The night of November 8th, 2016 saw a flurry of talking points dissecting what happened after it became clear that Donald Trump’s victory was imminent. Chief among the concerns was the fall of the Democrat’s so-called “Blue Wall.” With the distinct exception of Michael Moore (a native of Flint, Michigan) pundits and pollsters couldn’t conceive of the old labor-union, Midwest states such as Michigan and Pennsylvania crumbling under the prodigious weight of economically disenfranchised white men. Yet crumble they did, taking with them the outdated notions of what the regional voter preference and attitudes were. While plenty of digital ink has been spilled deconstructing the causes of the Blue Wall’s failure, precious little has been written about new regional strategies Democrats can pursue. The future road to victory for the Democrats doesn’t snake its way through coal country, but rather cuts across the Sun Belt.
The Sun Belt is traditionally understood as the collection of states below the 36th parallel containing the Deep South, Southwest, Texas, and the southern half of California. The name is derived for the comparably large amount of sunlight the area receives year-round. It’s also home to the United State’s most consistent population growth and intra-country migration flow. Though it seems preposterous to offer the traditional republican heartlands such as Texas and Georgia as targets for Democratic party converts, the data would suggest otherwise. In 2012 Mitt Romney carried Texas with a sizeable 18 percentage points while Donald Trump only managed to muster 9% in 2016. Similarly, Georgia was particularly striking with the Donald narrowly pulling out 51.4% victory in the face of Romney’s 53.3% win in 2012. Similar stories can be seen in Trump’s 49.4% victory in Arizona and narrow 49.1% win in the ever fickle Florida. These poll numbers can be considered especially surprising with the knowledge that Hilary Clinton was one of the least liked candidates in modern history. If one of the weakest candidates Democrats put forward could make such inroads into red territory, one can only imagine what a more positively-viewed contender could accomplish.
Another strategic advantage of the Sun Belt is the manner in which it’s emblematic of long term demographic shifts that benefit the Democrats. Unsurprisingly, the Southwest including California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas are home to the largest population of Latinos in the country with Florida containing a sizable population of its own. Considerable Asian-American and African-American populations are also present within the Sun Belt and growing at a steady pace. Though the Democrats seem content to wistfully dream about what America will be like in the future (when racial demographics slant more in their favor overall), they are ignoring what can be done in the near term to kickstart that shift.
Though the Sun Belt may seem poised to flip political allegiance, Democrats must understand that securing these states will require a reexamination of the party’s platform to conform to local cultural preferences. One of the biggest impediments to co-opting red territory might be the Democrat’s support of gun control. Collectively, Arizona, Texas, Georgia and Florida have some of the most permissive gun laws in the country, as well as some of the highest rates of firearm ownership . A Republican House, Senate and Presidency combined with the ascent of a presumptive strict constitutionalist to the Supreme Court effectively acts as a wet blanket on any ideas of gun control being pushed through at the federal level. Liberals and Democrats themselves have been making moves towards embracing firearms ownership in the face of Trump’s rise to the presidency.
It may seem anathema to Democrats to abandon something they are so emotionally invested in such as gun control, the fact remains that as of yet there is no coherent strategy to move forward. It may become necessary to make sacrifices in order to widen the net of potential voters. There are more urgent conversations that need to be had among party leadership about whether to follow a Sanders-style economic populism or continue with Clintonesque Neoliberal policies. However, these conversations should be underpinned by a new regional strategy that seeks to play towards demographic strength.
