States that you don't see going R or D in the next 2 decades? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 04:51:24 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  States that you don't see going R or D in the next 2 decades? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: States that you don't see going R or D in the next 2 decades?  (Read 1205 times)
Gracile
gracile
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,061


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -7.65

« on: March 07, 2020, 03:32:29 PM »

For the Presidency:

Not Going D: Wyoming, West Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio
Not Going R: California, New York, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Washington State


Illinois saw the largest population decline after New Jersey. The more people leave it, as is the case with the rest of the Rust Belt, the redder it gets. It won't go solid red, but it'll be a swing state. I expect it to go Republican at least once between 2036 and 2044 after peaking this year or 2024.

I'm going to have to disagree with you on IL, since much of the population loss has happened in conservative areas downstate while Chicagoland has held up fairly well over the last decade. It's hard to see Republicans winning Illinois in the near future unless they make major inroads with the kind of voters they've alienated in the most voter-rich corner of the state.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 8 queries.