The electoral map in 10 years
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:08:44 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  The electoral map in 10 years
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: The electoral map in 10 years  (Read 17273 times)
Mr. Illini
liberty142
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: March 21, 2013, 11:13:38 AM »

Here is my rough projection.The demographic shift in Louisiana suggests a hard turn to the right. FL will go right as well as Rubio becomes the face of the state and rallies Hispanics. Also, as the GOP drops its stances on gay marriage and marijuana, I see NH and Maine leaning Republican. Iowa I think could do a 180 and go GOP just because of changing positions within the party, but I am not sure. Meanwhile, VA and NC will be in the Democratic column because of demographic shifts. NV continues its march to the left. Wisconsin and Ohio become Midwest Democratic strongholds because of the increasingly progressive culture in the north central US. Arizona will go to the Democrats eventually as well.


Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: March 21, 2013, 03:46:09 PM »

Absolutely no way on Maine and New Hampshire there.  Iowa and Arizona are off too but not so glaringly.
Logged
old timey villain
cope1989
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,741


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: March 22, 2013, 12:17:21 PM »

Here is my rough projection.The demographic shift in Louisiana suggests a hard turn to the right. FL will go right as well as Rubio becomes the face of the state and rallies Hispanics. Also, as the GOP drops its stances on gay marriage and marijuana, I see NH and Maine leaning Republican. Iowa I think could do a 180 and go GOP just because of changing positions within the party, but I am not sure. Meanwhile, VA and NC will be in the Democratic column because of demographic shifts. NV continues its march to the left. Wisconsin and Ohio become Midwest Democratic strongholds because of the increasingly progressive culture in the north central US. Arizona will go to the Democrats eventually as well.




How does NC become safe D while Georgia remains safe R? Those two states are very similar and are experiencing pretty much the same political and demographic trends. If anything both states become lean R/tossup in 10 years, with NC a little farther along than Georgia.

And Maine will stay safe D, unless the entire Republican party becomes like Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins.
Logged
TDAS04
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,469
Bhutan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: March 22, 2013, 01:25:25 PM »

Why is Georgia potentially competitive in the near future, but not South Carolina?
Logged
Asian Nazi
d32123
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,523
China


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: March 22, 2013, 01:30:08 PM »

Why is Georgia potentially competitive in the near future, but not South Carolina?

It's just demographically closer to being a swing state than South Carolina.  I'd say the order of coastal Southern states goes (from bluest to reddest) Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama.
Logged
TDAS04
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,469
Bhutan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: March 22, 2013, 01:40:39 PM »

Why is Georgia potentially competitive in the near future, but not South Carolina?

It's just demographically closer to being a swing state than South Carolina.  I'd say the order of coastal Southern states goes (from bluest to reddest) Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama.

True, Georgia is much more diverse.  Still, South Carolina gets far more Northern transplants than Alabama, Mississippi, or Louisiana.  Politically, South Carolina seems to be more like Georgia than those three Gulf Coast states.
Logged
Sol
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,054
Bosnia and Herzegovina


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: March 22, 2013, 04:16:28 PM »

Why is Georgia potentially competitive in the near future, but not South Carolina?

It's just demographically closer to being a swing state than South Carolina.  I'd say the order of coastal Southern states goes (from bluest to reddest) Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama.

True, Georgia is much more diverse.  Still, South Carolina gets far more Northern transplants than Alabama, Mississippi, or Louisiana.  Politically, South Carolina seems to be more like Georgia than those three Gulf Coast states.
A lot of those transplants are retirees, who mostly vote R. I think Nate Silver has a good post on the subject.
Logged
old timey villain
cope1989
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,741


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: March 22, 2013, 04:43:22 PM »

Why is Georgia potentially competitive in the near future, but not South Carolina?

It's just demographically closer to being a swing state than South Carolina.  I'd say the order of coastal Southern states goes (from bluest to reddest) Virginia, Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama.

