Why all this gloom-and-doom talk about the Republican Party?They only lost the presidency — and majorities in Congress. But so what: The Democrats came back from 2004, didn’t they? This isn’t the first time a Republican has lost the White House. Sen. John McCain was just an uninspiring, unenthusiastic candidate with a lackluster campaign, right? The Republicans will have a better candidate for 2012, won’t they?Some of these questions and observations have merit. Political analysts have substantially less to talk about these days, so when they’re not talking about Sen. Hillary Clinton becoming President-elect Barack Obama’s secretary of state, they relegate themselves to talking about the grim prospects for the Grand Ole’ Party. And yes, after the Democrats’ defeat in the 2004 presidential election, speculation roared about the prospect of a “permanent Republican majority.” It didn’t happen.But the 2008 presidential election was different, and it would be foolish to think the changing electoral map doesn’t present challenges to the GOP.  The problem begins and ends with the Republican electoral coalition.The Democrats have traditionally had a more diverse coalition, generally winning minorities, poor voters, young voters and some religious groups by modest to large margins. In the past, Democrats had to maximize their support in those diverse groups and keep the white vote margins tight — sometimes done by appealing to the South. The Republican Party’s traditional winning formula, on the other hand, relied largely on capturing the less diverse but more populous white vote. Republicans also had to either keep the margins tighter in large urban centers or increase their margins among white voters. To do this, Republicans, like Democrats, have developed political tactics to appeal to southern whites. This culminated in the 1970s, after 1964s civil rights legislation angered many southern white voters — the infamous “southern strategy.” And the South has remained a solidly Republican stronghold for national office seekers. Democrats needed to make attempts — sometimes fruitless — to appeal to this southern bloc of whites if they hoped to have any chance of winning. Adding to this complication for Democrats was losing the “Joe the Plumber” vote — described by former President Bush speechwriter David Frum as “almost entirely white, almost entirely resident in the middle of the country, moderately affluent, middle-aged and older, more male than female, with some college education but not a college degree.”The 2004 presidential election represents a text book representation of both parties’ fights for votes. Sen. John Kerry selected former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards for a running mate in an attempt to woo and charm Southern whites.  It didn’t work.Bush won white voters, according to exit polls, by 17 points, and they comprised 77 percent of total voters. Kerry won every other race by large, double-digit margins — making up the remaining 23 percent of total voters. Bush won all southern states. Kerry won the West and East coasts, and Bush won the middle. Kerry won most of the industrial, blue-collar north — save for one exception:   Bush won Ohio — that crucial “Joe the Plumber” vote. So, why did 2008 foretell trouble for Republicans?Obama — unlike his Democratic predecessors — stood up the Deep South. He didn’t need the South to win. He selected a Democratic senator from Delaware for a running mate, opting instead for the “Joe the Plumber” vote — Ohio. McCain still won white voters — albeit by smaller margins, according to exit polls. He also won every Deep South state  except North Carolina and Virginia.Obama won in Virginia because the state’s changing demographics favor Democrats — more populous and growing urban centers like Richmond, an influx of younger voters and an increasingly educated electorate. Similar changes are happening in the Southwest.For the GOP’s time-tested winning strategy to work, they’ll have to win more and more of the white vote. Simultaneously, though, running up margins among whites is becoming harder and harder for the GOP.The economic crisis is seems to be pushing the “Joe the Plumber” vote away from conservative economic rhetoric, and they have been losing ground on white educated voters while substantially losing young white voters. Moving forward, Republicans will need a new strategy.Frum sees the party at a crossroads: Will the GOP decide to pursue larger margins among white voters — the Sarah Palin route, as Frum calls it? Or will the party attempt to reach out to voters they have struggled with — minority, educated and young voters?”To do so will involve painful change, on issues ranging from the environment to abortion. And it will involve potentially even more painful changes of style and tone: toward a future that is less overtly religious, less negligent with policy, and less polarizing on social issues,” Frum writes. If diversity is the answer, Frum sees little room for the likes of Sarah Palin. Thank God.     —-Contact Nate Monroe at [email protected]