Minnesota

[buritobr]

How can we explain the results in Minnesota? Since 1932, Minnesota voted R only in 1952, 1956, 1972 (and in 1972 was close). But unlike Massachusetts and Rhode Island, other D strongholds, in Minnesota, D never had huge margins.

In 2008, Obama's margin was bigger in Wisconsin and Michigan than it was in Minnesota. In this forum, between 2012 and 2016, we considered that R could carry Minnesota before carring Michigan.

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

In this forum, between 2012 and 2016, we considered that R could carry Minnesota before carring Michigan.

Speak for yourself.

Wisconsin and Michigan have been on paper more Democratic but they're also way more elastic.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Minnesota has a history of left wing politics the tradition of which is just about well recalled enough (and have not been stomped on by national Democratic policies; contrast with the former bastion of homespun syndicalism known as central Appalachia) to give a slightly higher degree of solidity to the D vote than is the norm. And even that nearly crumbled. But it was critical; sure the Duluth/Iron Range area turned marginal, but in most other states...

[TJ in Oregon]

In this forum, between 2012 and 2016, we considered that R could carry Minnesota before carring Michigan.

Speak for yourself.

Wisconsin and Michigan have been on paper more Democratic but they're also way more elastic.

Minnesota and Michigan, prior to this year, had roughly the same PVI but very different characteristics as midwestern states. Minnesota is far more upscale white collar than Michigan. It's also much whiter. The type of Republican campaign that would be needed to win Minnesota is more like a more popular version of Romney, someone who could win upscale suburbanites as well not get destroyed among rural populists. It's easy at first glance to say MN is a Safe D state based on the fact that the Dems always win it, but the margins are always close because unlike, say Massachusetts, there actually is a large Republican base in Minnesota: BRTD's favorite German Catholics and Michelle Bachmann. Trump's coalition was always less likely to win Minnesota than any other non-Illinois state in the midwest.

Michigan on the other hand is a state the Democrats generally win by running up huge margins on the black vote in Detroit and having the rest of the state be roughly a wash. The rest of the state has been roughly a wash because that's how industrial blue collar whites in the midwest outside major cities have largely voted in the last couple decades. Thus, it should be apparent that Trump was likely to do better in Michigan than Minnesota.

[Cubby]

The swing to the Democrats in 2008 was very low in Minnesota, except for the northwest part, I thought maybe it was because the GOP National Convention was held there.

[henster]

Trump didn't do that much better than Romney/McCain in their vote share despite the massive swings outstate. Hillary just bled a ton of support to 3rd parties.