Likely Democratic States

[barfbag]

What makes Washington and New Jersey likely Democrat, light blue, or moderate Democrat at the presidential level? Stick to New Jersey and Washington. I hope we can continue our group discussions.

[barfbag]

Anyone on New Jersey and Washington?

[ElectionsGuy]

Washington is part of the Oregon-Washington west coast area that has been trending D for a while, I used to call this Lean D, I know can comfortably call this one Likely D. Whites are definitely part of the trend, but increased Hispanic population does the job well too. This is also one of the fastest growing states, and I'm guessing white liberal people are moving here (like people from Madison, WI or Chapel Hill, NC).

New Jersey, while part of the Northeast, it isn't necessarily safe, but Likely D is a good description. Unlike New York, whites are more conservative, and a massive liberal city doesn't make up 40% of the population. But just like New York, the state has a lot of non-white population, making it Likely D.

[barfbag]

Washington is part of the Oregon-Washington west coast area that has been trending D for a while, I used to call this Lean D, I know can comfortably call this one Likely D. Whites are definitely part of the trend, but increased Hispanic population does the job well too. This is also one of the fastest growing states, and I'm guessing white liberal people are moving here (like people from Madison, WI or Chapel Hill, NC).

New Jersey, while part of the Northeast, it isn't necessarily safe, but Likely D is a good description. Unlike New York, whites are more conservative, and a massive liberal city doesn't make up 40% of the population. But just like New York, the state has a lot of non-white population, making it Likely D.

Internally, New Jersey is safe or solid blue, but at the presidential level it's been light blue. Chris Christie could make it light red only if he's the nominee or if on the ticket it could barely go for the Republicans. Bush made a decent run in the Garden State and it was only 8 points to the left of the popular vote for McCain.

Washington probably won't change as much as it did in the first half of the 2000's. If I'm correct it's been 57-40 for Obama and 56-41 last year. This means it trended by one more point to the left. What's funny is Washington's leftward trend in 2012 was the same as Georgia's and Democrats aren't nutting about it.

[ElectionsGuy]

Washington is part of the Oregon-Washington west coast area that has been trending D for a while, I used to call this Lean D, I know can comfortably call this one Likely D. Whites are definitely part of the trend, but increased Hispanic population does the job well too. This is also one of the fastest growing states, and I'm guessing white liberal people are moving here (like people from Madison, WI or Chapel Hill, NC).

New Jersey, while part of the Northeast, it isn't necessarily safe, but Likely D is a good description. Unlike New York, whites are more conservative, and a massive liberal city doesn't make up 40% of the population. But just like New York, the state has a lot of non-white population, making it Likely D.

Internally, New Jersey is safe or solid blue, but at the presidential level it's been light blue. Chris Christie could make it light red only if he's the nominee or if on the ticket it could barely go for the Republicans. Bush made a decent run in the Garden State and it was only 8 points to the left of the popular vote for McCain.

Washington probably won't change as much as it did in the first half of the 2000's. If I'm correct it's been 57-40 for Obama and 56-41 last year. This means it trended by one more point to the left. What's funny is Washington's leftward trend in 2012 was the same as Georgia's and Democrats aren't nutting about it.

New Jersey:

57.3% Obama, 41.7% McCain (57-42) = D+8.4%
58.3% Obama, 40.6% Romney (58-41) = D+13.8%

Washington:

57.7% Obama, 40.5% McCain (58-40) = D+10.0%
56.2% Obama, 41.3% Romney (56-41) = D+11.0%

They both trended to the left naturally, but New Jersey saw a decent democrat trend due to Hurricane Sandy and the demographics and culture that fit the democrats best.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, if anything it makes Washington safer for them, so of course they aren't "nutting" about it. Even if it was trending to the right about 1 point I can almost guarantee you they wouldn't be talking about it. Here's why: They often don't recognize the Obama advantage that I or you remove, that is, I subtract the Obama margin (3.9%) from democrat states, and add the margin to republican states. This way it is equal to both parties. Most democrats tend to ignore that and go by pure results.

Georgia 2008/2012:

52.2% McCain, 47.0% Obama (52-47)= R+12.4%
53.3% Romney, 45.5% Obama (53-45)= R+11.7%

Washington 2008/2012:

57.7% Obama, 40.5% McCain (58-40) = D+10.0%
56.2% Obama, 41.3% Romney (56-41) = D+11.0%

As you can see trend wise, these to states are pretty much the opposite, in fact Georgia is slightly safer than Washington here, but people think Washington is safer because Obama won by a bigger margin than Romney won Georgia. But because Obama won by very decent margins both times, they would tend to be pretty equal in a very close election. Now of course elasticity has a lot to do with states (especially Georgia) but it gives you a realistic idea.

