Can Donald Trump flip Minnesota red?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

He'll lead there in polls after the 1st debate. Whether he'll participate or not

[KingSweden]

Stop trying to make GOP Minnesota happen! It's not gonna happen!

[Seriously?]

No. Not only is Minnesota getting more Atlas Red by the election, but Trump is a very poor fit for the state. Minnesota is a lot like Illinois in that the metropolitan hub will almost always outvote the rural areas surrounding it. But while many of Michigan's Dems are blue-collar union types that could make up Trump's biggest strength, Minnesota's Dems tend to be diverse, urban millennials.

In a best-case Trump election, Minnesota will likely be the spot of red in a sea of Midwest blue.

Minnesota's PVI has been relatively flat, if not slightly Republican-trending since 1994.  It ws D+6 in 1994, D+4 in 1998, D+3 in 2002, and D+2 ever since.

PVI is irrelevant when your ceiling is below 50%. See also: NH.

So PVI was irrelevant for Bill Clinton in 1992 and 1996 because of Perot? Come on, TN volunteer, you're a better poster than to come up with that.

[Koharu]

HAHAHA. Hahaha! haha hahaha wooo~~

I mean, it's not impossible, because anything is technically possible.

But seriously. Even the Minnesotan Republicans I know hate Trump. My home-state went for Rubio in the GOP primary. I know a few people who support Trump, but they are people who have never voted in their lives and while they like to talk about how great he is, I have a hard time believing they're actually going to show up to vote this year. Even if Minnesota didn't lean D, Trump is just the totally wrong kind of Republican for the state.

Now I actually want to have my dad ask his very Republican neighbors who they all plan on voting for at top of the ticket...

[Plankton5165]

In a 40 state Trump landslide he probably still loses it.

Yeah right, he probably wins it in a 35 state landslide. 40 is better.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

OK, who's the troll who said 99-100%?

[Plankton5165]

HAHAHA. Hahaha! haha hahaha wooo~~

I mean, it's not impossible, because anything is technically possible.

But seriously. Even the Minnesotan Republicans I know hate Trump. My home-state went for Rubio in the GOP primary. I know a few people who support Trump, but they are people who have never voted in their lives and while they like to talk about how great he is, I have a hard time believing they're actually going to show up to vote this year. Even if Minnesota didn't lean D, Trump is just the totally wrong kind of Republican for the state.

Now I actually want to have my dad ask his very Republican neighbors who they all plan on voting for at top of the ticket...

It says your home state is Wisconsin, not Minnesota.

[Koharu]

It says your home state is Wisconsin, not Minnesota.

I lived 23 of my 30 years in Minnesota. It's my home-state. I live in Wisconsin now (though am back in Minnesota on a regular basis to visit family), but I've also lived in West Virginia. Shocking that people can move! Who would have ever guessed!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Having lived here and studied our elections so extensively, I've basically determined this: A Republican victory in Minnesota is an event that requires some pretty artificial circumstances that can't be "forced" and rely on lots of luck. Basically a combination of several factors like a bad DFL candidate, good GOP year, strong third parties and a Republican overperformance in some key areas. This is all easier said than done, and a great example of why no Republican has won Minnesota in 10 years, and no Republican has broken 50% in over 20. The problem is mostly that Minnesota's Republican base heavily relies on evangelicals but can't pull off a winning plurality without not getting clobbered in the metro, meaning they need some Moderate Hero and Western Ukrainian suburbanites. Actually not just "some", they need to win them big. So it's a tricky balancing act. The key is to run someone who checks all the right boxes for the socons but doesn't come across as a lunatic and can appeal on some other issues. Tim Pawlenty did this, but we all saw how good of a Presidential candidate he was. Since then they haven't been able to replicate it. But in 2014 the Secretary of State race came within a point:



You can't see it there, but the Republican had a great performance in some areas that normally don't give that for Republicans, Dakota and Washington counties were close to 50% for him. And therein lies the problem, those educated middle class areas are the sort of places that are swinging against Trump brutally. Actually even they don't matter much, I can't wait to see how badly Trump nosedives in non-Minneapolis Hennepin County. And of course Trump also isn't all that strong amongst evangelicals, even if they're warming up to vote for him reluctantly. But when you have such little room for error, even losing about 5% or so to non-voting or third parties puts victory out of reach. And if Trump gets killed worse than Romney in the metro, where does he make it up? It's not like outstate is full of Trump friendly places where he can run up huge margins. None of the urban areas favor him. St. Cloud? I know it has kind of a conservative reputation, but it's still a pretty educated college town, and Trump needs to do more than just match Romney's numbers. A big improvement in such a polarized area isn't easy. Mankato? See above, except it's a lot more liberal. Rochester? Demographic nightmare. Highly educated white collar city that's prone to swings. Minnesota side of the Fargo metro? Also home to a university and lots of educated tech workers. Duluth? Hahahahaha. Squeezing a few extra points out of some rural counties isn't going to cut it, assuming he can even do that, which I doubt (though I'll buy he could at least match Romney's performance in many of these areas, while Hillary tumbles from Obama's numbers thanks to stronger third parties.)

So yeah, it's tough to see how the ingredients needed for a Republican victory in Minnesota can be harvested by Trump. Or for that matter any candidate capable of winning a national Republican nomination.

[Plankton5165]

It's possible, perhaps, but...no Democrat has EVER won the White House without winning Minnesota. 

That is not true, Wilson won without MN in 1916.