The Tipping Point

[Timsup2nothin]

It's almost as if the person we need is Hillary "The Republicans are the enemy and going to obstruct us on Day 1 and my experience with that living in the white house in the 90s makes me most qualified" Clinton.

Obama said "that's ridiculous" and won that election.

And it turned out not to be ridiculous.

 

[Estebonrober]

How? Most red states have already taken their forty some odd percent democrat voters and shoved half of them into one district and splintered the rest among the remaining districts so they have no voice. What can they do to make it worse? Federal level gerrymandering is maximized already. It can't get worse. In states where the Republicans have the executive and supermajorities the state level districting is already maximized also. It too cannot be made any worse.

This is going to be one of those "hold my beer" memes isn't it?

Constitutional Convention. Republican base has been itching for it, liberal base is starting to as well. It will be a no holds bar fist fight that will probably lead to violence, BUT! it's dangers can be overwhelmed I believe because the majority of Americans are good nature people with stewardship of their nation at heart. . . I reserve the right to be nightmarishly wrong though.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Constitutional Convention. Republican base has been itching for it, liberal base is starting to as well. It will be a no holds bar fist fight that will probably lead to violence, BUT! it's dangers can be overwhelmed I believe because the majority of Americans are good nature people with stewardship of their nation at heart. . . I reserve the right to be nightmarishly wrong though.

The people who want a constitutional convention pretty much universally want to abandon the pretense of democracy and just have their beliefs enshrined in the minority rule of the land. They also pretty universally fail to understand that the outcome of a constitutional convention would not give them anything like that, unless the process could somehow be hijacked. Therefore the outcome of a constitutional convention is that either everyone who wanted it comes away angry with the results, or we get some product of hijacking that requires the resulting minority rule to either be accepted or violently overthrown. Either way, bad news.

 

[Phrossack]

Gerrymandering works. When 45% of the vote can hold your majority in the legislature there's no disputing that it works. But in that 45% there are a significant number that have to be allowed to "turn a blind eye" on the cheating. Not all of them, obviously. There are also plenty who are all for cheating so long as they win. But if opening eyes reduces them down to just the "do whatever it takes" portion then even the most efficient gerrymander won't be enough.

I'm not sure Republican voters think like that.

In general, those who turn a blind eye to their party's violations, and who are then given irrefutable proof that prevents them from turning a blind eye, learn to accept whatever it was they used to ignore. Evangelicals who hated Bill Clinton's infidelity instead have become much more accepting of infidelity in the past three years. The GOP reversed its stance on Russia's occupation of Ukrainian territory overnight once Trump was nominated.
Republican voters believe whatever helps them square the circle and sleep at night, not whatever's true, and no amount of irrefutable evidence of Republican perfidy and corruption can change that. If they could stick with Trump when he suggested taking guns without due process, or trying to pass off the Acosta forgery, they can and will stick with him through anything.

 

[Estebonrober]

The people who want a constitutional convention pretty much universally want to abandon the pretense of democracy and just have their beliefs enshrined in the minority rule of the land. They also pretty universally fail to understand that the outcome of a constitutional convention would not give them anything like that, unless the process could somehow be hijacked. Therefore the outcome of a constitutional convention is that either everyone who wanted it comes away angry with the results, or we get some product of hijacking that requires the resulting minority rule to either be accepted or violently overthrown. Either way, bad news.

Well that does seem to be the case with the republican base that's pushing for it, that's almost the opposite the case of what the liberal base is pushing for, thus let both ideas shine in the naked light? The tyranny of the minority or the balanced rule of the plurality. It seems to me once republicans start openly pushing for limitations on voting rights Americans will en mass push back, and I look no farther than bloody Florida which just recently passed reestablishing voting rights for felons who have served their terms.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm not sure Republican voters think like that.

In general, those who turn a blind eye to their party's violations, and who are then given irrefutable proof that prevents them from turning a blind eye, learn to accept whatever it was they used to ignore. Evangelicals who hated Bill Clinton's infidelity instead have become much more accepting of infidelity in the past three years. The GOP reversed its stance on Russia's occupation of Ukrainian territory overnight once Trump was nominated.
Republican voters believe whatever helps them square the circle and sleep at night, not whatever's true, and no amount of irrefutable evidence of Republican perfidy and corruption can change that. If they could stick with Trump when he suggested taking guns without due process, or trying to pass off the Acosta forgery, they can and will stick with him through anything.

Republican voters are not monolithic. No doubt there are people exactly as you describe, but there has been an undeniable decline in the Republican voter population so clearly they aren't all like that. If a local anecdotal proof helps, consider that @rah has mostly abandoned the GOP in the wake of Trump, and I abandoned the GOP in the wake of GWBush.

