"The GOP is the "country" party" - June, 2012, republished October, 2016

It seems to me that the Republican Party is destined to be the dominant political force outside the big cities and the northeast.  A map similar to the one above for the 2008 election is quite  similar in its distributions of the results by county.

The exceptions to the general position outside the big cities are easy to explain.  African-Americans,  American Indians, mining areas, Latinos along the Mexican border, retirees from the NE on the gold coast in Florida, these are the non big city populations that vote Democratic.

This would indicate to me that the chance of the GOP recovering control of the Executive Branch through a presidential victory is slim, and likely to remain that way ffor a long time.

The semi-rural base of the Republican Party does not wish to become the latest converts to "coastalism."  Their representatives in the world pf professional politics want just that.  They want to out-Democrat the Democrats.  This makes them continuously vulnerable to primary challenges.

Try to imagine a Republican who could win the nomination in the primary process and then win the general election.  I think Huntsman or Christie could win the general, but they  are both very unlikely to win the nomination.

Nevertheless, the United States remains a federal republic.  The GOP is very strong in many states.  Most governors are Republicans.  Most state legislatures are controlled by the GOP.  The US House of Repersentatives has been re-districted by both parties in such a way as to "freeze" power in place.

Perhaps the GOP should accept a future in which it controls most of the states and the House of Representatives.  Control of the US Senate may also be within reach from time to time.  pl

Comments

[MajW]

Great map, thank you. do you have a legend that deines the greens and others?

[turcopolier]

MajW

The blue counties were won by the Democrats, the red ones by the Republicans. pl

[Bill H]

I think this overlooks only the degree to which Democrats can become disillusioned and/or disgusted by their own leadership. As Democratic presidents continue to exercise executive power more and more ruthlessly Democratic voters begin to stay home on election day and open the door to possibility of Republican victory.

[Abu Sinan]

As the white population declines in the US so will the GOP. They have to reach out and find common ground with non white communities or they will forever be the "minority" party.

[Anonymous]

And Democrate voters are somehow confident that a Republican President would be LESS apt to exercise broadened executive powers? While they may be upset at Obama, they would be certain that if it were a Republican in office, it would still be the same, except for worse domestic policies.

[turcopolier]

abu sinan

I think you miss several points 1- The white population is not declining and will not decline. It is forming a smaller percentage of the whole but the numbers of white people are not declining. 2- the population is not evenly distributed. My map is an illustration of that. The federal structure of American government insures that the "country party" will have sufficient "clout" to tie in knots any Democratic "city party" that holds the WH. This kind of power will force the "coastals" into negotiations of the kind being seen now. To think that one must hold the WH to have power is untrue. 3- The immigrant population is likely to evolve over time. Hispanics, East Asians, etc. are culturally conservative... pl

[scott s.]

For me the significant question is whether the map represents the division of Republican/Democrat, or rather conservative/liberal. The difference being if the division is political or philosophical/ideological. I tend towards the latter, which I think represents a trend beginning the late 20th century.

[GulfCoastPirate]

One thing you are forgetting. GOP austerity economics will be far worse for the inlanders than for the coastals so the GOP is doomed as lack of opportunity sends more and more inlanders (particularly their young) into the coastal cities. It is mathematically impossible for the economics of the GOP to work (which is why we had the recession in 2007-2008) and as the economy increasingly depends upon trade the inlanders will by necessity increasingly abandon the GOP unless the GOP changes. Of course, that then makes them coastals also. They really have no other choice.

[turcopolier]

GulfCoastPirate

Yet another economic determinist heard from. Your opinions are worth no more than mine. History will tell us. pl

[CK]

If only acres could vote it would be a Republican world.
According to the unbiased folks that count stuff for the US government, in the year ended in June 2012 the number of non-Hispanic whites who died exceeded the number of non-Hispanic whites born by 12,000+. A first in American history. The white population is declining in both absolute and relative numbers.
Democracy appears to trump Federal Republic every time, at least since the horrid 17th amendment. ( Which if it hadn't been passed, then your map would be important as a picture of senatorial power.)
According to Pew Polling ( their worth is for you to determine ) Hispanic Catholics in the USA who can vote; vote Liberal. The statement that Hispanics are socially conservative is not supported by any testable evidence.
What has been tested and is supported is that over time, Hispanics from Mexico do not assimilate into the USA, nor do they attain higher educational outcomes than their parents or previous iterations.

