What is Trump's path to victory without WI/MI/PA?

[Medal506]

Typically just the rest of the states and Maine's district 2 that he had in 2016 plus Minnesota but that would be the closes victory in U.S history. Still a victory though. Probably would be contested but still a victory.

Republican - 270
Democrat - 268

[pbrower2a]

Here are maps of the most recent approval polls, showing approval and disapproval.  At this point, my best guess for how the President does in a re-election bid in 2020 is basically 100-DIS as a prediction of his share of the vote.  It is far easier to raise approval ratings by cutting into the undecided vote than it is to cut into disapproval.

This approval map shows  electoral votes to the states on the approval map.

Trump approval, net positive

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

Trump approval, net negative

44-49%
40-45%
39% or lower

But raw disapproval numbers appear instead  of electoral votes here:

Disapproval (net negative for Trump) :

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

(net positive for Trump)
46-49% 
41-45%
40% or lower

Republicans will need a really-weak challenger from the Democrats (someone  inept as a campaigner? Someone tainted?) to re-elect President Trump.

The polls for Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are now stale...  A couple recent polls from Florida and North Carolina suggest deep trouble for Republicans. The November 2017 election suggests that Virginia is gone for the Republicans. I expect to see no more polls (due to the Thanksgiving weekend) until mid-December. Michigan  and Wisconsin have few Puerto Ricans, but Pennsylvania does. I expect the next poll of Pennsylvania to look really bad for Trump.   

Trump can basically forget two of his three barest losses -- Minnesota and Mew Hampshire have seemed out of reach in most of 2017, and it will take a huge swing in the fundamental realities of electoral attitudes to make those states close. Nevada looks to be within range if everything goes right. Problem: everything must go right.

Among Trump wins in 2016 -- Arizona, North Carolina, Florida, and Iowa are big trouble with disapproval ratings above 50. Ohio isn't lost, but it could easily get there. Recent polls of Trump approval in Alabama and Arkansas suggest that the president is losing some once-reliable supporters in at least those two states. Does anyone want to guess what '46' in Arkansas and '47' in Alabama suggest for

TEXAS?

[Rookie Yinzer]

Typically just the rest of the states and Maine's district 2 that he had in 2016 plus Minnesota but that would be the closes victory in U.S history. Still a victory though. Probably would be contested but still a victory.

Republican - 270
Democrat - 268

Minnesota is not voting to the right of WI/MI/PA.

[Lechasseur]

I think he can get away with losing Michigan but if Trump loses Wisconsin and Pennsylvania he loses the election.

[Shadows]

Here are maps of the most recent approval polls, showing approval and disapproval.  At this point, my best guess for how the President does in a re-election bid in 2020 is basically 100-DIS as a prediction of his share of the vote.  It is far easier to raise approval ratings by cutting into the undecided vote than it is to cut into disapproval.

This approval map shows  electoral votes to the states on the approval map.

Trump approval, net positive

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

Trump approval, net negative

44-49%
40-45%
39% or lower

But raw disapproval numbers appear instead  of electoral votes here:

Disapproval (net negative for Trump) :

55% or higher
50-54%
44-49%

Ties are in white.

(net positive for Trump)
46-49% 
41-45%
40% or lower

Republicans will need a really-weak challenger from the Democrats (someone  inept as a campaigner? Someone tainted?) to re-elect President Trump.

The polls for Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are now stale...  A couple recent polls from Florida and North Carolina suggest deep trouble for Republicans. The November 2017 election suggests that Virginia is gone for the Republicans. I expect to see no more polls (due to the Thanksgiving weekend) until mid-December. Michigan  and Wisconsin have few Puerto Ricans, but Pennsylvania does. I expect the next poll of Pennsylvania to look really bad for Trump.   

Trump can basically forget two of his three barest losses -- Minnesota and Mew Hampshire have seemed out of reach in most of 2017, and it will take a huge swing in the fundamental realities of electoral attitudes to make those states close. Nevada looks to be within range if everything goes right. Problem: everything must go right.

