Democrats have 53% chance of winning Arizona (if white support normalizes)

[HillOfANight]

http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/2015/08/27/on-the-prospects-of-a-blue-arizona/

Long article, but after SB 1070 (Jan Brewer's discrimination law), Arizona Latinos went from 58% Obama in 2008 (while Latinos in US were 72%), to 77% Obama in 2012, compared to 72% nationally for Latinos.

!If whites vote 40% for Democrats as they have like in 2008 and before (down to 32% in 2012), than Democrats stand a good chance of winning Arizona.

From the article, I couldn't tell what Democrat % from Latinos Josh uses in his assumptions though (seems he's thinking higher than 77%).

[dudeabides]

If Donald Trump is the nominee, I give it a 90% chance. The Democrats would absolutely destroy him in Arizona. But, if he's not the nominee, the GOP will keep Arizona.

[Crumpets]

53% seems pretty high, but Arizona is almost definitely the most likely McCain '08 state for the Democrats to carry. No candidates except for Paul and Christie have polled more than 5 points ahead of Clinton, and the latest poll (from May) had Clinton and Bush tied. And although that was before Clinton's recent slide, it was also before the whole Trump debacle, which will almost certainly galvanize more casual Hispanic voters to turn out. I don't think the Democrats necessarily have a better than 50% chance of carrying Arizona, but they'd be missing a good opportunity if they choose not to spend any time or money there.

[Nyvin]

Seems like a really long shot for the Dems to win Arizona.    I guess if nothing else, investing in the state for the presidency might make McCain's seat a tad bit more competitive...

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

No. Only in the event of a TOTAL train-wreck GOP nominee will the Dems win AZ.

Arizona is a weird place, and not at all like NM, CO or NV.

* The population mix in AZ is much whiter and importantly, whiter and older. The population growth in Latinos has been equaled by the increase in white voters from the North and California, who are GOP voters. 
* Since 2000, the regardless of the national outcome the Democratic vote has been between 44-45.5%, to the point of being one of the most inelastic states. AZ to me is less likely to flip to the Dems than PA or WI to the GOP (and I think they're absolutely fool's gold... note the Democrat has won AZ once in the last 25 years, whereas the GOP hasn't won PA since 1988 and WI since 1984).

[TJ in Oregon]

If the Democrat wins Arizona, she (or he) will have won nationally by quite a large margin. It has about the same magnitude of PVI as Illinois.

[RFayette]

http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/2015/08/27/on-the-prospects-of-a-blue-arizona/

Long article, but after SB 1070 (Jan Brewer's discrimination law), Arizona Latinos went from 58% Obama in 2008 (while Latinos in US were 72%), to 77% Obama in 2012, compared to 72% nationally for Latinos.

!If whites vote 40% for Democrats as they have like in 2008 and before (down to 32% in 2012), than Democrats stand a good chance of winning Arizona.

From the article, I couldn't tell what Democrat % from Latinos Josh uses in his assumptions though (seems he's thinking higher than 77%).

Arizona actually trended GOP from 2008 to 2012, so even though immigration hurt among AZ Latinos, the corresponding white conservative shift was enough to balance it out.  Considering that Arizona is a place of huge Trump support, I bet Trump would narrowly carry the state despite huge Latino opposition.

[Mehmentum]

In 2012, Arizona actually had a more Republican PVI than in 2004.  

Arizona's white vote is very old.  Its not going Democrat until the age gap is bridged (or a massive landslide).

[HillOfANight]

I ran the math, and his article adds up.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=AZP00p1
http://elections.nbcnews.com/ns/politics/2012/arizona/president/#exitPoll

In 2008, Democrats got 40% of the 75% of the white vote (30 points), and assume 60% of the rest of the vote (60%*25%=14 points).

In 2012, horrified of SB1070, while whites soured on Obama and gave him 32%*75% (24 points from whites), others gave him 82% of the other vote (82%*25%=20.5 points).

