Does the GOP’s Demographic Death Spiral End in a Texas Graveyard?

Selwyn Duke, The New American, May 22, 2012

If Democratic voters were rapidly increasing in number and Republican voters rapidly decreasing, it should be pretty big news, shouldn’t it?

Not when at issue is a third rail of American social commentary: race.

Recently I wrote a piece on race and voting patterns, using as a lede the story about how white births now account for less than 50 percent of the U.S. total for the first time in history. And while most respondents agreed with my analysis, some reacted predictably: Uncomfortable even hearing about race and/or frightened by what lies ahead, they rationalized away obvious facts.

And here is one: You cannot understand where our nation is headed ideologically without grasping the link between racial identification and voting patterns—and demographic changes that will yield Democratic hegemony.

One response to my piece was that “it’s not about race.” This is true—in a sense. It’s about how group identification correlates with many other factors. For instance, Scandinavian immigrants are very liberal, and Jews vote Democratic upwards of 80 percent of the time. Thus, if these two white populations were increasing rapidly, it would make sense to discuss their future impact on the political landscape. But they’re not.

Another response was that I was confusing race with culture. Actually, though, this confuses the “what” with the “why.”

And here is a significant “what”: Republicans derive 90 percent of their presidential-election vote from whites. Democrats win the non-white vote by, on average, more than 70 percent.

Here is another “what”: One of these constituencies is shrinking, and the other is growing—rapidly.

How rapidly? Non-Hispanic whites shrank from almost 90 percent of the U.S. population in 1965 to 69 percent in 2000. And between 2000 and 2010, their share dropped another six points—faster than analysts expected.

Given the last statistic, it’s safe to say that, all other things being equal, the GOP will have a tougher time winning the 2012 election than it did the razor-thin-margin 2000 election. And all other things aren’t equal: Today Republicans face an incumbent.


For Romney to win, however, he must not only hold states leaning his way, he must almost run the table with the toss-ups or peel off some likely Obama states. He has little margin for error.

Some will say that this is only one election. But Obama is the most radical leftist ever to assume the presidency; a 2007 study showed that he had the Senate’s most left-wing voting record (avowed socialist Bernie Sanders was number two). And Massachusetts Mitt is a moderate on a good day—a liberal on a bad one. So I ask: What conservative GOP candidate could possibly change the electoral equation? {snip}


As to the “why,” demographics aren’t the only reason. There is, of course, the leftist ideology preached through academia, the media, and entertainment. And there are exceptions to the racial voting correlation such solidly blue Vt., which is 95 percent white. But the demographic patterns and influence are unmistakable—and, among conservatives, largely unmentionable.

When it is discussed, however, we sometimes hear the term “tipping point.” So is there a GOP-Dem. electoral tipping point? Well, this brings us to my title. When Texas—which is experiencing huge demographic changes—finally flips and puts its 38 electoral votes in the Democratic column, what realistic path will Republicans have to presidential victory?

Of course, political parties adapt, so the GOP could move left with the electorate and survive. But authentic Americanism would not. And, then, the question is, with the way we’re being balkanized, will America join Americanism in the dustbin of history?


Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Of course, political parties adapt, so the GOP could move left with the electorate and survive

    Or, more hard to the white (notice I didn’t say “right”) and thrive.

  • IstvanIN

    The best course of action is separation. Accept what has been lost and regroup in a smaller, but all white America. And learn from the past, we shouldn’t allow our lands to be invaded again.

    • Oil Can Harry

      Why separate? Diversity has made my hometown of New York City a paradise.

      Here’s the latest in local news: Muslim Rapes White Family’s Pet Dog.

      • IstvanIN

        If the dog was female the owner was at fault for not covering it in a burka thus allowing the dog to inflame Kujtim Nicaj passions.  If the dog was male then the dog must have been a “sodomite” who converted the poor man to a wayward life.  Freedom for poor Kujtim Nicaj who was led astray!

        • Oil Can Harry

          Good point. In the interest of cultural sensitivity we Americans must cover our pet dogs, cats and horses in burkas so as not to arouse lust in the practitioners of the Religion Of Peace.

          • IstvanIN

            Goats! Don’t forget the goats!

    • MikeofAges

       Or accept that some things never were yours in the first place. Said it before, take everything north of the southern border of Pennsylvania (the old Mason-Dixon line, if you are an historical rube) and from the there to the Golden Gate. If you starting talking about that area as your North American homeland, where your culture, at least, must categorically prevail,  you’ll find it harder for anyone to argue against you. If they do, they’ll will know that they are the usurper.

