Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Donald Lambro :: Townhall.com Columnist
The paper-thin blue line
by Donald Lambro
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Is President Obama's Afghanistan plan a step in the right direction?


WASHINGTON -- Democratic control of Congress may be more tenuous, especially in the long run, than post-election analysts have thus far been willing to acknowledge.

Democrats have a 233 to 202 majority in the House, but many of them picked up Republican-held seats by extremely thin margins in a very dismal environment for the GOP.

For example: Democrats gained a total of 14 House seats by less than 10,000 votes each, or roughly by a margin of 5 percentage points or less. Most, if not all, of these gains were in Republican-heavy districts that, with a more favorable political climate and good candidates, could be back in the GOP column in 2008 and likely will be.

Longer term, though, Democrats face an even bigger election problem: the ongoing population shifts from the North to the Sunbelt states that will benefit Republicans more than Democrats in the next decade and could also enlarge the GOP's electoral count in presidential elections.

While demographic and political analysts caution that Democrats have offset the GOP's Sunbelt advantage with new gains in the Northeast and have made inroads in parts of the South and Southwest, they say the sheer size of the migration by the end of this decade will help Republicans more.

"I think on balance the Republicans will benefit from the large number of seats in the Sunbelt region. They won't get 100 percent of it, but more than the Democrats do," said Merle Black, a veteran historian and analyst in southern political realignment at Emory University in Atlanta, Ga.

In a recent study by Election Data Services, which analyzes how population movements affect redistricting changes under reapportionment, the firm reported the significance of this continuing realignment. Its projections of the number of Americans moving from the Democratic Northeast to the more Republican-friendly Southern and Western states "show that seven congressional seats in 13 states have already changed at this point in the decade."

EDS forecasts that seven states -- Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri and Louisiana -- will lose House seats and six will gain them: Florida, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada and Utah gaining one each, and Texas getting two.

But in a separate analysis, Polidata, a Washington-area demographic and political-research firm, sees a larger "probable" shift in seats from the North to the Sunbelt regions.

Under these "probable changes, there could be 13 seats shifting among 19 states, eight gainers and 11 losers. All the gainers are in the South and West and all the losers are in the East and Midwest, except Louisiana, Polidata said. The "biggest gainers" would be Texas, with four additional seats, and two each in Florida and Arizona. Georgia, Utah, Nevada, Oregon and Washington state would each gain one.

The biggest losers: New York and Ohio, losing two seats each, while Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri and Louisiana would lose one.

Since each state's electoral votes are based on its representation in Congress, the shift in House seats to the Sunbelt, where Republicans are strongest in presidential elections, would mean increased clout in the Electoral College, too.

"Overall, given a 2004 electoral vote of 286 Bush to 252 Kerry, the vote count based upon these 2010 projections would have been 292 Bush, 246 Kerry, a gain of six for the Republican ticket," Polidata said.

However, analysts who have studied these projections say that while there would be GOP House gains in the South and Southwest, they note that last year's election resulted in a decline in Republican strength in the South and a Democratic increase in the Northeast.

Black points out the number of Southern Republican House seats fell from 82 to 77 seats, while Democrats saw their numbers rise from 49 to 54. "That dropped the Republican surplus in the South to 23 seats," he said.

In the Northeast, Democrats held 68 House seats and Republicans only 24, the result of a rash of GOP losses from New Hampshire to Pennsylvania -- giving Democrats a 44-seat surplus in the region.

"So for the first time in modern American politics, the Democrats' lead out of the Northeast is larger than the Republican lead in the South. If that continues, it would be a major structural change in American politics," he said. Another caveat in all this is, "We don't really know the demographics that are driving the in and out migration," says election analyst Rhodes Cook. "Some of them could be affluent white conservatives, but they might be Hispanics who tend to vote more Democratic."

Of course, redistricting can iron out the wrinkles, and Republicans will be in charge of drawing the new lines in states like Texas and Florida.

The bottom line: Democrats won in the short term in 2006 because of an unpopular war and a spate of scandals, a combination they will not have going for them in the 2012 elections. But the longer-term population trend lines are working to the GOP's advantage well into the next decade and perhaps beyond that.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Donald Lambro is chief political correspondent for The Washington Times.

Be the first to read Donald Lambro's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

But the longer-term population trends...
I think it is a fine example of how skewed our politics are to point to the future politics based on demographics rather than policy.

When the H*ll are we going to put the future of America before the future of a political Party?

