Why do people think WA/OR will trend Republican?

[Xing]

Both states have trended significantly Democratic since 2000, and population changes in these states definitely don't favor Republicans. Our Oregon posters could give more detail on Oregon, but in Washington, the Seattle area is one of the fastest growing regions in the country, and it's not getting any less liberal. The Seattle suburbs, which were once a swing region, have also become increasingly Democratic. In fact, the parts of Washington where Trump made massive gains (Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Pacific, etc.) are either growing much more slowly than the rest of the state or even losing population. If anything, Washington is headed the same way as California, and is much more likely to continue to trend Democratic than trend Republican.

Are people just saying that these states will eventually vote Republican because "muh trend R whites"? White voters in Washington (especially Seattle) don't vote the same way as they do in Ohio, and anyone who lives here can back me up on that.

[Person Man]

Basically they eventually see the end of the Southern Strategy after Trump.

[Keep cool-idge]

Okay I live in Vancouver Washington and Portland is 10 miles from me
There is no way Washington or Oregon go republican anytime soon
Portland is gaining 100 people a week and the past 2 years I have started seeing tons of out of state cars
Most common being California,Massachusetts,Colorado,Texas,Minnesota
Even so Portland is mostly white newbies there from the states I listed
Now if Portland were gone Then Oregon would have voted trump by 5,000 votes
While Washington would vote Hillary by 22,000

[maga2020]

I agree, Trump started the midwestern strategy, which will bring midwestern whites to vote for the GOP by the same margins southern whites do, not the western strategy.

In Washington/Oregon, this will happen only after liberal overreach turns the PNW into another rust belt and they see the socialist "paradises" of Seattle and Portland morphing into new versions of Crimecago, Deathtroit and Theiveland.

California will be free from it because that will basically become Northern Mexico in a decade.

[libertpaulian]

I agree, Trump started the midwestern strategy, which will bring midwestern whites to vote for the GOP by the same margins southern whites do, not the western strategy.

In Washington/Oregon, this will happen only after liberal overreach turns the PNW into another rust belt and they see the socialist "paradises" of Seattle and Portland morphing into new versions of Crimecago, Deathtroit and Theiveland.

California will be free from it because that will basically become Northern Mexico in a decade.

The PNW also happens to be very white and Asian.  Maybe if the GOP can figure out how to moderate, and win back the Western vote and Asian vote, it can win WA and OR.

[Keep cool-idge]

I agree, Trump started the midwestern strategy, which will bring midwestern whites to vote for the GOP by the same margins southern whites do, not the western strategy.

In Washington/Oregon, this will happen only after liberal overreach turns the PNW into another rust belt and they see the socialist "paradises" of Seattle and Portland morphing into new versions of Crimecago, Deathtroit and Theiveland.

California will be free from it because that will basically become Northern Mexico in a decade.

The PNW also happens to be very white and Asian.  Maybe if the GOP can figure out how to moderate, and win back the Western vote and Asian vote, it can win WA and OR.

Portland is one of the biggest and liberal city's in America it will take a lot to flip oregon the GOP has milked southern Oregon as much as possible eastern Oregon same the only place the GOP can improve is the north west coast had a Yuge swing to trump.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Easy when the GOP switches to a Suburban strategy they will be competitive in the PNW . Winning Beaverton,Hillsboro is much more important to winning the state then Portland

[Keep cool-idge]

Easy when the GOP switches to a Suburban strategy they will be competitive in the PNW . Winning Beaverton,Hillsboro is much more important to winning the state then Portland

The only way the republicans win Oregon is to increase numbers in Salem and bend and flip Clackamas county, republicans are not going to flip Washington county it's gone the way of fair fax county or Dallas county or Delaware county Pennsylvania.

[This is Eharding, guys]

OR will trend slightly Republican due to there being many non-college educated White Democrats in the state. WA will not trend Republican at all, for the reasons mentioned.

[TheSaint250]

I highly doubt they will. I never got it either.

