Is Wisconsin a new deep red state?

[RINO Tom]

No state with Madison + Milwaukee in it will ever be "deep" red.

While I agree it will never be "deep red," Madison does have suburbs, and at least one of those counties did vote Republican, not to mention that the Milwaukee suburbs and Minneapolis exurbs that are in Wisconsin are SUPER Republican.  If Democrats lose ground permanently with rural voters in the state (sorry, but they are simply not making up ANY longterm ground in those sububs that were mentioned, at least not for the foreseeable future), they will absolutely be at a big disadvantage ala Republicans with Virginia.

[Steam Boat Willie]

Is there any possibility from 2020 and beyond that Wisconsin will be the reliable Midwestern red state along with Indiana?

Indiana and Wisconsin are apples and oranges.  Look at the presidential numbers throughout the last century.  Wisconsin only scores a -0.11 which is something Democrats don't like to talk about despite their blood thirst for cold data and numbers.  This means that with all things being equal in a 2 way race, Wisconsin would only be a tenth of a point left of center.  It's very purple.  However, based on Midwestern trends throughout the 20th century, there is a fair argument to be made without hindsight that Wisconsin is trending into the Republican column.  This can be traced to the movement that started in Missouri in the 1996 election.  Despite Missouri's purple history, Bush was never in doubt there.  By 2008 it was a very even state despite Obama's victory margin nationally.  In 2012 it wasn't even competitive.  Last year Missouri was as red as Kansas.  Look at Iowa last year compared to the last election as well.  There is a fair argument to be made that the trend will be spreading to Wisconsin and Minnesota but only time will tell.  The term "deep red" is out of hand though.  I'm not sure what evidence there is to compare the Badger State to say Wyoming because I simply don't see it.  As for Indiana, Mike Pence may have helped by a couple points but it's always been a solid/light red state anyways.

[Hammy]

Another thing to look at with Wisconsin, more often than not the margins are small to start with, so it was pretty much inevitable that the state would vote R at some point eventually.

[Skill and Chance]

Not deep red, but more like the NC or GA of the Midwest going forward where Democrats always get to 45% but still almost always lose.  Of the 3 close Rust Belt states, PA is the most likely to come back for the Democrats because they can win by expanding on Clinton's margin in the Philly burbs or simply regaining Obama's margin in Philly.

[Steam Boat Willie]

Not deep red, but more like the NC or GA of the Midwest going forward where Democrats always get to 45% but still almost always lose.  Of the 3 close Rust Belt states, PA is the most likely to come back for the Democrats because they can win by expanding on Clinton's margin in the Philly burbs or simply regaining Obama's margin in Philly.

I can see Pennsylvania being the new Ohio, but it'll be hard for it to fully follow the West Virginia trend because of Philadelphia.  Ohio is more likely to become a light red state due to the trend coming from their southern neighbor.

[DPKdebator]

Not deep red, but more like the NC or GA of the Midwest going forward where Democrats always get to 45% but still almost always lose.  Of the 3 close Rust Belt states, PA is the most likely to come back for the Democrats because they can win by expanding on Clinton's margin in the Philly burbs or simply regaining Obama's margin in Philly.

If Trump hasn't maxed out the rural vote yet, just regaining Obama's margin in Philly won't work. The difference between the result in '08 and '16 isn't terribly different. The only viable method would be to try and expand in the suburbs, but there's no guarantee that will work.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Well people are calling it Wississipi but in all seriousness Republicans aren't as loved right now in the state either. The dairy farms were all gung ho on Trump and now they're terrified. They are living scared because they need the illegal immigrants to survive and plants in Canada are no longer buying their milk so they'll have to start dumping soon. They're begging Trump to do something, it's sad and amusing at the same time.

Well in all fairness, what the f[inks] did they think was going to happen?

[Person Man]

Well people are calling it Wississipi but in all seriousness Republicans aren't as loved right now in the state either. The dairy farms were all gung ho on Trump and now they're terrified. They are living scared because they need the illegal immigrants to survive and plants in Canada are no longer buying their milk so they'll have to start dumping soon. They're begging Trump to do something, it's sad and amusing at the same time.

Well in all fairness, what the f[inks] did they think was going to happen?

The election of Trump should answer the questions millions: "Why am I poor?"

[Dr. Arch]

Well people are calling it Wississipi

That's cool. Are people really calling it that?

Some people, not many, usually the people that use it are pretty far left. Would take a very, very long time for Wisconsin to get anywhere as bad as Mississippi in anything.

Don't worry. The WI voters fully intend to let that time pass.

