Can Donald Trump flip Minnesota red?

[Plankton5165]

Minnesota hasn't voted Republican since 1972. Well now, it's getting easier and easier for the Republicans to win it once again.

[Penelope]

I mean.. I can think up a scenario where he can, but I can think up a scenario where Hillary wins Kansas.

[Nyvin]

Nope.   I'd honestly say Minnesota would be harder than Michigan.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Minnesota has been red in the last several presidential elections, but Trump can make it more so.

[Figueira]

He'll make it even more Atlas red.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Minnesota is a Republican fool's gold state.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Hell, while we're at it, what are the odds Donald Trump wins Hawaii by 80%?

[Sir Mohamed]

It is already red. Isn't it?


* On Atlas.

[Xing]

No, he won't even come close.

[pppolitics]

Can Hillary Clinton flip Kansas blue?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Can Hillary Clinton flip Kansas blue?

Can Trump flip the town of Keene, NH?

[Bojack Horseman]

Even Reagan couldn't win Minnesota. Romney said the same thing, that he'd win Minnesota, and yet the streak continued. It's not going to happen.

[edmund]

No.  The only reason it was fairly close in 2000 and 2004 was because of the Nader factor, also in the case of Wisconsin and Oregon.

[OwlRhetoric]

It's very unlikely, much as I wish he could. His only chance of doing it is either a total national Hillary meltdown, or an extremely high third party vote mostly taking from Dems. With Johnson out of the debates, I don't see either happening right now.

[Maxwell]

not a chance - Minnesota has a hard ceiling for pubbies.

[elcorazon]

silly for so many to think odds are so low. I would say 10-20, but 20-30 might be more accurate. Trump might win people, this election is not over. If Trump wins, Minnesota WILL be fairly close and if Trump wins by a few points, Minnesota will almost certainly swing to him.

sad.

[cinyc]

Everyone thinks Minnesota is an uber-Democratic state, given its voting history.  But Minnesota is just a D+2 state, on par with Wisconsin, and more Republican-leaning than D+4 Michigan.  That doesn't mean Trump will win it, but it's more possible than 0% if Trump wins the election by a fair margin.  That's why I voted 5-10%.

[FairBol]

It's possible, perhaps, but...no Democrat has EVER won the White House without winning Minnesota. 

[OwlRhetoric]

There are several things working against Trump here, even if he wins nationally:

-Historical (D) tilt at the Presidential election.

-Very high voter turnout, over 75% in recent cycles.

-Johnson/Stein/other unlikely to peel more than 15% combined away, mostly from Hillary and disgruntled indies (as of today, anyway).

I think a 5-10% chance is as good as it gets unless something dramatically wrecks Hillary across the board, or third party support magically surges to at least Perot '92 levels.

[elcorazon]

It's possible, perhaps, but...no Democrat has EVER won the White House without winning Minnesota. 

that wasn't the question. if Trump loses the election, he likely will have also lost Minnesota. If that were the question, the answer would be less than 1%, I think, but since he has a pretty decent chance to win, his chances in Minnesota are also more than that.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

No. Not only is Minnesota getting more Atlas Red by the election, but Trump is a very poor fit for the state. Minnesota is a lot like Illinois in that the metropolitan hub will almost always outvote the rural areas surrounding it. But while many of Michigan's Dems are blue-collar union types that could make up Trump's biggest strength, Minnesota's Dems tend to be diverse, urban millennials.

In a best-case Trump election, Minnesota will likely be the spot of red in a sea of Midwest blue.

[Plankton5165]

It's possible, perhaps, but...no Democrat has EVER won the White House without winning Minnesota. 

Not true, check out Woodrow Wilson's elections.

[SWE]

In a 40 state Trump landslide he probably still loses it.

[cinyc]

No. Not only is Minnesota getting more Atlas Red by the election, but Trump is a very poor fit for the state. Minnesota is a lot like Illinois in that the metropolitan hub will almost always outvote the rural areas surrounding it. But while many of Michigan's Dems are blue-collar union types that could make up Trump's biggest strength, Minnesota's Dems tend to be diverse, urban millennials.

In a best-case Trump election, Minnesota will likely be the spot of red in a sea of Midwest blue.

Minnesota's PVI has been relatively flat, if not slightly Republican-trending since 1994.  It ws D+6 in 1994, D+4 in 1998, D+3 in 2002, and D+2 ever since.

[cinyc]

No. Not only is Minnesota getting more Atlas Red by the election, but Trump is a very poor fit for the state. Minnesota is a lot like Illinois in that the metropolitan hub will almost always outvote the rural areas surrounding it. But while many of Michigan's Dems are blue-collar union types that could make up Trump's biggest strength, Minnesota's Dems tend to be diverse, urban millennials.

In a best-case Trump election, Minnesota will likely be the spot of red in a sea of Midwest blue.

Minnesota's PVI has been relatively flat, if not slightly Republican-trending since 1994.  It ws D+6 in 1994, D+4 in 1998, D+3 in 2002, and D+2 ever since.

PVI is irrelevant when your ceiling is below 50%. See also: NH.

Ceilings only exist until they don't, like Trump's supposed ceiling in the primaries. 

If Trump wins the two-party vote 55-45 (unlikely), he'll likely win Minnesota and New Hampshire.  Heck, he could win both states if he wins 53-47, too.