OK, Iím a strange one to engage in a bit of snark considering I wrote that whole series on the need for Democrats to win more white voters. I still think thatís the case, but part of the case has not materialized, specifically the part about Republicans cutting into that gap with DLDGs. The assumption was actually a refusal to assume, namely refusing to assume Republicans would have no success. There was a chance they would make a serious effort, wouldnít bumble it all, wouldnít undermine themselves at every turn, and might enjoy some success. Not a lot of success, not like flipping young voters or women voters, but they didnít need to. Cutting off a few percent would be enough to flip election results, and couldnít count on them not doing it. Except it looks like they havenít trimmed a few percent and have bumbled it all, judging by this Quinnipiac poll on the 2016 presidential election in Florida.
Readers who follow politics regularly can probably fill in the caveats, but just so nobody gets left behind, that poll is just about Florida. Itís about only the presidential election. The 2016 election is a long way off. The pollster asked about a bunch of Republican candidates but only about Hillary Clinton in the head-to-head matchups, so she could muck up the whole thing by not running.
However, Florida is the third biggest state and a swing state, the biggest contested prize in the electoral college (unless Democrats make Texas competitive sooner than reasonably expected), so we do care. Candidates have to care about the poll results because they have to decide in about a year whether to run, and whatís most important to our main point, the demographic fundamentals still matter. Theyíre the interesting part, in terms of what changed since last election, or, as readers might have inferred from the first couple paragraphs, havenít changed.