Could IN/MO flip before GA does?

[Vosem]

In other words, is this a possible map?

The general consensus has been that, after NC, the next two best Democratic targets are AZ/GA, followed by IN/MO. But GA has shown itself to be a very inelastic state; downballot Democrats seem to be doing very well in IN/MO and not particularly well at all in GA; and we may have overestimated the pace of demographic change since 2008 (when IN voted Democratic, MO was Republican by less than a percent, while GA was still fairly comfortably Republican).

So...could Hillary carry some of her Midwestern long-shots while still falling short in the Southeast?

[OneJ]

It's certainly likely. I am definitely not ruling out the possibility.

[User157088589849]

The biggest reason why democrats aren't competitive in these states is because of gerrymandering. Republicans have done everything in their power to make congressional districts totally uncompetitive and frankly in my eyes undemocratic because you're making politicians unaccountable. So by making more congressional districts uncompetitive it makes it harder for democrats to win statewide as they have a smaller bench to work from.

Georgia and Missouri are two states that have seen shameful gerrymandering. Democrats can't win in Georgia as they have no vote outside of Atlanta.

2020 is the most important presidential election because the 2010 gerrymandering of districts needs to be undone and be more democratic.

Gerrymandering is the biggest reason why this country is divided. We have an electoral college favouring democrats and a congressional map that is gerrymandered to every cm across America to ensure a Republican majority hence nothing gets done in Washington.

[jamestroll]

Indiana has been more friendly to Democrats in the past decade and Missouri went GOP in the early 2000s and with exception of Presidential Elections, it has been stable lean-gop.

The two states are essentially the same now. Republican states that can elect Democrats. I think that MO and IN have greater potential for huge swings to a Democratic presidential candidate, but within a few cycles Democrats should regularly be favored in Georgia. This is due to sheer demographics.

Issue by issue, I don't think MO, IN and GA are significantly different. (Foreign policy, abortion, minimum wage, etc)

[Bojack Horseman]

The polls have Indiana and Missouri firmly in Trump's column, but we have a real shot at winning Georgia. 2016 is no 2008 type wave, but if this happens, I think it's more because of demographic changes and certain demographics being pissed off at the Republican nominee than anything else.

[Bacon King]

reminder: in Georgia polls, undecideds always end up breaking extremely heavily for the GOP

AZ definitely goes Dem before Georgia, but I think GA, IN, and MO all have very similar margins - my hunch is that GA will be slightly more Dem than the other two but that's just a guess

[jamestroll]

reminder: in Georgia polls, undecideds always end up breaking extremely heavily for the GOP

AZ definitely goes Dem before Georgia, but I think GA, IN, and MO all have very similar margins - my hunch is that GA will be slightly more Dem than the other two but that's just a guess

Yes.. but Georgia has only gotten less white since 2012 and this will be presidential election year turnout. I think Georgia may end up as the closest state. This has got to be the last presidential election that Republicans win Georgia in a competitive contest though.

Arizona Latinos are more Republican then average but Trump has turned them off big time, and AZ whites are not as bad as Georgia Whites. So I agree, AZ goes to Clinton before Georgia. I think Clinton is favored in Arizona. But it is possible that without Trump, AZ Latinos may revert back to only leaning Democratic.

Long term, I am unsure which state is better for Democrats. White liberals do exist in a notable number in Arizona, but not Georgia. However, Georgia's minority growth is booming more, and is mostly black. More reliable for Democrats.

Prior to 2008, I think Indiana was more Republican and Missouri was more Democratic then they should be up and down the ballot. It appears both states have corrected themselves and are the same now.

[nicholas.slaydon]

Indiana and Missouri will go Lean D before Georgia does.

[jamestroll]

Indiana and Missouri will go Lean D before Georgia does.

Why on earth would you think that? Even today, state elections and presidential vote are often different. The demographics in Georgia are near perfect for Clinton to pick up that Republican state.

Missouri and Indiana, on paper, are demographically perfect for Trump. Trump is just not blowing out Clinton in those two states because of the national climate and both states have Republicans who are willing to vote for Democrats occasionally.

[Cashew]

Indiana and Missouri will go Lean D before Georgia does.

Why on earth would you think that? Even today, state elections and presidential vote are often different. The demographics in Georgia are near perfect for Clinton to pick up that Republican state.

Missouri and Indiana, on paper, are demographically perfect for Trump. Trump is just not blowing out Clinton in those two states because of the national climate and both states have Republicans who are willing to vote for Democrats occasionally.

The whites in Georgia are far less elastic.

[jamestroll]

Indiana and Missouri will go Lean D before Georgia does.

Why on earth would you think that? Even today, state elections and presidential vote are often different. The demographics in Georgia are near perfect for Clinton to pick up that Republican state.

Missouri and Indiana, on paper, are demographically perfect for Trump. Trump is just not blowing out Clinton in those two states because of the national climate and both states have Republicans who are willing to vote for Democrats occasionally.

Turns out Comey may have skewed the results but I was right that those two states were demographically perfect for Trump. I also underestimated the rural gop magnitude, but as some people can attest too I was freaking out a little bit before the election.

It was foolishness to even suggest IN and MO could flip before Georgia.

I would not be shocked at all to see Democrats win something statewide in MO and/or IN while Trump is President, but it was foolishness and relying too heavily on past election results to suggest MO would flip before Georgia in a Hillary vs Trump election.

[Nym90]

Probably not, but it is worth keeping in mind that the Midwest in general is much more elastic than the South. If (almost certainly when) Trump fails to deliver on his promises of bringing the 1950's back, states like Missouri and especially Indiana will likely swing sharply back against him, similar to how the Midwest moved so strongly towards the Democrats in 2008.

[jamestroll]

Probably not, but it is worth keeping in mind that the Midwest in general is much more elastic than the South. If (almost certainly when) Trump fails to deliver on his promises of bringing the 1950's back, states like Missouri and especially Indiana will likely swing sharply back against him, similar to how the Midwest moved so strongly towards the Democrats in 2008.

I agree, but Mo and In are stretches to far.

Kander v Blunt gave me a good idea of what a winning coalition for MO will be. Kander lost St Charles by single digits, unheard of for a losing Democratic Senate candidate. He also won Clay and Platte counties. But I think for Senate and especially governor and below, the Democrats will have to win places like Platte, Clay and Boone counties decisively, and come close or even win St Charles and Jefferson counties on the other side of the state. St Charles County would be the toughest nut to crack, but the others I mentioned are not difficult.  As long as Democrats do that and get some support in rural areas they can win statewide. Below president of course.