Why are white people the only large demo group that supports republicans?

This is a continuous curiosity to me and if I recall it did not always used to be the case. I remember that certain asian sub groups used to be more republican, but now it’s almost 75% to 25% democrat to republican from Asians.
This divide seems to span economic groups, so it’s not that. Age is an issue, but there are a lot of old black people and latino people and asian people. On that last though, perhaps because some of the non white population tends to have come more recently, there are fewer older voters from certain sub groups and that is skewing things?
I get that the seeming hostility to immigration (both illegal and to some extent legal) is part of the reason minority groups are less receptive to the modern republican party, but what about whites?
Is the hostility to immigration a DRAW for white people?
I’m not white, but my guess is that most of you are. And though I’m pretty sure the political leanings of this board skew liberal, some of you must have conservative leanings, or know fellow white conservatives in the extended family. So why are white people so overly drawn to the republican party?

Whites are the majority race, and feel chipped away or eroded by immigration or whites’ decreasing majority %.

You pretty much got it. In California Republicans did okay with Latino voters until they pushed rabid anti-immigration measures. Now we are basically a one-party state. You make large blocs of voters think you hate them and they stop voting for you.
Republicans can turn it around, but it will take time and they’d have to turn their back on the alt-right.

They benefit disproportionately by Republican policies.

I think there is also another, more complex, issue afoot:

Conservatives generally want everyone to be treated as if they are already all equal. Liberals generally want everyone to be treated as if they are still unequal.

By which I mean, conservatives usually argue against racial affirmative action, saying that it is unequal treatment - why should a Hispanic student be treated differently than a white one? But liberals argue in favor of affirmative action, saying that minorities are still disadvantaged compared to whites, and so minorities need to be given a leg up in order to put them on equal level/footing with whites.

Similarly, some conservatives have said that there ought to be a White/Caucasian Heritage Month, since we already have a Hispanic Heritage Month, black heritage month, native American heritage month, and since white people are only one racial group in America, just like every other racial group (or so conservative logic goes,) why shouldn’t there be a White Heritage Month? But liberals typically oppose this idea because they say that white people are already privileged, and so giving them a White Heritage Month would further boost white people even further up, whereas by denying white people a White Heritage Month while giving minorities their minority-race heritage months, you are therefore leveling the field and making things more equal.
Now, many white people in America feel that there’s a double standard whereby they are not getting the favorable treatment that minorities get, and they either want some of that good stuff too, or feel that minorities shouldn’t get that preferential treatment (since everyone is already equal, right? There’s no more racial disadvantage in America…right?) And so some white people have this grievance whereby they feel they are the overlooked or OK-to-poke-fun-at race in America, and they feel the Republican Party better represents their grievances.

Disclaimer: I’m not white. This is just my observation. White folks, please tell me where I am wrong in my analysis. :wink:

This white folk thinks you have a reasonable grasp of the sort of white folk that would be likely to support the Republicans.

(Please note that I am not a Republican or conservative even if I am white - I’m very much a liberal with Democratic leanings, though I have been known to vote for sane Republicans over whackjob Democrats)

This needs to be reminded often, there is a grim lesson to all in the sense that Pete Wilson and the Republicans did win with their xenophobic laws. Only to later send Hispanics to the Democrats and make California a virtual one party state. One thing the Republicans forgot is that many Hispanics are also business owners and they are also movers and shakers.

If Trump somehow manages to win the only silver lining with that would be that the giant will also awake in places like Texas and and become more active in Florida.

You’re missing the first step, I think – it’s generalizing, but broadly there might be some truth to the statement that conservatives generally believe that everyone is already treated equally by society, while liberals generally believe that various minorities are still disadvantaged and not treated equally by society.

And I think you’re missing what liberals believe – they certainly don’t want people treated unequally; quite the opposite. Many liberals believe that the closest we can come to equal treatment today includes things like affirmative action to make up for other inequalities.