The only way I see them trending that way is if Republicans pursue a moderate social issues path (with conservative economics) with attention on winning over minority voters. At the same time, the Democrats would pursue a Midwest and plain states strategy based on Bernie-style populism.

And even that's a stretch.

[Keep cool-idge]

Why would white Christians go democrat if roe v wade is overturned and the ne got republican?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Easy when the GOP switches to a Suburban strategy they will be competitive in the PNW . Winning Beaverton,Hillsboro is much more important to winning the state then Portland

The only way the republicans win Oregon is to increase numbers in Salem and bend and flip Clackamas county, republicans are not going to flip Washington county it's gone the way of fair fax county or Dallas county or Delaware county Pennsylvania.

There's another way to win Oregon ,win nationally by 9-11 points .

[hopper]

I agree, Trump started the midwestern strategy, which will bring midwestern whites to vote for the GOP by the same margins southern whites do, not the western strategy.

In Washington/Oregon, this will happen only after liberal overreach turns the PNW into another rust belt and they see the socialist "paradises" of Seattle and Portland morphing into new versions of Crimecago, Deathtroit and Theiveland.

California will be free from it because that will basically become Northern Mexico in a decade.

I just don't see Midwestern Whites voting like Southern Whites ever. I could be wrong though.

[Keep cool-idge]

Easy when the GOP switches to a Suburban strategy they will be competitive in the PNW . Winning Beaverton,Hillsboro is much more important to winning the state then Portland

The only way the republicans win Oregon is to increase numbers in Salem and bend and flip Clackamas county, republicans are not going to flip Washington county it's gone the way of fair fax county or Dallas county or Delaware county Pennsylvania.

There's another way to win Oregon ,win nationally by 9-11 points .

Well in that case they also win all the states decided by 10% or less plus CT DE NJ ME1 and maybe WA and IL

[Xing]

Easy when the GOP switches to a Suburban strategy they will be competitive in the PNW . Winning Beaverton,Hillsboro is much more important to winning the state then Portland

The only way the republicans win Oregon is to increase numbers in Salem and bend and flip Clackamas county, republicans are not going to flip Washington county it's gone the way of fair fax county or Dallas county or Delaware county Pennsylvania.

There's another way to win Oregon ,win nationally by 9-11 points .

And where is the evidence that Republicans can do that easily? Even if they were to suddenly win the popular vote by such a wide margin, that wouldn't suggest that Oregon is trending Republican, just that it might barely fall in a 1980-style landslide.

Anyway, even if there is a "realignment", the only scenario in which WA/OR would become more competitive would be if the Republican Party became as liberal or more liberal than the Democratic Party. I don't think Trump is really causing that to happen.

[Xing]

Anyway, even if there is a "realignment", the only scenario in which WA/OR would become more competitive would be if the Republican Party became as liberal or more liberal than the Democratic Party. I don't think Trump is really causing that to happen.

I don't think so. They vote for the Democratic Party largely on cultural issues. Pre-culture wars (before 1992 when the GOP embraced folks like Buchanan) they were much more likely to vote Republican than they are today.

Hillary Clinton won the highest recorded age bracket in both of these states (100k-200k) by over 20 percentage points. A Sandersized Democratic Party vs. GOP that's not reliant on the southern strategy and that has embraced climate change (Florida is too valuable to lose) will almost certainly make inroads with these voters and cause these states to shift closer into swing state status.

Sanders is actually a much better fit for WA/OR than Clinton was, and he wouldn't have lost some of the Obama voters in places like Tillamook and Cowlitz. It's not just the "culture wars", it's population growth and change. Seattle was a very different city in the early 90s, and places like Bellevue were actually somewhat Republican-leaning. As Seattle has become much more of a tech hub and grown in size, Democrats have gone from winning 2:1 to regularly getting over 80% of the vote. Republicans will not be able to make inroads with even more affluent voters here (except the ones who already vote Republican) unless they become much more socially liberal. Seattle is a fundamentally liberal/progressive city, and as long as Republicans struggle to crack 15% here, they have no chance in a national race in Washington.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I agree, Trump started the midwestern strategy, which will bring midwestern whites to vote for the GOP by the same margins southern whites do, not the western strategy.

