Why Is The Democratic Party Shrinking?

[SkyChief]

The New York Times explains why in this Op/Ed article, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/12/opinion/democratic-party.html but it hits a paywall so I cannot read it.

But there are other sources which might offer some clues. https://www.pewresearch.org/politic...on-of-the-electorate-and-partisan-coalitions/

Historically, the Democratic Party's base has always outnumbered the GOP's base, but last year that paradigm changed. Both parties equally represent 27% of the electorate. Independents now are the supermajority with 43%.

". . . The electorate, like the U.S. population, has become much more racially and ethnically diverse. This shift is reflected much more in the demographic profile of Democratic voters than among Republicans. . . . . The growing racial and ethnic diversity has changed the composition of both parties, but the change has been starker among Democrats."

To me, this seems counter-intuitive. I would expect that ethnic diversity would favor the Democratic Party, and cause numbers to increase - not decrease. This was the impetus for dems encouraging immigrants to "surge to the borders" . They expected the newcomers to vote democratic. And even those who didn't vote, the large influx would create changes in populations, and possibly allow for more Congress representatives (in those districts which met the necessary census criteria for adding Reps).

I really can't figure out what is causing the erosion of the Democratic Party. They have always outnumbered repubs. If this erosion trend continues, republicans could outnumber dems at some point.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Less engagement in the overall populace.

 

[LouC]

Here you go.

A gift link for the OP.

Opinion | Why Is the Democratic Base Eroding?

Readers react to a column by Pamela Paul criticizing the party’s direction. Also: Inequality and test scores; WIC funding.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Mycroft]

The New York Times explains why in this Op/Ed article, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/12/opinion/democratic-party.html but it hits a paywall so I cannot read it.

But there are other sources which might offer some clues. https://www.pewresearch.org/politic...on-of-the-electorate-and-partisan-coalitions/

Historically, the Democratic Party's base has always outnumbered the GOP's base, but last year that paradigm changed. Both parties equally represent 27% of the electorate. Independents now are the supermajority with 43%.

". . . The electorate, like the U.S. population, has become much more racially and ethnically diverse. This shift is reflected much more in the demographic profile of Democratic voters than among Republicans. . . . . The growing racial and ethnic diversity has changed the composition of both parties, but the change has been starker among Democrats."

To me, this seems counter-intuitive. I would expect that ethnic diversity would favor the Democratic Party, and cause numbers to increase - not decrease. This was the impetus for dems encouraging immigrants to "surge to the borders" . They expected the newcomers to vote democratic. And even those who didn't vote, the large influx would create changes in populations, and possibly allow for more Congress representatives (in those districts which met the necessary census criteria for adding Reps).

I really can't figure out what is causing the erosion of the Democratic Party. They have always outnumbered repubs. If this erosion trend continues, republicans could outnumber dems at some point.

First of all, that "surge to the borders" doesn't help...yet. Those illegal aliens can't vote...yet. I don't know the Party rules, but I doubt they can even become members of the Democratic Party. So that means that we are talking about changes within the Party by people who can vote.

I'm thinking the Dem Elites kind of shot themselves in the foot by installing their puppet. The American people don't like the guy very much. Perhaps they are putting their dislike into action by leaving the Party.

 

[mrjurrs]

The New York Times explains why in this Op/Ed article, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/12/opinion/democratic-party.html but it hits a paywall so I cannot read it.

But there are other sources which might offer some clues. https://www.pewresearch.org/politic...on-of-the-electorate-and-partisan-coalitions/

Historically, the Democratic Party's base has always outnumbered the GOP's base, but last year that paradigm changed. Both parties equally represent 27% of the electorate. Independents now are the supermajority with 43%.

". . . The electorate, like the U.S. population, has become much more racially and ethnically diverse. This shift is reflected much more in the demographic profile of Democratic voters than among Republicans. . . . . The growing racial and ethnic diversity has changed the composition of both parties, but the change has been starker among Democrats."

To me, this seems counter-intuitive. I would expect that ethnic diversity would favor the Democratic Party, and cause numbers to increase - not decrease. This was the impetus for dems encouraging immigrants to "surge to the borders" . They expected the newcomers to vote democratic. And even those who didn't vote, the large influx would create changes in populations, and possibly allow for more Congress representatives (in those districts which met the necessary census criteria for adding Reps).

I really can't figure out what is causing the erosion of the Democratic Party. They have always outnumbered repubs. If this erosion trend continues, republicans could outnumber dems at some point.

Depends on the source?

"The number of registered voters for the Republican Party is approximately 38.8 million."
"The number of Democratic voters is reported to be around 49 million."

Registered Voters by Party 2024

 

[Phys251]

Depends on the source?

"The number of registered voters for the Republican Party is approximately 38.8 million."
"The number of Democratic voters is reported to be around 49 million."

