Why Republicans have an Electoral College problem

[Mehmentum]

Here are the PVI (statewide vote compared to national vote) trends from 2000 to 2012. Negative numbers represent Republican trends.  The color shows how states voted in 2000.

West Virginia: -23.82
Arkansas: -21.63
Tennessee: -19.92 (Gore home state)
Oklahoma: -15.04
Louisiana: -12.9
Missouri: -10.95
Kentucky: -10.95
Utah: -10.93 (Romney home state)
Alabama: -10.69
Massachusetts: -7.54 (Romney home state)
Arizona: -6.16
Rhode Island: -5.0
Kansas: -4.3
Wyoming: -4.14
Connecticut: -3.52 (Lieberman home state)
Florida: -2.49
Pennsylvania: -2.17
New Jersey: -1.42
New York: -0.18

The vast majority of Republican trending states since 2000 already voted Republican in 2000.  If you discount MA and CT due to home state bounces, then all you're really left with is Rhode Island (which is too strongly Democratic to be in play in the near future) and Pennsylvania.  As small a trend it is, Pennsylvania is the only Democratic state with really any promise.

Its actually even worse than that.  You'll notice that there are fewer Republican trending states than Democratic trending states.  This is because Republicans have 9 states trending 10 points or more toward them.  Democrats have 4 states trending that strongly to them.  ALL of those nine states were already solidly Republican in 2000, so gaining 10 to 20 points in those states are wasted votes as far as the electoral college is concerned.

Now look at the Democratic trending states:

Georgia: 0.49
Michigan: 0.99
South Dakota: 1.33
Illinois: 1.48 (Obama home state)
Minnesota: 1.91
Mississippi: 2.03
Indiana: 2.05
South Carolina: 2.08
Iowa: 2.12
Deleware: 2.19 (Biden home state)
Ohio: 3.11
Wisconsin: 3.34 (Ryan home state)
New Hampshire: 3.47
Nebraska: 3.84
D.C.: 4.05
Idaho: 4.24
North Dakota: 4.59
Texas: 5.15 (Bush home state)
Washington: 5.91
Maryland: 6.3
New Mexico: 6.71
Maine: 6.8
Nevada: 6.85
North Carolina: 7.41
California: 7.94
Montana: 8.04
Oregon: 8.27
Virginia: 8.54
Colorado: 10.34
Alaska: 13.58
Hawaii: 21.0 (Obama home state)
Vermont: 22.28


Notice the strong trends in Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, and Nevada.  Not to mention weak trends in Ohio, New Hampshire, and Iowa.  All but one of the 2012 battleground states have had Democratic trends since 2000.  

So basically, Republicans have gained a lot in states they were already strong in.  While Democrats have gained in both lean Republican states and tossup states.  

Very few lean Democratic states are trending R.  Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin are either stationary or have weak Democratic trends (Wisconsin, despite Ryan's presence on the ticket).  The only apparent openings Republicans have are Florida and Pennsylvania, which both have weak trends that may just be noise.

[Mehmentum]

Well the Dem trend in CO, NC, and VA are what's killing Republicans and of course you have to win Ohio. The last President to win the election without Ohio was JFK in 1960. I don't think NV is off the board for the Republicans. I read on Latino Decisions the more NV Latino's educated in terms of schooling and income(the more money they make) the more R they vote.

Florida trending Republican is shocking.

Of the Republican trending states that are now in the Dem Column only PA is within near  reach.

Ohio, Wisconsin, Idaho, New Hampshire, DC, and Nebraska all moved with the national average from 2000-2012. The electorate swung 3-4 points Dem from 2000-2012.

These shifts are adjusted for the swing in the national PV. 

Two other interesting states are Arizona and Georgia.  Despite a lot of talk that these states are trending Democratic, Arizona actually has a strong Republican trend since 2000, while Georgia is pretty much stationary.

[Mehmentum]

The GOP doesnt have a Electoral Vote problem. They have a popular vote problem. Since 1988, they ahve broken the 50% mark only once. Thus when a state is D+2 or D+3 like PA, WI, MI, NH, IA it just looks like they have an EV problem. The real problem is a popular vote problem

Statistically, 1/6 isn't significantly different than 50/50 and by the way Democrats have only broken 50% of the PV in 2 of the last 6 elections.

The Republicans do have an electoral college problem.  In an election where Republicans tie the Democrats in the PV, or even win by a small margin, the Democrats will win the electoral college (basically a reverse 2000 scenario, except the Republican electoral position is worse now than the Democratic position was in 2000).

This is because in the past decade or so, Republicans have been gaining huge numbers of votes in solidly Republican states (particularly the 10% or greater shifts in WV, AR, TN, OK, MO, KY, AL.)  Meanwhile, Democrats have been gaining significant numbers of votes in formerly Republicans states (particularly the 5 - 10% shifts in VA, NC, NV, and CO). 

Contrary to the opinions of many on the board, the midwest isn't trending GOP.  The trends of most midwestern states is small enough to be white noise, but if anything Democrats are gaining in the region.  Sure, you could argue that Pennsylvania's 2 point Republican trend is significant, but then you'd have to admit that Ohio's, New Hampshire's, Iowa's, and Wisconsin's 2 to 3 point Democratic trends are significant as well (needless to say, this is a bad trade for the Republicans overall).

[Mehmentum]

Yes, states do follow national trends to a large extent, however each state reacts differently to the same campaign.  Perhaps Obama's '08 and '12 campaigns did focus on winning the popular vote, thus carrying over a large number of states, however, its not like every state shifted equally, some even shifted away.

So yeah, considering the national environment is important, which is why I use the margins with respect to the popular vote to calculate the trends, but each state is its own environment and they often react differently, sometimes radically so.

It just so happens that the current coalitions the parties consist of pack a huge number of Republican voters into their base states, more so than the Democrats.  This has the effect of an electoral college gerrymander.

Perhaps the situation is as impermanent as you suggest, but I don't buy it.  Appalachia is dead for the Democrats.