[Tyler]

I don't know what the hell the Republican Senators were thinking in passing the immigration treason, but all they've done is threaten to rupture the party by kicking it down to a House that has elections next year.

Rubio's likely to get primaried, and Flake is at about 33% approval rating out here. That whore McCain can't do a town hall without screaming at his constituents. Looks like populism might be back in style.

Best chance for a Presidential win would be Senator Ted Cruz, as opposed to yet another liberal in conservative drag from the Northeast who hits all the right buttons for the Beltway crowd but can't appeal to the voters.

Of course, this is all assuming the country stays together. With every decision shoved down the throats of the rurales by effete coastal elites, the indignation builds. Our cities are a wreck, the border is still unlawful, and the State is currently going after a hispanic man for defending himself against a noble urban youf that tried to bash his skull in while Nidan Hassan STILL waits to be tried.

A house divided...

[jerseycityjoan]

So many of the recent posts have struck a nerve in me -- the one about knocking down the neglected areas of Detroit, the writeup by Richard Sale of his experiences at the 1968 convention, the possibility of a civil war in Egypt. They have made me think of many things I would prefer not to think about.

I am going to think more about this post and other ones and come back and say more.

But I will say for now that I think the 2012 election map as above will sort of hold for the next two presidential elections anyway.

However, I see many changes and uncertainties ahead.

I think the Republican Party's days are numbered if it remains committed to very conservative, far right policies. Due to current demographic and economic changes and challenges, I do not think American will be able to sustain a major party committed to "small government conservatism" in the future -- not even if the "small government" philosophy is frequently violated as it is today.

I say this because I expect middle class jobs and wages to continue to disappear. Poor people are needy people.

I can certainly envision the rise of new party in opposition to the Democrats who foolishly never seem to consider that the destructive immigration policies that they have pursued with such determination (along with many cheap labor lovers in the Republican Party) will come back to haunt them.

I think we may experience social unrest and economic problems that will shock us all and greatly affect all of our social institutions and make many people change their ways of thinking in the years ahead.

[turcopolier]

CK

"If only acres could vote it would be a Republican world." Acres DO vote. That is called federalism. pl

[Tyler]

You think the Republican Party is dedicated to 'small government conservatism' and is 'far Right'?

That's adorable. Meanwhile the far Left Democrats who are pushing for transsexual rights, more wars, more immigration from the third world and post-natal abortions are all totally reasonable.

[Tyler]

I agree with you that the idea that Hispanics are 'social conservatives' is something Rove and the Beltway Cru came up with back in Shrub's term to justify blowing up the housing bubble in order to turn Hispanics into Ohio Republicans.

However, it blew up in their faces and now they can't live it down. More marriage out of wedlock, more usage of social services, more crime, more educational issues... Not hallmarks of 'social conservatives'. They want their gimmedats.

[turcopolier]

tyler

IMO you are taking too short a view. pl

[twv]

If assumptions are invalid, then the conclusion is worthless.

The recession of 2008-2009 was the bursting of the housing bubble which was caused primarily by insane lending with useless or no credit checks.
Then leading to the massive MBS trading, Credit Default Swaps and on and on as dominos.
Should Glass-Steagall have been repealed?
Of course not, but the Democrats and their media lapdogs conveniently forget that Clinton signed that repeal.

And I see a longer demographic trend here as coastal states (especially in the NE) become increasingly expensive and hostile to business, jobs (and people) will move.
There is already population flattening or loss happening in NY and most of the New England states.

[Will Reks]

This is true. It's why the Democrats dominated the House for 4+ decades. They used to win many of those acres.

Both parties try to dilute the voting power of the other's constituencies so we'll see how that takes shape in the next few years. I would have preferred to see the VRA applied equally to all 50 states with full voting protections for all including from voter fraud and voter disenfranchisement.

[GulfCoastPirate]

Actually, I'm not but the math doesn't lie. By voting with the GOP the non-coastals are voting against their own economic interests. Which of the two groups recovered from the recession quicker? Entirely predictable and the same thing will continue to happen each cycle. Math/science isn't opinion. That's why every time you turn your computer on you know exactly what is going to happen given no man-made defects. The equations that govern the electromagnetic waves that make your computing devices work are the same equations which govern economics. You can't say the equations are correct in one area but incorrect in another. The equations are immutable and are correct throughout the universe.

