Long term demographic and partisan trends

[eric82oslo]

Thanks to data selected from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Hispanic_whites#Population_by_state_or_territory + the two pages of presidential elections), I've worked out two different rankings of long term changes in all 50 states and D.C.. One is a ranking of the percentage point decline of the non-Hispanic white population in each state between 1990 and 2016 (projecting the 2010-12 change to continue for 4 more years). The other one is the partisan changes in the presidential votes between the 1988 and 2012 elections.


US states' changes of partisan affiliation between 1988 & 2012 [2016 projection if trends continue at same speed]

Vermont: R+3.52% -> D+35.60% => D+39.12% [D+42.1%]
Hawaii: D+9.52% -> D+42.71% => D+33.19% [D+48.2%]
New Hampshire: R+26.16% -> D+5.58% => D+31.74% [D+10.9%]
New Jersey: R+13.64% -> D+17.81% => D+31.45% [D+23.1%]
Delaware: R+12.40% -> D+18.63% => D+31.03% [D+23.8%]
Maryland: R+2.91% -> D+26.08% => D+28.99% [D+30.9%]
Nevada: R+20.94% -> D+6.68% => D+27.62% [D+11.3%]
Maine: R+11.45% -> D+15.29% => D+26.74% [D+19.7%]
California: R+3.57% -> D+23.12% => D+26.69% [D+27.6%]
Virginia: R+20.50% -> D+3.87% => D+24.37% [D+7.9%]
New York: D+4.10% -> D+28.18% => D+24.08% [D+32.2%]
Florida: R+22.36% -> D+0.88% => D+23.24% [D+4.8%]
Connecticut: R+5.10% -> D+17.33% => D+22.43% [D+21.1%]
Illinois: R+2.08% -> D+16.87% => D+18.95% [D+20.0%]
Michigan: R+7.90% -> D+9.50% => D+17.40% [D+12.4%]
Rhode Island: D+11.71% -> D+27.46% => D+15.75% [D+30.1%]
D.C.: D+68.34% -> D+83.63% => D+15.29% [D+86.2%]
Massachusetts: D+7.85% -> D+23.14% => D+15.29% [D+25.7%]
New Mexico: R+4.96% -> D+10.15% => D+15.11% [D+12.7%]
North Carolina: R+16.26% -> R+2.04% => D+14.22% [D+0.33%]
Ohio: R+10.85% -> D+2.98% = D+13.83% [D+5.3%]
South Carolina: R+23.92% -> R+10.47% => D+13.45% [R+8.2%]
Washington: D+1.59% -> D+14.87% => D+13.28% [D+17.1%]
Colorado: R+7.78% -> D+5.37% => D+13.15% [D+7.6%]
Georgia: R+20.25% -> R+7.82% => D+12.43% [R+5.7%]
Arizona: R+21.21% -> R+9.06% => D+12.15% [R+7.0%]

National average: R+7.73% -> D+3.86% => D+11.59% [D+5.79%]

Indiana: R+20.16% -> R+10.20% => D+9.96% [R+8.5%]
Alaska: R+23.32% -> R+13.99% => D+9.33% [R+12.4%]
Mississippi: R+20.82% -> R+11.50% => D+9.32% [R+9.9%]
Pennsylvania: R+2.32% -> D+5.39% => D+7.71% [D+6.7%]
Oregon: D+4.67% -> D+12.09% => D+7.42% [D+13.3%]
Wisconsin: D+3.62% -> D+6.94% => D+3.32% [D+7.5%]
Minnesota: D+7.02% -> D+7.69% => D+0.67% [D+7.8%]

Nebraska: R+20.96% -> R+21.78% => R+0.82% [R+21.9%]
Alabama: R+19.30% -> R+22.19% = R+2.89% [R+22.7%]
Texas: R+12.60% -> R+15.78% => R+3.18% [R+16.3%]
Tennessee: R+16.34% -> R+20.40% => R+4.06% [R+21.1%]
Iowa: D+10.22% -> D+5.81% => R+4.41% [D+5.1%]
Missouri: R+3.98% -> R+9.38% => R+5.40% [R+10.3%]
Idaho: R+26.07% -> R+31.91% => R+5.84% [R+32.9%]
North Dakota: R+13.06% -> R+19.63% => R+6.37% [R+20.7%]
Louisiana: R+10.21% -> R+17.21% => R+7.00% [R+18.4%]
Montana: R+5.87% -> R+13.65% => R+7.78% [R+14.9%]
Kansas: R+13.23% -> R+21.72% => R+8.49% [R+23.1%]
Arkansas: R+14.18% -> R+23.69% => R+9.51% [R+25.3%]
Kentucky: R+11.64% -> R+22.69% => R+11.05% [R+24.5%]
South Dakota: R+6.34% -> R+18.02% => R+11.68% [R+20.0%]
Utah: R+34.17% -> R+48.04 => R+13.87% [R+50.4%]
Oklahoma: R+16.65% -> R+33.54% => R+16.89% [R+36.4%]
Wyoming: R+22.52% -> R+40.82% => R+18.30% [R+43.8%]
West Virginia: D+4.74% -> R+26.76% => R+31.50% [R+32.0%]

In other words, Vermont has become 39% more liberal/Democratic over the span of 24 years, while West Virginia has become almost 32% more conservative/Republican over the same number of years. Quite a monumental change! Back in 1988, West Virginia was in fact much more Democratic-leaning than Vermont - today they could hardly be more different! Also notice how gigantic the partisan changes have been in all of the three northeastern most states of Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. Are these demographic changes likely to continue there or have the Democratic tilt of these three states already peaked? The closest to a good explanation I can find is that these three states also happen to be the three least religious states in the US. Having this in mind, there's a case to be made that they might become even more Democratic-leaning still.


