2020 Trend Map?

[Skill and Chance]

Here's my idea:

Premise: Dems take back the House and more or less maintain the status quo in the Senate in 2018 running on a populist anti-Ryan/McConnell message.  McConnell is ousted as majority leader for someone ideologically closer to Trump.  Trump moves quickly to the center and starts making deals with the Democratic House on infrastructure, health care, etc.  Several of these deals pass the Senate with Republicans using Manchin, Heitkamp, etc. to go around Cruz, Paul and other hardliners.  The next Trump SCOTUS appointment is notably more moderate than Gorsuch.

Trump surges further with the white working class and makes gains with working class minorities while cratering with libertarians and the Chamber of Commerce crowd.  Religious right base turnout falls, however, Democratic base turnout on the coasts is also down.   

[wxtransit]

What would the PV and the Electoral College be?

And also, who would be the Democratic nominee?

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

They should all be some shade of red.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

They should all be some shade of red.

thats not how trends work lol.

[PoliticalJunkie23]

They should all be some shade of red.

I always go to you for unbiased and accurate political analysis.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

This is my trend map prediction.

Trend maps usually look like some form of a garbled mess.

[The Undefeatable Debbie Stabenow]

I know it's a bit of a cop-out, but I left about a third of the states grey as "insignificant", meaning a trend of less than, maybe, 2%. I'm predicting a Democratic PV win of about 6%.

CA/MD/MA are essentially maxed out for the Democrats, meaning they trend right as they stay at about the same margins of victory for the Democratic candidate. All Plains states except KS trend right, as Trump seems more popular in this region than anywhere else but the GOP's disastrous economic failures in KS (as well as their more educated populace) is enough for KS to trend to the left slightly. IL/NY seem to be trending to the right overall and I don't see any Democratic candidate exceeding Clinton's margins by very much, so I put those two as trending to the right in 2020. I think traditionally Democratic Southern states like KY/TN/AL may have hit their ceiling in 2016 and will begin to revert back towards the Democrats, while I think WY/ND may have also hit their ceilings but are less likely to trend to the left.

[OneJ]

They should all be some shade of red.

That's impossible because trends don't work like that. Lmao.

[Blackacre]

Pretty sure WV trends D, I think Trump's maxed out in that state. Meanwhile, CA, HI, and MA trend R

[cvparty]

This is my trend map prediction.

Trend maps usually look like some form of a garbled mess.

It makes sense. Places where Clinton or Trump did abnormally well are the places to look for a trend back to normal. I thing the north in general is gonna trend D as the reapity that Trump wasn't the answer to the WWC's problems sink in, while CA and MD and MA are closed to maxed out (I guess they could still swing left again, but I'm about 99% sure they'll trend right)

not all trends are blips where everything will go back to the previous status quo...in fact many signal a long-term trend

[Blackacre]

This seems like as good a guess as any.

[TheSaint250]

This seems like as good a guess as any.

How'd you make that?

[Blackacre]

This seems like as good a guess as any.

How'd you make that?

I have a mac, so I use paintbucket, though MS Paint would likely work just as well. For the color key I used swing and trend maps from previous elections on the atlas, though I think the atlas master key exists somewhere.

[Greedo punched first]

Pretty sure WV trends D, I think Trump's maxed out in that state. Meanwhile, CA, HI, and MA trend R

I think CA still trends D and WV trends R. I don't see any end to that in sight, especially because Trump's so popular in WV and very unpopular in CA.

[JA]

I base this map on my post here.

[AGA]

They should all be some shade of red.

That's impossible because trends don't work like that. Lmao.

It technically is possible if there is a massive shift in turnout towards Republican states, but all states are more Democratic. Not practical at all, though.

[twenty42]

A huge swing in the PV would probably result in a number of states trending the opposite way, just because of the way trends work. Just like in 2008 when there was a 10-point D swing in the PV but 24 states trended R.

Trends can be counterintuitive, and you don’t technically need to “max out” in a state for it to trend the opposite way either. If Trump improves in WV by 2% but improves in the NPV by 3%, it would still be a D trend. Just like how 2012 NC trended D even though the state flipped from D to R.

[AN63093]

Trend maps usually look like some form of a garbled mess.

This.

I get where you're going with this S&C, but your map just looks a little too.... I dunno... "neat" to be realistic.


This far out, I can't really make any trend predictions, since it's way too early to even have an educated guess about where the national PV will be.  But I will re-post my current swing map:

Explanations:

MI- dark red to denote that I think this state will not only swing D, but flip.

CA- Dems close to maxing out, so all it needs is a little bit of Trump-outrage fatigue.  If it doesn't happen this cycle and the Dems win 2020, then it's a near lock for a 2024 R swing.

AZ- it had the highest D swing last time, after UT, CA, and TX.  I do think this is a state that's trending D long term, but I think it got out a little bit over its skis, so we might see a "course correction" for one cycle.  Won't be very much, maybe 1% or so.

WV- GOP is getting close to maxed out in this state.  WV trended R 7 times in row, which is absurd.  At some point there will be a dead cat bounce, even if its less than 1%.  This is assuming the Dems run a certain candidate though; e.g., if the Dems run Harris, it's not gonna swing D.

OK- shaded green, because I just don't know what to do with this state.  This is another one I think the GOP is close to maxed out on, but on the other hand, OK swung R even in 2008 (one of only 5 states to do so), and the margin there is pretty consistently in the low 30s.  I guess I could see a small D swing, but not as confident in the others.

This map is assuming Harris isn't the nominee.

[cvparty]

They should all be some shade of red.

That's impossible because trends don't work like that. Lmao.

It technically is possible if there is a massive shift in turnout towards Republican states, but all states are more Democratic. Not practical at all, though.

correct me if I'm wrong but um isn't it impossible for every state to become more democratic relative to the country at large?

[AN63093]

If we're talking about swing, it's certainly possible.  In '92, every state swung D except IA.  In '80, every state swung R but VT.  In '72, every state swung R except SD.  In '32, every single state swung D.  I'm sure there are many other examples I'm missing.

I think pittsburghsteel was talking about swing, even if he didn't realize it.

Now in terms of trend, that's a much more difficult (and perhaps, interesting) question.  It may mathematically be possible, but I'm not sure.  For '20, it would require a scenario where GOP turnout went way, way up (perhaps Trump even winning the PV), but it would have to be concentrated in such a way that a minimum of states are affected and so the votes are wasted.  So for example, if like millions of Republicans popped out of nowhere in NYC and voted Trump (or if millions of Dems in NYC all decided to flip to Trump for some reason), such that the national PV moved R, but no other state was affected (or swung D).

Even then though, you'd have a minimum of one state trending R, NY in this case.  I don't know if it's possible with zero states.

[Blackacre]

I base this map on my post here.

Only criticism of your map is that there's too many states shaded in a dark color, that would (by the atlas key) indicate a 15 or 20 point swing relative to the NPV. I don't see that happening.

Also, trends tend to be lessened when it's an incumbent running for re-election rather than two completely new candidates.