Reply #23: I am sure historians will quibble about the details

[nadinbrzezinski]

but here is how this realignment was seen by Texeira.

It was to be centered in urban centers in both the east and west coast, as well as places like Austin. where we had a young population that was highly educated, latte drinking (He is a democratic party operative, so he did not mean it in the pejorative way), and somewhat well to do. And if you pay attention to the electoral map as it takes shape this year... absolutely... that is what is happening... states that never, ever would switch, are... they are younger states. Old stalwarts of the dems in particular... are not... they are older states.

This also was to be taking the country towards a left lurch. He and his partner predicted back then a new era of progressivism, where the people would be taken care off

Given the forces present in 1932 and today... I'd be a little concerned that the legacy may go right ward... due to the influence of IMF fans in the Economics Advisor team.. (Rubin and Volkner especially)

Now this is truly inside baseball, but Volkner is a really old hand Keynseian before he turned after joining the IMF

The last three months may have turned him into a pragmatist... I hope

But there is another thing about realignments, usually they have core constituents also become activist, and in this case that means leaving the keyboard and actually taking direct action, which takes many forms.

On edit, thanks for making me remember that analysis about the urban centers and younger centers .. one of the core constituents is also a strong immigrant community

The electoral map is making sense now