Percentage point change in non-Hispanic white population between 1990-2016

Nevada: -28.8% (from 78.7% to 49.9%)
California: -19.8% (from 57.2% to 37.4%)
New Jersey: -18.9% (from 74.0% to 55.1%)
Florida: -18.6% (from 73.2% to 54.6%)
Texas: -18.3% (from 60.6% to 42.3%)
Maryland: -17.6% (from 69.6% to 52.0%)
Washington: -17.5% (from 86.7% to 69.2%)
Delaware: -17.0% (from 79.3% to 62.3%)
Georgia: -16.9% (from 70.1% to 53.2%)
Arizona: -16.6% (from 71.7% to 55.1%)
Connecticut: -16.2% (from 83.8% to 67.6%)
Rhode Island: -15.9% (from 89.3% to 73.4%)
Oklahoma: -15.0% (from 81.0% to 66.0%)
Oregon: -15.0% (from 90.8% to 75.8%)

National average: -14.6% (from 75.6% to 61.0%)

Massachusetts: -14.2% (from 87.8% to 73.7%)
Virginia: -13.9% (from 76.0% to 62.1%)
New York: -13.7% (from 69.3% to 55.6%)
Illinois: -13.5% (from 74.8% to 61.3%)
Alaska: -13.1% (from 73.9% to 60.8%)
Minnesota: -13.0% (from 93.7% to 80.7%)
Nebraska: -12.8% (from 92.5% to 79.7%)
Kansas: -12.6% (from 88.4% to 75.8%)
Utah: -12.6% (from 91.2% to 78.6%)
Colorado: -12.5% (from 80.7% to 68.2%)
New Mexico: -12.3% (from 50.4% to 38.1%)
North Carolina: -12.1% (from 75.0% to 62.9%)
Pennsylvania: -10.9% (from 87.7% to 76.8%)
Idaho: -10.0% (from 92.2% to 82.2%)
Indiana: -9.9% (from 89.6% to 79.7%)
Arkansas: -9.5% (from 82.2% to 72.7%)
Wisconsin: -9.5% (from 91.3% to 81.8%)
Iowa: -9.3% (from 95.9% to 86.6%)
South Dakota: -9.2% (from 91.2% to 82.0%)
Wyoming: -9.0% (from 91.0% to 82.0%)
Tennessee: -8.8% (from 82.6% to 73.8%)
Hawaii: -8.4% (from 31.4% to 23.0%)
North Dakota: -7.7% (from 94.2% to 86.3%)
Alabama: -7.5% (from 73.3% to 65.8%)
Ohio: -7.5% (from 87.1% to 79.6%)
Missouri: -7.4% (from 86.9% to 79.5%)
Louisiana: -7.3% (from 65.8% to 58.5%)
Michigan: -7.2% (from 82.3% to 75.1%)
Kentucky: -6.9% (from 91.7% to 84.8%)
Mississippi: -6.6% (from 63.1% to 56.5%)
New Hampshire: -6.5% (from 97.3% to 90.8%)
Montana: -5.8% (from 91.8% to 86.0%)
South Carolina: -5.0% (from 68.5% to 63.5%)
Vermont: -4.7% (from 98.1% to 93.4%)
Maine: -4.5% (from 98.0% to 93.5%)
West Virginia: -3.8% (from 95.8% to 92.0%)
D.C.: +8.9% (from 27.4% to 36.3%)

Nevada really strikes you as being in a league of its own when it comes to recent demographic changes. Although, since 2010, New Jersey has in fact changed at the same speed as Nevada. Besides, Nevada is likely to become minority-majority sometime during 2016.


If you add the two rankings together, you might get an approximation of whether a state is more likely to trend Democratic or rather Republican going ahead. A low number meaning trending Democratic is the more likely option, while a high number means the most likely outcome is a Republican trend:

