Post a map that shows....

[MT Treasurer]

... which states will be more Republican and Democratic than the nation as a whole in 2016.

Here's mine:

CO, WI and FL were close calls, though.

This is the 2012 map, by the way:

[Human]

[Xing]

No way will Wisconsin be more Republican. Muh Trend R WI was disproven in 2012, when even having a Wisconsinite on the Republican ticket couldn't make it close. It was still the most Democratic of the swing states. Here's my guess:

IA, PA, and FL are all quite close.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Michigan was D +5.61% last election, and will trend at least 6% R for Trump.

The Democrats' narrow advantage in Florida (it will trend just enough to put it over the line) gives them the advantage in the electoral college.

Dem 278
Rep 260

[Senator-elect Spark]

[Pragmatic Conservative]

[Nyvin]

Trump will do well in the Northeastern states, which does help him trend PA to the GOP, but other than that it will  only serve to dampen Hillary's margins in states like NJ, NY, CT, DE, MD, and maybe extend a bit into IL.   Basically places that are establishment territory who like "insiders" traditionally.  

This will have an effect to make it much easier for the swing states to vote left of the nation since the margins in those solid Dem states will be lower.    

That compounded with the fact that Trump isn't likely to do well in western states (as shown in polling) since they tend to like "nice" outsider type of candidates, and Trump is really neither...he's a NYC businessman...

Places like Florida or Nevada where there's potential for minority votes to increase significantly from 2012 with Trump as a candidate for the GOP will probably see some significant swings to the left, and it's a real possibility Florida votes to the left of the country.  We've seen this with polling in Florida (there aren't any polls for Nevada).

0% chance Wisconsin votes to the right of the nation this year...absolutely nothing showing that happening at all in the statistics we have available.   Trump is NOT their candidate at all.

No idea about ME-2...that place is just quirky.   Who the heck knows.

[RaphaelDLG]

Obama 2012 - Florida and Ohio, Pennsylvania about as close to even as possible, tilt D

[Mallow]

[YaBoyNY]

I get aneurysms everytime I look at threads like this.

[Dr. Arch]

Ok seriously. WHAT is up with these tossup Minnesota and tossup Michigan memes floating around? Only on Atlas.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Ok seriously. WHAT is up with these tossup Minnesota and tossup Michigan memes floating around? Only on Atlas.

Minnesota is lol.

However if the popular vote is truly 50/50 split, Trump's gains to get there are coming from the rust belt, therefore MI becomes tossup to slight R.

We won't ever see competitive polls in Michigan, because the national race is never going to be close.  But if somehow this does become a race, I guarantee you you're going to see polls with Trump ahead in Michigan.

[Mallow]

Ok seriously. WHAT is up with these tossup Minnesota and tossup Michigan memes floating around? Only on Atlas.

If you're referring to my map, you're misinterpreting. The thread asked us to post a map of "which states will be more Republican and Democratic than the nation as a whole in 2016." My best guess is that (mainly due to stronger Latino support for the Democrats in southwestern states) Minnesota will vote pretty close to the national average this election--which will be Clinton +7 or so. Not a tossup.

As for Michigan being more Republican but Minnesota being more Democratic, MI has voted left of MN in three of the last four presidential elections, with the 2004 election being an essential tie between the two. In fact, in 2008, MI was more than 6 points left of MN (by margin). With demographics (much higher minority count in MI) and the MN trend towards the right, I am highly skeptical that MN votes left of MI this election.

[Dr. Arch]

Ok seriously. WHAT is up with these tossup Minnesota and tossup Michigan memes floating around? Only on Atlas.

Minnesota is lol.

However if the popular vote is truly 50/50 split, Trump's gains to get there are coming from the rust belt, therefore MI becomes tossup to slight R.

We won't ever see competitive polls in Michigan, because the national race is never going to be close.  But if somehow this does become a race, I guarantee you you're going to see polls with Trump ahead in Michigan.

I see. Well, I feel there's little evidence to back that up, but I understand your point here.

Ok seriously. WHAT is up with these tossup Minnesota and tossup Michigan memes floating around? Only on Atlas.

If you're referring to my map, you're misinterpreting. The thread asked us to post a map of "which states will be more Republican and Democratic than the nation as a whole in 2016." My best guess is that (mainly due to stronger Latino support for the Democrats in southwestern states) Minnesota will vote pretty close to the national average this election--which will be Clinton +7 or so. Not a tossup.