In Washington/Oregon, this will happen only after liberal overreach turns the PNW into another rust belt and they see the socialist "paradises" of Seattle and Portland morphing into new versions of Crimecago, Deathtroit and Theiveland.

California will be free from it because that will basically become Northern Mexico in a decade.

Seattle's economy is expanding so rapidly that labor economists (by accident) found that the minimum wage increase drastically reduced the number of "low wage" working hours because the number of jobs that pay above 19 dollars an hour has increased a break-neck pace. It's attracting migration from all across the country and around the world for obvious reasons - Amazon is located in Seattle, Microsoft is located within the metro area etc. Because Amazon is a retailer, it offers services that are non-tradeable so there's little reason to believe that it's function as a distributor will be rendered obsolete anytime soon or that significant outsourcing will occur etc. In otherwords, Seattle's future is one in which it will almost certainly be a Great American City.

Everything written about Seattle could be said about the Bay Area.

There are gross inequities that have been generated by the innovation that has taken place on the West Coast but it's rather clear/obvious that this innovation has taken place due to immigration (Elon Musk is an immigrant), the financing of world-class public universities and labor law that protects employees such that "non-compete" contracts are outlawed, allowing workers to seamlessly flow between firms, allowing for spillovers.

As far as your racist anti-Mexican sentiment is concerned, you are aware that immigrants come to the US because wages are much higher here, right? If convergence is taking place - and it has - immigration will cease - and it has. The convergence has occurred because northern Mexico has become wealthier as it is a center of both light and advanced manufacturing so the movement of industry to Mexico and the creation of supply chains between the US and Mexico has reduced immigration. This shows that everything spoken about and written about by your leader is a bald-faced lie. He is a con-artist.

[maga2020]

Immigration is a long term winner for the left if they bring enough people to vote for them and keep the borders open, right now, the swing voter prefers the GOP's opposition to facilitate it because it sees that the most recent immigrants are not up to assimilate as much as the previous ones.

Mexico is the main source of immigration right now, americans don't have a problem with mexicans but Mexico is also a very populous country and that means tons of immigrants flooding America, including some of the worst types of people like criminals, rapists, drug dealers, because Mexico is no paradise, in fact, it's a country plagued by drug cartels and violence between them. But overall, Americans care more about the number of mexicans getting in than the fact that they are mexicans, that's why we need the wall, who is more opposed than supported because "muh human rights" but once it gets built, tearing it down will be much more unpopular because it will signal support for open borders and the reduction in illegal immigration the wall will produce, just like it happened in Hungary with the "refugees" will speak for itself and turn the wall into something popular.

If the source of immigration shifts to the Middle East, then opposition will only increase, Americans will never believe most of them can assimilate when people from that region threw two airplanes into one of the most famous buildings in NYC, and they see the horrors of open border policy for "refugees" in Europe and the increasing threat of radical islamic terrorism. They want vetting, even if they don't want an outright ban, when the temporary nature of the travel ban is mentioned in polls, support for it increases, it's clear that Americans want a very restricted quota of people coming from terrorist-plagued areas and "refugees" are not very welcome.

[NOVA Green]

Anyway, even if there is a "realignment", the only scenario in which WA/OR would become more competitive would be if the Republican Party became as liberal or more liberal than the Democratic Party. I don't think Trump is really causing that to happen.

I don't think so. They vote for the Democratic Party largely on cultural issues. Pre-culture wars (before 1992 when the GOP embraced folks like Buchanan) they were much more likely to vote Republican than they are today.

Hillary Clinton won the highest recorded age bracket in both of these states (100k-200k) by over 20 percentage points. A Sandersized Democratic Party vs. GOP that's not reliant on the southern strategy and that has embraced climate change (Florida is too valuable to lose) will almost certainly make inroads with these voters and cause these states to shift closer into swing state status.

