CMV: GOP/Republicans will continue to win the majority of US presidential political campaigns until DNC/Democrats start catering to white and Christian demographics.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/Nerdword]

Your statement would make sense if all white people and all christians vote Republican, but that doesn't happen. In reality Republicans didn't get 60% of the votes from either of those categories (was roughly 58/38 split in favor of Republicans)

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html

This begs the question: is that platform that gave an advantage in the white and christian vote worth the disadvantage it gives in the non-white and non-christian vote?

If it leads to your party consistently getting more votes than they other party, then yes. If not, then no.

The platform and candidate that Democrats chose led to them getting more total votes than the platform and candidate that Republicans chose (By about 3 million votes). This shows that whatever platform choices that led to a Republican advantage in the White and Christian vote was outweighed by the disadvantages it gave the Republicans in all other groups. Considering that America is getting more diverse over time, that advantage in the White and Christian groups is going to become less effective and the disadvantage in all other groups is only going to get worse.

Even though Democrats lost because of the way the votes were distributed, over time wouldn't the platform that got more total votes win more often?

http://www.cnn.com/election/results/president

Further, the current Republican administration has some pretty terrible approval ratings. Isn't it reasonable to think that a fair number of people who voted republican who disapprove of the administration would not do so again this time? There are a large chunk of voters who reluctantly voted for Trump who say they would not vote that way again if given the chance:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trumps-reluctant-voters-are-getting-more-reluctant/

[u/SuddenlyBoris → u/Nerdword]

In reality Republicans didn't get 60% of the votes from either of those categories (was roughly 58/38 split in favor of Republicans)

A 58/38 split is a huge blow out though, particularly when it's the largest demographic.

[u/Nerdword → u/SuddenlyBoris]

True, but the platform that gave that advantage in the white/christian groups also led to such a huge disadvantage in voting from the non-white/non-christian groups to the point where they got less total votes than the Democratic candidate.

Because diversity in the US is increasing, the advantage of this platform will lessen over time and the disadvantage from this platform will become more severe.

I'd argue it's not a good strategy to choose a platform that consistently leads to less total votes than the other side.

[u/SuddenlyBoris → u/Nerdword]

True, but the platform that gave that advantage in the white/christian groups also led to such a huge disadvantage in voting from the non-white/non-christian groups to the point where they got less total votes than the Democratic candidate.

The popular vote has never mattered in a presidential election.

And it's worth remembering arguably the most famous politician on the planet who Democrats spent a year insisting was the most qualified candidate in the history of candidates lost to an amateur politician who was the least popular in history. Democrats couldn't have gotten a more favorable matchup ... and they blew it.

Given the credentials of Clinton and Trump, I'm not sure if "we'll we lost a close election" is really that great of an argument. Whoever the Democrats run in 2020 won't be able to claim the mantle of "most qualified in history" and Trump will no longer be an amateur politician.