Registered Voters by Party 2024

The OP seems to think that registered voters and overall voters are one and the same. They're not.

 

[LouC]

The only "can't vote yet" way for the "yet" to come to fruition would be for some President to sign into law a neo-amnesty Bill from Congress, Reagan style.

Until that happens, Congress sending a Bill to the President's desk granting amnesty aka a path to Citizenship, for the Illegals who have entered this country since 1982, then there is no path to any of those Illegals voting legally in Federal Elections.

Contrary to what ignorant Right Wingerism might promote.

 

[eman623]

The New York Times explains why in this Op/Ed article, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/12/opinion/democratic-party.html but it hits a paywall so I cannot read it.

But there are other sources which might offer some clues. https://www.pewresearch.org/politic...on-of-the-electorate-and-partisan-coalitions/

Historically, the Democratic Party's base has always outnumbered the GOP's base, but last year that paradigm changed. Both parties equally represent 27% of the electorate. Independents now are the supermajority with 43%.

43% is not a supermajority. A supermajority is when your group has enough votes to set policy all by itself. Independents cannot carry the majority by themselves and need one side or the other.

". . . The electorate, like the U.S. population, has become much more racially and ethnically diverse. This shift is reflected much more in the demographic profile of Democratic voters than among Republicans. . . . . The growing racial and ethnic diversity has changed the composition of both parties, but the change has been starker among Democrats."

To me, this seems counter-intuitive. I would expect that ethnic diversity would favor the Democratic Party, and cause numbers to increase - not decrease. This was the impetus for dems encouraging immigrants to "surge to the borders" . They expected the newcomers to vote democratic. And even those who didn't vote, the large influx would create changes in populations, and possibly allow for more Congress representatives (in those districts which met the necessary census criteria for adding Reps).

I really can't figure out what is causing the erosion of the Democratic Party. They have always outnumbered repubs. If this erosion trend continues, republicans could outnumber dems at some point.

I find it not at all surprising and predicted this a couple decades ago.

I said as the Dem coalition got bigger and bigger, it would inevitably fracture and collapse under its own weight. You can't be the party of blue collar whites and blacks and Hispanics and LGBTQIA+%~@ if all those groups want different things.

 

[Ambig]

I'm thinking the Dem Elites kind of shot themselves in the foot by installing their puppet. The American people don't like the guy very much.

Americans LOVE Dark Brandon!

Why wouldn't they? Just look at the economy.

And that's a distant second after his greatest achievement... keeping the insurrectionist out of our White House.

 

[LouC]

Americans LOVE Dark Brandon!

Why wouldn't they? Just look at the economy.

And that's a distant second after his greatest achievement... keeping the insurrectionist out of our White House.

 

[SkyChief]

43% is not a supermajority. A supermajority is when your group has enough votes to set policy all by itself. Independents cannot carry the majority by themselves and need one side or the other.

I stand corrected. . . . it should read majority - not supermajority.

. . . I said as the Dem coalition got bigger and bigger, it would inevitably fracture and collapse under its own weight. You can't be the party of blue collar whites and blacks and Hispanics and LGBTQIA+%~@ if all those groups want different things.

an interesting hypothesis

 

[SkyChief]

The only "can't vote yet" way for the "yet" to come to fruition would be for some President to sign into law a neo-amnesty Bill from Congress, Reagan style.

Until that happens, Congress sending a Bill to the President's desk granting amnesty aka a path to Citizenship, for the Illegals who have entered this country since 1982, then there is no path to any of those Illegals voting legally in Federal Elections.

That's only half of the equation.

Regardless of how the immigrants vote - or NOT vote, their numbers could allow for additional representatives, which would clearly favor Democrats because most immigrants will reside in Blue districts.

Dems could potentially gain House seats with a sufficient influx of migrants.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

First of all, that "surge to the borders" doesn't help...yet. Those illegal aliens can't vote...yet. I don't know the Party rules, but I doubt they can even become members of the Democratic Party. So that means that we are talking about changes within the Party by people who can vote.

I'm thinking the Dem Elites kind of shot themselves in the foot by installing their puppet. The American people don't like the guy very much. Perhaps they are putting their dislike into action by leaving the Party.

The surge of absentee ballots which will be harvested by partisan activists don’t care who marks them

 

[EMNofSeattle]

That's only half of the equation.

Regardless of how the immigrants vote - or NOT vote, their numbers could be sufficient for some districts to add representatives, which would clearly favor Democrats because the districts where most immigrants settle is in Blue districts.

Dems could potentially gain House seats with a sufficient influx of migrants.