Sanders is actually a much better fit for WA/OR than Clinton was, and he wouldn't have lost some of the Obama voters in places like Tillamook and Cowlitz. It's not just the "culture wars", it's population growth and change. Seattle was a very different city in the early 90s, and places like Bellevue were actually somewhat Republican-leaning. As Seattle has become much more of a tech hub and grown in size, Democrats have gone from winning 2:1 to regularly getting over 80% of the vote. Republicans will not be able to make inroads with even more affluent voters here (except the ones who already vote Republican) unless they become much more socially liberal. Seattle is a fundamentally liberal/progressive city, and as long as Republicans struggle to crack 15% here, they have no chance in a national race in Washington.

Two things,

1. I'm not denying that Sanders platform plays well in these states in the short run, but these kind of voters will be the first to shift in a progressive realignment when it's their pocket books that are affected from higher taxes. Places like Arizona and New Mexico are not gonna retaliate against the Democrats in the same manner given that their support in those states reside primarily in working class populations. So yes, a Sanders Democratic Party will play well here...in the short run.

2. A leftward shift on cultural issues (actually an abandonment of a lot of it) is gonna characterize the GOP these next couple decades whether they like it or not. The cultural wars is a very baby boomer-specific phenomena. The GI generation did not give birth to the religious right or the New Left, and millennials are not at all interested in re-hashing their parents culture wars. When baby boomers (the children of the consciousness revolution and those who ushered in the rise of the New Left and the religious Right) start passing away then they'll have to appeal more and more to Xers, millennials, and Gen Z than they do now. This will fundamentally shift the tone of both political parties moving forward.

While I am hesitant to predict trending, considering the unknowns regarding policy and electoral coalition shifts between the two major political parties and how that will play out at a national level over the next decade or so, especially considering the unknowns of the lasting longevity of "Trumpism" within the Republican Party (Economically protectionist, rhetorically isolationist, and anti-immigrant to the point of accentuating racist themes and stereotypes) and the emergent progressive economic populist wing of the Democratic Party (Sanders style "Modern New Deal" type proposals), I am skeptical that the PNW will trend Republican in the near future for multiple reasons...

I'll leave my focus on Oregon, which arguably would be riper for a "Republican Trend" than Washington State, although many similarities apply.

1.) What Xingkerui said regarding Metro Seattle applies to Metro Portland. Trump only received 13% of the Vote in Portland, way down from the 23% that George W. received in 2004. It's also important to note that HRCs numbers stayed constant, even with almost 10% of the voters defecting to the Left!!!!

2.) It is true that there were some significant swings between '12 and '16 among upper-income precincts and communities in Metro-Portland, as I have detailed elsewhere, that might well swing back to a "normal" style of 'Pub Presidential nominee. These swings likely offset some of the swings towards Trump in parts of rural and downstate Oregon.

3.) What is often missing from discussion regarding Oregon, is the reality that in many ways it is still a relatively blue-collar and working-class state, compared to Washington and California. Regardless of the various stereotypes from Portlandia, this is also the case in Metro-Portland. There was virtually no gain in Republican % numbers in most WWC parts of Metro-PDX The main reason for the swings in some of these communities was a drop-off of Democratic Party support towards 3rd Party Candidates...

4.) This pattern also exists in most of the larger population centers of the State in WWC precincts and neighborhoods from Salem-Keizer, to Albany, to West Eugene, Springfield, etc...

5.) The WWC voters in the larger population centers rejected McCain/Romney/Trump. Why would that change with a new Republican candidate of any stripe?

6.) As others have noted the 'Pub vote is virtually maxed out in most of Eastern and Southern Oregon, and the population that is replacing the older voters doesn't have the same affinity for the Republican Party as their Grandparents. Even in Republican strongholds such as Malheur and Umatilla County, the share of the Latino population has been growing significantly, and many will start reaching voting age over the next decade.

7.) The same demographic pattern exists in the Mid-Willamette Valley (Yamhill/Polk/Marion Counties). These counties are at the core of the Republican base in the 5th Congressional District.

