Oh, not all trends favor Democrats. Missouri is no longer a pure tossup, and I'm skeptical of those who claim Texas is becoming competitive. The Dakotas, in addition, have always been Republican but are becoming more consistently partisan at a congressional level. Southwestern Pennsylvania has certainly trended against us--no way Obama will win Westmoreland except against Bachmann.
In addition, Democrats still do well in the region at a local level--look at the statehouse. Two of the three non-Pittsburgh districts still send Democrats to Congress, and Sestak, despite losing Fayette and Greene (along with the state), did better than Obama (who won by 11 points), and in a uniform swing to a Sestak win he would have won both.
Texas is interesting because there are multiple trends occurring at the same time. The major counties are shifting towards the Democrats (Harris, Dallas), but east Texas a former Dem strong hold has swung dramatically towards the GOP. West Texas has probably reached a ceiling for GOP support in the last few cycles with almost nothing to indicate small shift back is likely. Also Travis County has been shifting to the left.This is also all occurring against the back drop of two very important issues; increased Hispanic voting power (good for Dems) and increasing suburban population in DFW and Houston (good for GOP). So it is a very complicated picture to look at.
1996 vs. 2008 Presidential elections show a stark shift in the state. Clinton won more than two dozen west Texas Counties and did decently in East Texas. However he only won Travis with 52.6% and lost Dallas and Harris.
With all this going on it does make it difficult to track the state which is why I think the 2012 results will be very telling, especially if there is any major shift in either direction relative to national totals