[jdledell]

Pat - I agree with you that time will tell but the trends are against rural conservatives holding on to the power they have today. I think everyone can agree cities are overwhelmingly Democratic, even in bright Red states. Urban areas continue to grow fairly dramatically compared with rural areas. According to one site I checked rural population declined by 2 full percentage points in just the last 10 years. While the correlation between urban and rural areas and liberal vs conservative political leanings is not perfect, there is no doubt in my mind that as urban areas continue to grow, Republican prospects will diminish.

Even in a Republic, as cities and their attached suburbs continue to grow, Republican dominance the House of Representatives will grow weaker. Republicans may continue to dominate State politics for a variety of reasons but even there power will accrue to politicians from Urban areas as time goes on.

It will be interesting to see how the 2014 Congressional races turn out. My bet is Democrats will make sizable gains in the House but not yet a majority. Living in an Urban area requires compromise to make it liveable and the more that Republicans appear to be against compromise will hurt them in Urban areas aside from their actual policies. Many Liberal Coasters are socially liberal but fiscal conservatives (I consider myself one) and Republican fights against abortion, Gay Rights, Immigration, universal healthcare etc will cause voters to reject them even though we agree with their fiscal policies.

[turcopolier]

jdledell

How do you propose to change the constitution in order to enable the growing numbers in the big cities? There are two possibilities 1- amendment. Do you think that will work? 2- a constitutional convention. Will that work for you and do you want to risk it. The first constitutional convention was called to amend the articles of confederation. Things got completely out of hand and a new form of government resulted. Or, perhaps you could just use the federal armed forces to overthrow the present constitutional order. pl

[GulfCoastPirate]

True about assumptions but I'm not making assumptions. Decreasing real income per person is a consequence of GOP economic theory. All the things you mention are a consequence of declining real income. If real incomes were rising you wouldn't have had those problems with the items you mention although I agree that lax regulation of Wall Street contributed to the severity of the problem once it became apparent.

Personally, yes, I would reinstitute something close to Glass-Steagall. As for the Democrats math isn't political. Many people looked at the math and made a fortune off the downturn and they didn't have to worry about anything the government was or wasn't going to do. They were going to make money either way. Some of those were Democrats and some of those were Republicans.

There was a reason Reagan and the Bush's kept increasing government spending while preaching otherwise to the faithful. I believe Poppy referred to it originally as 'voodoo'. A lot of people who lost out in 2007-2008 and who will lose out in the future should go back and listen to what he said at the time because it was, and is, 'voodoo'.

[Tyler]

"socially liberal but fiscal conservatives". That combination doesn't work. You can't be "fically conservative" when you're importing the Third World, paying for the ninth baby of Ofelia and Shitvaria, and gouging the middle class to keep the proles in EBT and SNAP cards.

This canard I keep seeing is a fig leaf for people who are screaming liberals and come up with this "err if Republicans were more liberal I'd vote for them!" nonsense when the reality is that people who identify as Conservative outnumber liberals AND independents for the first time.

[] "Diverse" Society
[] Prosperous Society

Pick one. You want to know what your "fiscally conservative but socially liberal" society looks like? Take a peek at the riots across Europe as "socially liberal" Northern Europe decided to invite the Third World to their "fiscally conservative" societies and now they get to deal with the joys of a diverse society, free of hate (race riots, cars on fire, anarcho-tyranny).

[Mark Logan]

MajW,

The US does not have proportional representation. "Winner take all" election accounting almost prohibitively favors two-party political representation.

[Will Reks]

Pat, why is a change to the constitution necessary? The present status quo in the House is due to gerrymandering by whichever party controlled redistricting after the 2010 census.

2016 and 2020 could see big shifts in terms of who controls the majority of governorships and state legislatures. Thus we could see a new majority in the House after the 2020 census and the re-drawing of districts that will follow.

The whining over small states getting the same representation is just that. Irrelevant whining. All that's needed is the next big wave election. If rural voters outvote the cities and suburbs then Republicans will benefit. If not, Democrats could take back the House. I don't see that happening for another decade.