Sun Belt vs. Rust Belt

[ShamDam]

In thinking about the Democrats' electoral strategy for 2020, I see the two main paths to victory being either reclaiming the Rust Belt, which is trending away from Democrats but was only barely lost in 2016, or finally making the necessary inroads in the Sun Belt, which has states we lost by 3-9 points but that seem to be trending towards us.

I'm worried that by 2020, neither strategy will be ideal. If Michigan/Wisconsin/Pennsylvania start to behave electorally more like Iowa and Ohio, but Arizona/Georgia/Florida are still JUST out of reach (with perhaps even Texas being within 5 points) I could see Democrats losing despite gaining even more of the popular vote because we lose like 7 or so states by 5 points or less.

What say you? If you were strategizing for the electoral college, which states would you be inclined to focus on? Or should we just worry about presenting a message that broadly appeals to voters in any of those states?

[OneJ]

It really depends on the economic condition of those rust belt states 4 years from now. Whites without a college degree are very swing-able. It also depends on who the democratic nominee is. Sherrod Brown or Al Franken might be using a different strategy than Cory Booker or Kamala Harris will.

If the economies of the rust belt states start to improve and the Democrats secede the economic populism ground to Trump then the sunbelt strategy will probably come first. They'll emphasize social issues, double down on identity politics, and pursue a more hawkish tone on foreign policy. Their targets will be NC, AZ, FL, and maybe GA. College educated whites + minorities coalition.

If the rust belt is still crap and the nominee is Sherrod Brown or Al Franken then you'll see the rust belt strategy be in effect. They'll target whites without a college degree and emphasize economic populism combined with a more humble foreign policy. They'll likely moderate more on issues like gun control and possibly abortion. Whites without a college degree + minorities coalition.

JBE as the nominee might try to apply the rust belt strategy to southern states as well and build a minorities plus working class whites coalition to win states like GA, FL, NC, etc.

I agree with this. It's certainly the safest route to take. Trump, when he gets full hold of the economy, will probably bring the economy down which will likely cause frustration in the three Midwestern states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

If Democrats are lucky, maybe even Ohio may swing back.

[Mr. Smith]

Or the Democrats could just do what they for did '92 and nominate a popular person from a trending away region, but capitalize on a trending towards region and cater to 'em.

In this case, that'd mean find a popular, charismatic Midwesterner, but have them mostly campaign for the Sun Belt while leaving a few ties and whistles to friendlier Rust Belt states [technically, this IS what Obama did after all].

Also, if the economy of the big cities in the Sun Belt states go well, south because of the travel ban and free trade issues, these states could be won based on an urban populist appeal. Identity politics would be technically doubled down, but it'd be in the style of Trump rather than the condescension of Hillary.

And given how off the rails Trump sounds on foreign policy, it'll probably be best to go full-on Obama with Iraq. It was probably the seeming isolationist policy that got him over the top in the first place.

[White Trash]

It really depends on the economic condition of those rust belt states 4 years from now. Whites without a college degree are very swing-able. It also depends on who the democratic nominee is. Sherrod Brown or Al Franken might be using a different strategy than Cory Booker or Kamala Harris will.

If the economies of the rust belt states start to improve and the Democrats secede the economic populism ground to Trump then the sunbelt strategy will probably come first. They'll emphasize social issues, double down on identity politics, and pursue a more hawkish tone on foreign policy. Their targets will be NC, AZ, FL, and maybe GA. College educated whites + minorities coalition.

If the rust belt is still crap and the nominee is Sherrod Brown or Al Franken then you'll see the rust belt strategy be in effect. They'll target whites without a college degree and emphasize economic populism combined with a more humble foreign policy. They'll likely moderate more on issues like gun control and possibly abortion. Whites without a college degree + minorities coalition.

JBE as the nominee might try to apply the rust belt strategy to southern states as well and build a minorities plus working class whites coalition to win states like GA, FL, NC, etc.

YES

[Jeppe]

JBE is never going to be the nominee, he's way too conservative for even black Democrats to support, much less the white liberal Sanders brigade.

[zorkpolitics]

Who isn't JBE?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Or should we just worry about presenting a message that broadly appeals to voters in any of those states?

This is the only non-"Dover Beach" answer.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

JBE is never going to be the nominee, he's way too conservative for even black Democrats to support, much less the white liberal Sanders brigade.

Yup, Bernie people aren't going to support some conservadem Perez supporter and the SJWs aren't going to support some straight southern cis white male.

[Adam Griffin]

[Shadows]

Dems have to double down on both but the key to winning the EC is to flip WI, MI, PA where Trump won by less than 1%, they are easily winnable with the right candidate. The Sun belt will come into play in 10-12 years with a more diverse population & young people coming into the voting bloc.

Dems so far 1 Sen fron OH, 2 from MI, 2 from MN, 1 from WI, 1 from PA, that's 7, you can't make that number easily. The Senate & the WH will be lost for a generation, for atleast 10-12 years.