[RINO Tom]

Not deep red, but more like the NC or GA of the Midwest going forward where Democrats always get to 45% but still almost always lose.  Of the 3 close Rust Belt states, PA is the most likely to come back for the Democrats because they can win by expanding on Clinton's margin in the Philly burbs or simply regaining Obama's margin in Philly.

Trump was the worst fit possible for most suburban areas, and he still won multiple suburban counties in the Philadelphia metro area and ALL of them in the Pittsburgh metro area.  He won all of Scranton's suburbs and Harrisburg's, too.  Let's stop pretending that Trump won PA with just rural voters and some disgruntled coal miners in Western PA; it's just a blatant lie to paint his voters a certain way.

Your way forward for Democrats of just appealing to a few more suburbanites who are *EDUCATED* would absolutely crash and burn, and (thankfully for your party) most Democratic leaders seem to get that, going in a DECIDEDLY populist direction (even Schumer, for God's sake...) since the 2016 defeat.  The Clinton strategy failed hard, and it's going nowhere.

[Adam Griffin]

People in this thread be like:

It's gone. In the current political dynamic, it might as well be Wisconsin Iowa.

Of course, the Republican Democratic Party could moderate in the coming years and that could help put the state back into play - and certainly Republicans Democrats will continue to do well in statewide contests for quite some time - but the growth and trends we see in Virginia Wisconsin are too strong for a Generic R D presidential candidate to overcome at this point. Frankly, I believe the tipping point for Virginia Wisconsin in presidential elections was reached circa 2006 2014 - had it not been, I don't think Obama Trump would have carried the state in 2012 2016.

Now, if we ever get an actual leftist right-winger running for President, that might be enough to scare those rich NOVA-types WOW-types to the Republicans Democrats...

[Fuzzy Bear]

Yeah I don't see how we could possibly win a state Trump won by less than 1% with 47% of the vote. No choice but to write it off.

LOL at the sarcasm here.

I view WI as the biggest anamoly of 2016, and the most likely state to go Democratic in 2020 that went for Trump this year.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Yeah I don't see how we could possibly win a state Trump won by less than 1% with 47% of the vote. No choice but to write it off.

LOL at the sarcasm here.

I view WI as the biggest anamoly of 2016, and the most likely state to go Democratic in 2020 that went for Trump this year.

Eh, second to Michigan.

[MT Treasurer]

I view WI as the biggest anamoly of 2016, and the most likely state to go Democratic in 2020 that went for Trump this year.

You keep saying this, but I don't know why. PA and MI are far more likely to flip than WI, especially since Trump can afford to lose some rural support in WI by doing better in the Milwaukee suburbs (see also: Ron Johnson's path to victory).

FL and WI are basically must-win states for the GOP in 2020.

[RINO Tom]

I view WI as the biggest anamoly of 2016, and the most likely state to go Democratic in 2020 that went for Trump this year.

You keep saying this, but I don't know why. PA and MI are far more likely to flip than WI, especially since Trump can afford to lose some rural support in WI by doing better in the Milwaukee suburbs (see also: Ron Johnson's path to victory).

FL and WI are basically must-win states for the GOP in 2020.

Exactly.  Everyone FOCUSED on Trump winning Wisconsin because it was the first GOP Presidential win in 2008 and because of his obvious rural gains, but the fact remains that Walker and Johnson did worse in rural areas than Trump, better in the WOW counties and won the state by SUBSTANTIALLY more.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

It could definitely end up being a red state if somehow Republicans can hold onto Trump's rural gains AND get Walker-like numbers in Waukesha, Washington, and Ozaukee.

The state would start at Leans Republican in a presidential race if that were the presumption.

Deep red isn't going to happen. Not enough people to offset blue Milwaukee end even bluer Madison.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

the moment somebody steps in to restore democracy in wisconsin (and/or in michigan, north carolina, florida etc), we're gonna see a lasting five-to-ten-point shift to the left in their official results
obviously i'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, but y'know

[Wiz in Wis]

No state with Madison + Milwaukee in it will ever be "deep" red.

While I agree it will never be "deep red," Madison does have suburbs, and at least one of those counties did vote Republican, not to mention that the Milwaukee suburbs and Minneapolis exurbs that are in Wisconsin are SUPER Republican.  If Democrats lose ground permanently with rural voters in the state (sorry, but they are simply not making up ANY longterm ground in those sububs that were mentioned, at least not for the foreseeable future), they will absolutely be at a big disadvantage ala Republicans with Virginia.

Madison's "suburbs" are almost entirely within Dane County... and they voted 60%+ Democratic. You are implying that Sauk/Columbia/Rock/Green/Iowa/Jefferson counties are Madison's suburbs... they aren't.

