I'll be coming back with additional thoughts about the election just concluded for days, weeks, maybe months. It was that big a deal.
My latest thought is this. The pundits who observed the changing demographics in the U.S. overlooked a key variable: where those new non-white voters are located. They are not evenly distributed across the U.S.
Rather, for reasons we've explored here, they tend to cluster together, where their votes become largely superfluous. Who cares whether CA goes Democrat by 51% or 91%? It yields the same electoral and senate votes either way. Ditto in NY, IL, etc.
CA, for example, is probably majority non-white at this point, or soon will be. Adding additional black and brown Democratic votes to the CA total does little nationally, so long as an equal number of whites leave the state and go elsewhere. Perhaps it yields an additional handful of D House seats in CA whereas the displaced whites will yield the same number of R House seats elsewhere - nationally no change.
A map of which presidential candidate won each congressional district shows most of the U.S. bright red. The blues are concentrated along the west coast and the north east, with islands in the midwest. If lots more Democrat-voting minorities move to those states, their national political impact is minimal.
Just sayin'.,,,