[barfbag]

Washington is part of the Oregon-Washington west coast area that has been trending D for a while, I used to call this Lean D, I know can comfortably call this one Likely D. Whites are definitely part of the trend, but increased Hispanic population does the job well too. This is also one of the fastest growing states, and I'm guessing white liberal people are moving here (like people from Madison, WI or Chapel Hill, NC).

New Jersey, while part of the Northeast, it isn't necessarily safe, but Likely D is a good description. Unlike New York, whites are more conservative, and a massive liberal city doesn't make up 40% of the population. But just like New York, the state has a lot of non-white population, making it Likely D.

Internally, New Jersey is safe or solid blue, but at the presidential level it's been light blue. Chris Christie could make it light red only if he's the nominee or if on the ticket it could barely go for the Republicans. Bush made a decent run in the Garden State and it was only 8 points to the left of the popular vote for McCain.

Washington probably won't change as much as it did in the first half of the 2000's. If I'm correct it's been 57-40 for Obama and 56-41 last year. This means it trended by one more point to the left. What's funny is Washington's leftward trend in 2012 was the same as Georgia's and Democrats aren't nutting about it.

New Jersey:

57.3% Obama, 41.7% McCain (57-42) = D+8.4%
58.3% Obama, 40.6% Romney (58-41) = D+13.8%

Washington:

57.7% Obama, 40.5% McCain (58-40) = D+10.0%
56.2% Obama, 41.3% Romney (56-41) = D+11.0%

They both trended to the left naturally, but New Jersey saw a decent democrat trend due to Hurricane Sandy and the demographics and culture that fit the democrats best.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, if anything it makes Washington safer for them, so of course they aren't "nutting" about it. Even if it was trending to the right about 1 point I can almost guarantee you they wouldn't be talking about it. Here's why: They often don't recognize the Obama advantage that I or you remove, that is, I subtract the Obama margin (3.9%) from democrat states, and add the margin to republican states. This way it is equal to both parties. Most democrats tend to ignore that and go by pure results.

Georgia 2008/2012:

52.2% McCain, 47.0% Obama (52-47)= R+12.4%
53.3% Romney, 45.5% Obama (53-45)= R+11.7%

Washington 2008/2012:

57.7% Obama, 40.5% McCain (58-40) = D+10.0%
56.2% Obama, 41.3% Romney (56-41) = D+11.0%

As you can see trend wise, these to states are pretty much the opposite, in fact Georgia is slightly safer than Washington here, but people think Washington is safer because Obama won by a bigger margin than Romney won Georgia. But because Obama won by very decent margins both times, they would tend to be pretty equal in a very close election. Now of course elasticity has a lot to do with states (especially Georgia) but it gives you a realistic idea.

So what you're saying is that there was only a 0.7% trend for Georgia in 2012 and Democrats are nutting about it. Meanwhile we have Pennsylvania which trended another two points to the right and we here silence from the left. I love it.

[ElectionsGuy]

So what you're saying is that there was only a 0.7% trend for Georgia in 2012 and Democrats are nutting about it. Meanwhile we have Pennsylvania which trended another two points to the right and we here silence from the left. I love it.

Pennsylvania went from D+4.9% in 2004, to D+3.1% in 2008, to D+1.5% in 2012. I would say that they make excuses, but the idea that it looks like fools gold to the republicans is actually accurate. Generally throughout history, when the democrat wins the state gets further right, but when the republican wins it gets further left combating the republican gain. However, that rule was objected to in 2012 when Obama won by a smaller margin and the state trended to the right.

But honestly, they do use the "Obama underperformed with whites" excuse and dismiss the idea of a battleground Pennsylvania. If you compare Bush white % and Romney white %, they're not much different. With the trend of white voters as seen by over 20 years of data shows that that excuse has been debunked. They can argue about the "speeding up" of republican trend during Obama all they want, but its still a republican trend overall.

1992: R+7.6% (granted, Perot definitely shortened the margin)
1996: R+11.5%
2000: R+11.5%
2004: R+14.6%
2008: R+19.2%
2012: R+23.9%

In my opinion, Democrats should be just as concerned about Pennsylvania as Republicans should be concerned about North Carolina.