8.) Even if we look at some of the key areas where there were significant swings towards Trump, which includes many rural areas and Mill towns throughout Southern and Western Oregon, where Trump exceeded 'Pub margins over the past 20 years in many places, you're still looking at a large number of voters that supported Obama in '08/'12 and voted Merkley/Wyden in '14/'16. Kind of a risky proposition to assume that these voters will stay 'Pub in 2020, let along through the 2030s....

9.) So the theory that if the Pubs shift towards more moderate stances on social issues to win the Portland 'Burbs seems a bit bunk on the surface.... I mean the Oregon Republican Party has been running Moderate candidates in many races for a few decades now, and places like Washington County keep slipping further and further away from their grasp. If Republicans can't even win Statewide races running Moderate candidates and playing local politics, why would be expect that this strategy would work at this point in Oregon with a National candidate?

10.) Sure, could Oregon trend Republican in the near future? Well, it would require the national popular vote to shift significantly towards the Democratic Party, considering the both Romney and Trump lost Oregon by basically the same margins with very different messaging and themes. Even if the US Popular vote shifts Democrat in 2020/2024/2028, it's difficult to see how they keep their '12 or '16 coalition without losing the other leg of their coalition, which in Oregon would amount to essentially a debit/credit on their raw vote totals.

[GlobeSoc]

I agree, Trump started the midwestern strategy, which will bring midwestern whites to vote for the GOP by the same margins southern whites do, not the western strategy.

In Washington/Oregon, this will happen only after liberal overreach turns the PNW into another rust belt and they see the socialist "paradises" of Seattle and Portland morphing into new versions of Crimecago, Deathtroit and Theiveland.

California will be free from it because that will basically become Northern Mexico in a decade.

Seattle's economy is expanding so rapidly that labor economists (by accident) found that the minimum wage increase drastically reduced the number of "low wage" working hours because the number of jobs that pay above 19 dollars an hour has increased a break-neck pace. It's attracting migration from all across the country and around the world for obvious reasons - Amazon is located in Seattle, Microsoft is located within the metro area etc. Because Amazon is a retailer, it offers services that are non-tradeable so there's little reason to believe that it's function as a distributor will be rendered obsolete anytime soon or that significant outsourcing will occur etc. In otherwords, Seattle's future is one in which it will almost certainly be a Great American City.

Everything written about Seattle could be said about the Bay Area.

There are gross inequities that have been generated by the innovation that has taken place on the West Coast but it's rather clear/obvious that this innovation has taken place due to immigration (Elon Musk is an immigrant), the financing of world-class public universities and labor law that protects employees such that "non-compete" contracts are outlawed, allowing workers to seamlessly flow between firms, allowing for spillovers.

As far as your racist anti-Mexican sentiment is concerned, you are aware that immigrants come to the US because wages are much higher here, right? If convergence is taking place - and it has - immigration will cease - and it has. The convergence has occurred because northern Mexico has become wealthier as it is a center of both light and advanced manufacturing so the movement of industry to Mexico and the creation of supply chains between the US and Mexico has reduced immigration. This shows that everything spoken about and written about by your mentally retarded leader is a bald-faced lie. He is a con-artist and you are a sucker.

Read a book, tool.

Thank you. He's a hack. Only Krazen is comparable. Actually, Krazen at least keeps his posts to a few words most of the time, so that's an insult to Krazen.

[Nyvin]

Immigration is a long term winner for the left if they bring enough people to vote for them and keep the borders open, right now, the swing voter prefers the GOP's opposition to facilitate it because it sees that the most recent immigrants are not up to assimilate as much as the previous ones.

Mexico is the main source of immigration right now, americans don't have a problem with mexicans but Mexico is also a very populous country and that means tons of immigrants flooding America, including some of the worst types of people like criminals, rapists, drug dealers, because Mexico is no paradise, in fact, it's a country plagued by drug cartels and violence between them. But overall, Americans care more about the number of mexicans getting in than the fact that they are mexicans, that's why we need the wall, who is more opposed than supported because "muh human rights" but once it gets built, tearing it down will be much more unpopular because it will signal support for open borders and the reduction in illegal immigration the wall will produce, just like it happened in Hungary with the "refugees" will speak for itself and turn the wall into something popular.