 

[Estebonrober]

Republican voters are not monolithic. No doubt there are people exactly as you describe, but there has been an undeniable decline in the Republican voter population so clearly they aren't all like that. If a local anecdotal proof helps, consider that @rah has mostly abandoned the GOP in the wake of Trump, and I abandoned the GOP in the wake of GWBush.

and I abandoned them during Obama's first election.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well that does seem to be the case with the republican base that's pushing for it, that's almost the opposite the case of what the liberal base is pushing for, thus let both ideas shine in the naked light? The tyranny of the minority or the balanced rule of the plurality. It seems to me once republicans start openly pushing for limitations on voting rights Americans will en mass push back, and I look no farther than bloody Florida which just recently passed reestablishing voting rights for felons who have served their terms.

The liberal base incorrectly believes they are the majority, just like the Republican base mistakenly believes that they are. The liberal base's commitment to democracy folds like a tent the moment they figure out that they are wrong.

 

[Phrossack]

Republican voters are not monolithic. No doubt there are people exactly as you describe, but there has been an undeniable decline in the Republican voter population so clearly they aren't all like that. If a local anecdotal proof helps, consider that @rah has mostly abandoned the GOP in the wake of Trump, and I abandoned the GOP in the wake of GWBush.

Could that not also be chalked up to mortality and an inability to recruit enough young new voters to replace them?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Could that not also be chalked up to mortality and an inability to recruit enough young new voters to replace them?

@rah and I are dead?!?

 

[Lexicus]

It's almost as if the person we need is Hillary "The Republicans are the enemy and going to obstruct us on Day 1 and my experience with that living in the white house in the 90s makes me most qualified" Clinton.

Obama said "that's ridiculous" and won that election.

fwiw I didn't support either of them until Hillary's campaign got racist.

 

[Phrossack]

@rah and I are dead?!?

Returned from beyond the grave to continue unfinished business on CFC...

I meant to say, "Might the drop in GOP voters be due to older members dying and the party's inability to get enough new young voters to replace them?"

 

[rah]

As has been pointed out, part of the drop is some older GOP voters getting so fed up that "We" refuse to support the party anymore. Some of us didn't die, just fed up.

 

[Phrossack]

As has been pointed out, part of the drop is some older GOP voters getting so fed up that "We" refuse to support the party anymore. Some of us didn't die, just fed up.

While that's sincerely heartening to hear, I'm curious about the numbers of desertion vs. mortality. I really don't know how they match up.

Perhaps all the Republicans who are open-minded and capable of changing their minds, such as you and Tim, have already done so? I don't know what more it could take to convince a Republican to abandon the party now that hasn't already happened. Sure, if there's an economic downturn, people will almost certainly leave in some number, but not because they decided that there's something fundamentally wrong with the party.

 

[El_Machinae]

I don't expect people who self-identify as Republican to abandon the party. But I'd appreciate it if they were willing to defend it a bit more aggressively than they currently are. It requires an increase it targeted punishments as well as a refusal to materially support. The party could easily survive Trump

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The Democrats have held the majority in the Wisconsin legislature exactly one time in the past two decades plus

How many of those elections happened without gerrymandering and suppression influencing the vote? There are also often enthusiasm gaps which translate into self-supressed turnout for one side or other which doesn't directly correlate with how right- or left-wing a state is. That was a strong theme during the Obama years during midterms and carried over into the 2016 general election. And in any case, Wisconsin was still voting for Democrats in the Senate and Presidency more often than not over the last two decades.

Gerrymandering works. Wisconsin was not a solidly red state for the last two decades and it isn't one now despite the complete blowout the Republicans handed the democrats in the state legislature. I see no evidence that gerrymandering efforts have backfired there or anywhere else, really. Some court reversals have slowed it temporarily but not consistently and the latest Republican tactics are to just ignore the courts with total impunity.

The census is actively being used to make gerrymandering worse and it will accelerate in this census cycle. Most redistricting efforts are tied directly to the census and since it is kicking off now, the Republicans currently have enough power in enough states to tilt it in their favor - as they are pursuing already. Even should the Democrats have a landslide in 2020, gerrymandering is so bad that it can't be overcome in a single cycle. And I really think we have a single cycle to fix some of these pressing, underlying issues before the Republicans win back a split Congress and are therefore able to prevent further rollbacks.

Gerrymandering has gotten so bad that it should no longer be treated as a political question but a criminal one.


And of course it's only one part of the overall picture of the corruption of our government.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

While that's sincerely heartening to hear, I'm curious about the numbers of desertion vs. mortality. I really don't know how they match up.

