Red state turning blue
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 29, 2024, 04:01:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Red state turning blue		 « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: Which red state is the most likely to turn blue?
#1
Alabama
#2
Alaska
#3
Idaho
#4
Kansas
#5
Mississippi
#6
Nebraska
#7
North Dakota
#8
Oklahoma
#9
South Carolina
#10
South Dakota
#11
Texas
#12
Utah
#13
Wyoming
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Author Topic: Red state turning blue  (Read 13709 times)
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,206
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: September 25, 2011, 05:27:18 AM »
Quote from: Icefire9 on September 20, 2011, 03:26:46 PM
Texas or failing that South Carolina.
They're the only states on the list to have the types of growth that might lead to turning Democratic somewhere in the distant future under current patterns.
Then again, they're still so far away that those patterns might change before then...
Logged
Duke David
Atheist2006
Rookie
**
Posts: 240
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 11, 2011, 11:43:33 AM »
Quote from: seatown on October 04, 2011, 05:07:10 PM
South Carolina, Texas, Utah
In that order. First two will be close though.

Utah? Huh Only if a Democratic Mormon ran.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 11, 2011, 05:19:30 PM »
Quote from: chdr on September 20, 2011, 09:58:05 AM
I think Texas is the most likely state in the list to become a swing state (because let's face it, there are huge chunks of Texas that will never not be Republican). Most of Texas' growth is coming from Hispanics and out-of-staters moving in, something that resembles Florida (another red state with influential pockets of blue). It probably won't happen until a few decades from now, but I don't think Republican gerrymandering can prevent it forever.

I completely disagree.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,652
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 11, 2011, 05:49:20 PM »
Well I think Utah is trending left in that if the Democrats have a year like 2006 in 2020, they would win some statewide offices in UT.  It won't be giving its electoral votes to a Democrat anytime before 2040, though.
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,322
Thailand


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2011, 05:04:46 AM »
Quote from: Atheist2006 on October 11, 2011, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: seatown on October 04, 2011, 05:07:10 PM
South Carolina, Texas, Utah
In that order. First two will be close though.

Utah? Huh Only if a Democratic Mormon ran.
Utah has insane population growth that's non-Mormon. It's pretty likely it will be like Colorado in about 20 years.
Logged
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,920


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 13, 2011, 06:20:25 AM »
Quote from: seatown on October 13, 2011, 05:04:46 AM
Quote from: Atheist2006 on October 11, 2011, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: seatown on October 04, 2011, 05:07:10 PM
South Carolina, Texas, Utah
In that order. First two will be close though.

Utah? Huh Only if a Democratic Mormon ran.
Utah has insane population growth that's non-Mormon. It's pretty likely it will be like Colorado in about 20 years.

Colorado is only about 2% Mormon though. Yes, Utah non-Mormons are very Democratic, but I suspect a lot of that is oppositional voting. If Mormons were reduced to a minority and no longer dominated the states' politics, I'd guess the non-Mormons Utahns would start voting somewhat similarly to non-Mormon Coloradans, leaving the state still quite Republican.
Logged
Colbert
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 474
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: November 27, 2011, 11:02:15 AM »
I vote north caroline...if the demography of black people growht faster
Logged
Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,804
Spain


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -9.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2011, 11:27:44 AM »
Quote from: Colbert on November 27, 2011, 11:02:15 AM
I vote north caroline...if the demography of black people growht faster
Quote from: Colbert on November 27, 2011, 11:02:15 AM
NC is not an option. And it was a blue state in 2008
Logged
The_Texas_Libertarian
TXMichael
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 825
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2011, 01:13:54 PM »
Arizona's not an option?
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,577
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: November 27, 2011, 01:44:28 PM »

He probably just forgot (somehow). 
Logged
LastVoter
seatown
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,322
Thailand


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: November 28, 2011, 03:33:11 AM »
Quote from: Nichlemn on October 13, 2011, 06:20:25 AM
Quote from: seatown on October 13, 2011, 05:04:46 AM
Quote from: Atheist2006 on October 11, 2011, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: seatown on October 04, 2011, 05:07:10 PM
South Carolina, Texas, Utah
In that order. First two will be close though.

Utah? Huh Only if a Democratic Mormon ran.
Utah has insane population growth that's non-Mormon. It's pretty likely it will be like Colorado in about 20 years.