It’s my impression of recent history that this whole thing is based on politics in the southern states. (By whole thing, I mean the current election, but even most of the shifts we’ve seen since the 1940s.) Wikipedia lays it out pretty well:
1948: Dixiecrats leave the Democratic party because they oppose civil rights. This defines the Republican party as the home of racists.
1964: Republicans oppose

To look at how this affected African American voters: (from http://blackdemographics.com/culture/black-politics/ ), Going into the 40’s, they were almost evenly divided between the two parties. You see a shift starting in 50’s, and by the 1964 and 1968 elections, you’re looking at the new normal that has defined race and politics ever since. When the racists left the Democrats, they joined the Republicans and that shifted politics for the South and the nation ever since.

The civil rights era was mostly framed as black vs white, but it seems to me that you’d have to be a very naive Asian or Hispanic to think it didn’t affect you. Especially when imbeciles like Trump make Hispanics out to be their bogeyman.

So… you can’t really simplify it down to what white people think because they’re not a single entity. Some are just plain racist and always have been. Before Trump, I would have said it was about 10% of Republicans… 20% at the most. But in the current election, it seems like 30% or more. People are showing their true colors I suppose.

Anyway, I think the not-racist white voters are Republican because it tends to represent the status quo. If you’re situated well and things are going good for you, it makes sense to support more of the same. The status quo looks better for more whites than it does for more blacks, just as it looks better for the wealthy than the poor. Some of this ideology is current issues, and some is rooted in wishful thinking (Republicans are more likely to think that they will become rich, even if they aren’t now).

I think we may be talking past each other - we’re describing the same thing. Affirmative action, is, by definition, unequal treatment within the context of college admissions alone - someone is being given different treatment on account of their race. The issue of dispute is whether this unequal treatment is a good or bad thing.

According to supporters, such policies reduce inequalities - whites are getting other advantages, so AA lessens the unequal treatment.

As a white liberal, I am almost embarrassed to admit that affirmative action bothers me. No. 1 example: Clarence Thomas.

But while I wish it weren’t necessary, we whites have so many advantages that AA is necessary to level the playing field. In addition to that there really is an advantage to diversity. In addition, universities have never practiced equal treatment. They favored geographic diversity, they favored alumni children, and (I know this from the example of a not very bright cousin of mine), they favored children whose father made a nice fat donation to the school.

The anti science nonsense the GOP has been pushing has probably alienated the Asian community as well. Republicans have gone from trying to slip Creationism into school curriculums to outright climate change denial.

And this has been repeated with many Asian communities as well, which strictly ideologically-speaking should be conservatives. Muslim Americans being one obvious example, but I’ve noticed the Indian community shift pretty remarkable to the Democrats over the last 15 years or so. I’m pretty sure I’ve read that Bill Clinton only got like 30-40% of the Asian-American vote while Obama got something like 70%.

Within the context of the action alone, the affirmative action is unequal treatment.
If I am an airline CEO, and I say, “To remedy centuries of institutionalized discrimination, I hereby announce that Native American passengers will be given discounts on first-class seating,” then that action, in and of itself, is unequal treatment. It may remedy past discrimination, but in and of itself, it is unequal.

I believe there are many white folks in America who genuinely, sincerely, believe that they are equal to other races - in the sense of having no particular privilege or advantage. This would be especially the case with white folks who are impoverished, unemployed, or have had some other misfortune befall them.

So when they perceive a double standard in that minorities get certain benefits that they do not, they understandably get pissed off. If someone believes that all races are already equal, he or she will unsurprisingly get irritated if the races are treated as if they are not equal. I think this makes up a significant component of Trump’s support base.

What, you figure asshole black weasels shouldn’t get to go to Yale Law School along with all the asshole white weasels?

Policies aside, Republicans suffer from an image problem. It is hard to want to get on board with a party when almost all the faces in that party don’t look like you or speak like you.

FWIW: Trump and Clinton are neck in neck among English Dominant Latinos

The problem is that an absolutely “color-blind” test for access to colleges, employment, and housing also means unequal treatment.

This was the principle behind the old South and the “literacy test” for voting. Everyone took the same test, but poorly educated blacks passed the test far less often than better-educated whites.

(Plus, outright cheating. No answer a black applicant gave was ever correct.)

Naive neutrality produces unequal results, and therefore is not “equal” by definition.

(Liberals are often accused of wanting “equality of results,” not “equality of opportunity.” I believe that without equality of results, true equality of opportunity did not exist. The results are the only way to measure the reality of the opportunity.)

Naive equality means both men and women are judged by how far they can piss.