Perhaps all the Republicans who are open-minded and capable of changing their minds, such as you and Tim, have already done so? I don't know what more it could take to convince a Republican to abandon the party now that hasn't already happened. Sure, if there's an economic downturn, people will almost certainly leave in some number, but not because they decided that there's something fundamentally wrong with the party.

More than "desertion," the issue can be analyzed as long standing incompatibility.

The GOP, for basically my entire life (which is long) has contained what Hillary called the basket of deplorables. Nixon appealed to them directly in the southern strategy response to the civil rights movement. As more of the unconcerned middle took offense to open racism in government the appeals had to be toned down to dog whistling by Reagan, but the deplorables were still loyal enough. GWBush had to fight for the margins because even dog whistles to the deplorables were considered offensive to a huge majority by the turn of the century. The deplorables stayed loyal because they had nowhere else to go, but the shunning took a toll.

Romney ran under a party mandate that recognized the deplorables as a dead end street. Open racism is just too widely offensive now and without diversifying the GOP was headed to eventual death. Romney didn't do a great job of it, but he did try to shift the brand further away from the deplorables. Trump's calculation was that this path to long term survival is irrelevant in the short term and he seized the party by direct supplication of the deplorables. It worked to get him elected, because it brought disgruntled deplorables back to the polls and the rest of the GOP in the immediate sense had nowhere else to go. But that 'rest of the GOP' is, in fact, just as incompatible with the open appeal to the deplorables as anyone else.

That incompatability is clearly illuminated by the term RINO, which the Trumpists apply to at least half of all Republican voters. If you don't openly state that Black Lives Matter is the real racism and should be put down with extreme prejudice by law enforcement using anti-terrorism laws, you're a RINO. If you don't support "the threat of Sharia law" as justification to enact Abrahamic law, you're a RINO, and of course there's no place for anything but a man cleaving to a woman under that law in their opinion. They are done being hidden in the attic like so many drunken uncles caught fondling their nieces and nephews, the deplorables now consider themselves irrevocably as the new face of the GOP. Oddly, against even the most basic rules of mathematics, they think they can shrink the party by half and still be a majority.

If they 'succeed' in driving half of Republican voters into the ranks of the Democrats no amount of gerrymandering or voter suppression is going to carry the day, even in the deepest sorry states of redness. What might carry the day is if the Democratic party makes a very strong point of making their newly available voters unwelcome. They had nowhere to go in the immediate sense, but they are looking now. The midterm showed that.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The problem is that despite all their good intentions the RINO's of the party still show up and vote straight ticket Republican no matter how morally, ethically and legally repulsive they know their party's candidates to be. Never Trump didn't really take off in 2016 or 2018 as near I can tell.

Do we have evidence of significant defections from the GOP to the Democrats in 2018? Or was it mostly self-suppression (staying home) on the right and high turnout on the left? I agree that switching sides would destroy the GOP in an election but I don't see evidence of that happening.

And if the Democrats are not unable to completely reverse the gerrymandering and other issues by the following cycle, they could be in just as big of a pickle as they are now as more moderate Republicans will pop up in the aftermath of Trump's downfall and win back the old gerrymandered districts.

It took the GOP more than a decade of consistent, coordinated effort to push things this far. I don't think the Democrats can undo it fast enough to save the country.

I hate being this pessimistic; I want to believe I'm totally wrong. I just don't see it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

The problem is that despite all their good intentions the RINO's of the party still show up and vote straight ticket Republican no matter how morally, ethically and legally repulsive they know their party's candidates to be. Never Trump didn't really take off in 2016 or 2018 as near I can tell.

You just acknowledged that they didn't show up. At the least they self suppressed. That's a problem for the GOP that can only grow as long as Trump, or candidates like Trump, openly play to the deplorables. And the deplorables have been down the dog whistle road before; if GOP candidates stop playing to them openly they will definitely stay home. Either way, the door is open for the Democrats to take office. Staying in office is a different thing. That's going to require performance.

Never Trump is a dead play, because Never Trump is an attempt to salvage the GOP from the deplorables. It is founded on the incorrect principle that the deplorables are really just a tiny sliver of the GOP, not such a slice that the GOP cannot survive without them. The massive turnover of Republican incumbents that either got primaried or declined to run in the face of the inevitable proves them wrong.

 

[rah]

If they 'succeed' in driving half of Republican voters into the ranks of the Democrats no amount of gerrymandering or voter suppression is going to carry the day, even in the deepest sorry states of redness. What might carry the day is if the Democratic party makes a very strong point of making their newly available voters unwelcome. They had nowhere to go in the immediate sense, but they are looking now. The midterm showed that.

Ding ding ding ding.
A lot of my fellow repugs from the suburbs have stopped voting for the party. But as Tim mentioned the alternatives are limited. The Dems would be stupid to push us away. It's a rare opportunity for them.