh, and if there’s far more money floating around than there’s stuff to invest in - which is where we’ve been since 2008 - then in fact that money has effectively disappeared out of the economy. It drives up the prices of securities, real estate in especially desirable areas, art, and other rarities, but that’s about it.
They won’t go anywhere. In states with democratic party leanings like CA or VT the Republican party still exists. Democrats still exist in heavily Republican states like OK.
However due to demographic changes the gop may need to change their views soon. But I have no idea when or if. I know a party based on white, married old people who deny science and civil rights is going to be harder to build a winning coalition on. In 2020 over 40% of the electorate will be millennials.
People are underestimating the resiliency of political parties. In the 1980s, the Democrats suffered three consecutive blowout defeats, yet rebounded very ably.
The GOP has lost the popular vote in the last two presidential elections by an average of 5.6%. This is a bitterly split, divided nation.
Most people get more rigidly entrenched in their political views. Most shifts of political parties happen through attrition. The old entrenched base dies off, and the party gradually shifts its platform to capture new voters.
This is especially noticeable for the GOP because, as the conservative party, it’s always going to look like it’s behind major trends and clinging to an outdated and rigid
Look at, say, gay marriage, a major polarizing issue. Public support is shifting rapidly, and so are the positions of politicians. 20 years ago, Clinton signed DOMA. 7 years ago, Obama stated that he wasn’t in favor of SSM, but pretty weakly, and many believed that he really was in favor, but didn’t think he could afford to state it openly. Now, you’re hard-pressed to find a single democrat who is opposed to SSM.
Here’s an article with a variety of public statements on the issue. Most of them appear to just not want to talk about it, because they’ve realized that the GOP is basically where the Democrats were 8 years ago. Split to the point where they don’t really want to make a strong statement at all.
In twelve years I predict the top five GOP primary presidential candidates will publicly support SSM. And the GOP will still be getting about half the vote in the country.