I still think they all should be termed out and a new batch brought in, without much baggage, to try their hand at this.

Instead of a lottery to win millions from some state gambling scheme there should be a lotto to speak to the entire Congress as an individual. The House and Senate members should be compelled to be in attendance and broadcast on every publicly licensed TV channel.

That would be entertaining and perhaps quite challenging to the audience. Do it monthly.

What About all of the Criminal Invaders?
After Jorge Bush and his Democratic cronies "legalize" about 20 million criminal invaders, who then bring in at least another 40 million of their welfare requiring families, the Republican Party will be toast, and no migration to the Sunbelt is going to make any difference.

America prefers Democrat policies.
Sorry Mr. Lambro, but you're wrong. Democrats won because the American people want the things that Democrats stand for. It is idiotic to suggest that a certain party won because people actually want what the loser had to offer. If they wanted that, then the loser would have been the winner.

Instead, as many top Democrats have stated, the election was a mandate from the people for the adoption of issues that are near and dear to Democrats. Americans want goverment established wages, amnesty for all illegal aliens, free health care for all, a total pullout from Iraq, a massive reduction in military strength, an increase in taxes for the wealthy, the elimination of the death penalty, reparations for slavery, affirmative action across the board, and so on.

Democrats now have the power to implement all of their goals, and that is what the people of this country wanted. If this wasn't so, the people would not have elected Democrats to office. Thus, Pelosi, Reid, and Kennedy are right to assume that their goals to bring about such massive social changes is right on target with what the American people want. And even if it wasn't, these top officials know what is best for everyone. All that matters is that now they have the power to do what they know to be best.

Fact:they didn't win...
Loyal dem actually thinks the Dems won the last election....lets no get confused here...the Dems 'benefited' from the election, but won nothing...the Republicans lost. Its that simple. Post election analysis shows the Republicans lost support at the polls, but also show the Democrats 'didn't' gain any. There's a good reason for that. The Dems had nothing to offer the normal folk of the country. They were, and are obstructionists,whiners, accusers and liars. They offered no functional ideas, no solutions, no anything of positive value. The seats they gained were gifts from the Republican leadership who stupidly thought they could out liberal the real liberals and to heck with their base. Seats gained by default loyal dem, are not the same as seats won. The Dems 'won' nothing no more than a man who finds a hundred dollar bill 'earned' it.Like the Dems, he simply benefited from something lost by someone else.

That being said, I agree with Donald in one respect. The Republican party can easily return to power in '08...but from there I don't buy his conclusions. The Republicans can also lose more seats...their future is in their own hands. There was an election. Republicans lost...they need to find out why...and they need to get it right...up or down is in their own hands...learn or leave. No other choices exist for the Republican party.

As to the rest of Donald's column, I disagree with his conclusions. What he is speaking of could be called power politics theory. I call it rotten apple politics. One rotten apple will in time spoil the barrel of good apples, and so will a liberal Yankee moving to the south spoil the conservative politics of the south. The change in geography doesn't give the liberal Yankee intelligence...he still remains a liberal, and like a rotten apple, as he gains in numbers, he will spoil the south. Think not...look at what's happening out west to Nevada, Arizona, Etc., as the California rotten apples now flee the state they ruined. Those states are moving more and more to the left as the rats stampede out of California. The south will also, over time, become more and more liberal as the rust belt escapee's move here in search or paradise. It's here, but won't be for long. Every time I hear a white legged Yankee say "in New York we did it this way" etc., I see the snake entering the garden of eden. No Donald..Yankee's coming south won't help either the Republicans or conservatives. They will ruin our beautiful barrel of apples though.

ziggy
You are so right. The Dems didn't win. The
Dumbas-ed Repubs lost. Not only do we in the
south have nothern liberals moving in, we have
an invasion from South of the border. We can't
stop the movement from the North but we can
sure stop it from the South if our federal
government will just enforce the LAWS already
on the books.

Look at the Demographic Trends
The differences in birthrates between blacks and hispanics on one sides and whites on the other, ensure that in the long run the Democrats will be the one dominate party in the United States. Texas may be growing but the part that is growing are the the Hispanics who vote Democrat about 70% of the time.

In 2010, the Democrats will be able to rearrange Congressional District and eliminate about 10% of the Republicans in Congress. When that happens, it is game over for the Republicans.

You got that right...
Pineknot, I completely agree. Bush, accurately determined that terrorists flying planes into the world trade center was an act of war against our nation, yet refuses to acknowledge that illegal's steaming across our southern border, aided and encouraged to do so by the Mexican government, is also an act of war against us. It boggles the mind.

As a result of Governmental entities at all levels picking and choosing which laws they'll abide by and enforce and which ones they obviously won't, they now have no standing to dispute a citizen of this country picking and choosing as well. Personally, I see anarchy coming soon to a street near you and I. When the citizenry loses respect for governing laws and the governments that are charged with enforcing them something is going to give. When day in and day out we see Government misconduct...when we see clear examples of malicious political prosecutions, such as the two border guards now facing prison time...when we see judges dismiss charges against pedophiles because he/she got piqued at an attorney for being a few minutes late coming to court...when we see illegal's facing forty years for child rape given their freedom for a $5000.00 bail...its not long before the law abiding begin to decide which laws they will abide by....when police can't or won't protect you before you are assaulted or killed, and may or may not prosecute the perp after the fact...its not long until people decide to protect themselves....people are arming themselves all across this country because their faith in those charged to protect them either can't or won't. People all across this country are arming themselves because the constitutional government of, by and for the people has been perverted and stolen. In the federalist papers it is stated that the best protection from a renegade government with a standing army is a well armed citizenry willing to defend themselves from and to take back their government. These and many other things make a coming anarchy easy to see, and the possibility of an armed revolt doesn't tax the mind at all.

LD
As usual you are way off base. The Dems don't have the super majority in either house of Congress to override a presidential veto. The voters voted out the war. They didn't vote in the Dems, except as a function of hating Bush and his policies. Bush won't be a factor in 2008, and the Dems will hopefully show their true colors over the next two years and get tossed quickly.

Lambro
I disagree with the thesis that just because there will be more voters in an area that is traditionally Republican, doesn't mean that the new voters migrating there from Dem strongholds will suddenly start voting intelligently. A Lib in the South is still a Lib.

Third World Immigration & Politics
The Republican Party and the Democratic Party are roughly at parity. If not for the lack of support for the Iraq debacle, the Republicans might actually have a little more support than the Democrats.

As for the future, it is true that Republicans have more children, Democrats die off faster due to the many social dysfunctions of their client constituencies, and inner-migration from Democratic states to Republican states continues at a good clip. However, massive Third World immigration to the United States is changing the demographics of the country in a way very unfavorable to the Republican Party. Yet party leaders from George W. Bush, John McCain, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell and Sam Brownback support the demographic destruction of their country and party.

If the demographic revolution occurring in the USA remains unabated, the Republican Party will become either a party of the left so as to compete for the votes of Third Worlders or a permanent minority party.

As usual, Don Lambro shows the analytical ability of a Freeper or a College Republican.


New Hampshire
New Hampshire used to be quite reliably common sense and conservative as recently as 2000. However, the trend for the past quarter century has been for Massholes to migrate to southern New Hampshire (to take advantage of zero sales and income taxes) and the turning point has finally been reached. Southern New Hampshire now is merely a Boston suburb and the new liberal population now outnumbers and overwhelms the rest of the state. Florida and North Carolina seem to be going the same way. Add the Mexican invasion of the Southwest (how soon before a Hispanic Congressional caucus starts ranting about rich gringos?) and it seems to me that the future of a conservative national political party is quite bleak.

nope...
He writes:"I think on balance the Republicans will benefit from the large number of seats in the Sunbelt region. They won't get 100 percent of it, but more than the Democrats do," said Merle Black, a veteran historian and analyst in southern political realignment at Emory University in Atlanta, Ga."

nope.........in Texas, there would be NO increase in population without the illegal invasion...and in Calif...the population would be DEcreasing if it weren't for the same illegal invasion. The Republicans..as conservatives are becoming a dying breed unless they stand up now for the rule of law and integrity.

The Beginning of the End

.....Lambro...

.....Fiddle away my friend ...the barbarians are at the gates and pouring over the walls ...resistance is futile .....COLOSSUS

When Liberals Move
Here's a funny thing. When liberals move to Red America, they can suddenly get a place to live that is not a postage stamp. If a couple wants kids, they now have room to have them. When you have kids, the appeal of going to see "performance art" by Annie Sprinkle kinda diminishes.

They can either stay home all day, or go out among their gun-loving neighbors and have a round or two at the shooting range. When they shop at the supermarket instead of the bodegas of an overcrowded city, they can see a real difference in prices---and two bucks for a bag of spaghetti becomes unacceptable. When they go to work, they find they do need nice, comfortable cars to get through the commute. The antique Volvo is not going to cut the mustard.


GEEE!!
Tanks unknown. I'll try other sites...If you will...I'll be open minded and search for truth...If you will...I'll think for myself...If you will...DEAL???

superdestroyer
Congressional District reformed...2010

Armed revolution...2011

America finally rid of lib menace...2015

Craig C
I think you missed his point. The idea is not that the voters moving southwest will become more conservative, just that they will boost the influence of Southwestern states. Texas is the state in which this seems most likely.

Even suppose, as someone suggested, that all of Texas' growth is immigrants and that they are mostly democrats, then Republicans will win the state by smaller margins. But they will still win the state and they will get two additional electoral college votes for doing so.

The effect in Congress may be smaller given that Texas has already gerrymandered the state for republican advantage. So an influx of democrats would benefit dems since there may be no way to safely gerrymander even more dems to create additional republican districts.

Where this argument would fall apart is in any states which actually went from dem to Repub. If this happened in Florida for example that would be a huge swing in the other direction. It could also happen in Arizona or Nevada. In those cases it would matter whether it is dems or repubs doing the moving.

I agree with Liberal Democrat
I also beleive in the current proposal to have the pre-election polling count toward the actual election process. It would free up congestion on election day. Lower greenhouse gases, as votes would be rendered by polling personel over the phone, instead of driving the bemouth to the polls.

No way for Bush to stuff the ballot boxes, like 2000 and 2004. For there would only be a few ballot boxes for those without phones. Besides, who would you trust more? Some old granny checking your voter ID card. Or a professional polling company taking your votes over your own phone line.

This would end voter fraud manipulated by Rowe and the rest of the republican goon squad.


Blame
And this time, we really can say "blame Bush". He's the one who wants to give amnesty to millions of illegals, and will sign the bill. President Reagan would have vetoed it. Bush's legacy will be that he was the president who assisted America in becoming a third world country.

I remember attending a rally before the 2004 election, sitting in a public park in the freezing cold for more than two hours, surrounded by large TV screens and enthusiastic Bush supporters. I was filled with pride when the president made his appearance.

How things have changed.


Fletch
And she didn't disappoint us either. She snuck in a reference to Bush.

I'm telling ya, just mentioning Bush around her might be enough to get her breathing hard and getting all huffy-puffy.

kimbat, get help for your "I'm-stuck-on-Bush" syndrome.

Pathetic!
Many great posts detailing this absolutely ridiculous article and thesis by Mr. Lambro.

How he could give practically no mention or analysis to the 3rd World invasion renders his article absolutely worthless. He's staring at the 800 pound gorilla (as described in a recent Townhall article) and refusing to acknowledge it's presence and consequences.

Almost all of the demographic growth that is being experienced in this country is from the 3rd world invasion (both legal and illegal). Most of these people are poor and uneducated with distinct cultural, linguistic, and physical differences waiting to be exploited by the liberals. In other words they won't be voting to take away the "freebies" and diversity preferences of our generous welfare state.

Right now the 3rd world voting population is rather small (except in some local and regional areas such as California), but 10 years down the line it will be huge, and 15-20 years from now it will be enormous. How can Mr. Lambro ignore this glaring reality and predict Republican gains in the future?!?

Bottom Line: The only way that the Republicans can compete in this seismic demographic realignment is by moving ever leftward -- In other words, continue with their current strategy. In doing so they will have left me and a lot of other people sympathetic to the conservative cause to seek shelter elsewhere. Basically, the Republicans can't win either way; and Mr. Lambro has just written the most absurd article and thesis I have ever read on Townhall.

What will happen....
How do the Republicans win the presidency when states afflicted with large-scale Third World immigration are lost to them? Texas. New Mexico. Arizona. Nevada. Colorado. Add them to the normal Democratic states and you have an insurmountable Democratic advantage.

Kimbat
You must be really popular with the guys, if you can see such great size in something so small.

Most of the races won by Dems in formerly GOP districts were won by razor-thin margins, and the majority of the Democrats does not exceed the number of potential "swing votes" among the Democratic caucus.

Don Lambro
Don Lambro has many problems with seeing the big picture, Sammy. He's been part of the Beltway world for about thirty years and has limited knowledge of the country at large. He's an old Kempite, willfully ignorant about ethnic realities. All the old Kempites acknowledge economic values and a few universalist bromides and little else. More recently, Lambro has become part of the Bush kool-aid brigade, rivalling Fred Barnes as sycophant-in-chief. Lastly, Lambro is of Arab heritage and probably resents at some level the European heritage of the American majority.