Seems highly unlikely Latinos will go back to just 60% Democrats, especially with Trump, and I think Hillary can do well with white voters if the media stops obsessing over eGhazi.

[TJ in Oregon]

Why are AZ whites suddenly going to take a left turn? I fail to see why they will suddenly support the Democrats in larger numbers than they did last time. It wasn't like 2012 was a Republican tsunami.

[HillOfANight]

Not a left turn, so much as a reversion to the norm of when they gave Kerry 41%, Obama 40%.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/AZ/
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=AZP00p1
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/can-democrats-turn-texas-and-arizona-blue-by-2016/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe people will wake up, notice gas is cheap, people have jobs, traffic is unfortunately back, we haven't engaged in serious war, the DOW is higher than ever.

[eric82oslo]

No. Only in the event of a TOTAL train-wreck GOP nominee will the Dems win AZ.

Arizona is a weird place, and not at all like NM, CO or NV.

* The population mix in AZ is much whiter and importantly, whiter and older. The population growth in Latinos has been equaled by the increase in white voters from the North and California, who are GOP voters. 

Colorado is actually much more white than Arizona, so this is simply false. However, the problem with Arizona is that the state has by far the US' lowest latino turnout together with Texas. I think the latest exit polls from both states showed only between 25% and 30% of latino voters actually turning out, in presidential elections (I think it was 2008).

[TJ in Oregon]

But why would you expect the white voters to vote like they did in 2004? A lot of them didn't even live in Arizona in 2004. What will have changed since 2012 to make them revert?

[Adam Griffin]

I did a detailed write-up/compare and contrast between GA & AZ last year, with the overall premise being that AZ would be a lot harder to flip than GA when you're talking about actually getting to 50% in the long-run. AZ's demographics are simply more difficult when you break them down bit-by-bit. It's possible that AZ could flip in a fluke beforehand - sort of like how NC did - but it'd require either the same type of circumstances (heavy investment) or the worst-case scenario for Republicans (Trump). I will admit that my memory is a bit fuzzy on said write-up and it did not factor in huge swings among Latinos caused by an anomaly like Trump.

[eric82oslo]

But why would you expect the white voters to vote like they did in 2004? A lot of them didn't even live in Arizona in 2004. What will have changed since 2012 to make them revert?

Obama was unpopular in Arizona in 2012 because he had a very public fight with Jan Brewer. Hillary has never been in a public quarrel with any Arizona Governor that I know of, nor with any other Arizona high official/politician that I know of, so I don't seen any reason why she would be as disliked among white Arizonians as Obama was.

[TJ in Oregon]

But why would you expect the white voters to vote like they did in 2004? A lot of them didn't even live in Arizona in 2004. What will have changed since 2012 to make them revert?

Obama was unpopular in Arizona in 2012 because he had a very public fight with Jan Brewer. Hillary has never been in a public quarrel with any Arizona Governor that I know of, nor with any other Arizona high official/politician that I know of, so I don't seen any reason why she would be as disliked among white Arizonians as Obama was.

That animus has been Tea-Party-ized by now. The national Democratic Party is still Obama's coalition and the dislike is directed at the party as much as it is him. It's not like the rest of the Democratic Party was resisting calls for boycotts in the wake of that. Arizona's whites are mostly upper class suburbanites and retirees. I have a really hard time seeing Hillary making inroads into either, absent some sort of dramatic realignment or the Republican candidate getting utterly annihilated nationwide. Do you really think Hillary is going to win Arizona? 2004 was a very long time ago in a place like suburban Phoenix in ways that it wasn't for the Midwest. Large areas hadn't been built yet. 2004's retirees are dead by now. I know I could be wearing rose-colored glasses for the GOP, but I really can't see how this would happen.

[HillOfANight]

I did a detailed write-up/compare and contrast between GA & AZ last year, with the overall premise being that AZ would be a lot harder to flip than GA when you're talking about actually getting to 50% in the long-run.

