States candidates will win no matter what

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Assuming this 'all states that are safe D/R' rather than all states which a hypothetical D/R candidate could have made somewhat competitive (i.e. D/R ceilings at the federal level), I find that map a bit too assuming.

I'd exclude ME-02 (Biden polled ahead here in the one survey we had of the district), in addition to OH where Biden has also polled ahead and IA because he's at least been within MoE (he's not polled ahead since last year, but it's a pretty volatile state - I expect a lopsided Trump win, but can't completely rule out Biden yet).

I'd also exclude RI (which seems to get overlooked a lot on here) because it had an extremely strong R trend last time and there's at least some chance that continues, though it doing so all that much would make ME-02 a lock for Trump. Without surveys indicating it's a lost cause, NM can't be counted out in the most lopsided of realistic Trump victories. A path may exist if Biden fails to mobilise Democratic-leaning Hispanic voters and if the RNC successfully attempts to expand Trump's appeal to social, non-cultural conservatives. There's a decent Libertarian base to pitch to here if public opinion turns sharply against lockdown, which it might do well after the fact.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Iowa is not gonna vote right of Texas. Don't be stupid.

It's utterly moronic that people think an R-trending state that voted to the right of a D-trending state in 2016 could do so again in 2020.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I'd also exclude RI because it had an extremely strong R trend last time and there's at least some chance that continues, though it doing so all that much would make ME-02 a lock for Trump. Without surveys indicating it's a lost cause, NM can't be counted out in the most lopsided of realistic Trump victories. A path may exist if Biden fails to mobilise Democratic-leaning Hispanic voters and if the RNC successfully attempts to expand Trump's appeal to social, non-cultural conservatives. There's a decent Libertarian base to pitch to here if public opinion turns sharply against lockdown, which it might do well after the fact.

Trump still got under 40% in Rhode Island, only 3 points better than Romney. The reason for the swing is that Hillary did 8 points worse than Obama -- the remaining 5 percent is due to the unusually strong third party presence that year that will not be replicated this year. Rhode Island is absolutely safe D. The idea that it isn't is one of the dumbest things you ever see said here. A New England state consisting of mostly well-educated AND urban/suburban voters? It's not gonna vote for Trump under any circumstances. Better chance Joe gets over 60% again.

New England doesn't always follow suburban/rural patterns elsewhere, and I don't think it's so ridiculous to entertain the possibility that an unexpectedly strong trend in RI couldn't be repeated in 2020 (I think the state's likely D and almost safe, but not necessarily unflippable thanks to this possibility). Doing only 3.7% better than Romney here is not bad considering that he did about 1.1% worse than Romney nationally. Overall, the D->R trend was stronger in RI than it was in ME, so I'm just not willing to count it out.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Darker colouring indicates states are states that would have been safe with any matchup or different but realistic environment in 2020. MA depends on the Republican nominee being Charlie Baker.

Edit: UT also belongs in the 'safe, but not titanium' category, but only in the event of a strong third-party challenge that disproportionately hurts Republicans there.