Not only is the country's racial demographics changing, the younger voters are more progressive and they are more active than before. A recently released analysis of the 2020 election confirms this as well.
https://news.yahoo.com/gops-main-voter-bloc-shrinking-153954578.html "A new deep dive into the 2020 electorate by Pew Research contain mostly bad news for Republicans, whose approaching demographic dooms less racial than it is generational. While it shouldn't be news to anyone at this point that young voters are a solidly blue voting bloc, the more worrisome developments for the GOP are the unexpectedly elderly nature of the party's coalition and the unyielding Democratic lean of younger voters as they age. If Pew's numbers are to be believed, the only solidly Republican age demographic last year was 75 and over, meaning that every time the sun comes up, the GOP's struggle to win a majority of American voters gets harder."
That last sentence is particularly interesting. If the GOP's most solid voter block is over 75, the more the GOP makes it harder to vote by mail, the more that block's ability to vote is suppressed. In fact, many of the vote-by-mail movements were begun by the GOP in order to maximize votes from their loyal seniors. Now they are busy reversing that method.
From an article on The Hill:
"younger voters are getting more comfortable casting their ballots: Among those between the ages of 30 and 39, almost half are frequent voters, up from just over a third four years ago, a sign that a generation-long dismissed for its apathy is engaging in politics more habitually. There are signs that the emerging younger electorate is likely to provide a windfall for Democratic candidates. In states where voters are allowed to register by party, 52 percent of voters 18 to 29 are registered Democrats, compared with just 35 percent who are registered, Republicans. Among 30- to 39-year-olds, the gap is even wider: 53 percent are registered Democrats, while just 34 percent are registered, Republican"
Some comments about whether socialism would lead to communism, down the road ...
.With a flock of relatives in Austria and Croatia who live with western European-style socialism and love it, I think calling their brand would lead to Communism is a very big laugh. Between spending portions of my life in close hand on-site observation of life under communism, one does not lead to another. What is more likely to cause communism is abject poverty and rule by well-off elites. What defines communism is dictatorship of one group oppressing another by force and prohibiting dissent. I have asked my European friends if they resented regressive vat taxes and other tax burdens...but usually, they felt what they gave to the government, what government gave them back was worth it. They got their money's worth. Those in the US may have a different view,, but those in both the US and those in western Europe felt their desires of an overwhelming majority got expressed through the ballot box. Politicians in Europe who tried to remove or restricts or reduce elements of government services did not get very far. To this day, I remember the early days of the Tea Party movement when demonstrators sincerely chanted, don't let government take my (social security or medicare) away from me, not realizing they were government programs they were so ignorant or self-delusional.
One advantage European socialism has is that most of the countries spend less of their GDP on military expenditures that the US. It varies from country to country, but it is generally true.
Wht is Texas a hard right state? Demographics are bad news there, but to stave off changes, Texas GOP gets help from political gerrymandering. Partisan gerrymandering has empowered a hard-right turn in Texas (yahoo.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment