UPDATE: This analysis lends further weight to the population drift/Electoral College proposition;
"When I say the blue states are in a depression, I don’t mean the collective funk they are in because they lost the election to Donald Trump.
I’m talking about an economic depression in the blue states that went for Hillary. Here is an amazing statistic. Of the 10 blue states that Hillary Clinton won by the largest percentage margins — California, Massachusetts, Vermont, Hawaii, Maryland, New York, Illinois, Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Connecticut — every single one of them lost domestic migration (excluding immigration) over the last 10 years (2004-14). Nearly 2.75 million more Americans left California and New York than entered these states.
They are the loser states. They are all progressive. High taxes rates. High welfare benefits. Heavy regulation. Environmental extremism. Super minimum wages. Most outlaw energy drilling. The whole left-wing playbook is on display in the Hillary states. And people are leaving in droves. Day after day, they are being bled to death. So much for liberalism creating a worker’s paradise.
Now let’s look at the 10 states that had the largest percentage vote for Donald Trump. Everyone of them — Wyoming, West Virginia, Oklahoma, North Dakota, Kentucky, Tennessee, South Dakota, and Idaho — was a net population gainer.
This is part and parcel of one of the greatest internal migration waves in American history as blue states especially in the northeast are getting clobbered by their low tax, smaller government rivals in the south, southeast and mountain regions."
******************************************************
Of course there won't be a "permanent" Republican or Democratic majority (Sean Trende "The God That Failed) in the universal sense, there never has been such a situation in the country's history and never will be.
Even President Monroe's effective one party state "era of good feelings" and the dominance of the Democratic-Republican Party after the collapse of the Federalists (1801-1825) ended with the ascension of Andrew Jackson and the resumption of the two party system.
What the Republicans have under president Trump is the opportunity to cement in place a long period of Electoral College dominance until some major unforeseen event, like a war or depression, changes things once again.
That sort of "permanent majority' has happened on a number of occasions. The Democratic party had just two presidents from 1860 to 1932-72 years! If it were not for the great depression who can say how much longer that trend may have continued. The wheel turned though and from 1932 to 1952 there were no Republican presidents.
Since then the two groupings have swapped back and forth, usually with two term presidents, with the exception of the Reagan two term 'era of good feelings" extending to a G.W.H Bush further four years.
What gives the Republicans the opportunity to cement in place a solid "red wall" Electoral College majority, it being taken for granted that with New York and California voting massively for any Democratic candidate the odds will always be against a Republican winning the popular vote, is the nature of Trump's victory.
Trump 306 Electoral votes Clinton 232 (270 required)
The GOP won back from the huge defeat in 2008 the G.W. Bush 2004 states, which were lost to Obama, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio (once) and Iowa (twice). Missouri, which McCain narrowly held has become a solid red state subsequently. On the other hand it appears that New Mexico and Virginia have become solid blue states no matter how much a lead the early results favor the GOP in the latter.
Commentators see a structural movement, via demographics, in state support which considers a slow but steady process of "sunbelt" and some Southern states shifting to the Democratic Party.
It is clear, as the 2016 election showed that Barack Obama was an electoral aberration, exceptional circumstances,
rather than a true shift to the Democratic Party
The GOP gained six Electoral College votes after the last census-equal to an Iowa. The next census will show a further population drift South and more EC votes for the GOP. New York has gone from 41 EC votes to 29 since 1980 as Texas has increased from 26 to 38.
This is purported to be caused by a rising Hispanic population in Arizona, which would eventually see that state follow New Mexico, and a population drift from the North to Georgia allied to an increasing Hispanic population and larger Black turnout which would shift the state into the Democratic column.
The counterweight to this is what delivered the election to Trump now without having to wait for the slow grind of demographics. Trump kept Georgia, North Carolina Texas and Arizona, states that are supposedly under threat, whilst winning the true battleground state of Florida and the "rust belt' states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin against nearly all pundit predictions.
A simple mathematical calculation shows who would come off best if the predicted trends fully eventuate. If the Democrat's pick up Arizona and Georgia (Texas is not going anywhere and if it did then most certainly the Democrat's would have a "permanent majority") they gain 27 votes. If the GOP can keep
Ohio/Michigan/Wisconsin/Pennsylvania they gain 64 electoral, votes a net gain of 37.
Much has been made of the Dem's structural advantage of having a bedrock head start of 84 electoral votes from New York and California. The striking change in this situation, if the GOP can hold the four rust belt states, is that these votes plus Texas would give them a 102 EC vote head start.
Republicans could lose Arizona and Georgia and still win, holding Florida of course, with 279 votes. Further, if the GOP keeps those two states in their column they could even lose Florida and still win.
The future of the permanent Republican majority lies very much in the new administrations hands.
If Trump can deliver even a sense of progress for the benighted blue collar workers in the rust belt states so they turn out for him in such massive numbers again, then the GOP has every chance of keeping them in their column.
Similarly with the Hispanic community who turned out for him (29%) at about the same level as they did for Romney, without the massive losses the pundits predicted. If they find their economic situation bettered and the illegals/dreamers/wall/Cuba problems dealt with fairly, there is no reason why that communities progress into the middle class and Republican support can continue.
Hispanic's were the largest movers into the GOP column of all faith based communities (as were Catholics generally) and the new administrations pro-life and Supreme Court nominee, presumably a conservative, may accelerate that trend.
The Black community which turned out so massively for Barack Obama had no such overwhelming love for Hillary Clinton. President Obama won 95 % of Black voters in 2012 to Romney's 5% Not only did Black's not turn out for her in the 2012 numbers in Detroit, which cost her the state, but total Black support dropped to 88% whilst Trump increased to 8%.
Black voters went from overwhelming support for the Republicans in 1928 to overwhelming support for FDR in 1932 for economic reasons. There are indications that if Trump continues his outreach to the Black community which post-election is in a watching and waiting mode, delivers jobs, helps reduce crime (whilst encouraging fair and balance policing) and removes illegals as job competitors, that 8% could increase strikingly.
If that did eventuate, or more realistically the optics were such that obvious improvement had commenced, the Democratic Party would be in a world of trouble. There could even be the possibility of a further expansion of the GOP's map into New Hampshire, Maine and Minnesota all narrowly lost in 2016
The GOP stands on the brink of a possible major tectonic shift in its favor. The party totally dominates government holding a majority in Congress, State Governors and state legislatures, state Congressional delegations, the Supreme Court and an overwhelming number of counties;
Many ducks have to be in a row, but if Trump can pull it off, the semi-permanent "permanent Republican majority" is well within reach.
