Talk Elections

I was thinking about voting patterns and what the future may hold. So, I've compiled what I think voting trends may look like in the not too distant future.

Democratic Locks:
HI, CA, NM, IL, NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA, VT, DC

Republican Locks:
ID MT WY UT ND SD NE KS OK LA MS AL AK GA SC KY ID

Soft Democratic: (States which tend to go democratic but tend to be a little closer than most)
AZ NV MN WI MI FL WA ME IA MD DE

Soft Republican:
CO, TN, NC, VA, WV, AR, NH, TX

Tossups: (Mainly cause I don't know where they're going)
OH, MO, PA

The reasons most of these states have moved around is that I believe that Latinos will increase rapidly in the population in the Southwestern states, (CA, NV, AZ, NM, TX) softening up Republican strength there. Also I think the Republicans will start to appeal to the mid-west states (OH, PA,) to try and commensate.

I'm sure there's a lot of holes in my thoughts, but I just wanted to through that out there.

Siege

The map for that looks as follows (obviously EV totals incorrect).

BTW, you are missing Indiana but I am assuming you think it trends Republican. Also missing is Oregon. Not sure how you think that will go but I have left it with the Democrats.

()

()

That look right or were my assumptions on Oregon and Indiana incorrect?

I predict the map starts looking uglier as things become less polarized.

()

As a side note, this is a 269-269 tie by today's EVs.  It wasn't intentional.

Lunar, I personally think that Minnesota will stick with the Democrats.

With regards to PA, here's my take:

Pennsylvania will polarize between east and west bigtime.  If the modern Republican party gets too neo-conservative, there may be huge problems for them especially in the Southeast around Philly which were once very strong GOP areas.  I think Montgomery Co will be solid Dem with Bucks, Delaware, and Chester trending in that direction.  The Lehigh Valley has been slightly trending GOP, but I think it will reverse with the expansion of New York and Philadelphia.  The old "Reagan Democrat" will die out and newer, more educated Democrats will take over.  The same will trend for the Poconos area.  Pittsburgh and the West may even out.  The economy out there has to drastically get better for any real shift in power.  PA stays soft Dem and maybe even expands.  

()

Thanks JFK. I wrote Indianna's intitials as ID instead of IN, oops. OR would be soft Dems and IN would be Rep. Lock. I think that the Neo-Conservative branch of the Republicans will be... suppressed if Bush loses or by 2008, leaving the McCain Republicans, more moderate Republicans, and that will get them the stability they want with the mid-west.

But I heard that the South was urbanizing which means Democratic influence, that's why VA and NC are softening up.

Siege

IMO, by 2016, the Northeast will be a Democratic lock.   The coastal South will become more liberal (minus South Carolina), while the inner southern states like Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia and Louisiana become more conserative.  The Upper Midwest will trend republican, Ohio and Pennsylvania become tossups, while Michigan and Illinois remain the democratic base in the midwest.  The Southwest and Pacific will become Democratic strongholds.  

In the end....by 2016

STRONG DEMOCRATIC STATES
Maine
New Hampshire
Vermont
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Rhode Island
New York
New Jersey
Delaware
Maryland
DC
Illinois
New Mexico
Arizona
Nevada
California
Washington
Hawaii

LEAN DEMOCRAT
Virginia
North Carolina
Florida
Michigan
Minnesota
Colorado
Oregon

TOSSUPS
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Iowa
Wisconsin

LEAN REPUBLICAN
West Virginia
South Carolina
Louisiana
Missouri

STRONG REPUBLICAN
Indiana
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
Arkansas
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
Nebraska
South Dakota
North Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
Idaho
Montana
Alaska

I think the future is rough for the republicans.  Once strong republican states are seeing much population growth and dem trends like NC, AZ, and VA....while the states in the Northeast losing population don't look like they're becoming republican strongholds anytime in the near future.  

()

A lot of it depends on how neo-con the Republican party gets.  I can safely say eastern Pennsylvania including the staunchly GOP areas will not go for it and signs are alredy pointing to that.  If Bucks Co., PA had even a half decent Democratic party, PA-8 would easily flip. I can definititely see states like Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina become more Dem.  PA's Republican party is falling fast.

