What States do you think will gain and lose electoral votes in the future?

[Thomas]

And state the number that you think those States will gain or lose

[Skill and Chance]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the Northeast and Midwest will continue to lose over the next ~30 years.  Massachusetts is the most likely to hold at its current EV, and Minnesota could stay at 9 after it loses 1 in 2021.  When you get out past 2050, it's possible that there is a reverse influx of retires into Northern New England and the Great Lakes due to climate change, though.

I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

I would be surprised if Tennessee doesn't gain a CD by 2050.

WV should be down to 3 by then barring some major industrial revival. 

NE has been close to losing for a while now, which would have electoral implications with the loss of a swing EV because NE-02 has to expand into uber Republican rural territory.

Maine may eventually go to 3 EV, in which case the EV splitting law becomes irrelevant.

[Thomas]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the Northeast and Midwest will continue to lose over the next ~30 years.  Massachusetts is the most likely to hold at its current EV, and Minnesota could stay at 9 after it loses 1 in 2021.  When you get out past 2050, it's possible that there is a reverse influx of retires into Northern New England and the Great Lakes due to climate change, though.

I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

I would be surprised if Tennessee doesn't gain a CD by 2050.

WV should be down to 3 by then barring some major industrial revival. 

NE has been close to losing for a while now, which would have electoral implications with the loss of a swing EV because NE-02 has to expand into uber Republican rural territory.

Maine may eventually go to 3 EV, in which case the EV splitting law becomes irrelevant.

Will the electoral votes stay at 538?

[cvparty]

they ALL lose their electoral votes when we dump the EC and move to popular vote

[Greedo punched first]

Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota probably lose. Florida, North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, Arizona likely gain.

[Skill and Chance]

they ALL lose their electoral votes when we dump the EC and move to popular vote

The only viable way for this to happen (without an impossible constitutional amendment) involves binding a majority of the electors to the PV winner, so states would still have EV.  They would just be bound to cast their votes based on something other than the statewide results (which is very constitutional).

[Skill and Chance]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the Northeast and Midwest will continue to lose over the next ~30 years.  Massachusetts is the most likely to hold at its current EV, and Minnesota could stay at 9 after it loses 1 in 2021.  When you get out past 2050, it's possible that there is a reverse influx of retires into Northern New England and the Great Lakes due to climate change, though.

I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

I would be surprised if Tennessee doesn't gain a CD by 2050.

WV should be down to 3 by then barring some major industrial revival. 

NE has been close to losing for a while now, which would have electoral implications with the loss of a swing EV because NE-02 has to expand into uber Republican rural territory.

Maine may eventually go to 3 EV, in which case the EV splitting law becomes irrelevant.

Will the electoral votes stay at 538?

I see the next Dem trifecta admitting at least Puerto Rico among the US territories and possibly admitting all of them.  It would counter the increasing GOP skew of the Senate without looking like a blatant power grab.

[Dr. MB]

NE has been close to losing for a while now, which would have electoral implications with the loss of a swing EV because NE-02 has to expand into uber Republican rural territory.

Not necessarily. A district combining the Omaha and Lincoln metros would still be as competitive as NE-02 is today.

[Greedo punched first]

Ohio and loses electoral votes.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the
I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

No!
CA's population would double if it had better zoning. What does Texas offer to make it grow past CA?

[Greedo punched first]

California will probably stay the same, but could possibly gain or lose.

[Mr. Smith]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the
I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

No!
CA's population would double if it had better zoning. What does Texas offer to make it grow past CA?

Cheaper land, better per-pupil spending on education, and better roads for starters.

[RINO Tom]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the
I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

No!
CA's population would double if it had better zoning. What does Texas offer to make it grow past CA?

What does CA offer that Texas doesn't, aside from your personal preference?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the
I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

No!
CA's population would double if it had better zoning. What does Texas offer to make it grow past CA?

What does CA offer that Texas doesn't, aside from your personal preference?

1. Better global links
2. Better weather
3. Better scenery
4. Bigger and better cities
5. Higher per capital wealth
6. More innovation
7. Better universities
8. More high-profile/glamorous
9. More amenities
10. Better infrastructure

There are three, easily changable things keeping down California's population:
1. High housing prices
2. High corporate taxes
3. Bad K-12 education

The fact is, California is globally glamourized as a place to live. Texas is not. This isn't meant as a insult to Texas, but if CA got it's cost of living under control, it would probably have 80 million people to Texas' 20.

[Suburbia]

Sadly Northeastern states like Connecticut, New York, New Jersey will lose a couple electoral votes due to the Census. (2020 Census)

Texas, Florida, Virginia, Missouri, Iowa, and Georgia will gain electoral votes.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Sadly Northeastern states like Connecticut, New York, New Jersey will lose a couple electoral votes due to the Census. (2020 Census)

Texas, Florida, Virginia, Missouri, Iowa, and Georgia will gain electoral votes.

[jamestroll]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the
I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

No!
CA's population would double if it had better zoning. What does Texas offer to make it grow past CA?

What does CA offer that Texas doesn't, aside from your personal preference?

1. Better global links
2. Better weather
3. Better scenery
4. Bigger and better cities
5. Higher per capital wealth
6. More innovation
7. Better universities
8. More high-profile/glamorous
9. More amenities
10. Better infrastructure

There are three, easily changable things keeping down California's population:
1. High housing prices
2. High corporate taxes
3. Bad K-12 education

The fact is, California is globally glamourized as a place to live. Texas is not. This isn't meant as a insult to Texas, but if CA got it's cost of living under control, it would probably have 80 million people to Texas' 20.

But there may not be the water to support that population. Desalination will help but it is extremely energy intensive and expensive.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

FL will gain EVs for the next decade or two. Then the bubble will pop big time. It might have fewer people, not just EVs, in 2070 vis a vis 2030.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Pretty much all of the large/medium size states in the
I expect California to lose a few after stagnating at 55.  Texas should cross California for the most populous state at the 2050 census, with an outside chance of it happening in 2040. 

No!
CA's population would double if it had better zoning. What does Texas offer to make it grow past CA?

What does CA offer that Texas doesn't, aside from your personal preference?

1. Better global links
2. Better weather
3. Better scenery
4. Bigger and better cities
5. Higher per capital wealth
6. More innovation
7. Better universities
8. More high-profile/glamorous
9. More amenities
10. Better infrastructure

There are three, easily changable things keeping down California's population:
1. High housing prices
2. High corporate taxes
3. Bad K-12 education

The fact is, California is globally glamourized as a place to live. Texas is not. This isn't meant as a insult to Texas, but if CA got it's cost of living under control, it would probably have 80 million people to Texas' 20.

But there may not be the water to support that population. Desalination will help but it is extremely energy intensive and expensive.

California does not have a water problem. It has an irrigation problem. Were we to grow slightly fewer water-intensive crops, or use water 10% more efficiently in agriculture, cities could double their populations.

[Greedo punched first]

Most Rust Belt states will lose electoral votes.