[RINO Tom]

No state with Madison + Milwaukee in it will ever be "deep" red.

While I agree it will never be "deep red," Madison does have suburbs, and at least one of those counties did vote Republican, not to mention that the Milwaukee suburbs and Minneapolis exurbs that are in Wisconsin are SUPER Republican.  If Democrats lose ground permanently with rural voters in the state (sorry, but they are simply not making up ANY longterm ground in those sububs that were mentioned, at least not for the foreseeable future), they will absolutely be at a big disadvantage ala Republicans with Virginia.

Madison's "suburbs" are almost entirely within Dane County... and they voted 60%+ Democratic. You are implying that Sauk/Columbia/Rock/Green/Iowa/Jefferson counties are Madison's suburbs... they aren't.

Was just going by the counties in the Madison metropolitan area:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison,_Wisconsin,_metropolitan_statistical_area

Are some of those towns small?  Sure.  But they're not stand-alone rural towns, those people's daily lives are ridiculously influenced by the city of Madison, and many of them probably work there.

[Strudelcutie4427]

the moment somebody steps in to restore democracy in wisconsin (and/or in michigan, north carolina, florida etc), we're gonna see a lasting five-to-ten-point shift to the left in their official results
obviously i'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, but y'know

Restoring democracy doesn't mean restoring what you believe, these are red states because of how their people voted. Under your belief should Estonia or Ukraine restore democracy as the Estonian and Ukrainian SSRs

[Nhoj]

Well people are calling it Wississipi

That's cool. Are people really calling it that?

Some people, not many, usually the people that use it are pretty far left. Would take a very, very long time for Wisconsin to get anywhere as bad as Mississippi in anything.

I think our roads might qualify! In all seriousness I had heard a report after the election that WI was one of the states still with more boomers than millennial's which certainly helps explain last year.

[Virginiá]

I think our roads might qualify! In all seriousness I had heard a report after the election that WI was one of the states still with more boomers than millennial's which certainly helps explain last year.

The swing among 18-29 year olds, but namely 18-24 year olds, is pretty significant too. Obama had won 18-29 year olds 60-37 in 2012, while winning 18-24 year olds 61-35. In 2016, Trump won 18-24 year olds 45-43, and reducing Hillary to winning 18-29 year olds by only 3% (47-44). Suffice to say, if Hillary had performed as well as Obama did among young voters, she'd have carried Wisconsin, and Trump's gains among boomers would not have looked as significant given how Democratic the 18-44 bloc would have been.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

the moment somebody steps in to restore democracy in wisconsin (and/or in michigan, north carolina, florida etc), we're gonna see a lasting five-to-ten-point shift to the left in their official results
obviously i'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, but y'know

Restoring democracy doesn't mean restoring what you believe, these are red states because of how their people voted. Under your belief should Estonia or Ukraine restore democracy as the Estonian and Ukrainian SSRs

preventing hundreds of thousands of people from voting is generally considered undemocratic, little-known fact

[Fuzzy Bear]

the moment somebody steps in to restore democracy in wisconsin (and/or in michigan, north carolina, florida etc), we're gonna see a lasting five-to-ten-point shift to the left in their official results
obviously i'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, but y'know

Restoring democracy doesn't mean restoring what you believe, these are red states because of how their people voted. Under your belief should Estonia or Ukraine restore democracy as the Estonian and Ukrainian SSRs

preventing hundreds of thousands of people from voting is generally considered undemocratic, little-known fact

How are people prevented from voting?  By requiring an ID?

I understand the "poll tax" aspect of voter ID laws, but there are solutions in order to ensure folks have "Real ID" for voting.  I understand the bias indicated in blocking convicted felons from voting and the racially biased motives behind this, and I support the idea of restoring voting rights to those who have completed their sentences and are (presumably) now taxpayers. 

But I have come around to viewing the idea of requiring an ID to vote as reasonable.  Is it "democracy" if folks who are not citizens vote, and affect vote totals?  Or folks who don't live within a state or district?  Or folks who vote in 2-3 different states?  I recognize these issues are often overstated, but a ballot box stuffed by ballots from persons who are not eligible voters isn't exactly democratic either.

[Beet]

Talking about democracy in a nation full of gerrymandering (at the state and Congressional level), the Senate, and the Electoral College is a joke. At no level of government do we have democracy. Quite the opposite- every indicator suggests majority dissatisfaction with government and rule by the minority. Disenfranchising people by making it harder to vote only makes the problem worse, but by no means constitutes the sum total of it with respect to "democracy", so long as the word has any meaning. And that's not even getting to the influence moneyed interests and lobbyists have over both parties.