Is the liberal urban America destined to eclipse the rural conservative part of America?

[Ardent15]

Demographic trends point to this. Urban parts of the nation are growing fast, and the younger generation (which I am part of) is more liberal than previous generations. Immigrants are mostly Democratic. And the GOP has alienated suburbia, which is more reliant than ever on the government.

So, is this nation destined to move in a leftward direction because of this?
.

[BlooInBloo]

1. Maybe if all of the cats ever get pointed in the same direction.

[alp227]

2. I think this was the change Obama envisioned?

[rwheeler31]

3. I wish they could talk to each other.

Go see a real family farm. These are decent people.

[Ardent15]

4. I'm sure they are

Never implied they weren't decent people, just that they tended to be more conservative than urban people.

[TxRider]

6. Don't worry they'll still feed you

At least until the mega corps finish buying them all out..

[Wapsie B]

8. The mega corps control agriculture now and have for years.

This idea of the small farmer feeding the world is so 100 years ago.

[bluestateguy]

5. As communities urbanize they become more Democratic

As suburbs become more like large cities, they become more Democratic.

The Republicans are demographically fucked if they don't straighten themselves out.

[nevergiveup]

7. If people vote in big numbers progressives tend to win.*

The challenge is getting them to vote.
*edit to exclude the the South**
**edit to exclude Florida and North Carolina from the South

[LatteLibertine]

9. The problem is

some in the wealthy ruling class are skilled at dividing poor and middle class people along racial lines. If middle class and poor white people voted for their own economic interest they would already be in the Democratic party.

I mean heck there are almost 34 million white people in the United States who are poor.

I do believe moderates and independents will continue to trend away from the Republican party. On a side note, some Republicans definitely have a manner of Stockholm syndrome.

I dearly hope one day poor and middle class people stop letting the most wealthy 1-10% manipulate them.

[appamado amata padam]

10. Just my impressions...

...but to me it seems a little bit more complicated than that.

I think that the truly rural parts of the country have been shrinking for a long time, and most of the country is now urban/suburban. With increased technology and communication, I think that fewer people will align their political beliefs with their surroundings.

I think that some immigrant groups tend to be more liberal, and some more conservative, but these allegiances can shift pretty rapidly.

Finally, I think that some people are financially liberal, but socially conservative (and vice versa). To solve this country's unprecedented problems, I think we are going to have to evolve some dynamic solutions that transcend the conventional "left" or "right" characterizations.

I keep saying "I think" because I am no expert, and have no scientific data. Again, these are only my impressions.

I do hope that more of our resources will go to the more needy. I hope that our priorities will shift to safer and more sustainable lives for all, instead of the opulent luxury of the few.

Yes, these are typically "liberal" goals, but it may require in some ways "conservative" measures to get there.

Thank you for posing the question.

[LostInAnomie]

11. The Senate's representation not being based on population...

... is the only thing that has kept it from drifting left for decades.

[Juche]

12. Yes it is

But that is only part of it. The growth of big cities is why the dems (I think why) won states like Virginia or North Carolina. And why Georgia and Texas are moving to the left.

Conservatives have also alienated the professional class (lawyers, doctors, scientists, etc) with their embrace of superstition, the religious right, know nothingness, Sarah Palin and their attitudes on sex education, climate change and evolution.

They have also alienated single people (who are growing rapidly). Unmarried women vote democratic nearly 70% of the time. I believe unmarried men do so around 60% of the time. Part of the reason is being unmarried makes you more economically vulnerable. Single women now make up nearly 1/4 of the (potential) electorate. There have been articles saying single women may be to dems and progressives what evangelicals were to the GOP. I don't know if I buy that, their turnout is low as hell.

Plus unions might make a comeback. If we get unions back, that means hundreds of millions each election cycle into progressives and millions of man hours knocking on doors and volunteering, as well as higher turnout for democratic and progressive candidates.


So its virtually every demographic that is growing is moving away from the GOP:

Urbanites, unmarried people, non-whites, youth, professionals, secularists, union members (possibly if we get EFCA)

Every demographic that benefits the GOP is shrinking or at best static:

Rural dwellers, married people, whites, the elderly, christian evangelicals



http://www.amazon.com/Emerging-Democratic-Majority-Lisa-Books/dp/0743226917

From Publishers Weekly

In 1969 a prescient Kevin Phillips published The Emerging Republican Majority, predicting the rise of the conservative Republican movement. Now Judis, a senior editor at the New Republic, and Teixeira, a fellow at the Century Foundation and author of The Disappearing American Voter, argue that, if current demographic and political trends continue, a new realignment of political power is inevitable, this time sweeping Democrats to power. In support of their thesis they argue that the electorate is becoming increasingly diverse, with growing Asian, Hispanic and African-American populations-all groups that tend to vote Democratic. On the other hand, the number of white Americans, the voting population most likely to favor Republicans, remains static. Further, according to the authors, America's transition from an industrial to a postindustrial economy is also producing voters who trend strongly Democratic. Judis and Teixeira coin the word "ideopolis" for the geographic areas where the postindustrial economy thrives. They also argue that other changes, specifically the growing educated professional class and the continuing "gender gap," will benefit Democrats, whose political ideology is more consonant with the needs and beliefs of women and professionals. Judis and Teixeira predict that all these elements will converge by 2008, at the latest, when a new Democratic majority will emerge. Wisely, they warn that their predictions are just that, and that events might overtake the trends. But their warning will bring little comfort to Republicans, who will find their well-supported thesis disturbing.
Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc.

[Xithras]

13. Liberal? Yes. Democratic? Probably not.

The elimination of the Republican party as a political force would simply lead to the fragmentation of the Democratic party. Our own party represents a diverse and wide array of different viewpoints, political opinions, and priorities, which are generally united by the realization that Republican rule sucks and is bad for their positions.

If Republican political power wanes, the only opposition to the implementation of the various political agendas of the different wings of our own party becomes other people within our own party. With no enemy, we'd start fighting each other to determine who's agenda "wins". The pro-business Clintonite DLC faction? The quasi-Socialists like Kucinich? The Blue Dogs?

The result is fairly predictable. The factions vie for power, they start competing against each other in the election booth, and before you know it the Democratic Party has now broken up into several other parties, each pushing their particular brand of liberalism.