AK-PPP - Clinton competitive

[barfbag]

We can have all the polls we want to, but they won't win it for either party. What we do have is every Presidential Election in Alaska's history and it doesn't look good for Democrats.

[barfbag]

Between 1952 and 2004 Virginia was reliably Republican. It had last gone Democratic in a close election in 1948. It never went for Carter even though every other former-Confederate State did so in 1976. It never went for Clinton in two near-blowout elections for him.

States can shift swiftly.

Parties change more than states and states like Alaska really don't change. Virginia was reliably red but was never in the safe column. It would be solid when we won and likely when we lost.

[barfbag]

Between 1952 and 2004 Virginia was reliably Republican. It had last gone Democratic in a close election in 1948. It never went for Carter even though every other former-Confederate State did so in 1976. It never went for Clinton in two near-blowout elections for him.

States can shift swiftly.

Parties change more than states and states like Alaska really don't change. Virginia was reliably red but was never in the safe column. It would be solid when we won and likely when we lost.

There's more going on then just parties changing. Nixon beat McGovern by 26 points in Vermont. I think it's pretty clear that if there was a 1972 do over, even without hindsight, Vermont would vote McGovern today.

Vermont was a New England Republican state and the party became a combination of the Goldwater wing and southern Democrats. The voters weren't much different ideologically and to my knowledge Vermont has always had only 3 electoral votes. Alaska still fits the Republican and tea party platform. Numbers changing as much as they have could be voter turnout. The state has so few people that only a few thousand could make a significance in percentage points.

[barfbag]

Alaska is moving toward the Democrats.  It's a ways away from being a swing state, but enough liberal environmental types have moved in to re-elect Begich.

Do you know that for a fact, and if so, do you have a source?  I'd be curious to know how the voting demographics of Alaska are changing.

It's hard to believe Alaska would see a wave of people migrating to live there. It's days in the safe GOP column may be numbered though.

[barfbag]

Alaska is moving toward the Democrats.  It's a ways away from being a swing state, but enough liberal environmental types have moved in to re-elect Begich.

Do you know that for a fact, and if so, do you have a source?  I'd be curious to know how the voting demographics of Alaska are changing.

It's hard to believe Alaska would see a wave of people migrating to live there. It's days in the safe GOP column may be numbered though.

For whatever reason Alaska is shifting D, fast. This isn't just due to Palin- it's been trending D since 1992, and it's really begun to accelerate. It went from R+30 in 2000 to R+16 now. At this rate it will be Democratic by 2028. It could easily be the next Vermont.

I don't think it's possible for a state to become as blue as Vermont. I have to admit though, Alaska's averages for recent election will severely change when 2000 is replaced with 2016 in discussions.

[barfbag]

Alaska's not taking kindly to this new "no government assistance for states" brand of Republican.

That combined with RELIGION RELIGION RELIGION out of the GOP doesn't sit well.  With that being said I don't see Alaska becoming a swing state on the Presidential level anytime soon, but more Begich's are certainly possible.

I can't blame them for not taking kindly to such things, but they're still far enough to the right to be reliably red for a few decades to come. One thing I don't like is when religion is used for political purposes. However, the claims of how often it happens is exaggerated.

[barfbag]

Alaska's not taking kindly to this new "no government assistance for states" brand of Republican.

That combined with RELIGION RELIGION RELIGION out of the GOP doesn't sit well.  With that being said I don't see Alaska becoming a swing state on the Presidential level anytime soon, but more Begich's are certainly possible.

So, they can be the new Montana.

It's not a bad comparison, but is either party going to spend time and money traveling to Alaska where hardly anyone lives?

[barfbag]

Well it sounds like you're ready to party over Alaska, but if people are leaving the left coast in such numbers then what does it say about their political structure? You can tell me all you want that they're not leaving simply because of liberalism, but if you look deeper, then it doesn't take long to come into contact with the effects of liberalism. I'm talking about the far left San Francisco radicals who infest California and the rest of the west coast with their NAMBLA loving ways. Liberalism is chasing people away. I don't see either party spending time or money to travel up to Alaska in order to win a measly 3 Electoral Votes. To most people, Alaska isn't even a real place.

[barfbag]

What I'll agree with is that it can become a likely Republican state and I'll agree with that. However, no state the size of Alaska with only 3 EV will ever be anything more than competitive when Democrats win by more than 5 and light-solid red when Republicans win. It's twice the size of Montana and still has the same number of electoral votes. Vermont and Delaware are very different because they're small states. If Alaska were only the size of Vermont and Delaware, then I'd say sure it could become battleground or even blue. There's too much elbow space for it to be a battleground state.

[barfbag]

Alaska might actually worth more than Montana in the future to Democratic presidential candidates since both have 3 EV, but Alaska may be a lower hanging fruit.

It's still a far travel for 4 or 5 EV then. I don't see either party making a big deal over it.