I agree, I think the Reps would do best to go Moderate. McCain style.

Siege

We're falling fast? We hold the Legislature, we hold both U.S. Senate seats, we have a majority in the Congressional delegation, we hold the state Attorney General's office, Rendell (D) has the weakest approval ratings out of the statewide office holders....and the PA GOP is the party falling fast?

Wishful thinking.. not going to happen...

The Asher/Fawkes machine is falling like a deck of cards.  Both are crooks and people know it.  Boyle is gonna beat Kenney I can feel it!  Melissa Brown will have to do better than Section 8 to get elected this time.  

Boyle beating Kenney? Give me a break. Kenney has been re-elected by time and time again (by sizable margins, too). Every two years we hear how Kenney will lose. He is the state Rep. targeted by the Dems. And after all their attempts, they fail. And this year will be no different.

Joe Nicoletti and youself are not the only opinions in the Northeast.  Answering for the @ssholes up top will be a tough problem for the GOP even in NE Philly.  Had the Dems picked a more moderate and prominent candidate, I could see Speaker Perzel's seat in jeopardy as well.  Right now, the only GOPer in the Northeast that's 100% squeaky clean is John Taylor.  The others are as rotten as Street!  Good riddance!  

Perzel has a safe GOP district now. Nobody will beat him. And as for the "only GOPer in the Northeast that's 100% squeaky clean is John Taylor. The others are as rotten as Street." you must be kidding. What's your problem with Denny O'Brien? The Dems of PA169th House district really like O'Brien. That might be why they chose not to run candidates against him. How can you compare George Kenney to John Street? You have some strong opinions Handzus but most are pretty ridiculous.

I forgot about O'Brien.. sorry.  Kenney is Perzel's lackey and Perzel himself is an f-ing thief!  

Give me a break. How is he a thief? This man is a very dedicated community leader. You Dems might not like him but to call him a thief...don't you think that's alittle extreme?

Hell no!  I will not apologize for that statement.  He has his wife and his in-laws raking it in from a failing charter school, he is trying to privatize everything so he can get a hefty payday.  I hope the residents of PA-172 can see thrugh his pork-barreling garbage.  The guy looks up to pond scum.

my take:

()

everyone think Michigan will stay lean democrat

That's really interesting RightWingNut, I agree with most of what you got there, minus AZ, TX, FL and maybe VA.

Siege

()

wishful thinking I know.

That looks so wierd.... I don't think that could ever reasonably happen.

Siege

Thanks a lot...

Anyway its mostly based on if the hispanic vote becomes bigger and trends conservitive and the Democrats become a bit more populist.

By 2016 I would hope the Libertarians would control a state. We'll see.

What state do you think they could win?

Siege

If I had to venture a guess I would say Texas or Florida.

I'm told we're developing a strong powerbase in Texas, so that might be a possibility.

Florida is a guess because we have a chance of winning a Congressional race(federal, not state). District 21 - Libertarian Frank J Gonzalez versus Republican incumbent Lincoln Diaz-Balart, no Democrat candidate. Gonzalez has a lot going for him - Diaz-Balart has run unopposed for 5 terms(so his campaign skills may be rusty or he'll be overconfident and not campaign at all) and he's pissed off the Cubans(55% of the district) by imposing greater restrictions on their ability to visit and send money to their families still in Cuba. So, if Gonzalez succeeds it gets a Libertarian into federal office, and may influence the neighboring districts as well. Here's his site if you're interested: http://www.politicalgateway.com/cand.php?id=40&page=cand (http://www.politicalgateway.com/cand.php?id=40&page=cand)

Other states, I'd guess maybe California(we have a good deal of officials there), but that would be a long-shot, or perhaps Georgia(few officials, but a high percentage of Georgians voted Libertarian in the last election).

()

For all we know this could be the map :

()

My prediction: All your predictions are wrong :P

Any thoughts Al on what the map might look like?

Siege

Aha... but then I'd be breaking my own rule...

Come on Al, just a bit of fun.

Siege

Hmmm... problem with trends is that they change so often...
A wild guess:

NM, AZ, NV et al don't trend Dem because the GOP puts a lot of work into appealing to Hispanic voters. There is then a backlash amoung poorer whites further east.

