TX, meanwhile, is much closer to CA when it comes to makeup, not FL. Texas is mostly an urbanized state, with only 19% of its pop. living in designated rural areas. The Rs win in TX thanks to weak D margins in the Urban areas, and their stranglehold on the suburbs.
This is rather similar to CA back in the 1980s and 1990s, with the area of San Francisco being comparable to Austin(a Liberal Stronghold, but not powerful enough to exercise enough influence), and LA with Houston(a tossup area thats rapid D trend causes the state to flip). Not to mention the fact that the Hispanics in TX arent Cubans, or Venezuelans, or other Hispanic groups with a famed hatred of left wing practices, but Mexican Americans, and Central Americans, the most pro-D Hispanics in the US. It also should be noted that the areas exploding in population are the urban areas and its close suburbs, the areas trending rapidly D.
If TX flips, IMO, and we are still in the same party system as today, it goes the way of CA, not FL.
You make good points, but also:
** TX is much more religious than in CA ever was, particularly in rural areas but also in cities.
** Many more Hispanics in TX have deep roots in the state and are therefore more likely to be moderate or conservative. GWB did well with them, for instance.
** The major industries attracting people to TX are not as left-wing as those in CA.
** TX also attracts people who value low taxes.