      Elsewhere, the people who live there will have to work out their own arrangements with the other populations which live there.

  • Fakeemail

    I wouldn’t have a sigh of relief even if assured that non-white peoples would
    vote Republican and carry on American traditions (which they won’t).

    I’m going to reiterate a point that Jared Taylor has made in the past.  For the sake of argument, let’s say Mexicans become as smart and hard working as Asians and vote for liberty, sovereignty,  and personal responsibility like the staunchest White patriot.

    I still wouldn’t want them here nor certainly want them to dominate and become the future of this country.

    I want the future this country to be held by MY PEOPLE; for good or for ill.  For the same reason I prefer my child over another parents child even if it could be argued that the other child is better.  Do you think the Japanese would be okay if they were displaced by white people who  carried on a better Japan than them?  It wouldn’t be Japan any more; even if the whites carried on every Japanese tradition down to the t.

    I want to see my image, my genes, MY SELF in the future.  Not swarms of blacks, asians, and mexicans even if they could carry on the best of American traditions better than white people.

    And of course they can’t.

    • IstvanIN


  • Johnny Reb

    I love how he slipped in “jew” and “white” into the same sentence. 

    He seems confused about other things as well . . . such as the assumption that the Democrats can hold their constituency together.

    Suppose Republicans do fade away.  Ex-Republicans won’t vote Democrat.  Some new, conservative party will arise (the “Tea Party” or the “Neo Whigs,” etc).  The constituency of angry, disaffected whites who feel their nation has been invaded and are sick of multicult, political correctness and socialism in general, aren’t going away . . .  in fact, they’ll be growing.

    But as Hispanics grow, they will clash more with blacks.  Blacks and homosexuals already despise each other.  You already have deep divisions among blacks.  And so on.

    So it’s VERY likely that 20 years from now, we’ll have a number of small parties that broke away from the Democrats and a number of small parties that broke away from Republicans.  Instead of two large blocks, we’ll have many splinters.

    You tell me which “splinter” constituency will be the smartest, most capable and angriest!

    Remember this little bit of history . . .

    In the first election in 1932, Hitler won just 30% of the vote compared to Hindenburg’s 50%.  In the run-off a month later, Hitler won 36% to Hindenburg’s 53%.  That means that 65-70% of germans were AGAINST Hitler.

    But by getting into the government . . . and by helping create some of the chaos that followed that year . . .  Hitler’s power grew and he was appointed Chancellor six months later.  Within another six months, he had suspended the constitution and the “Enabling Act” made him dictator.

    Lesson learned . . . Republicans will lose power . . . but so will Democrats.  “Splinterization” is good for whites . . . BECAUSE THEN IT DOESN’T REQUIRE A MAJORITY TO SEIZE POWER.

    • IstvanIN

      We do not have a parlimentary system with a head of state and head of geovernment.  If Hindenburg hadn’t died Hitler may not have consolidated power.  If Woodrow Wilson hadn’t been so anti-monarch and let Germany retain a hereditrary Kaiser perhaps WWII wouldn’t have happened.  And perhaps hyper-liberalism, the end result of WWII, wouldn’t have conquered the western world.

      • Johnny Reb

        True, our three-headed hydra is a different political system.  But the point is that when a two-party system turns into a many-party system, a well-organized and disciplined party can gain power with a small percentage of the vote.

        • MikeofAges

           Winner takes all. That circumstances inevitably leads to some form of institutional two-party system. If “third” parties become the norm, whichever of the two institutional parties can maintain the most cohesion  wins.

    • I agree.  The Democratic party is made up of uppity whites, blacks, Hispanics, gays, Muslims, feminists, etc.  What could go wrong there?  Especially when the whites start declining in the party (which they already are) which are the ones that run the nursery.  The Democratic party has the potential to implode into several professional victim splinter parties.

      That’s when things get interesting as US politics become Mississippiized.  The Democrats foolishly thinks they will keep us from becoming even a dog catcher.  But they are prone to hubris and delusions of grandeur.  They have a way of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

    • ‘Remember this little bit of history . . .’

      It is also interesting to note that the Bush Administration had no problem with using some of Carl Schmitts legal precepts to help justify the war on terror.

      Republicans and other Right-Wingers just may have to avail ourselves of even more past German precepts in the future…

  • This goes back to a point I made yesterday on the Bloomberg thread.