By further East do you mean the Atlantic Coast, or all of the South and maybe the Great Plains too?

Siege

Not sure... but it'd certainly produce a backlash

How could you forget about New Hampshire?  Or are you assuming it will simply leave the Union? :)

Florida and Texas have too many religious conservatives to ever go Lib.  The states most likely to turn yellow:

1. New Hampshire
2. Alaska
3. Idaho
4. Nevada
5. Montana
6. Wyoming
7. Oregon

The only double-digit state I could see ever going yellow would be Wisconsin, based on the strong showing Ed Thompson had in 2002.  Although Ed was helped by name recognition, and a general distaste for both Doyle and McCallum.  I'm not sure if that's a sign of LP life in the state.

This also would only happen under the following circumstances:
1. The Republicans get increasingly Populist (they are moving in that direction)
2. The Democrats get increasingly Left-Liberal.
3. The LP moderates a lot of its positions.
4. The health care problem solves itself.

In this case, the LP moves into the economic Right vacuum that the Republicans create, and attract lots of Western-Wing Republicans.  They may even attract some East-Coast moderates, making them much stronger in New Jersey and Connecticut - but not strong enough ever to "take over" those states.

Actually, in this scenario, the LP and Republicans will probably merge, since this would leave the Democrats in full control of Washington.  Two parties are simply how this country's political system runs.

I saw a poll that showed Badnarick polling 3% in Nevada, significant for a LP candidate.  Not sure of he makes a strong showing in any other states.  I do see a stronger LP by 2016.

I think everyone here needs some lessons in how to not be one dimensional thinkers.

1) No matter who wins this election, both parties will try to expand their base.  The flaws of the current (de?)allignment are looming, glaring and numerous.  That fact that there are fewer toss-up states in this election than any in recent memory proves this fact.  No party can legitamently hope to get more than 360 EV's.  The Republicans cannot hope to win more than two states in New England and the Democrats cannot hope to win More than one of the plains states (Colorado)  Nor more than one state south of the Mason-Dixon (Florida).  This leaves both parties little room for loss anywhere and is a clear signal that both parties need to expand.

2) The Republicans are making clear efforts to gain an even footing with the Hispanic vote.  If they succeed, this puts Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada into the Bush colum; California and New Jersey would be competitive again and Texas would remain safely in with the Republicans.  As a side note, Bush does seem to be polling better among Hispanics than in 2000.

3) Everything depends on this race.  Whoever wins will have a headstart in the effort to expand the party.  However, by 2016-2020, both parties will have sufficently restructured.

My Prediction:  More competetive states.  Less of a GOP lock on the South.  Less of a Dem lock on the Northeast.  Midwest remains very competitive.

Also, if the 3rd parties ever become very successful, the two major parties will simply adopt many of their possitions.

This may be a shock to you. But most likely by 2016, the 1st Congressional District of Idaho, of only 2, will be 50% Democrat and 50% Republican. Why? Because of the increasing number of crimes committed by the republican party, fraud, all sorts of stuff, and the huge growing population of Hispanics in the Boise Area.

Until 1992 the first Congressional District, of only two in the state, was Democratic. It changed between 1988-1994 because a large conservative population, about 13-20,000, moved from Sand Diego to Couer d' Alene, in the norther part of the state. Now that growth is slowing down as the area's costs of living is rising very fast and the southern part of the district is increasing with Hispanics that constitute the majority of the growth in ADA. Democrats for the first time won the Mayor seat of Boise two years ago.

Also, the popular US Congressman, Butch Otter, will be running for Governor in 2006, a sure win, making the seat open.

Maybe if all the liberals in Cali moved to Arizona and Oregon and left a Republican stronghold in Cali

This was entertaining to read

...and also 10 years old. Why bump?

Well, the next presidential election is 2016, right? And by 2014 it gives us an idea of how accurate the former predictions were based on that time of perception.

I'm surprised how accurate HockeyDude's prediction is so far, I mean there are a few more states to go to the Republicans, and a few to the Democrats, but really accurate considering it was 12 years before the election.