Are you saying that the #analysis will be that it's gone for Democrats in 2020? Because the idea that Republicans can't win PA is definitely dead by now.
No, for Republicans. I've already seen like two people here (most notably pbrower2a) saying that 2016 was a fluke and that the state will go back to being "likely D" in 2020 or whatever based on that one poll that showed him with poor approval ratings in the state. PA might vote Democratic (and I agree that it's the most or second-most likely state to flip to the Ds), but I definitely think it is winnable for Republicans (the same way FL was winnable for Obama in 2008, if you want).
But generally the "fools gold" analysis isn't very useful in most cases. Many states are always fool's gold until they aren't. Democrats could win AZ, just like Republicans could win MN.
Edit: Another thing that could be rejected is the idea that <candidate X is too liberal to be elected nationwide!!>.
It's obviously ridiculous to say that PA is certain to flip, but if it's only two people claiming that, I don't think it can really be called the prevailing analysis here. I'd sooner say that MI is going to be very hard for Trump to hold on to, though it's obviously not Safe D or "fool's gold."
