Which state would flip to a Democrat first: South Carolina or Missouri

[AN63093]

Hmm.  This one's tough.

10 years ago, it would've been MO obviously.  In 10 years, it might be clearly be SC.  Consider that SC is one of the top 10 states in growth, MO is just outside of the bottom 10.  The St Louis MSA is just barely growing, and both St Louis County and the city proper are losing population.  The KC MSA, on the other hand, is growing.  Not substantially, but it is growing.

In contrast, all of SC's major cities are growing, some substantially.  Charleston is one of the fastest growing MSAs in the US.  Greenville is a little more modest, but it's still hitting over 7%.  The city itself is on pace to hit close to 30% by the next census.  Both Greenville and Charleston counties swung and trended D in 2016.  Clinton won Charleston, and didn't come close in Greenville, but it would be interesting to see what happens there in 10 years or so.

Both states swung and trended R in 2016, though MO at a faster rate.

Dems have a higher floor in SC, but I get the feeling that although they could get close, those last few % would be next to impossible to get.  On the other hand, though MO has pretty dramatically swung R, I get the impression that there are still lots of ancestral Dems there that would be open to voting D in the right circumstances/for the right candidate.

I dunno, tough call.  I guess I'm going with SC, but just barely.

[AN63093]

SC, but both states will remain solidly Republican for a long time. I could see SC trending Democratic, but like I said it's a stretch at this point. MO is a lost cause for Democrats, and it will become even more obvious in 2018.

The fastest growing areas of SC are the most Republican, unlike the more Democratic rural ones.  It's equally likely it trends R.

You keep saying this, but what areas are you talking about?

The fastest growing areas are in the Charleston MSA, and Charleston Cty both trended and swung D in 2016.  Do you have some precinct level data that breaks it down better?

Also Richland and Lexington Counties (Columbia) trended/swung D.  Greenville Cty swung/trended D....

So what exactly are you referring to?

If you're just talking about margin; well Clinton won Columbia and Charleston.  Trump won Greenville but not by spectacularly better margins than rural areas... better than some, worse than others.  I mean, sure, I get that Allendale Cty is 76% D, and Dems do well in the black belt, but not every rural county in SC is in the black belt, Tom.

[AN63093]

Regarding your first point, I wasn't arguing that SC MSAs are ripe for gains.  I also wasn't making some over-arching theory about the political future of the US.  What I was questioning was your assertion that the metro areas are more R-leaning than the rural areas.  I haven't seen any data to support that, especially given that Clinton won two out of three metro areas, and even Greenville's margins weren't significantly more R than rural areas, except for some of the black belt counties.  I will grant you that Greenville is more R than the black belt.  That is backed up by the data, but that's not what your claim was.

Regarding your second point, your claim wasn't about suburban voters.  It was, and I quote, "South Carolina's metro areas vote to the right of the rural areas."  Metro areas include both suburban and urban (and actually rural, the way MSAs are drawn, but I digress).  I'm going off of the actual vote counts from these counties (Charleston, Richland, Greenville) on the Atlas.  That would seem to me to be more accurate than an "exit poll."

Those vote counts do not support your point, unless you are limiting rural areas to the Black Belt.  Even then, the claim wouldn't be entirely accurate since Columbia had a higher D % than most Black Belt counties.