Thread by @unseen1_unseen

This thread is for the "muh we are all doomed, demographics" crowd out there. I'll be using two articles for the data. This one👇

pewsocialtrends.org/essay/an-early…

And this one👇

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016…

As can be seen from the articles Trump won the white non Hispanic vote by 21% margin (58-37) a point higher than Mitt who only got a 20% margin. He lost the black vote by 80 pt margin (88-8%) he also lost the Hispanic vote by 36 margin(65-29%). He lost Asian vote 38 pt (65-27%)

These results are pretty constant from election to election. Bush was able to capture more of the Hispanic vote 44%(2004) & 35%(2000) but that was probably due to him being from Texas than anything else. So figure a 40 pt margin for Hispanic voters & a 80pt margin for blacks.

Then there is turnout to consider the white and black historic turnout in last three Presidential elections was around 60% of the population. The Hispanic turnout was around 50%
npr.org/2016/12/22/506…

These are all long term trends and can and have changed in individual races depending on candidate. The "muh we are all doomed, demographics" crowd looks at this and sees doom and gloom since the white population is decreasing and the minority populations are increasing as %.

The doom and gloom is a function of people once again looking at a trend and drawing a straight line into the future to make predictions. Nothing that I have posted tells anyone what the future holds. It's how people interacted in the past.

As the Bush results show a candidate from TX was able to draw more Hispanic votes than one from MA or NY. Not really a shock. Also a black candidate was able to draw more of the black vote than a tired old crooked white woman. Again not a shock.

In politics as in most other things, actions have equal and opposite results. If a party goes after one racial group for votes, the other racial groups will move to other parties all things being equal as they are ignored.

Economics play a big part in elections. If one party pushes economic/ government policies that help one racial group that group will more likely vote for that party. Security plays a big part. Education levels play a role, gender plays a role and on and on.

There are so many topics and issues that determine individual elections that racial make up is just one of many.

I can think of several examples that would change how the "demographics" vote in the future based on policies, candidates, economics etc. but....

....let's say the "muh we are all doomed" crowd is right and demographics is the deciding factor when people vote. Let's look at those projected numbers for 2020 from the link above.

The eligible pool of voters break down to

66.7% white
13.3% Hispanic
12.5% black
4.7% Asian

But that doesn't tell u anything. The turnout of those groups are different. In every presidential election since 1988 (except 2008/12) whites have turned out in higher % than others.

The white turnout rate in presidential elections as been between 55-65%

From 1988-2004 blacks were at about a 50% turnout rate. 2004-2016 they surged to 60%-70% turnout rate

Here is a link to the turnout numbers...

electproject.org/home/voter-tur…

Hispanic and other groups turnout rate was around 40% from 1988-2004. From 2004-2016 it's stayed around 45% hitting about 50% in 2008. So what changed in 2004 to increase turnout rates? What kept the turnout rates higher than before 2004 for minorities in 2008, 2012 and 2016?

Those that draw a straight line to predict the future were caught off guard in 2004 as turnout rates rose and in 2016 when they fell. All of their predictions were wrong because they didn't see those events happening in their straight line predictions.

What happens in 2020 if the turnout rates for whites increase or Hispanics/minorities fall back to pre 2004 levels? All predictions of the "muh we are all doomed, demographics" crowd will be wrong just by being incorrect about that one statistic.

But......let's say everything in Turnout stays the same.......

So we have 60% of 66.7% showing up

60% of 12.5% showing up
45% of 13.3% showing up. And
45% of 4.7% showing up in 2020

Let's put some real numbers in here instead of %

There are about 240million eligible voters

So that equates to about

160 million eligible white voters
30 million eligible black voters
32 million eligible Hispanic voters
11million eligible Asian voters
7 million eligible "other" voters

So if turnout models stay the same..that means...the electorate will be

96 million white voters
18 million black voters
14.5 million Hispanic voters
5 million Asian voters
3 million "other" voters.

Total 136.5 million votes

Let's further state that Trump/GOP will win the same % of each group as he did in 2016

So 58% of 96million = 55.7
8% of 18 million = 1.44 million
29% of 14.5million = 4.2 million
27% of 8 million = 2.16 million

Total of 63.5 million

And let's say the Dem gets the same % of each group as 2016

37% of 96m = 35.5 million
88% of 18m =15.84 million
65% of 14.5m = 9.42 million
65% of 8m = 5.2 million

Total of 65.96 million

So 66 million vs 63.5 million. Pretty much the result of 2016. The Dem wins popular vote

As 2016 shows it's also about where those votes live in the electoral college.

Let's play with the numbers some and assume everything WON'T be the same. Unlike the experts think.

What happens if Trump gets 10%(1.8m) of the black vote?

Or

60% of the white vote (57.6m)

Or

31% of the Hispanic vote (4.49m)

Or

29% of Asian/other vote (2.32m)?

Which group would a 2% increase in support help Trump more?

1.9m whites
360k blacks
290k Hispanics
160k Asians/other

Which party is calling all whites racists again?

Just a great economy can change 2 out of every 100 people's minds when it comes to their votes. Having the opposition actually hate you based on nothing but your race? That could change more than 2 out of 100...

So does running a political party just on demographics help or hurt you? Well that depends on if you are running it in support or opposition to the majority race, I suppose. Now, what happens if one party runs completely based on demographics against the majority while the...

...other political party runs on other issues besides demographics. If they run on policies that help all groups regardless of race, issues like a growing economy, freedom of speech, a strong military, secured borders, less war, less government interference in your life?

Issues that transcend race? Sure you will have some of the hard core racists always vote based on race, that can't be helped. But most people aren't hardcore racists. Most people if given the choice will allow other issues to dominate their vote choice. Finally...what happens

...to the political party that made everything about race if those groups' concerns are being addressed not in racial terms but in holistic terms that help all groups equally?

These are just some simple questions to cast doubt on the current accept groupthink. It's easy to see other pathways where demographics does not determine destiny in a Representative Republic.