True, Georgia is much more diverse.  Still, South Carolina gets far more Northern transplants than Alabama, Mississippi, or Louisiana.  Politically, South Carolina seems to be more like Georgia than those three Gulf Coast states.
A lot of those transplants are retirees, who mostly vote R. I think Nate Silver has a good post on the subject.

Yes, most of those transplants are of the Republican persuasion. Beaufort county SC is a hot spot for retirees (Hilton Head) and it's pretty safe Republican. Same thing for Myrtle Beach and Horry county. Also, SC has no major city that can offer Dems a solid core of votes. The growth is happening either in resort communities, suburbs of cities in other states like York county (Charlotte suburb) or the upstate, which is really a large conurbation of small cities linked together by sprawl.

Georgia's growth is different. Most importantly, the state's minority population is growing much quicker. SC's black share of the population has declined over the last 10 years while Georgia's has grown. Also, unlike SC Georgia has Atlanta, whose urban core is growing larger by the day. Since the recession growth in the suburbs has slowed considerably while growth in the urban area inside I-285 has increased. If this continues then Democratic votes in places like Fulton and Dekalb counties will be able to better counterbalance Republican votes in places like Forsyth, Cherokee and Paulding counties. What should be most worrisome to Republicans is that they can no longer count on Cobb and Gwinnett to send a flood of votes their way. Both counties have become more competitive in presidential elections.
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,109
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: March 22, 2013, 09:20:22 PM »


I can't for one second agree with you on Iowa.

Dye is cast in numerous states, and that's one where there is a Democratic tilt.

Florida -- in the column of presidential winners in 20 of the last 22 cycles (since 1928, minus 1960 and 1992) -- is like Ohio: bellwether, one election after the next, and constantly on the map of battleground states.

Georgia is on the way to becoming competitive.

One thing is this: realignments. When we get them, you have to factor in the Top 10 and Top 20 states being more advantageous to the party in favor. Ga. isn't immune to shifts. Had Barack Obama been re-elected with a stronger margin and likewise electoral-vote score, Ga. and Arizona are liable to have been pickup states (in spite of the Republican pickups in Indiana and Nebraska #02).
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,109
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: March 22, 2013, 09:22:37 PM »

Absolutely no way on Maine and New Hampshire there.  Iowa and Arizona are off too but not so glaringly.

+1
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: March 26, 2013, 07:34:03 PM »
« Edited: March 26, 2013, 07:35:50 PM by 5280/East California »

Logged
TNF
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,440


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: April 01, 2013, 10:18:21 AM »

Why does everyone presume that become more 'libertarian' will help the GOP? If anything it will doom them to losing the next few election cycles. As the Democrats embrace the values that most of the country hold (i.e. progressive values, if the polling is correct) going further to the right on economics and moving to the center on social policy is going to create a situation in which they lose their base and alienate independents or Democratic-leaning independents altogether.
Logged
Asian Nazi
d32123
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,523
China


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: April 01, 2013, 06:02:18 PM »

Why does everyone presume that become more 'libertarian' will help the GOP? If anything it will doom them to losing the next few election cycles. As the Democrats embrace the values that most of the country hold (i.e. progressive values, if the polling is correct) going further to the right on economics and moving to the center on social policy is going to create a situation in which they lose their base and alienate independents or Democratic-leaning independents altogether.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that they go rightward on economics.  I feel like if they kept a similar position on economics and at least toned down the social issues rhetoric like the Democrats used to have to they'd start to do better with independents.  There's still a market for moderate Republicans in many blue states.
Logged
TNF
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,440


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: April 01, 2013, 09:33:43 PM »

Why does everyone presume that become more 'libertarian' will help the GOP? If anything it will doom them to losing the next few election cycles. As the Democrats embrace the values that most of the country hold (i.e. progressive values, if the polling is correct) going further to the right on economics and moving to the center on social policy is going to create a situation in which they lose their base and alienate independents or Democratic-leaning independents altogether.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that they go rightward on economics.  I feel like if they kept a similar position on economics and at least toned down the social issues rhetoric like the Democrats used to have to they'd start to do better with independents.  There's still a market for moderate Republicans in many blue states.

