A Democratic southern strategy? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 25, 2024, 10:37:09 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)
  A Democratic southern strategy? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Could this be a plausible battleground map in the future?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 52

Author Topic: A Democratic southern strategy?  (Read 4177 times)
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,892
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« on: September 07, 2016, 09:51:32 AM »

MS is small enough that they might let it slide through, but GA, NC, FL, and TX are going to remain tossups at best (for Democrats) and the Democrats will maintain their advantage in the upper Midwest. I can see WI and MI as tossups, but not full-on Republican.

For how long, though? The changes in the electorate that is shifting these states around can't be held off forever. It's not like parties haven't tried to hold on to once-reliable states in the past. Eventually their welcome is worn out regardless of how much attention they pay to it.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,892
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2017, 02:23:36 PM »

^

I'm surprised that Michigan young voters are such strongly in favour of the democrats p, especially compared to some of its neighbours.

Anyway these numbers tell us what a lot of us already believe will happen: the sunbelt will move towards the Democrats while certain white, rural states in the north will move towards the GOP.

The issue I have is that many of these states' 18-29 year old groups voted enormously for Obama just 4 years prior. Now, granted, most of the swing among 18-29 year olds in these states happened with 18-24, many of whom couldn't even vote in 2012, but all of this makes me wonder exactly how much of this is permanent. Clinton was such a bad candidate for these states, and she was even worse one for Millennials. This was bound to be an issue somewhere. Also, even in states where 18-24 year olds flipped, it was often not by all that much. For instance in Minnesota and Wisconsin, Trump only won 18-24 year olds by low-mid single digits. He flat out lost them in Pennsylvania and bigly in Michigan. Looking back to the 2000 election, it would not have been as easy to predict how things would play out from their young voters. For instance, 18-29 year olds in Minnesota voted for Bush by a slim plurality only to go hugely Democratic not that much later.

It's difficult to deny these states will probably get more Republican in the future, but I just wonder how much. These numbers are nothing like the youth in the South and some western states. But, I suppose we'll see how far this is going once the 2020 results roll in. 2018 exit polls should also help.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.022 seconds with 14 queries.