Among Trump wins in 2016 -- Arizona, North Carolina, Florida, and Iowa are big trouble with disapproval ratings above 50. Ohio isn't lost, but it could easily get there. Recent polls of Trump approval in Alabama and Arkansas suggest that the president is losing some once-reliable supporters in at least those two states. Does anyone want to guess what '46' in Arkansas and '47' in Alabama suggest for

TEXAS?

Good analysis with maps! I just can't see Trump winning Minnesota. Maine 02 looks the only winnable part which Trump lost in 2016. Among the 3 key victories for Trump, Michigan looks toughest, Wisconsin next & then PA.

Rural PA is going to drive Trump & make him stay competitive in PA. Trump's only hope is a terrible Dem candidate & the best path looks like -> the Romney States + FL + NC + OH + PA.

It is fairly possible that Trump loses all of these 4 states, if Dems get a decent candidate who can run a good campaign.

[Beet]

GOP - 273
Dem - 265

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

2020 election will see campaigning in even fewer states. MI/WI/PA/Iowa/Ohio/NC/Florida - Those will be the swing states. Perhaps Arizona maybe competitive as well.

I would take IA off that list and add AZ and GA.

[Shadows]

2020 election will see campaigning in even fewer states. MI/WI/PA/Iowa/Ohio/NC/Florida - Those will be the swing states. Perhaps Arizona maybe competitive as well.

I would take IA off that list and add AZ and GA.

Why would Trump abandon Iowa because the Democrats won't.

There is a considerable chance for a Dem to win by 6/7% or around Obama/McCain margins which would make Iowa 100% competitive.

Arizona & Georgia will probably be competitive in 2024, maybe 2020. But if I was the Democrat, I would try & lock in states like Florida, Michigan, PA rather than wasting resources on a state which may be like PA was for the GOP all these years. Dems would focus on locking down all of the Obama 2012 states.

[ElectionsGuy]

Nevada is the only plausible option here, but that's becoming harder and harder. It's worth noting that Trump could still win if he loses Florida but keeps everything else. I think the R's goal in 2020 is to keep their upper Midwest gains and possibly go for Minnesota/New Hampshire in the event of North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona or Florida flipping (although if 3 of those 4 go the R's lose).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

2020 election will see campaigning in even fewer states. MI/WI/PA/Iowa/Ohio/NC/Florida - Those will be the swing states. Perhaps Arizona maybe competitive as well.

I would take IA off that list and add AZ and GA.

Why would Trump abandon Iowa because the Democrats won't.

There is a considerable chance for a Dem to win by 6/7% or around Obama/McCain margins which would make Iowa 100% competitive.

Arizona & Georgia will probably be competitive in 2024, maybe 2020. But if I was the Democrat, I would try & lock in states like Florida, Michigan, PA rather than wasting resources on a state which may be like PA was for the GOP all these years. Dems would focus on locking down all of the Obama 2012 states.

If your post was only about Republicans conceding CO, VA and NV, then why the hell didn't you say so. You post implied both sides would contract to truly competitive territory.

It stands to reason that Iowa would come off the list in favor of GA and AZ. Both of which were closer, both of which are much more diverse and both of which have more electoral votes.

Of course it depends on who the nominee is, but if you go from winning the PV by 2%, to winning by 6% or 7%, just using a uniform swing means that AZ and GA flips while Trump still wins both OH and Iowa by 2% and 3% respectively.

If you don't apply a uniform swing then you have to figure that swings are larger with college educated whites and minorities (as well as minority turnout being higher), and smaller with non-college whites, then the situation becomes even more the case.

Consider also that GA now has automatic "opt-out" registration, 3 years means 3 more years of out of state Dems moving in, and 3 more years of the state getting that much more diverse. I think the "It's Happening GIF" will be needed four years sooner, especially if Harris is the nominee, or one of the New Yorkers or one of the Virginians.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nevada is the only plausible option here, but that's becoming harder and harder. It's worth noting that Trump could still win if he loses Florida but keeps everything else. I think the R's goal in 2020 is to keep their upper Midwest gains and possibly go for Minnesota/New Hampshire in the event of North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona or Florida flipping (although if 3 of those 4 go the R's lose).