Looking forward - a summary

New Jersey: 4 + 3 = 7
Nevada: 7 + 1 = 8
California: 9 + 2 = 11
Maryland: 6 + 6 = 12
Delaware: 5 + 8 = 13
Florida: 12 + 4 = 16
Connecticut: 13 + 11 = 24
Virginia: 10 + 16 = 26
New York: 11 + 17 = 28
Rhode Island: 16 + 12 = 28
Washington: 23 + 7 = 30
Illinois: 14 + 18 = 32
Massachusetts: 18 + 15 = 33
Georgia: 25 + 9 = 34
Arizona: 26 + 10 = 36
Hawaii: 2 + 36 = 38
Texas: 36 + 5 = 41
New Mexico: 19 + 25 = 44
Oregon: 31 + 14 = 45
North Carolina: 20 + 26 = 46
Alaska: 28 + 19 = 47
New Hampshire: 3 + 45 = 48
Colorado: 24 + 24 = 48
Vermont: 1 + 48 = 49
Minnesota: 33 + 20 = 53
Nebraska: 34 + 21 = 55
Indiana: 27 + 29 = 56
Maine: 8 + 49 = 57
Michigan: 15 + 42 = 57
Pennsylvania: 30 + 27 = 57
Ohio: 21 + 39 = 60
Oklahoma: 49 + 13 = 62
Wisconsin: 32 + 31 = 63
Kansas: 44 + 22 = 66
D.C.: 17 + 51 = 68
Idaho: 40 + 28 = 68
South Carolina: 22 + 47 = 69
Iowa: 38 + 32 = 70
Utah: 48 + 23 = 71
Tennessee: 37 + 35 = 72
Mississippi: 29 + 44 = 73
Alabama: 35 + 38 = 73
Arkansas: 45 + 30 = 75
North Dakota: 41 + 37 = 78
Missouri: 39 + 40 = 79
South Dakota: 47 + 33 = 80
Louisiana: 42 + 41 = 83
Wyoming: 50 + 34 = 84
Montana: 43 + 46 = 89
Kentucky: 46 + 43 = 89
West Virginia: 51 + 50 = 101

(A number below 50 suggests a Democratic trend is more likely, a number above 50 suggests a Republican trend is the more likely outcome.)

According to this combined ranking (taking into account both demographic changes as well as already observed partisan changes), West Virginia is by far the state most likely to continue its already strong Republican trend. It is followed next in line by Montana and neighbouring Kentucky. Also strongly likely to trend Republican relative to the national popular vote are Wyoming, Louisiana, Missouri and both of the Dakotas. On the other end of the spectrum we find states highly likely to continue its Democratic trend. New Jersey and Nevada are both close to 100% in its certainty to continue its Democratic trend in presidential elections over the next decade or two. In the second tire behind them, we find California, Maryland, Delaware and Florida - all more than 95% likely to trend Democratic relative to the national popular vote.

[hopper]

I like the bottom statistic of trending in the last post:


Trends good for the GOP:

Ohio, Wisconsin,  Pennsylvania,  Michigan,  Iowa, Maine, and Minnesota.

Bad Trends for the GOP:

Florida, Texas, Virginia, Illinois(outside of Cook County GOP is decent), Georgia, and Arizona.

Basically Colorado is Toss Up/Tilt D and North Carolina has a small Tilt D to it.

Vermont stays at its current trajectory I guess: interesting!

[retromike22]

This was very interesting, good work

[Mehmentum]

Wow, those are some incredibly strong trends in Florida and Virginia.  The GOP would need to flip Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, which have much weaker trends for them, just to balance those two out.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Good work. I wonder if there would be a way to control the second number (decrease in white population) for where the state was starting from. For instance, New Mexico at -12.3% is arguably a bigger deal than Oregon -15.0%, since New Mexico started at only 50.4% white and Oregon started at 90.8% white.

[Boston Bread]

Some of those pro-GOP trends in WI, MN, etc. are not actually due to the states getting redder but because those states are not becoming more diverse while the rest of the country is. There are few actual R gains among whites in presidential elections in the midwestern and northeastern swing states.

[hopper]

Some of those pro-GOP trends in WI, MN, etc. are not actually due to the states getting redder but because those states are not becoming more diverse while the rest of the country is. There are few actual R gains among whites in presidential elections in the midwestern and northeastern swing states.

Well...lets see:

MN:

1992 Actual Presidential Results: D(Clinton) 44% R(Bush H.W.) 32% Other candidates(mainly Perot) 25%

If I took out indies and gave indies the normal 2% of the vote that they usually get in Presidential Elections I get the following:

D 55% R 43%

1996: D(Clinton) 51% R(Dole) 35% Other Candidates(mainly Perot) 14%

Again if I took out indies I come up with the following result:

D(Clinton) 57% R(Dole) 41%

2000:

D (Gore) 48%R ( Bush W.)46% Others 7%(so Nader got  a reasonable amount of votes here)

Do the same scenario as 1992 and 1996 and give Indies 1% of the vote I come up with

I will actually give Gore 5% of the Nader Vote which he got in the state I come up with though:

D(Gore) 53% R(Bush W. )45-46%

2004: D(Kerry) 51% R(Bush W.) 48%

2008:D(Obama) 54% R(McCain) 44%

2012: D(Obama) 53% R(Romney) 45%

So MN did swing to the R's a lot from 1996-2004(specially from from 1996-2000) but swung moderately D in 2008 and stayed at its 2008 trajectory in 2012. The state as not as D at the presidential level as it was in 1992 and 1996 if I split Perot's votes evenly to Bush H.W. in 1992. and Dole in 1996 currently. Bush W. was a good candidate for MN even if he didn't win the state.