American Migration Patterns Should Terrify the GOP

The Atlantic ^ | 21 Sept 2019 | Derek Thompson

[Theoria]

Millennial movers have hastened the growth of left-leaning metros in southern red states such as Texas, Arizona, and Georgia. It could be the biggest political story of the 2020s.

Liberals in America have a density problem. Across the country, Democrats dominate in cities, racking up excessive margins in urban cores while narrowly losing in suburban districts and sparser states. Because of their uneven distribution of votes, the party consistently loses federal elections despite winning the popular vote.

The most famous case was in 2016, when Hillary Clinton lost the presidential election despite her 2.4-million-vote margin. Clinton carried Manhattan and Brooklyn by approximately 1 million ballots—more than Donald Trump’s margins of victory in the states of Florida, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania combined.

But 2016 wasn’t a fluke. Neither was 2000, when Al Gore lost the election despite winning 500,000 more votes than George W. Bush. A recent paper from researchers at the University of Texas at Austin concluded that Republicans are expected to win 65 percent of presidential contests in which they narrowly lose the popular vote.

Democrats can blame the Electoral College for these losses—as they should. But according to the Stanford political scientist Jonathan Rodden’s new book, Why Cities Lose, the problem isn’t just the districting. It’s the density. All over the world, liberal, college-educated voters pack into cities, where they dilute their own voting power through excessive concentration. “Underrepresentation of the urban left in national legislatures and governments has been a basic feature of all industrialized countries that use winner-take-all elections,” he writes.

[redangus]

Haven’t seen any signs of that in the millennials I know. That’s what is scary.

[redangus]

And soon Indiana. Our reddest County may very well go blue in next years congressional race because of the influx if young, educated tech workers coming here to work for Salesforce, Infosys and others.

[Soul of the South]

“All of this can be laid at the doorstep of George W Bush. He had the political capital to slam the door shut on illegal immigration after 9/11, . . . “

His father, George H.W. Bush, also deserves blame. During the Reagan Administration, the president and Congress agreed to a one time amnesty for the illegals in the country. A new immigration law was passed to control illegal and legal immigration. From that point on the border was to be secured and legal immigration managed. Unfortunately, George H.W. Bush, who followed Reagan, was a globalist who failed to secure the border. Had Bush strictly enforced the law, and worked to secure the southern border, there would be millions fewer illegals in the country today.

[Georgia Girl 2]

When the SHTF most of them will be in the first die off. Problem solved.

[KC_Conspirator]

The mistake is that one assumes that voting patterns among millenials will always remain static. At some time they will grow up and possibly think and vote differently especially if they have kids.

[LS]

Correct.

I return to Breitbart. We must reclaim culture & entertainment when many conservatives pridefully boast how they avoid it. It’s cutting our own throats.

[dfwgator]

It should terrify all Americans.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Public School Indoctrination + Open Borders + The Grim Reaper = Socialists becoming a majority voting bloc within twenty years.

[x]

But according to the Stanford political scientist Jonathan Rodden’s new book, Why Cities Lose, the problem isn’t just the districting. It’s the density. All over the world, liberal, college-educated voters pack into cities, where they dilute their own voting power through excessive concentration. “Underrepresentation of the urban left in national legislatures and governments has been a basic feature of all industrialized countries that use winner-take-all elections,” he writes.

It was that way once and may be that way again. 50 years ago liberals were more spread out across the country. The result is that the upper middle class professional liberals could help elect candidates who supported their economic agenda, but those candidates didn't always go in for a progressive social agenda.

As liberal/progressive types clustered together on the coasts they were able to elect more candidates who supported their social agenda, but the old New Deal coalition broke apart. The Democrats' lurches leftwards alienated rural and working class voters who had more traditional values, and the party lost seats that it had held for years.

From the results of the last midterms, it does look like those upper middle class young progressives are spreading out over the country and bringing with them social and cultural agendas that most of the country disapproved of, and the more saner moderate Democrats are disappearing.

[Jane Long]

I just checked Twitter for TX Special Election, taking place (now, early voting) on Nov 5th.

EVERY tweet that came up, was for DEMS!!

I didn’t see ONE conservative or GOP tweet, in my search.

SCARY!!!

Paging Ronna McDaniel, Brad Pascale, et al.

HALP!!

[Albion Wilde]

ping!

[a little elbow grease]

I return to Breitbart. We must reclaim culture & entertainment when many conservatives pridefully boast how they avoid it. It’s cutting our own throats.

__________

VERY TRUE