Obama has done surprisingly well in Georgia, but this is complicated by the fact that Georgia has a very high percentage of black voters. It's doubtful that they will turnout as strongly for Hillary.

[eric82oslo]

But why would you expect the white voters to vote like they did in 2004? A lot of them didn't even live in Arizona in 2004. What will have changed since 2012 to make them revert?

Obama was unpopular in Arizona in 2012 because he had a very public fight with Jan Brewer. Hillary has never been in a public quarrel with any Arizona Governor that I know of, nor with any other Arizona high official/politician that I know of, so I don't seen any reason why she would be as disliked among white Arizonians as Obama was.

That animus has been Tea-Party-ized by now. The national Democratic Party is still Obama's coalition and the dislike is directed at the party as much as it is him. It's not like the rest of the Democratic Party was resisting calls for boycotts in the wake of that. Arizona's whites are mostly upper class suburbanites and retirees. I have a really hard time seeing Hillary making inroads into either, absent some sort of dramatic realignment or the Republican candidate getting utterly annihilated nationwide. Do you really think Hillary is going to win Arizona? 2004 was a very long time ago in a place like suburban Phoenix in ways that it wasn't for the Midwest. Large areas hadn't been built yet. 2004's retirees are dead by now. I know I could be wearing rose-colored glasses for the GOP, but I really can't see how this would happen.

Well acually, among all 2008 McCain states, Arizona is one of the least religious ones. I think people just assume that Arizona somehow must be very religious, like Texas or Utah, and for that reason conservative. I think it's traditionally conservative for very different reasons. Sure, Arizona has one of the highest Mormon populations of any state, and those are almost unanimously Republican of course. For the rest of the Arizona Republicans though, I think they're very much gun-loving and anti-immigrant. I'm pretty sure immigration is the number one issue among Arizona Republicans, as it was with Jan Brewer. Thus the extreme Trump popularity among whites in the state.

[/]

As much as I'd like to believe this, I don't know if the Dems have more of a chance of winning AZ than the GOP. Of course, if Hillary operates her campaign well, I could definitely see the Dems picking up this state (as well as NC, GA, NE-02, and MO).

[Xing]

No. Only in the event of a TOTAL train-wreck GOP nominee will the Dems win AZ.

Arizona is a weird place, and not at all like NM, CO or NV.

* The population mix in AZ is much whiter and importantly, whiter and older. The population growth in Latinos has been equaled by the increase in white voters from the North and California, who are GOP voters. 

Colorado is actually much more white than Arizona, so this is simply false. However, the problem with Arizona is that the state has by far the US' lowest latino turnout together with Texas. I think the latest exit polls from both states showed only between 25% and 30% of latino voters actually turning out, in presidential elections (I think it was 2008).

This. Arizona and Texas have a relatively young Latino population, and many simply aren't registered to vote or don't bother turning out. Until Democrats take some enormous steps to remedy this, both states will be safe for Republicans.

[Bojack Horseman]

I did a detailed write-up/compare and contrast between GA & AZ last year, with the overall premise being that AZ would be a lot harder to flip than GA when you're talking about actually getting to 50% in the long-run.

Obama has done surprisingly well in Georgia, but this is complicated by the fact that Georgia has a very high percentage of black voters. It's doubtful that they will turnout as strongly for Hillary.

That fact alone had given Dems a lot of hope that with a decent year, Georgia might go blue in a presidential race with the right candidate.

[Mr. Reactionary]

TRIGGER WARNING: SARCASM

But why would you expect the white voters to vote like they did in 2004? A lot of them didn't even live in Arizona in 2004. What will have changed since 2012 to make them revert?

