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

[HillOfANight]

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=GAP00p1
http://elections.nbcnews.com/ns/politics/2012/arizona/president/#exitPoll

Looking at these exit polls, 14% in 2008 was 18-29, vs 26% in 2012. 54% were 45+ in 2008 and 2012. Sure they could be inaccurate, but I don't see an aging electorate?

[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).

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%

The white vote in Arizona is more Mormon and much more immigrant-sceptic than in the three other states (although Nevada is quite Mormon too), so it's only natural that they're more conservative as a whole. Now having said that, the difference doesn't count for as much as 10-11% I believe, which I still believe was due to the Jan Brewer conflict. I could see the white vote of Arizona constantly being 4-6% more Republican than in the other three latino states, yet probably not much more than that. Now, I must say I'm surprised that the white vote in Colorado and Nevada is almost identical. Due to Colorado having one of the most educated electorates of any state, I would have presumed that Colorado whites would have been far more liberal-minded than those of Nevada. On the other hand, Las Vegas is the world capital of sin, so having that in mind, one shouldn't be awfully surprised that it does attract many liberal-minded, non-religious white folks as well.

[henster]

Hillary is not the type of candidate to expand the map she is too polarizing and her favorability numbers too low. We are already seeing her struggle in Obama states (PA, MI, MN, IA, NH) I don't see how she can expand the map.

[All Along The Watchtower]

It's not just that Arizona has a lot of conservative white voters. That's true of most of the interior Western states (including Colorado and Nevada).

What Arizona lacks, however, is a population of liberal (even moderately so; many of the Democrats in Colorado are fairly moderate) whites that is large enough (and more importantly, actually votes) to counterbalance the Republican dominance of the (mostly white) electorate.

AZ isn't going Democratic any time soon.

[bobloblaw]

Small problem.

Romney did better than McCain did in AZ and Obama got fewer votes. So easy to use this site to debunk absurd claims.

[bobloblaw]

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.

Like Michelle Nunn? lol

[eric82oslo]

Small problem.

Romney did better than McCain did in AZ and Obama got fewer votes. So easy to use this site to debunk absurd claims.

Did the Obama-Jan Brewer conflict exist when McCain run for president? Right! So what exactly are you trying to debunk? That Jan Brewer was not the number one racist of the US of A until Trump came along? Or that Obama has not always been the strongest of strong latino advocates since he took office? I'm quite confused to say the least.

[bobloblaw]

Small problem.

Romney did better than McCain did in AZ and Obama got fewer votes. So easy to use this site to debunk absurd claims.

Did the Obama-Jan Brewer conflict exist when McCain run for president? Right! So what exactly are you trying to debunk? That Jan Brewer was not the number one racist of the US of A until Trump came along? Or that Obama has not always been the strongest of strong latino advocates since he took office? I'm quite confused to say the least.

What I am debunking is that AZ moved toward Obama in 12.

[Fuzzy Bear]

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.

The legacy names meant little to many of the new, white residents of Georgia, many of whom are Republicans from other states (including Northern states).  Sam Nunn was last on a ballot in 1996, and Jimmy Carter is not exactly highly regarded by Southern and Conservative white voters.

There has not been the kind of inmigration to the Atlanta suburbs of liberal whites as there has been to the Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC.  The professionals and white-collar types of metro-Atlanta are more conservative than those in Northern Virginia, many of whom are public employees. 

[HillOfANight]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/10/perdue-edges-nunn.html
Sam Nunn and surprisingly Jimmy Carter had good approval numbers, especially Sam among conservatives. Michelle actually had higher favorable and lower favorables than David Perdue, but again, people vote for the party and not the person here.

[bobloblaw]

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.

The legacy names meant little to many of the new, white residents of Georgia, many of whom are Republicans from other states (including Northern states).  Sam Nunn was last on a ballot in 1996, and Jimmy Carter is not exactly highly regarded by Southern and Conservative white voters.

There has not been the kind of inmigration to the Atlanta suburbs of liberal whites as there has been to the Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC.  The professionals and white-collar types of metro-Atlanta are more conservative than those in Northern Virginia, many of whom are public employees. 

Correct, those comparing GA to NC or VA are going to be disappointed. Peachpundit covered this:

GA lacks the govt jobs of VA and the high tech jobs og NC. Most moving to GA are fleeing liberal bastions up north and are employed as self employed or as middle and upper management in the numerous Fortune 500 companies in Atlanta. They arent Dem voters like in VA or NC.