AHC: Democrats' voter base in White non-Southern working class, Southern college-educated Whites

Your challenge is for the Democratic Party's voter base to be found in non-Southern working class Whites and Southern college-educated Whites. Minorities are still a primarily Democratic bloc in this scenario.
 
Add dixie prole whites to it, and it becomes a possible coalition in "no southern strategy" atls but without dixie working class whites, it's not happening
 
. . . and Southern college-educated Whites. . .
So, the D’s get a healthy majority of well-off suburban voters in this scenario? In South but not the rest of the country?

Generally, the country advances past racial issues, but Catholic-Protestant becomes much more of a sticking point than OTL.
 
IRL Democratic Party in the 90s.

Oh, how do we do that again? I mean, how do we do that minus the Third Way crap?

So, the D’s get a healthy majority of well-off suburban voters in this scenario? In South but not the rest of the country?

Generally, the country advances past racial issues, but Catholic-Protestant becomes much more of a sticking point than OTL.

Yes, the Democrats get a healthy majority of well-off suburban voters in the South but not in other areas.

What do you mean by Catholic-Protestant becoming a sticking point...?
 
Believe it or not, Michael Dukakis of all people may have polled as much as one-third of the Alabama white vote in 1988. Much of this was probably from the New Deal generation (who would have been around their 60s in 1988). As that generation declined in numbers, the Democratic white vote in the South has gone from merely 'bad' to 'comedic'.
 
Believe it or not, Michael Dukakis of all people may have polled as much as one-third of the Alabama white vote in 1988. Much of this was probably from the New Deal generation (who would have been around their 60s in 1988). As that generation declined in numbers, the Democratic white vote in the South has gone from merely 'bad' to 'comedic'.

This is interesting. How do we get that percentage, but from college-educated Southern Whites rathern than working class Southern Whites?

IRL Democratic Party in the 90s.

On second thought, this was not the case. This was the time when the Democratic Party was beginning to win White well-off suburbs in the Northeast but was losing White suburbs in Virginia and Georgia, Midwest and West Coast by wide margins, thus giving them huge vote margins in states such as New York and California (which IMO was a foreshadowing of further erosion of GOP support in the suburbs come the Trump era in previously Republican suburbs such as in Loudoun County, Virginia and Cobb County, Georgia).

Yeah, the challenge you have is that this shift of college-educated Whites only happens in the South*; elsewhere, the Democrats have solid majorities among White working-class voters. So like you have the Democrats winning in rural industrial towns in Wisconsin and Ohio by Trump-like margins but also win Southern suburbs like Cobb and Gwinett County in Georgia with margins greater than Clinton's in 2016.


*Special case for West Virginia, which can still lean Democratic as long as the Party mobilizes there properly, e. g. if they were able to make Pro-Democratic unions very strong in the Mountain State and count on their support there.
 
Yes, the Democrats get a healthy majority of well-off suburban voters in the South but not in other areas.

What do you mean by Catholic-Protestant becoming a sticking point...?

Some cocktail of disagreements on combination social-economic issues,most likely. Off the top of my head; education (Some kind of tension over the continued existence/funding of parochial schools perhaps?), immigration (The rise in Catholic Hispanic immigration could create tensions on the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder over low skilled work and housing), and targeted public welfare.
 
What do you mean by Catholic-Protestant becoming a sticking point...?

Some cocktail of disagreements on combination social-economic issues,most likely. Off the top of my head; education (Some kind of tension over the continued existence/funding of parochial schools perhaps?), immigration (The rise in Catholic Hispanic immigration could create tensions on the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder over low skilled work and housing), and targeted public welfare.
For well-off suburban voters, it might have to be that Catholic colleges are given a crummy deal and the perception that they’re treated unfairly.

And maybe a couple of Attorney Generals in northern states go after big name bishops for covering up sexual abuse?

I tend to think the problem has been the lack of effective legal response. But you certainly could go after bishops in such a way that some of it is perceived as unfair. And not merely to throw down on the Catholics. The hierarchical Jehovah Witness organization has at least the same degree of problem with covering up sexual abuse, as documented in Australia and I think the UK as well. And no reason to think that hierarchical churches and organizations on the evangelical side are exempt.

But it plays out in public in certain specific ways, and people get their ideas which they tend to stick with.
 
@FillyofDelphi and @GeographyDude, is this scenario possible:

1. The Democrats sign civil rights and pass a huge slew of progressive economic reforms that raise their popularity with unions, e.g. Taft-Hartley repeal, universal health care, etc. Minorities, as well as unions, are now solidly pro-Democratic; however, Southern Whites leave the party.
2. The Democrats put AGs in power in the Northeast and these go after Catholic bishops for covering up sexual abuse but not Evangelicals, as @GeographyDude said.
3. The Democrats put many liberal justices in the Supreme Court; thus, funding for parochial schools is ruled unconstitutional and forced desegregated busing is protected in Bradford vs. Milliken; thus, Northeastern suburbs heavily buck for the Democrats because of that.

And these?

1. An influx of Silicon-valley people and minorities into Southern suburbs
2. An influx of liberal Jewish voters in Southern suburbs
3. More racial diversity turns more White voters there liberal
 
Top