When will South Carolina go Democratic in a presidential election?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Well?

[Sol]

It swung D in 2008. Have a good year for the dems again, and the same will happen.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

It swung D in 2008. Have a good year for the dems again, and the same will happen.

Perhaps I should have phrased this differently.  When will South Carolina go Democratic in a presidential election?

[Sol]

Oh, I see.

For the foreseeable future, it won't. Of all the GOP's deep/tidewater south conquests, SC is the safest. It lacks the slow African-American increases of LA/MS/AL or the rapid urban growth of NC/VA/GA. Instead, its fastest growing areas are Conservative places like Greenville-Spartanburg, the Charlotte suburbs, or Myrtle Beach.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

If Obama wasn't black he would have won it in 2008. But then again, if Obama wasn't black Hilary, McCain, or Romney would be president.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Oh, I see.

For the foreseeable future, it won't. Of all the GOP's deep/tidewater south conquests, SC is the safest. It lacks the slow African-American increases of LA/MS/AL or the rapid urban growth of NC/VA/GA. Instead, its fastest growing areas are Conservative places like Greenville-Spartanburg, the Charlotte suburbs, or Myrtle Beach.

I thought New England transplants were to have a role in a leftward shift.

[Sol]

Oh, I see.

For the foreseeable future, it won't. Of all the GOP's deep/tidewater south conquests, SC is the safest. It lacks the slow African-American increases of LA/MS/AL or the rapid urban growth of NC/VA/GA. Instead, its fastest growing areas are Conservative places like Greenville-Spartanburg, the Charlotte suburbs, or Myrtle Beach.

I thought New England transplants were to have a role in a leftward shift.

In the Charleston area yes, but Charleston doesn't have the same kind of influence that NOVA or the research triangle has.

[Indy Texas]

I think for the next several decades, South Carolina will be a "Pennsylvania" for the Democrats - a state they lose by less than 10 points and in very good years might come within a few points of carrying, that they throw piles and piles of money at, but that they never ever actually win. The high black population is never quite high enough, even with good turnout. The Charleston moderates are never numerous enough to get them over the top.

[All Along The Watchtower]

When black people make up at least 50% of the electorate.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Conceivably as early as 2020, but that would require a well-liked Democratic incumbent running versus a poor Republican candidate as well as a GOP that has considerably revamped itself on the social and immigration issues so to appeal more broadly to moderates and yet strongly weaken itself among the social conservatives that are the backbone of the SCGOP.  However, I don't expect the national GOP to refashion themselves that quickly, so I voted for the 2036 or later option.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Probably never.

[Donerail]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Probably never.
[/quote]

[Asian Nazi]

In the next Democratic landslide.

[TDAS04]

Probably not for a long time, but before Alabama.  South Carolina was closer than people expected in 2008 and 2012, and a Democrat was almost elected Governor in 2010.  It has more people moving in from outside than the mid-south, so it's more likely to change than states such as Alabama or even Tennessee.  I would guess 2028, but that still might be generous.

[DS0816]

South Carolina is approximately 15 percentage points redder than how the nation votes in presidential elections.

A Democrat is going to have nab about 57 percent, while the losing Republican is at 41 or 42 percent, with such strong national level that makes South Carolina able to turn blue. If that were to happen, Texas would carry. Georgia would definitely carry. And then there are host of other states, not only those in the Old Confederacy, which would also turn blue.

One thing to note: In at least the last 100 years, South Carolina has voted the same as Alabama and Mississippi, a neighboring duo which historically votes opposite Vermont. There are two years on record in which S.C. voted differently in that time frame from Ala. and Miss.: 1960 and 1968. I think S.C. can color differently from the other two … but if a Democrat was winning on that level, it suggests that playing well enough in S.C. may also make it possible for Ala. and/or Miss. (Since those two first voted in 1820, there is only one year on record in which they did not vote the same as each other: 1840.)

[pbrower2a]

Next Democratic landslide. That requires a populist swing in the South that puts it to the left of America as a whole, as in the 1970s.   

[illegaloperation]

No Democratic president is going to carry South Carolina in the foreseeable future (barring any landslide elections).

South Carolina is among the most inelastic states in the nation.

[Consciously Unconscious]

South Carolina will be a distant dream for the Democrats until the '30s, barring an enormous landslide.

[tarheel-leftist85]

idk, Looking at the lowcountry, it's very "culturally" libertine but enthused at handing Social Security to Wall Street - they call that "moderate," just like anyone remaining in the Dem fold - both of which would set them up for the Dems.  The upstate still embraces the pious cowboy act (though i tend to think they are comparatively leftist on economics than lowcountry libertines).  Should bode well for "business-friendly" [bankster friendly] candidates like Colbert-Busch.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

idk, Looking at the lowcountry, it's very "culturally" libertine but enthused at handing Social Security to Wall Street - they call that "moderate," just like anyone remaining in the Dem fold - both of which would set them up for the Dems.  The upstate still embraces the pious cowboy act (though i tend to think they are comparatively leftist on economics than lowcountry libertines).  Should bode well for "business-friendly" [bankster friendly] candidates like Colbert-Busch.

Upstate Republicans only look leftist on economics because most of them don't give a fig about it.  Upstate Republicans think GOP stands for God's Only Party.

[HoosierPoliticalJunkie]

This is a cross-post, but it's always important to adjust for elasticity.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=172830.0

[PJ]

Unless Clinton runs, or possibly Colbert-Busch in the very distant future, I can see SC becoming no more than a fool's gold for dems until the 2040's.