Does anyone ever think there will become a point where every state has a dominated political party where elections will only be held within the party. I know it is crazy idea but you look at states like Kansas or Mississippi which are Republican dominated and Vermont and Connecticut which were democrat dominated and I was think that could be a trend in all 50 states as generations go on. But I honestly think as baby boomers die off and more people are able to vote The republican party will be in ruins.
It's no surprise that the Republican party is dying. They can no longer relate to voters other than the bigots in their base.
"Republican-dominated" and "Democrat-dominated" states tend to be at worst something like 70-30, though. That's still a very large minority that refused to vote for the "dominate" party.
Yeah but that minority can never achieve what they want and more in danger politically every election cycle because of the party majority. You seen democrats fading away in states like Arkansas or North Carolina or Louisiana and those states are at risk of being dominated by one party. I wouldn't mind one party states but it wouldn't work out well and it would suck for a person to have to chose certain states to live in based on political views because moving costs money and finding a job in another state may be impossible so it could to some minority party leadership in the states.
Nope. Even within states that are dominated by one color, there will always be a dot of red in a sea of blue, or a blue rock on a red planet, or maybe a purple or green* person every now and then. Blue states have red counties, and red counties have blue towns, and blue towns have red neighborhoods, and red neighborhoods have blue houses. Besides, wouldn't it be costly to make specific forms for red and blue states? *Purple: Moderate. Green: Green Party; kind of self-explanatory :lol:
Nope, because there's always a huge divide in politics between rural and cities. Look at Virginia and Georgia for example. The democrats are primarily located in Atlanta (Georgia) and Richmond/ Northern Virginia, in contrast to the rural areas of those states. Just like New York City is purely democrat and upstate New York is (actually) republican. You'll never get it so where it's all one or the other. No way.
Yeah I get your point. I was not suggesting it could happen it was just an scenario I thoguth of but it is not possible. ---------- Post added 29th Jul 2014 at 11:59 AM ---------- Yeah big cities can really dominate a election and they always have. If you look at some political map like Colorado or Nevada you can see a democratic senator winning a election with the map mostly red and they won because of the heavily populated areas on the map.
Not every state, but most states fall into this category in some way. For example, only once in a blue moon can a Democrat win a statewide election in the original Confederacy, and it takes an extremely unpopular incumbent (Pat Quinn) and a scandal that resulted in an impeachment (Rod Blagojevich) for a Republican to win the Governorship of Illinois. However California is recovering from its days as a red state, as it voted Republican in 6 straight Presidential elections (1968-1988) had a Republican governor for 16 straight years (George Deukmejian from 1983-1991 and Pete Wilson from 1991-1999) and then promptly threw its first Democratic governor out of office since the 80's a few months into his second term and replaced him with Arnold Schwarzenegger, who ended up paying state employees with IOU's. It took them all that time to finally learn their lesson and now they have a Democratic Governor and a Democratic legislature as well as a balanced budget and a recovering economy. Kansas on the other hand primaried almost all of their moderate Republicans and replaced them with extremists. They bought Gov. Sam Brownback's line about "fiscal conservatism" and tax cuts, and now they want a refund. Kansas passed all these foolish tax giveaways for the rich and corporations, shifted the tax burden downward onto the middle class and said, "This is a shot of adrenaline in the heart of the Kansas economy." The result: an economy that's not improving, a $700 million budget deficit, the highest in the country, and the very real possibility that Kansas will have to declare bankruptcy. And what does Brownback have to say? "This is all Obama's fault."
The Republican Party won't die off. Most likely, we'll have a scenario like the Netherlands. The two most dominant parties of the Netherlands, People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (centre-right) and the Labour Party (centre left), agree on social issues. Both platforms support gay marriage, abortion, euthanasia, marijuana legalization, single-payer healthcare, secular government, and environmental protection. The only difference is money management. Right-wing parties always tend to support business deregulation, lowered taxes, free markets, and cultural assimilation. Left-wing parties are in favor of strengthening the welfare system and minimum wage hikes. Eventually, the Republican party will change their platform on social issues since they change over time. Slavery, indentured servitude, compulsory primary education, and women's suffrage were once political issues until some time passed, causing political platforms of both parties to be changed. Every side has their own way to manage the nation's money. This also shows why we need proportional representation and the multi-party system. Our two political parties are like black and white; most people have centrist beliefs.
I mean, I guess if it were possible, it'd be in states where there are not really any large cities in sight, like Vermont or Wyoming.
I never seen so much hatred of a President and it is worse than Bush in my perspective and the environment in Washington DC is full of personal hatred for each other. They go so slow not to the point to call the other party anti american. Shouldn't parties agree on one thing that they love their country and now personal attacks are more common. Thanks to people like Ted Cruz and Palin Washington is becoming more unworkable and uncivilized. Even if we do lose the senate this year the map in 2016 is more in our favor. Hopefully Hilary will be president than too. ---------- Post added 29th Jul 2014 at 12:40 PM ---------- More and more of young republicans are becoming more pro gay and pro abortion and that could change the parties platform generations to come. We need to get rid of these old conservative senators like Cochran because having these grandpa senators around is not gonna help solve our problems. It is great to see more Republicans coming out for gay marriage now and I can see the platform changing as time goes on. ---------- Post added 29th Jul 2014 at 12:43 PM ---------- Looking at the state houses and senates Wyoming and Vermont hold a huge majority of one party than the other.
I don't believe either party is thriving. Both are dying as the number of libertarian/awake Americans rise. And both parties are bigots imo
I am all for a libertarian candidate who is both pro gun and pro gay but the chances of them winning a election is very unlikely but it could happen soon if people are fed with the major parties.
The chances of there being someone who is libertarian and pro-gay seems pretty slim--since most self-proclaimed libertarians are usually Tea Partiers and currently influencing the GOP right now. I'm also pretty concerned about the amount of libertarians who are Christian Reconstructionists--which is pretty much like the Christian Taliban. It's scary how many there are of them...
That is disappointing. I don't think the tea party truly represents what being a libertarian is really about. I think it is about staying out of people lives and letting them do what they want with their lives as getting married to the same gender or having guns or even using drugs. Gary Johnson was a pro gay pro gun libertarian and I wish he could of been president because he represents what I would want in a leader.
Actually the Libertarian party platform is both pro-gun, and pro-gay, and Gary Johnson Libertarian candidate for president in the last election also listed pro-gun and pro-gay on his platform. The libertarians are also usually pro-pot, for those out there that want that. I proudly voted for Gary Johnson in 2012, since neither of the other parties came close to my beliefs anymore. ---------- Post added 29th Jul 2014 at 02:27 PM ---------- Also, while the libertarian party has low numbers now, and most don't think that they could get elected, there was another 3rd party noone thought could win. They won in 1861, and put a president in office that kept the country together through a brutal civil war. This party was the Republicans, and the president was Lincoln. So it just takes enough of the public to reject the status quo of the 2 main parities and throw them out.
Not exactly. The Republican Party was the result of the death of the Whig Party and the split of the original Democratic-Republican Party.