Which is bluer: MA or CA?

[DPKdebator]

Which state would you consider to be more (non-Atlas) blue: Massachusetts or California?

[Keep cool-idge]

Ca no doubt.
In Massachusetts we have the most popular governor in America.
In California the big battle is if we can even get a republican on the ballot.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

I'd actually go with Massachusetts, because it has a longer history as a solid blue state than California does.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

CA, but voted MA on accident.

[Landslide Lyndon]

California because it has much more POC who are the base of the party.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

The state that [likely] won't have a Republican gubernatorial/senate candidate in November

[Blue3]

Honestly, they have different "brands" of progressivism.

California is more SJW and environmentalist and newest social issues
Massachusetts is more healthcare and education/college and free press

[Famous Mortimer]

The answer is obviously the state that has more POC.

[Mike Thick]

Massachusetts is probably more liberal on the whole, but it’s also way more elastic. Going to go with California.

[King Lear]

California hands down, over here we don’t even let the republicans get on the senate and governor ballot.

[President Johnson]

California, especially because it is less elastic.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

CA

[RINO Tom]

Echoing what others have said, they seem to have different "brands" of liberalism, and it's kind of hard to answer because CA's GOP seems to be much more conservative than MA's, too.  However, it's hard to say that a state where Charlie Baker has become the most popular governor in America is inheritly more liberal than a state where Republicans can't even get a Senate nominee, regardless of the goofy process.

[Stranger in a strange land]

CA by far: the MA-GOP actually has a recent history of winning elections, which the CA-GOP... doesn't. Also, CA is a better fit for the Democrats' current coalition.

[SoLongAtlas]

CA is the answer. CA GOP is die-hard conservative, can no longer win statewide. MA GOP is moderate to liberal and can continue win statewide.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Right now, California.  Massachusetts has a popular GOP governor and put Scott Brown in the Senate; while California had a Republican as governor as late as 2010, he was so unpopular that he destroyed any chance the party had of remaining viable in the state.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

CA is the answer. CA GOP is die-hard conservative, can no longer win statewide. MA GOP is moderate to liberal and can continue win statewide.

The GOP in Massachusetts is just as conservative as any of them; the difference is that they were smart enough in 2014 to nominate a candidate who could actually win there (i.e. not a hard SoCon.)

[Sestak]

Are you guys all forgetting Ahnuld??

But MA's still not as blue - they'll have had GOP governors for 20 of the last 28 years by 2019.

[PragmaticPopulist]

CA has an ever-so slightly higher Dem PVI than MA, (D+12.51 vs D+11.68) plus it's less elastic than MA now.

[SoLongAtlas]

CA is the answer. CA GOP is die-hard conservative, can no longer win statewide. MA GOP is moderate to liberal and can continue win statewide.

The GOP in Massachusetts is just as conservative as any of them; the difference is that they were smart enough in 2014 to nominate a candidate who could actually win there (i.e. not a hard SoCon.)

Yes, but the Mass GOP is more moderate than most state GOP. It is the fact that they don't have a problem with moderation while most other state GOPs do that makes them successful.

[TDAS04]

California.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

As others have mentioned, California's less elastic, so that's my answer.

[ProudModerate2]

California and proud to be in this state.

[Mr. Smith]

California

CA is the answer. CA GOP is die-hard conservative, can no longer win statewide. MA GOP is moderate to liberal and can continue win statewide.

The GOP in Massachusetts is just as conservative as any of them; the difference is that they were smart enough in 2014 to nominate a candidate who could actually win there (i.e. not a hard SoCon.)

Neel Kashkari was no SoCon, and while it is true that trying to run against Jerry Brown would be as useful as a Democrat running against Bill Haslam in Tennessee or Gary Herbert in Utah or Dennis Daaugard in South Dakota or Matt Mead in Wyoming,....he would've lost badly even if Gavin Newsom were running.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Historically, Massachusetts.

Recently, California.