A Republican that wants to abolish Medicare is not a moderate, though. A moderate Republican would just be a milder Democrat. Like, raise the minimum wage, but only to $8.25 instead of $10.10, or something. At least that's how I envision a moderate Republican behaving.
Logged
patd25
Newbie
*
Posts: 6


Political Matrix
E: -5.03, S: -3.65

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: April 06, 2013, 04:57:07 PM »

The absolutely safe states -- and I number them at ten -- for Republicans are: Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina (which have voted the same in the last 100 years' worth of elections except the last having voted differently in 1960 and 1968; the first two have disagreed only once since they first voted in 1820); Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming; Kansas, Nebraska (statewide and #03), and Oklahoma in the plains and, to the west, Alaska. Now with a partisan advantage for the Republicans are the Bill Clinton-carried Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Tennessee, and West Virginia. So, that brings it up to 15 states for the GOP. Missouri, a former bellwether which has voted the same as that cluster in every election since 1972, is tilting decisively, but not as dramatically, red. This brings it up to 16 states. They are worth 106 electoral votes.

I would think that if the Dems can take Montana and the Dakotas, then Alaska shouldn't be completely out of reach. Like Montana, it's a very independent state that votes largely based on energy issues.

Also, Alaska has been tilting more and more Democratic with each presidential election.
Logged
GOPblue
Newbie
*
Posts: 2
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.26, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 12, 2015, 01:47:33 PM »

The Midwest should be tilting Republican in the next decade or so. More moderate conservatism is expected to thrive in order for the GOP to stay relevant.
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 12, 2015, 03:19:34 PM »

I m on my phone so I cant post maps.

I disagree with the idea that PA, IA, WI and MI are going to become more republican. 2008 was simply an exception, Obama quite overperformed this year.

I dont believe republicans can get a higher % of the white vote. If they want to win, they will have to get a much higher % of the latinos.

So I believe NV, NM, CO will become more republican in the future, not tilt dem/lean dem like today.
Logged
15 Down, 35 To Go
ExtremeRepublican
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,661


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 5.57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 12, 2015, 03:29:36 PM »

Of course based on a close national election:
Logged
Goldwater
Republitarian
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,054
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 12, 2015, 04:26:51 PM »



Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,142


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 12, 2015, 04:57:34 PM »
« Edited: October 12, 2015, 05:02:11 PM by Senator Truman »


Huh Are you using blue for the Dems or something?
Logged
Goldwater
Republitarian
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,054
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 12, 2015, 05:13:06 PM »


Sure, let's go with that. I clearly was not just assigning random colors to the states in protest of the futility in attempting to predict far off elections. Wink
Logged
Free Bird
TheHawk
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,918
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.84, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 12, 2015, 05:37:19 PM »


Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,999
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 12, 2015, 09:56:34 PM »

Obviously, no one knows.  I think the GOP will fall flat in 2016 and really have to take a look in the mirror, toning down the rhetoric on social issues.  Maybe this as a guess:

Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,284
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 13, 2015, 01:38:30 AM »

I m on my phone so I cant post maps.

I disagree with the idea that PA, IA, WI and MI are going to become more republican. 2008 was simply an exception, Obama quite overperformed this year.

I dont believe republicans can get a higher % of the white vote. If they want to win, they will have to get a much higher % of the latinos.

So I believe NV, NM, CO will become more republican in the future, not tilt dem/lean dem like today.

The Midwest (except IL) doesn't have many Latinos and the GOP can definitely improve with White voters here. IA is the perfect example, it's definitely trending Republican. It was rated Solid D in 2008 and now Clinton is losing it by double digits in the polls while leading in NH (a D+1 state as well) and keeping VA close.  
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,109
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 13, 2015, 04:15:40 PM »


Sure, let's go with that. I clearly was not just assigning random colors to the states in protest of the futility in attempting to predict far off elections. Wink

I'm good with it.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.061 seconds with 11 queries.