why didn't California start voting democratic up ticket until the 90s?

[RIP Robert H Bork]

It helped that between 1952 and 1984 (9 elections), only twice did the Republican ticket not feature a Californian (1964 and 1976). As it happened, the Republicans lost California only once during that period (coincidentally, 1964; and yes, I know that the Republicans would have lost California in any case).

[RIP Robert H Bork]

It helped that between 1952 and 1984 (9 elections), only once did the Republican ticket not feature a Californian (1964), also the only time during that period that the Republicans lost the state (yes, I know that the Republicans would have lost California in any case).

What about 1976?

Oh, right, sorry. I'll fix that. Still, the Republicans featured a Californian 7 times in 9 elections.

(I'm not counting 1948, because even though Dewey's running mate, Earl Warren, was from California, Truman won the state. Still, he only won by less than 1%.)

[RIP Robert H Bork]

California is more democratic than the nation overall since 1984. That means in a tied election, Mondale would have picked it despite being his opponent's home State.

Just like Vermont, California's shift toward democrats has happened sooner than people usually think.

Btw, this universal swing stuff that comes up constantly on this forum isn't exactly true.

Some state's voting habits are more swingable and more elastic at certain %'s. But I do agree that California would be razor-think for anybody in 1984 assuming a tied election.

Yes, indeed. Even if the nation did swing 18 points, that wouldn't mean that California would swing 18 points.