    When America goes non-white, it won’t mean the end of politics.  It will mean a political center that is far to the left of today’s.  Now, the Republican Party may or may not exist, but it won’t matter.  If it exists, it will be like New York City’s politics, where there are two parties in theory but the Republicans are hard left and the Democrats are far left.  If it does not exist, then you’ll have a Chicago/San Francisco/St. Louis paradigm, where the political center is lodged within the skull of the singular Democrat Party.  There will still be politics, and they will be hard left versus far left, but they will be intra-partisan.

    The left wing will love it either way.  If there’s no Republican Party, Democrats win everything.  If there is a Republican Party, they’ll be so left wing that, even though the left would prefer far left to hard left, they’ll win even when they lose.

    I tend to agree with Johnny Reb above — If the Republicans go out of business nationally, not just in urban areas, the same forces will also bork the Democrats. 

  • There will get to be a point where there are not enough tax payers to pay for the tax takers. 3rdworlders will allways vote for more benefits for workers to have to pay in taxes

    • The__Bobster

      We’ve already reached that point.

  • NONE of you get it: There won’t be anything but mayhem – anarchy.

    In 2032, WHO CARES how many will vote “Demopublican”

    THERE WON’T BE ANY JOBS – just banditry.

  • Cyb

    as long as europanic americans are forced through crushing university programs then worked to death in corporate ladders and taxed away so they can never afford children all the while non-europanics fornicate like wild beasts producing 100 children from 20 women well…  we can forget it. Since it’s obvious no national leaders will touch the race issue can we get one state? jsut one? where we aren’t taxed to oblivion? Where there is ZERO reward for having 20 children out of wedlock? Where Mexicanos dont get free houses and money just because their marriage is undeclared?

  • Like I said in a previous post I don’t think the US will last long enough for the Republican party to go the way of the Whigs.  The gibsmedat will get worse and worse.  As whites shrink, so will the tax revenues.

    • It’s going to be both:  Civil War and separating into ethnostates..

      If the blacks end up with the South, I (we) might or might not end up behind enemy lines.  We executed a ‘tactical retreat’ a couple of years ago and moved to the country, well away from the Diversities.  Best thing I ever did for my family.

      However, we won’t be budged.  Not by Diversities, nor Hell nor high water.. We’ve retreated about as far as I care to go, and I’m done running.

      We’re making our stand here, for good or otherwise.

      Besides, what would blacks do with farmland anyways? 

  • I’m going to have nightmares of the race war again tonight. If the “bible belt” becomes the “blue belt” how is the South not going to rise again? There’s a modern day racial serfdom going on. The labor of 1 race is directly supporting the existence of the other 2. Soon, the other 2 races will have the majority vote, thus politically controlling the fate of the welfare serfs. If that isn’t a recipe for revolt, what is? 

  • JohnEngelman

    The political center in the United States is to the right of where it is in Europe. This is because the population in the Untied States is more heterogeneous. Loyalties of race, nation, and ethnicity are usually stronger than loyalties of class.
    During the Great Depression Franklin Roosevelt owed his majorities in part to the facts that most blacks lived in the South where they were denied equal rights, and that the Immigration Act of 1924 limited all immigration, especially non white immigration. Consequently, white blue collar workers could vote Democrat with the assurance that they were not voting for equality with non whites.
    If the United States becomes a white minority country, more whites are likely to vote Republican, as they do in the South. 
    Because Asians usually earn more than whites after one or two generations, more of them are likely to vote Republican too. 

    Whites are more likely to vote than blacks and Hispanics.

    • anmpr1



      • Detroit_WASP

        Sounds like we need more Asians.

        • redfeathers

          No thanks, they’ve taken over northeast Queens, NY.  I’m now a minority in the area I’ve lived in my whole life.

  • KenelmDigby

    The Greeks had a word for it – ‘nemesis’ or poetic justice.
    Over the past decades the Republicans cynically conned White voters by pretending to be a party of immigration restriction, whilst in practice implementing policies of mass immigration (ie the Reagan amnesty, Bush’s various failed attempts).

    • JohnEngelman

      The GOP likes to import cheap labor. 

      • The__Bobster

        And you like to breed with it.

    • redfeathers

      I’m glad you mentioned the Reagan amnesty.  Many have forgotten about it, or were never aware.  I’m so tired of CONservative Reagan worship.

  • Follow my blog in the near future. I have a backlog of posts, many of which deal with things AR cannot. Skip the stuff on Girls, read the articles on politics.

    I’ll leave you with this: Your analysis of Europe is near perfect, except you leave out a major difference.