[PolitiJunkie]

So what you're saying is that there was only a 0.7% trend for Georgia in 2012 and Democrats are nutting about it. Meanwhile we have Pennsylvania which trended another two points to the right and we here silence from the left. I love it.

Pennsylvania went from D+4.9% in 2004, to D+3.1% in 2008, to D+1.5% in 2012. I would say that they make excuses, but the idea that it looks like fools gold to the republicans is actually accurate. Generally throughout history, when the democrat wins the state gets further right, but when the republican wins it gets further left combating the republican gain. However, that rule was objected to in 2012 when Obama won by a smaller margin and the state trended to the right.

But honestly, they do use the "Obama underperformed with whites" excuse and dismiss the idea of a battleground Pennsylvania. If you compare Bush white % and Romney white %, they're not much different. With the trend of white voters as seen by over 20 years of data shows that that excuse has been debunked. They can argue about the "speeding up" of republican trend during Obama all they want, but its still a republican trend overall.

1992: R+7.6%
1996: R+11.5%
2000: R+11.5%
2004: R+14.6%
2008: R+19.2%
2012: R+23.9%

In my opinion, Democrats should be just as concerned about Pennsylvania as Republicans should be concerned about North Carolina.

Yes it's very simple. Democrats play the race card instead of debating why Pennsylvania trended to the right again in 2012. They think they have it all. It's too bad their minds are so simplistic.

I literally have no idea how to respond to this so I just reported it instead. You are absurd.

[ElectionsGuy]

So what you're saying is that there was only a 0.7% trend for Georgia in 2012 and Democrats are nutting about it. Meanwhile we have Pennsylvania which trended another two points to the right and we here silence from the left. I love it.

Pennsylvania went from D+4.9% in 2004, to D+3.1% in 2008, to D+1.5% in 2012. I would say that they make excuses, but the idea that it looks like fools gold to the republicans is actually accurate. Generally throughout history, when the democrat wins the state gets further right, but when the republican wins it gets further left combating the republican gain. However, that rule was objected to in 2012 when Obama won by a smaller margin and the state trended to the right.

But honestly, they do use the "Obama underperformed with whites" excuse and dismiss the idea of a battleground Pennsylvania. If you compare Bush white % and Romney white %, they're not much different. With the trend of white voters as seen by over 20 years of data shows that that excuse has been debunked. They can argue about the "speeding up" of republican trend during Obama all they want, but its still a republican trend overall.

1992: R+7.6%
1996: R+11.5%
2000: R+11.5%
2004: R+14.6%
2008: R+19.2%
2012: R+23.9%

In my opinion, Democrats should be just as concerned about Pennsylvania as Republicans should be concerned about North Carolina.

Yes it's very simple. Democrats play the race card instead of debating why Pennsylvania trended to the right again in 2012. They think they have it all. It's too bad their minds are so simplistic.

I literally have no idea how to respond to this so I just reported it instead. You are absurd.

*PolitiJunkie responds to Barfbag*

*cracking open the popcorn, laughing*

[barfbag]

So what you're saying is that there was only a 0.7% trend for Georgia in 2012 and Democrats are nutting about it. Meanwhile we have Pennsylvania which trended another two points to the right and we here silence from the left. I love it.

Pennsylvania went from D+4.9% in 2004, to D+3.1% in 2008, to D+1.5% in 2012. I would say that they make excuses, but the idea that it looks like fools gold to the republicans is actually accurate. Generally throughout history, when the democrat wins the state gets further right, but when the republican wins it gets further left combating the republican gain. However, that rule was objected to in 2012 when Obama won by a smaller margin and the state trended to the right.

But honestly, they do use the "Obama underperformed with whites" excuse and dismiss the idea of a battleground Pennsylvania. If you compare Bush white % and Romney white %, they're not much different. With the trend of white voters as seen by over 20 years of data shows that that excuse has been debunked. They can argue about the "speeding up" of republican trend during Obama all they want, but its still a republican trend overall.

1992: R+7.6%
1996: R+11.5%
2000: R+11.5%
2004: R+14.6%
2008: R+19.2%
2012: R+23.9%

In my opinion, Democrats should be just as concerned about Pennsylvania as Republicans should be concerned about North Carolina.

Yes it's very simple. Democrats play the race card instead of debating why Pennsylvania trended to the right again in 2012. They think they have it all. It's too bad their minds are so simplistic.

