How does IL become competitive?

[Senator-elect Spark]

Have to offset Chicago.

[Kingpoleon]

Republicans like Kirk, and, to a lesser extent, Rauner can win all the counties but Cook. What has to happen is getting above 30% in Cook County to win.

[Adam the Gr8]

George Pataki/Brian Sandoval vs a "Berniecrat" ticket.

[RINO Tom]

Contrary to popular belief (and with the exception of 2014), it's not a Cook vs. everyone else situation to win for a Republican.  There are several working class counties Downstate like by the Quad Cities that vote Democrat, then you have Champaign as a university town and some counties in Southern Illinois that usually prefer statewide Dems.  If a Republican is going to win statewide, he needs to drive turnout up in Central Illinois, dominate DuPage and win Lake by a healthy margin.

[Kingpoleon]

Contrary to popular belief (and with the exception of 2014), it's not a Cook vs. everyone else situation to win for a Republican.  There are several working class counties Downstate like by the Quad Cities that vote Democrat, then you have Champaign as a university town and some counties in Southern Illinois that usually prefer statewide Dems.  If a Republican is going to win statewide, he needs to drive turnout up in Central Illinois, dominate DuPage and win Lake by a healthy margin.

Alexander County is the only other county not really necessary to win, IMO. Kirk's 2010 map is basically Cook and Alexander plus very narrowly a couple other counties, and he only won by 1.6%. Besides winning all counties besides Cook and Alexander and maybe two or three more, one also has to get over 30% in Cook to win. For example, Kirk got something like 33% of the vote in Cook and narrowly won. I'd say 30% is about the over/under there for a GOP nominee to win.

[Redban]

Contrary to popular belief (and with the exception of 2014), it's not a Cook vs. everyone else situation to win for a Republican.  There are several working class counties Downstate like by the Quad Cities that vote Democrat, then you have Champaign as a university town and some counties in Southern Illinois that usually prefer statewide Dems.  If a Republican is going to win statewide, he needs to drive turnout up in Central Illinois, dominate DuPage and win Lake by a healthy margin.

If you eliminate all of Cook County's votes, then Romney takes Illinois 51% to 46%, and Bush 2004 wins it by 10% (landslide territory).

You're correct that there are other counties that vote Democrat, but none of them singlehandedly costs the GOP this state, as Cook does.

[muon2]

It's more useful to look at the vote margin out of Cook and compare it to the margin for the state.

2004 Pres: Cook D+842 K, IL D+546 K.
2006 Gov: Cook D+508 K, IL D+367 K.
2010 Sen: Cook D+457 K, IL R+59 K.
2010 Gov: Cook D+501 K, IL D+32 K.
2014 Sen: Cook D+600 K, IL D+391 K.
2014 Gov: Cook D+443 K, IL R+142 K.

When the Dems have less than a 500 K vote margin out of Cook, they are in trouble statewide. So the Pub strategy is to keep the Dem vote margin out of Cook under 500 K and make it up in rest of the state.

[Sir Mohamed]

Exclude Cook County.

[Arbitrage1980]

Contrary to popular belief (and with the exception of 2014), it's not a Cook vs. everyone else situation to win for a Republican.  There are several working class counties Downstate like by the Quad Cities that vote Democrat, then you have Champaign as a university town and some counties in Southern Illinois that usually prefer statewide Dems.  If a Republican is going to win statewide, he needs to drive turnout up in Central Illinois, dominate DuPage and win Lake by a healthy margin.

Alexander County is the only other county not really necessary to win, IMO. Kirk's 2010 map is basically Cook and Alexander plus very narrowly a couple other counties, and he only won by 1.6%. Besides winning all counties besides Cook and Alexander and maybe two or three more, one also has to get over 30% in Cook to win. For example, Kirk got something like 33% of the vote in Cook and narrowly won. I'd say 30% is about the over/under there for a GOP nominee to win.

Romney got 25% in Cook County and about 51% outside of Cook.  Given that Obama was the hometown favorite, I think if the GOP had nominated someone normal such as Rubio, Kasich, Walker, they could have gotten somewhere around 35% in Cook and 55-60% everywhere else. 

[Kingpoleon]

How much does that give us for a total for the GOP?

Personally I think Cook is so inelastic it will only vote >30% GOP when the rest of the state votes about 67% GOP, which IIRC is just the right amount to win the state.

[Heisenberg]

I'd say in the future, Illinois will be closer as Chicago loses population due to people moving out. In about 16 years, it could become a battleground depending on how the trends and demographics play out, and who the nominees are. A Kasich-type Republican vs. a Sanders-type Democrat could make a competitive race in Illinois 2028/2032.

[Kingpoleon]

2016: 414 - 124

2020: 363(John Kasich/Senator Barbara Comstock) - 175

2024: 408: John Kasich/Barbara Comstock - 130: Governor Zephyr Teachout/Senator Keith Ellison

[jamestroll]

Contrary to popular belief (and with the exception of 2014), it's not a Cook vs. everyone else situation to win for a Republican.  There are several working class counties Downstate like by the Quad Cities that vote Democrat, then you have Champaign as a university town and some counties in Southern Illinois that usually prefer statewide Dems.  If a Republican is going to win statewide, he needs to drive turnout up in Central Illinois, dominate DuPage and win Lake by a healthy margin.

If you eliminate all of Cook County's votes, then Romney takes Illinois 51% to 46%, and Bush 2004 wins it by 10% (landslide territory).

You're correct that there are other counties that vote Democrat, but none of them singlehandedly costs the GOP this state, as Cook does.

Yes, but remember that people who live in Cook County.. each individual is still the same vote weight as everyone who lives in downstate Illinois. Geography should not matter in elections.