    Europeans are cattle. We Americans are heavily armed. Our entire Military cannot control Afghanistan, which is smaller than Texas.

    How the hell will Big Brother control Texas?

    • For most of Texas, the answer is “without breaking a sweat”. Even that fool Santa Ana managed to sweep right through the high plains, desert, and coastal-plains until he hit San Jacinto. The forests in the east might pose a problem, but even then, meh.

      Big Brother should worry more about West Virginia, if the money runs out and it has to occupy the place instead of (as now) bribing it.

    • NM156

      How will Texas control Texas? The five-guns-per-capita won’t change the demands of the hostile new majority.

      • Texas – AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT – can’t even control mexes shuffling across the border with milk jugs full of brackish water.

  • xxxtonygunsxxx

     fat black Negro “female” beats and kicks pretty blond mall employee while negro ” males” film

  • Exactly right.  Almost word for word what I have been thinking…

    We MUST separate.  Because the alternative:  full-blown Civil War- is almost unthinkable.

    I remember seeing a table of figures from years ago.. the list was made up of all-European nations and their ethnicities.  Countries that were above 90% white were stable and prosperous.  As the number of Diversities increased, the trouble increased until, at the bottom, were countries like the former Yugoslavia, which was then involved in a full-blown Civil War, where no group (Diversity or otherwise) was a clear majority.

    Once the population of whites in the US (and the West in general) hits lows less than 50%, Civil War becomes a real possibility.

    The only way to prevent that is separation.  I can see no other way.

  • Robert11110

    The GOP has already shifted to the left by its choice of presidential candidate. 

  • John Maddox

     The founders repeatedly warned against this. The introduction of large numbers of ethnic minorities into this country that can’t identify themselves with the founding stock has led to the formation of political alliances and factions that will ultimately lead to the destruction of this republic.

    Statesmanship is dead and the self interests of corrupt politicians reigns.
    Ever heard of a school of American Statesmanship in a modern University?

  • eunometic

    The enormous costs associated with “White Flight” (ie mortgages, private schools) and the wage lowering effects of cheap labour immigration from Mexico means that White women are forced into the workforce for the bulk of their lives to maintain family disposable income.   The result is a decline in White fertillity.

    Like any species our fertillity is reduced by a harsh competitive environment. created by elites seeking cheap labour.

    I would also add that cheap labour destroys investment in automation and the good jobs that go with it.  This is a big part of the USA loss of competitiveness.

    • MikeofAges

       Let’s not forget the mind-numbing effect of long commutes. The impact on family life. The financial impact.

  • Snowcrash7

    Really? Legislation introduced last year to stop giving tax breaks to companies who offshore jobs and otherwise replace American workers with aliens imported under the H1B visa was defeated in committee by 45 NO votes, 43 of which were GOP. While its true that both parties sell out the middle class, the neo-con corporate meat puppets of the GOP are in the forefront of shafting the American. Denying that is both foolish and factually incorrect.
    I suggest you turn off Fox News for awhile and so some research.

    • And even if the legislation passed, it wouldn’t have done any good.  Whatever “tax breaks” they would no longer have would be small potatoes compared to the much cheaper labor of outsourcing and insourcing.  If I steal a billion dollars, and I’m caught and prosecuted, and fined $250,000 without having to return what I stole, am I really punished?

      Unless I hear eliminating the H-xB/J-x visa programs and steep increases in tariffs, it doesn’t rise above my noise floor.

  • NM156

    The GOP is stupid. The GOP is all about money even if the pursuit of profit destroys the GOP. The US Chamber of Commerce and lobbyists from a wide spectrum of business and industry hold the GOP accountable for making sure they get what they want from immigration. Also, the GOP comprises big business globalists on Wall St. and in the capitals of every industrialized country who demand both free flow of money and labor. What prevents the GOP from throwing open the borders is the rank and file conservative voter. The conflict between their business interests and those of the conservative base is evident in the open enmity during the debate about immigration law in Alabama. The agricultural interests couldn’t care any less about the effects of millions of Third World immigrants on the middle class and working class of Alabama.

    • ‘The GOP is stupid. The GOP is all about money even if the pursuit of profit destroys the GOP.’

      “The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” — Lenin

      Looks like he may have been right…. (This is why my ideas on economics have a heavy dose-age of Populism and Third Positionism)

  • I try to avoid that rag as much as possible.

    It has deteriorated beyond the point of being useful in any way shape or form.

  • You’re going with B?  Really?