I literally have no idea how to respond to this so I just reported it instead. You are absurd.

No I'm not. What I'm saying is true. The only problem with it is that Democrats don't like it. Pennsylvania's trend is a lot more intellectually in depth than "oh it was racist whites." In fact, it trended more than Georgia and we don't hear Democrats talking about how they're going to lose Pennsylvania. I'm not saying they'll lose Pennsylvania either, but if you listen to a Democrat, you'd think Georgia was going to become the next New York.

[PolitiJunkie]

So what you're saying is that there was only a 0.7% trend for Georgia in 2012 and Democrats are nutting about it. Meanwhile we have Pennsylvania which trended another two points to the right and we here silence from the left. I love it.

Pennsylvania went from D+4.9% in 2004, to D+3.1% in 2008, to D+1.5% in 2012. I would say that they make excuses, but the idea that it looks like fools gold to the republicans is actually accurate. Generally throughout history, when the democrat wins the state gets further right, but when the republican wins it gets further left combating the republican gain. However, that rule was objected to in 2012 when Obama won by a smaller margin and the state trended to the right.

But honestly, they do use the "Obama underperformed with whites" excuse and dismiss the idea of a battleground Pennsylvania. If you compare Bush white % and Romney white %, they're not much different. With the trend of white voters as seen by over 20 years of data shows that that excuse has been debunked. They can argue about the "speeding up" of republican trend during Obama all they want, but its still a republican trend overall.

1992: R+7.6%
1996: R+11.5%
2000: R+11.5%
2004: R+14.6%
2008: R+19.2%
2012: R+23.9%

In my opinion, Democrats should be just as concerned about Pennsylvania as Republicans should be concerned about North Carolina.

Yes it's very simple. Democrats play the race card instead of debating why Pennsylvania trended to the right again in 2012. They think they have it all. It's too bad their minds are so simplistic.

I literally have no idea how to respond to this so I just reported it instead. You are absurd.

No I'm not. What I'm saying is true. The only problem with it is that Democrats don't like it. Pennsylvania's trend is a lot more intellectually in depth than "oh it was racist whites." In fact, it trended more than Georgia and we don't hear Democrats talking about how they're going to lose Pennsylvania. I'm not saying they'll lose Pennsylvania either, but if you listen to a Democrat, you'd think Georgia was going to become the next New York.

Once again...absurd.

[barfbag]

So what you're saying is that there was only a 0.7% trend for Georgia in 2012 and Democrats are nutting about it. Meanwhile we have Pennsylvania which trended another two points to the right and we here silence from the left. I love it.

Pennsylvania went from D+4.9% in 2004, to D+3.1% in 2008, to D+1.5% in 2012. I would say that they make excuses, but the idea that it looks like fools gold to the republicans is actually accurate. Generally throughout history, when the democrat wins the state gets further right, but when the republican wins it gets further left combating the republican gain. However, that rule was objected to in 2012 when Obama won by a smaller margin and the state trended to the right.

But honestly, they do use the "Obama underperformed with whites" excuse and dismiss the idea of a battleground Pennsylvania. If you compare Bush white % and Romney white %, they're not much different. With the trend of white voters as seen by over 20 years of data shows that that excuse has been debunked. They can argue about the "speeding up" of republican trend during Obama all they want, but its still a republican trend overall.

1992: R+7.6%
1996: R+11.5%
2000: R+11.5%
2004: R+14.6%
2008: R+19.2%
2012: R+23.9%

In my opinion, Democrats should be just as concerned about Pennsylvania as Republicans should be concerned about North Carolina.

Yes it's very simple. Democrats play the race card instead of debating why Pennsylvania trended to the right again in 2012. They think they have it all. It's too bad their minds are so simplistic.

I literally have no idea how to respond to this so I just reported it instead. You are absurd.

No I'm not. What I'm saying is true. The only problem with it is that Democrats don't like it. Pennsylvania's trend is a lot more intellectually in depth than "oh it was racist whites." In fact, it trended more than Georgia and we don't hear Democrats talking about how they're going to lose Pennsylvania. I'm not saying they'll lose Pennsylvania either, but if you listen to a Democrat, you'd think Georgia was going to become the next New York.

Once again...absurd.

Not as absurd as Democrats thinking Georgia is trending with no sign of stopping. Remember only a 0.7% trend to the left. Meanwhile Democrats don't talk about Pennsylvania's near 2 point trend to the right. They have a bias.