If the source of immigration shifts to the Middle East, then opposition will only increase, Americans will never believe most of them can assimilate when people from that region threw two airplanes into one of the most famous buildings in NYC, and they see the horrors of open border policy for "refugees" in Europe and the increasing threat of radical islamic terrorism. They want vetting, even if they don't want an outright ban, when the temporary nature of the travel ban is mentioned in polls, support for it increases, it's clear that Americans want a very restricted quota of people coming from terrorist-plagued areas and "refugees" are not very welcome.

You sound kinda nutty...or fanatical maybe.

Try to take a more balanced approach to things.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The only times since 1986 the GOP really had a chance to win the Oregon Governor elections were 1994 ,2002,2010 ( which were open elections) and 2014.

2014 was lost cause of the local media hiding Kitzhaber scandal until after he won and Richardson being way to far right socially

2010 was blown cause of the GOP nominating former NBA player Dudley who was a joke and you can argue the third party candidates also cost the GOP that year

In 2002 the GOP nominated an tough on crime candidate  , a type of candidate which doesnt really appeal to Oregon

1994 I dont know why gop did so bad

[politicallefty]

That's a good question. Both states trended to Hillary and Washington actually swung to Hillary. To be honest, I didn't study this topic too closely, but I do have some questions.

I'm not surprised that Hillary swung King County her way (basically, one-third of the state voted for Obama by about 40 points in 2012 and Hillary pushed that margin to nearly 50 points in 2016), but the Tri-Cities in Eastern Washington was quite surprising. For those from Washington, is that a result of the relatively high Latino population? For a Democrat that got crushed in rural America, Hillary seemed to do pretty well in Eastern Washington overall. In the Pacific NW, it was SW Washington and NW Oregon that swung hard to Trump.

[Keep cool-idge]

That's a good question. Both states trended to Hillary and Washington actually swung to Hillary. To be honest, I didn't study this topic too closely, but I do have some questions.

I'm not surprised that Hillary swung King County her way (basically, one-third of the state voted for Obama by about 40 points in 2012 and Hillary pushed that margin to nearly 50 points in 2016), but the Tri-Cities in Eastern Washington was quite surprising. For those from Washington, is that a result of the relatively high Latino population? For a Democrat that got crushed in rural America, Hillary seemed to do pretty well in Eastern Washington overall. In the Pacific NW, it was SW Washington and NW Oregon that swung hard to Trump.

Yes there are tons of Mexicans in eastern Washington and if turnout is high among Mexicans then eastern Washington will go democrat eventually
As for southwest Washington the key to the yuge swing was cowlitz county plus grays harbor and pacific counties which voted republican for the first time since 1928 and 1952
But the reason those places voted republican was union blue collar works

Update
So doing more research on these areas I mentioned from 1892-1928 it seems that grays harbor was dark red or blue on this site
Then the from 1932-1948 solidly democrat but from 1952-1960 it was a swing county then from 1964-2012 it was solidly democrat not even voting for Nixon or Reagan
But then trump came and just like the rust belt in the Great Lakes area these county's i listed are the rest belt of the west coast.

[RINO Tom]

It's annoying, but tbf the only people who think that are Atlas posters fantasizing about implausible "realignment" theories.

That you always seem to support.

I mostly agree with your theories and maps, but I'm not buying this strange idea that WA and OR will be voting to the right of OH, IA and PA in 20 years. I expect to see something like this:

Being generous to the GOP in TX and IL, though. Democrats will have the advantage in the EC but they'll be in big trouble in the Senate.

The only reason OR isn't Safe D is because I believe a Fairfax County-type Democratic Party (like that, RINO Tom? ) isn't the best fit for a state like Oregon, but it wouldn't be enough for the GOP to actually win the state (they'd constantly lose it by 5-7 points or so).

This would be a pretty decent map for a "Fairfax County-type Democratic Party" (I'm going to assume that I know what this implies, though I think the term is pretty meaningless, in reality); however, the Democratic Party has never been that type of party and literally can't ever be without losing its bulk of support.