Oh, alright. I stand corrected. Yea, Minnesota is completely inelastic and, assuming Clinton wins by +5-7, then Minnesota might look more R than the nation, but that's just Minnesota being Minnesota.

[Mallow]

Oh, alright. I stand corrected. Yea, Minnesota is completely inelastic and, assuming Clinton wins by +5-7, then Minnesota might look more R than the nation, but that's just Minnesota being Minnesota.

Agreed, though not for exactly the same reason you're suggesting. I think it's that if Trump picks up votes to make the election close, a lot of that has to come from Latinos who normally vote Republican but who I currently think won't this election. That would have no real impact on states like MN.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Oh, alright. I stand corrected. Yea, Minnesota is completely inelastic and, assuming Clinton wins by +5-7, then Minnesota might look more R than the nation, but that's just Minnesota being Minnesota.

Agreed, though not for exactly the same reason you're suggesting. I think it's that if Trump picks up votes to make the election close, a lot of that has to come from Latinos who normally vote Republican but who I currently think won't this election. That would have no real impact on states like MN.

Minnesota's margin, and margin nationally adjusted, year by year:

2012: 7.69% (3.83%)
2008: 10.24% (2.98%)
2004: 3.48% (5.94%)
2000: 2.40% (1.88%)
1996: 16.14% (7.62%)

Minnesota isn't really inelastic (it's ranged from a 16-point margin to a 2.4-point margin) but is fairly influenced by the national result.  It's always been more D, ranging from about +2% to under +8%.

This year, I feel that Trump is a really bad fit for Minnesota.  Compared to the +3-4% D of 2008-2012, in 2016 I expect more like +6%, even if Clinton wins by 5-7 points.  That means that yes, Clinton could win the state by as much 55-42.

[Mehmentum]

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

The problem with this is 294-244 is too large an EV advantage.  I know the EC is tilted to Democrats, but not that tilted.  I think there needs to be more blue on this map.

Who do you flip?  Virginia?  Colorado?  Iowa?  Nevada?  Wisconsin?  Florida?  Some combination of those?

I pick Michigan.  Even though they were over 5% over the national margin in 2012, trends that hard do happen, and I really think Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania will be your big R-trend states this time around.  The demographics favor Trump, the economic issues favor Trump, and while the polls have typically had Clinton doing as well or slightly better than the national average at the time, there have only been five of them so far all year.

If you put a gun to my head and forced me to make a prediction right now, I'd say Hillary will win by 7% nationwide, but only win Michigan by 6 or 6.5%.

[Mehmentum]

The problem with this is 294-244 is too large an EV advantage.  I know the EC is tilted to Democrats, but not that tilted.  I think there needs to be more blue on this map.

Who do you flip?  Virginia?  Colorado?  Iowa?  Nevada?  Wisconsin?  Florida?  Some combination of those?

I pick Michigan.  Even though they were over 5% over the national margin in 2012, trends that hard do happen, and I really think Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania will be your big R-trend states this time around.  The demographics favor Trump, the economic issues favor Trump, and while the polls have typically had Clinton doing as well or slightly better than the national average at the time, there have only been five of them so far all year.

If you put a gun to my head and forced me to make a prediction right now, I'd say Hillary will win by 7% nationwide, but only win Michigan by 6 or 6.5%.

This was had Iowa flipped, so its 288-250.  The next D state to flip, I'd be wavering between FL, VA, and CO.  I'd probably go with FL.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

The problem with this is 294-244 is too large an EV advantage.  I know the EC is tilted to Democrats, but not that tilted.  I think there needs to be more blue on this map.

Who do you flip?  Virginia?  Colorado?  Iowa?  Nevada?  Wisconsin?  Florida?  Some combination of those?

I pick Michigan.  Even though they were over 5% over the national margin in 2012, trends that hard do happen, and I really think Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania will be your big R-trend states this time around.  The demographics favor Trump, the economic issues favor Trump, and while the polls have typically had Clinton doing as well or slightly better than the national average at the time, there have only been five of them so far all year.

If you put a gun to my head and forced me to make a prediction right now, I'd say Hillary will win by 7% nationwide, but only win Michigan by 6 or 6.5%.

This was had Iowa flipped, so its 288-250.  The next D state to flip, I'd be wavering between FL, VA, and CO.  I'd probably go with FL.

Oh, you're right.  I missed Iowa.  My bad.  288-250 isn't as bad.  A +18 EV advantage seems extreme, but there are a lot of states that are close to the line.