Actually...
...Lambro is right. 2006 was no "sweep", like the Republican victory in 1994. Many of the Dims elected to the House are the so-called "Blue Dog" Dims, who had to make noises like conservatives to get elected (it remains to be seen if they are going to remember who sent them to DC and why, or if they will just fall lockstep behind the Commiecrat leadership), and their majority is not that big. As for the Senate, their majority is razor thin, and indeed will switch back to the Repubs if Tim Johnson does not recover.

So it shall be interesting see how long it takes the Dims to live down to our expectations of them and get themselves booted out in the next election cycle.

What's Missing Here?
...The effect of the Illegals when Amnesty someday becomes law. When over 12 million "adult" Illegal immigrants are registered and hellbent to vote for Democrats for free handouts, we can all hang it up. Thegame will have been over. They will severely alter the demographic becasue there are numerous provisions in the proposed legislation for extendedfamily memebers to be allowed to come to America and be naturalized aswell once Amnesty is granted to Illegal Immigrants already here. When it is all said and done, our population could increase by as much as 35 million people in one fell swoop with approximately 20 million or so new adult Democratic party voters that could forever keep the Senate in Democrat hands.

Points
Loyal Democrat's comments are in the form of shrewd, biting satire. Those of you that take him or her at face value are actually telling us far more about yourselves than "some leftist."

None of this demographic bull$#!+ matters. There is scant difference between most Republicans and most Democrats. Show me where either party has done anything recently that limits government growth, influence, or power, instead of individual liberty.

Conservatives, and/or traditionalists, and/or constitutional purists are feeling more and more like they aren't being represented by people who govern and legislate like proto-totalitarian elitists, whether they have an R or a D next to their name.

The best thing that could possibly happen is for leftists and the Democrats, in the government, the media, and the population, to carry on for the next two years as though they have a CLEAR MANDATE on the host of social issues that their splintered special-interest groups hold dear. You know, all those issues that they made special effort to keep out of the limelight during the campaign? Let them attempt to proceed at full throttle the resumption of their push toward European socialism, and let the light of day shine upon it all. Come next election, they will be toast. Gay marriage alone is enough to do it. Hello? Gays haven't been systematically deprived of ACTUAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, like blacks were. They don't have a new civil rights movement. They don't have justice on their side.

I do, however, have good news: With the country swarmed with illegal aliens, and welfare, inner-city hospitals, and social security bankrupt, America will cease to attract these illegal freeloaders. :-(

Yeah, we might want to re-think that fence. Some of us might want to be able to get OUT.

Just kidding! Everything's going to turn out just fine!

Old question
Lambro writes like someone paid him for this, I would be willing to bet it was the RNC. I have very bad feelings about this group ever since Haley Barber. They wasted money running Bob Dole and lost my support. They continued to support the pansy from Penn instead of new blood who was really conservative. Lincoln Chaffee? What a joke. Lizzy Dole another mistake. Why can't they find Michael Steele and others like him. How do you run a party into the same footprints left by the enemy. How do you have a justice system when illegeals and their crimes are the order of the day.

The name will have to be changed:

To RNF.

The Republican National Fiesta

Paper-thin or Invisible?
Lambro misses the point entirely I agree. The influx of "guests" from our southern neighbor who will undoubtedly vote Dim (many already are) because the Lame-Stream-Media will indoctrinate them into the "Republicans, Christians = BAD camp the very same way the black voter remains convinced it was Sens.Byrd,Fulbright,Gore Sr.etc. that fought FOR their rights in the 60's.
Another thing he fails to mention is that unless and until the Republicans STOP voting out their incumbant representatives to prove a point (something the Dims would never think of doing)the country will continue to slide toward the marxist/socialist side of the spectrum.
Republican voters whose votes(or lack thereof)are based on ethics & morals while the Lemming-crats cast their votes based on their anti-Republican,anti-Christian agenda & how the LSM tells them to vote.
But there is hope in the short term at least. The Nancy Pulloutski Congress is already showing its hypocrisy (see todays story re: min.wage & Starkist tuna). I tend to think the tipping point will come when the Dims show just how they plan to "support" our troops. Contrary to the mantra popular among Dummycrats, a vote for a "new direction" doesn't mean to put the machine into reverse. To most of us it means take the mittens off so we can load the weapons and finish the job.

And by the way
Now al-Kida is RUNNING from us. Just the way I like it.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.