Long term, this is correct. The Republicans need to look to find paths of lesser resistance, because I think GA is going to become like VA in the near future.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I don't know that he has one.  He needs to hold PA at all costs.  It's the state most likely to go for Trump in 2020 out of those 3 states, and the biggest of the three.

I would think that Trump would need to be looking to NH, CO, NV, and VA.  The problem there is that all of these states are trending toward the Democrats; these are states where events are going the Democrats' way, by and large.

Trump needs the aid of a flawed Democratic nominee to win in 2020.  Fortunately for Trump, the Democrats are probably quite willing to assist in this matter.

[Shadows]

2020 election will see campaigning in even fewer states. MI/WI/PA/Iowa/Ohio/NC/Florida - Those will be the swing states. Perhaps Arizona maybe competitive as well.

I would take IA off that list and add AZ and GA.

Why would Trump abandon Iowa because the Democrats won't.

There is a considerable chance for a Dem to win by 6/7% or around Obama/McCain margins which would make Iowa 100% competitive.

Arizona & Georgia will probably be competitive in 2024, maybe 2020. But if I was the Democrat, I would try & lock in states like Florida, Michigan, PA rather than wasting resources on a state which may be like PA was for the GOP all these years. Dems would focus on locking down all of the Obama 2012 states.

If your post was only about Republicans conceding CO, VA and NV, then why the hell didn't you say so. You post implied both sides would contract to truly competitive territory.

It stands to reason that Iowa would come off the list in favor of GA and AZ. Both of which were closer, both of which are much more diverse and both of which have more electoral votes.

Of course it depends on who the nominee is, but if you go from winning the PV by 2%, to winning by 6% or 7%, just using a uniform swing means that AZ and GA flips while Trump still wins both OH and Iowa by 2% and 3% respectively.

If you don't apply a uniform swing then you have to figure that swings are larger with college educated whites and minorities (as well as minority turnout being higher), and smaller with non-college whites, then the situation becomes even more the case.

Consider also that GA now has automatic "opt-out" registration, 3 years means 3 more years of out of state Dems moving in, and 3 more years of the state getting that much more diverse. I think the "It's Happening GIF" will be needed four years sooner, especially if Harris is the nominee, or one of the New Yorkers or one of the Virginians.

Uniform Swing? If that was the case, Texas wouldn't have been to the left of Iowa & Ohio.

The swing is never uniform. It is pretty basic. Iowa & Ohio IMO will be swing states which will be competitive, which may start out as Lean R but if Trump loses by 6-7%, I can see him losing both these states.

If the Dem nominee does 4-5% better than Clinton, then a disproportionate amount of those swing states would come from the Swing States. Trump would roughly hold his margins in the Confederate non-swing states & there is very little one can do to improve upon Clinton's number in CA. As I said, Georgia, may or may not be a swing state. It may turn out like NC did for Democrats in 2016. Maybe Dems will lose it by 1-2% instead of 5%. The point is no-one knows. GA has 0 Democratic Senators & doesn't have a Dem Gov. as well.

If I was the Dem Nominee, I would try & lock all Obama 2012 states. And I would prefer Arizona over Georgia because Hispanic population is young & young Hispanics are progressive (even though Southern Hispanics are more conservative than Northern ones). There is a substantial College population & Phoenix is a big city. If Democrats can get high youth & Hispanic turnout, coupled with demographic trends & millennials replacing boomers, AZ could turn blue.

But in the end, I would prioritize the Obama 2012 states. Trump has no path without MI/WI/PA. He has to win atleast 1 of them.

[DabbingSanta]

I think he can get away with losing Michigan but if Trump loses Wisconsin and Pennsylvania he loses the election.

Yes, if Trump wins in 2020 it will probably be without Michigan.

[Sir Mohamed]

For Trump? NOTA. The Rust Belt was always his only path to 270 EVs. CO could be an option for another Republican, but Trump is a bad fit for the state. If Trump picks up ME-all and NH, I don't see him losing WI (at least, not alone PA).