Talk Elections

How many electoral votes do you see each state having in 2050? (assuming the number of seats doesn't change)



My guesstimate would be this:
()

Is this post-2050?  If so, Florida would likely have 34-35 seats, assuming the state's population growth rates remain constant.

Don't buy CA losing seats - how exactly does this happen? If it is drought then why are the more vulnerable Colorado Rover states boom? I don't buy a lack of growth, CA has never stopped growing - the entire state isn't the high priced bay area. The only way I think CA can lose 5 districts in 3 cycles (CA is keeping all 53 in 2020, and earlier in the cycle was on track for 54) is a nuclear strile from NK, which isn't the best thing for these maps.

Similarly, Florida only haiming 3 seats isn't possible. Projections put it ar a gain of 2 this cycle, which means Florida only gains 1 seat in3 cycles. No.

Arizona gains 7, when they are currently gaining 1ish a cycle. Perhaps more growth could change that.

Utah gains 3??? Utah currently will only gain 1 in 2030. How does it gain two more? Does lighting growth occur in SLC? If so, then why is the state still safe R?

NY losing 7. Huh? NY is currently losing one a cycle, putting the state at a minimum of 25 EVs in 2050. The other thing about NY though is NYC and tge suburbs are still growing, upstate is just shrinking to fast for that growth to matter. Eventually this soft floor of NYC growth will prevent the state from losing a seat some cycles, but this may not happen by 2020.

CA has high levels of emigration already, so it is not at all unlikely to say that it could lose seats.

these electoral vote numbers in your estimate map seen disastrous for Democrats.

I get Arizona and Georgia turning to Lean D and Texas becoming a swing state again, but I've seen more than one person show Connecticut and sometimes Rhode Island becoming Republican again by about 2044 on average. Why is this?

Earthquake. Its bound to happen in the next 40years

The GOP likely moderates on social issues.  Examples: moderately pro-life on abortion, but doesn't take an "Every sperm is sacred" approach; gives up on opposing LGBT rights; supports weed legalization, etc.  The Northeast is secularizing at a rapid rate, and I could see Christians being a minority in New England by the 2050s.  The GOP would HAVE to adapt to such a demographic reality by that point.

Economically, they support policies that don't hurt white-collar suburban voters and have a more fiscally disciplined policy.

Their foreign policy would likely be somewhere in the middle between Ron Paul and Bill Kristol.

Yet people keep moving to the low-lying places that get routinely slammed by hurricanes? Earthquakes aren't that bad, CA is built for them, and the last ones didn't slow down growth. If anything, I see California's zoning getting liberalized, bringing statewide housing prices closer to the $200,000s, and further encouraging population growth. Conversely, I don't see long term growth in NC/GA/etc. At the end of the day, sprawly office parks with lowish wages can be anywhere.

Florida's just eternally damned to swing state status, isn't it?

why is MS a swing state and IL republican?

Florida will be underwater by then

Depends where it’s centrred and how strong. For example a 7.5+ along the San Andreas near San Fran, San Jose, or LA would make Katrina and Harvey look like a summer rain storm. But yeah Cali is better primed than more at risk areas like Memphis in the New Madrid zone or Seattle which is sandwiched between a cascadia mega quake and Mt. Ranier sending lahars down into the city

Agree. I see us as a Likely D, Virginia-sized state with a whole lot of single-issue-climate-change-policy voters, maybe Louisiana is like this too (just with a much smaller total population), and to a lesser degree NC and VA

2048: ()

2048 margins: ()

why this map?

Why would Massachusetts and Virginia be republican but not North Carolina and Maine?

What causes this realignment?

Moderate PA republican vs Huey Long esque democrat from the south.

So wouldn’t North Carolina be republican?

NC is close, but climate change voters swing it D (by only two points)

I would have thought the entire South would be Democratic in this scenario.

It's impossible to say whether the map will favor Democrats or Republicans that far in the future, but unless states like TX,FL, & OH (and a few others) start trending in the Democrats' favor in the next 10-20 years the Democrats could find that they have a disadvantage in the electoral college. It is within the plausible realm of possibility that FL could be a key swing state unless it moves more and more into the Democratic column. I don't know, but the map has definitely been moving in the GOP direction for the past 50 years or so.

Since (after) 1976 the Democrats have been losing the confederate states which now make up a large portion of the GOP base and the odds that a Democrat will ever lose the popular vote and win the electoral college are getting slimmer and slimmer and the possibility of the reverse is either getting more likely or remaining the same.

By 2032, the Democrats will have a hard time creating a firewall, since the current map is shifting toward a GOP advantage, unless states like FL or OH start trending more Democratic.

I could see a dystopian scenario where the Gulf Coast states are all near unanimous D with half their current EV due to single issue climate change voters, but 2050 is way too soon for that.  I could see it in 2100, though. 

When it comes to New England, I think there could be a big divergence of trends between CT and MA and the other states.  Dem improvement with white college+ voters should be able to completely lock down CT and MA even if working class whites in New England start voting like they do in Appalachia (which is not remotely impossible). 

Also, I wouldn't rule out Texas crossing California for 1st place in population by the 2050 census, though it probably won't happen until 2060-2070.

The northeast and midwest will have a population boom due to residents of southwest fleeing the effects of climate change

Atlanta flipped GA, and the republican vice president elect was a sitting senator from Tennessee (who still barely carried his own home state, and managed to outrun the top of ticket by something like 7 points.

I assume CA was a swing state that barely went for the Dem in this scenario?

Yes.

Same with the Pacific NW

2050 electoral vote predictions with 2016 colors/shadings

()

Interesting map...