Surprise Democratic States

[Erc]

Looking at some truly reach states for Clinton, beyond the usually discussed states.

Which of these would you be the least surprised to wake up on Wednesday the 9th and find out Clinton won?  And how likely would you say a Clinton win would be in that state?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Texas, not because it's likely to happen, but it is conceivable that Trump could manage to mobilize the Hispanic vote to come out in far larger numbers than it traditionally has.  But at this point, I fully expect all those state to be safely in the Trump column come November.

[Unimog]

- voted Montana
- possibly ND & alaska also

- but i'm quite sure that Trump is carrying all of this states.

[LLR]

Everyone knows my vote

[Sir Mohamed]

AK. Maybe with Gov. Walker's help, he's popular there.

[evergreenarbor]

Alaska or Montana. Voted Alaska because I think it's slightly more likely to flip, but I wouldn't be shocked if Clinton picked up either if she won in a landslide.

[Ljube]

It is very difficult to imagine conditions where a single one of those states would vote for Hillary.

Probably Louisiana. It was anti-Trump in the primaries.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

If Clinton hadn't blown it by picking Tim Kaine, I would have said Alaska, Missouri, and very possibly Utah were likely Clinton states.

[Mallow]

TX, about a 5% chance.

[Xing]

Alaska, since it might be trending Democratic. If not, South Dakota. You all know why.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Alaska

[Kingpoleon]

Alaska

[PeteB]

Probably none, but I picked Montana as the most likely.

[TDAS04]

Alaska

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

It is very difficult to imagine conditions where a single one of those states would vote for Hillary.

Probably Louisiana. It was anti-Trump in the primaries.

That doesn't mean a whole lot.  Indiana went to Clinton in the 2008 primary, but flipped to Obama in the general.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Couldn't vote because there is a 0% chance of any voting for Hillary.

[edmund]

It's not listed in this group but I would think possibly Missouri.  Until recently Missouri was a battleground state hotly contested going with the winner in every election from 1904 thru 2004 except 1956.  Obama just barely lost it in 2008.   If Hillary can increase her share in the main metropolitan centers of Kansas City and St. Louis she could carry Missouri although she doesn't need it.

[Young Conservative]

Obviously there is no chance any of these will vote for Secretary clinton

[dirks]

None of them. All of these are Trump, and all Trump +10.

Maybe SC could be under 10%

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Probably none, but I picked Montana as the most likely.

[afleitch]

Texas by a few thousand votes and a higher than expected Johnson vote? I'd go with that.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Demographically speaking, Texas.

Based on current trends, Alaska.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Given how tight the race appears, there's zero chance of Clinton taking any of these.  However, I can see the race shifting in a way that would.  Even with his convention bounce, Trump is still struggling to break 45% in the polls (except for a few outliers), and in a 4-way race, he's struggling to break 40%.  There is plenty of room for Clinton to occupy the rest of that space.  If the reason Clinton's numbers are so low is due to reservations swing voters - and liberal voters - have about her, a highly successful campaign could put those reservations to rest and turn things around.  A 52-41 (or 53-42) result is not out of the question, and a double-digit PV win opens up the map for her.

[Vosem]

Alaska has a high and rising Democratic floor, an elastic electorate, and a tradition of even minor third-party candidates receiving very strong percentages -- I would be very surprised if Johnson doesn't cross double-digits there even if he is only at 4-5% nationwide, and generally in Alaska third-party votes come from the right column, though not always. I could easily see something along the lines of C42-T41-J13-other3 even with current polling.

Montana has some of the same patterns, but it also has a traditionally-Democratic white-working class demographic (Schweitzer Democrats) that may be vulnerable to cross over for Trump, so I think it's less likely unless Johnson surges or makes it into the debate somehow.

Still, all of these are very unlikely. I'd be surprised if Alaska and Texas aren't at least within single digits (probably high single digits) though.

[Suburbia]

I say Texas. A large Hispanic population plus African Americans in Dallas and Houston.