We should be declaring an emergency and suspending all state house delegations of states which allow sanctuary city policies on the basis their delegations don’t democratically represent US citizens

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I stand corrected. . . . it should read majority - not supermajority.

majority means more than half, iow >50%

I think 'plurality' is the word you are looing for

 

[dmpi]

Unless you're a myopic left wing politcal hack it's pretty darn obvious that many of their policies such as free and open immigration, de-fund the police, legalize drugs, pamper the criminals and placate the homeless have flat out failed. Not only have they failed but they even made the problems much worse. Leftist thinking has put this county on a non-sustainable path so something has to be done. As bad a Trump is the alternative is complete social collapse and nobody wants to be responsible for that.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

43% is not a supermajority. A supermajority is when your group has enough votes to set policy all by itself. Independents cannot carry the majority by themselves and need one side or the other.


I find it not at all surprising and predicted this a couple decades ago.

I said as the Dem coalition got bigger and bigger, it would inevitably fracture and collapse under its own weight. You can't be the party of blue collar whites and blacks and Hispanics and LGBTQIA+%~@ if all those groups want different things.

Plus the Dem policy of appealing to more and more fringe causes is losing them support, the vast majority of Americans favor Israel in the Gaza war but Biden is now literally advocating for terrorists in Gaza to try to get Muslim votes in Michigan

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Unless you're a myopic left wing politcal hack it's pretty darn obvious that many of their policies such as free and open immigration, de-fund the police, legalize drugs, pamper the criminals and placate the homeless have flat out failed. Not only have they failed but they even made the problems much worse. Leftist thinking has put this county on a non-sustainable path so something has to be done. As bad a Trump is the alternative is complete social collapse and nobody wants to be responsible for that.

Of the things you listed there, which ones does Joe Biden support?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

More polarization. There are a lot of people to the left of the relatively centrist DNC for the first time in a while.

 

[Eriech]

The New York Times explains why in this Op/Ed article, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/12/opinion/democratic-party.html but it hits a paywall so I cannot read it.

But there are other sources which might offer some clues. https://www.pewresearch.org/politic...on-of-the-electorate-and-partisan-coalitions/

Historically, the Democratic Party's base has always outnumbered the GOP's base, but last year that paradigm changed. Both parties equally represent 27% of the electorate. Independents now are the supermajority with 43%.

". . . The electorate, like the U.S. population, has become much more racially and ethnically diverse. This shift is reflected much more in the demographic profile of Democratic voters than among Republicans. . . . . The growing racial and ethnic diversity has changed the composition of both parties, but the change has been starker among Democrats."

To me, this seems counter-intuitive. I would expect that ethnic diversity would favor the Democratic Party, and cause numbers to increase - not decrease. This was the impetus for dems encouraging immigrants to "surge to the borders" . They expected the newcomers to vote democratic. And even those who didn't vote, the large influx would create changes in populations, and possibly allow for more Congress representatives (in those districts which met the necessary census criteria for adding Reps).

I really can't figure out what is causing the erosion of the Democratic Party. They have always outnumbered repubs. If this erosion trend continues, republicans could outnumber dems at some point.

Biden was a Trump Democrat once. The party is leaving all but the insanely woke. I can't find fault in anything Biden says here. What happened to the man in 35 years.

 

[Ambig]

the vast majority of Americans favor Israel in the Gaza war but Biden is now literally advocating for terrorists in Gaza

Cite for that?

 

[LouC]

That's only half of the equation.

Is it?

Regardless of how the immigrants vote - or NOT vote,

Illegal immigrants never legally get to vote.
There is no "regardless" to it.

their numbers could allow for additional representatives,

If so, that is the fault of the writers of the Constitution.
Perhaps those RED States shipping immigrants to Blue States should rethink their actions?
But as it stands, reapportionment of the 435 Representatives in Congress, only takes place every 10 years.

which would clearly favor Democrats because most immigrants will reside in Blue districts.

Or not.
I mean, look at it, both Texas and Florida each have more Representatives than New York.

Dems could potentially gain House seats with a sufficient influx of migrants.

Or not.
Who knows where anyone will be in 2030 to be counted, if they are counted, or not.

 

[trixare4kids]

Depends on the source?

"The number of registered voters for the Republican Party is approximately 38.8 million."
"The number of Democratic voters is reported to be around 49 million."

Registered Voters by Party 2024

That doesn't really tell us very much as it relates to the O/P thread premise. One can still be a registered Democrat and still feel disillusioned by the direction of the party. That's the way I was when I decided the donkey tea was no longer for me.

 

[ralfy]

Both parties differentiate in terms of superficial issues, like those involving gender, abortion, race, etc. But when it comes to major ones, like the economy and foreign policies, they are actually alike, i.e., promote both neoconservatism and neoliberalism, and in favor of the rich.

 

[Lycanthrope]

Because they're infatuated with Dear Leader and have defected from the Democratic party to join the Trumplican Party.

Duh.