Once OUR GIRL HILLARY runs she will trick the icky racist white voters who used to vote Democrat until Obama ran into voting Democrat again. In fact she should make Missouri, Indiana, West Virginia, and of course Arkansas competitive again too, because we all know that the ONLY reason these ignorant-trashy-redneck-hillbilly States voted against Obama was because he was black. There is absolutely no other reason why those stupid-knuckle dragging-mouth breathing neo-liberal neanderthals in fly-over country Arizona should have not voted for Obama. Luckily Hillary is SO qualified and well-liked that she and Bill are going to win back all of the treasonous terrorists with pure charm. It should be easy since Hill Dawg is always so nice and respectful with the regressive, privileged, on-the-wrong-side-of-history Cuckservatives and their Jeebus. Also Koch Brothers, Patriarchy, Bayoneted Ghost Assault Weapon Launchers, etc., etc.

[Adam Griffin]

I did a detailed write-up/compare and contrast between GA & AZ last year, with the overall premise being that AZ would be a lot harder to flip than GA when you're talking about actually getting to 50% in the long-run.

Obama has done surprisingly well in Georgia, but this is complicated by the fact that Georgia has a very high percentage of black voters. It's doubtful that they will turnout as strongly for Hillary.

They'll turnout. Take a look at this:



The black electorate was 24% in 2006; 28% in 2010; 29% in 2014. In 2008 & 2012, it was only 30%, so the drop-off in the past two mid-terms when Obama was not on the ballot was marginal. The debate and effects will be in support, not turnout: a drop (which is all but guaranteed) back to 90% D (instead of 98% D in 2008 & 95% D in 2012) will knock anywhere from 1.5-2.5 points off of the statewide D total. If Nunn/Carter had received the same share of the black vote as Obama did in 2008, they would have received anywhere from 47-48% of the vote.


In regards to AZ, it is slightly overperforming what demographics suggest, while GA is slightly underperforming. Here was my post from last year:

Yeah I browsed over the discussion about AZ here, and I'll just boil my thoughts all down to this. We'll take the Democratic voting blocs and break them down by the numbers. The percentages shown below will build upon one another, showing the percentage of the vote statewide that is Democratic.

AZ not only a couple points less non-white than Georgia, but its non-white population is super-majority Latino, not super-majority Black. Latinos are barely 2-to-1 Democratic; Blacks are 9-to-1.

Theoretical non-white, Democratic vote (as a % of the state)
Georgia: 37.0%
Arizona: 30.8%

Then you have to factor in the fact that oh, say, 40% of the Latino population in a given area usually can't even register to vote.

Theoretical non-white, Democratic vote minus non-citizens (as a % of the state)
Georgia (83%): 34.8%
Arizona (69%): 21.0%

The whites in AZ may be more Democratic, but it isn't nearly enough to make up the difference.

Theoretical white, Democratic vote (as a % of the state)
Arizona (40%): 22.4%
Georgia (25%): 13.5%

When you add the two latter sets of numbers together:
Georgia: 48.3% D
Arizona: 43.4% D

Arizona's got a while before it's ready.

[HillOfANight]

Another issue with Georgia is that the white vote is very inflexible. Georgia ran with good legacy names and good campaigns, but white support was stuck around 20%. Even if the black vote % continues to rise, it will be years before it's competitive, whereas it seems Arizona could be right on the cusp of flipping.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

No. Only in the event of a TOTAL train-wreck GOP nominee will the Dems win AZ.

Arizona is a weird place, and not at all like NM, CO or NV.

* The population mix in AZ is much whiter and importantly, whiter and older. The population growth in Latinos has been equaled by the increase in white voters from the North and California, who are GOP voters. 

Colorado is actually much more white than Arizona, so this is simply false. However, the problem with Arizona is that the state has by far the US' lowest latino turnout together with Texas. I think the latest exit polls from both states showed only between 25% and 30% of latino voters actually turning out, in presidential elections (I think it was 2008).

This. Arizona and Texas have a relatively young Latino population, and many simply aren't registered to vote or don't bother turning out. Until Democrats take some enormous steps to remedy this, both states will be safe for Republicans.

I didn't say that AZ was the most white, I noted that AZ's white vote is generally much older and much less likely to vote Democratic. According to Exit Polls Obama's share of the White vote was:

NM - 41%
NV - 43%
CO - 44%
and AZ? - 32%