Colorado is only about 2% Mormon though. Yes, Utah non-Mormons are very Democratic, but I suspect a lot of that is oppositional voting. If Mormons were reduced to a minority and no longer dominated the states' politics, I'd guess the non-Mormons Utahns would start voting somewhat similarly to non-Mormon Coloradans, leaving the state still quite Republican.
I think all non-mormons will be voting as opposition until the first Dem victory in Utah which would be between 2025-2035, but I think the Hispanics being the biggest voting block in Utah after that would make it blue.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,779


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: November 28, 2011, 08:05:22 AM »

Logged
CaDan
Rookie
**
Posts: 181
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: November 28, 2011, 09:28:48 AM »
Why do liberals assume:

1. That all newcomers to a particular state from out of state are automatically "SUPERZ LEFTIZ!!!!!(TM) who will reflexively vote democrat."

2. That OH NOEZ! HIZPANICZ!!! (TM) are a permanent Democrat voting bloc.

The latter assumption is demonstrably racist, and the former is insanely stupid.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: November 28, 2011, 10:43:31 AM »

Arizona is turning a little bluer, but that map isn't going to tell you anything useful. You can make all the other counties whatever color you'd like but the only one in Arizona that really matters is Maricopa.
Logged
The_Texas_Libertarian
TXMichael
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 825
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: November 28, 2011, 04:18:08 PM »
Quote from: CaDan on November 28, 2011, 09:28:48 AM
Why do liberals assume:

1. That all newcomers to a particular state from out of state are automatically "SUPERZ LEFTIZ!!!!!(TM) who will reflexively vote democrat."

2. That OH NOEZ! HIZPANICZ!!! (TM) are a permanent Democrat voting bloc.

The latter assumption is demonstrably racist, and the former is insanely stupid.



Why do conservatives tend to have defective keyboards? 
Logged
Yelnoc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,182
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: November 28, 2011, 04:50:04 PM »
Why isn't Missouri an option?
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: November 28, 2011, 07:05:56 PM »
Quote from: CaDan on November 28, 2011, 09:28:48 AM
Why do liberals assume:

1. That all newcomers to a particular state from out of state are automatically "SUPERZ LEFTIZ!!!!!(TM) who will reflexively vote democrat."

2. That OH NOEZ! HIZPANICZ!!! (TM) are a permanent Democrat voting bloc.

The latter assumption is demonstrably racist, and the former is insanely stupid.



I'd assume no-one's going to actually bother responding to this incredibly obnoxious post, FWIW.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: November 28, 2011, 07:26:41 PM »
Quote from: Oakvale on November 28, 2011, 07:05:56 PM
Quote from: CaDan on November 28, 2011, 09:28:48 AM
Why do liberals assume:

1. That all newcomers to a particular state from out of state are automatically "SUPERZ LEFTIZ!!!!!(TM) who will reflexively vote democrat."

2. That OH NOEZ! HIZPANICZ!!! (TM) are a permanent Democrat voting bloc.

The latter assumption is demonstrably racist, and the former is insanely stupid.



I'd assume no-one's going to actually bother responding to this incredibly obnoxious post, FWIW.

Why bother?

I would've given the time of day to explain how historically migrant population demographics tend to favor the Democratic Party by bringing up an analysis of how die hard Republican states like Massachusetts became Democratic strongholds in a period of a little less than seventy years time and how that compares with the current Hispanic immigration trend in the Southwest.  But.....sadly this person decided to post in such an ASSumptive manner I'm not even going to touch base on that.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: November 28, 2011, 08:18:28 PM »
I'm pretty sure that if McCain weren't GOP nominee in 2008 Obama would carry Arizona. But now, Arizona flipping isn't that sure.
Logged
Chaddyr23
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 479
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.19, S: -5.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: November 30, 2011, 06:08:46 AM »
Texas simply for the lack of ethnic diversity and lack of big cities in all the other options
Logged
Indy Prez
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 290
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: December 02, 2011, 03:35:58 PM »
If Schweitzer runs against Christie in 2016 I think he will take a Dakota. But Texas will become a swing state.
Logged
The_Texas_Libertarian
TXMichael
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 825
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: December 03, 2011, 01:50:10 PM »
Quote from: Indy Prez on December 02, 2011, 03:35:58 PM
If Schweitzer runs against Christie in 2016 I think he will take a Dakota. But Texas will become a swing state.

If Christie talks to Texans like he does to New Jerseyans he will put Texas in the swing category.  Texans don't take it when people talk down to them and will call him out
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.242 seconds with 14 queries.