In the short term, you appeal to the rust belt, pretty indisputable IMO ! Rust Belt voters in Healthcare, Education, Trade (Anti-Free Trade is a classic left wing issue), Infra, Minimum Wage, etc mesh more with the Dem's than with the GOP!

[Xing]

Yep, Democrats should not even think about writing off any states at this point. Especially not ones which were within 5%.

[Sumner 1868]

They should try and recapture all the 2008 states (yes, even IN) plus AZ. But TX will not flip no matter how many times people insist it will.

[cvparty]

with strong trump opposition and a good candidate, dems can probably win both

[Figueira]

This. I'd say the easiest path to narrow victory is through MI and FL, which would require a combination of both strategies.

But if I absolutely had to pick one, I'd say Rust Belt, because we actually know we can win those states.

[Person Man]

If we pick the Rust Belt and end up losing Michigan by 2, PA by 3 and OH and FL by 6, we look like Gore or Kerry.
If we pick the Sun Belt and lose FL by 2, AZ and GA by 6, and MI and PA by 4, we end up looking like Romney or McCain.

We haven't had a democrat win a very close election since Carter. Even in 2012, Obama had three big states to spare.

[BaldEagle1991]

Well its because the Sun Belt and Rust Belt have two very different cultures.

[Person Man]

Well its because the Sun Belt and Rust Belt have two very different cultures.

Florida is a bit of both.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Yep, Democrats should not even think about writing off any states at this point. Especially not ones which were within 5%.

I do view MI and WI as flukish outliers, not likely to go Democratic in 2020 against another Democrat, unless Trump keeps his promises in a big way.

[BaldEagle1991]

Well its because the Sun Belt and Rust Belt have two very different cultures.

Florida is a bit of both.

For someone that has been to Florida a lot, and a gf from FL. It's not really.

[Person Man]

Well its because the Sun Belt and Rust Belt have two very different cultures.

Florida is a bit of both.

For someone that has been to Florida a lot, and a gf from FL. It's not really.

There are a lot of Rust Belt people down here. I guess it really depends on where you are.

[Skill and Chance]

Dems have to double down on both but the key to winning the EC is to flip WI, MI, PA where Trump won by less than 1%, they are easily winnable with the right candidate. The Sun belt will come into play in 10-12 years with a more diverse population & young people coming into the voting bloc.

Dems so far 1 Sen fron OH, 2 from MI, 2 from MN, 1 from WI, 1 from PA, that's 7, you can't make that number easily. The Senate & the WH will be lost for a generation, for atleast 10-12 years.

In the short term, you appeal to the rust belt, pretty indisputable IMO ! Rust Belt voters in Healthcare, Education, Trade (Anti-Free Trade is a classic left wing issue), Infra, Minimum Wage, etc mesh more with the Dem's than with the GOP!

Thing is, it's not hard to see a 2020 scenario where all of those states keep trending and vote for Trump by 5% anyway, like Florida for Bush in 2004.  It's not at all obvious that MI/WI/PA will be closer than FL/GA/NC next time.  It would be really, really bad to spend $50M in Michigan and $500K in Georgia and lose both by 3%.  Democrats have sucked at winning close elections for the past 50 years.  Perhaps it's because they spread themselves too thin trying to be everything to everyone?   

[Person Man]

Dems have to double down on both but the key to winning the EC is to flip WI, MI, PA where Trump won by less than 1%, they are easily winnable with the right candidate. The Sun belt will come into play in 10-12 years with a more diverse population & young people coming into the voting bloc.

Dems so far 1 Sen fron OH, 2 from MI, 2 from MN, 1 from WI, 1 from PA, that's 7, you can't make that number easily. The Senate & the WH will be lost for a generation, for atleast 10-12 years.

In the short term, you appeal to the rust belt, pretty indisputable IMO ! Rust Belt voters in Healthcare, Education, Trade (Anti-Free Trade is a classic left wing issue), Infra, Minimum Wage, etc mesh more with the Dem's than with the GOP!

Thing is, it's not hard to see a 2020 scenario where all of those states keep trending and vote for Trump by 5% anyway, like Florida for Bush in 2004.  It's not at all obvious that MI/WI/PA will be closer than FL/GA/NC next time.  It would be really, really bad to spend $50M in Michigan and $500K in Georgia and lose both by 3%.  Democrats have sucked at winning close elections for the past 50 years.  Perhaps it's because they spread themselves too thin trying to be everything to everyone?   

Devil's Advocate: But that is how Trump won.

[BaldEagle1991]

Well its because the Sun Belt and Rust Belt have two very different cultures.

Florida is a bit of both.

For someone that has been to Florida a lot, and a gf from FL. It's not really.

There are a lot of Rust Belt people down here. I guess it really depends on where you are.

She's from Orlando. I usually go to Central Florida (Orlando/Tampa) whenever I go there. Plus I sometimes drive through Northern FL. Miami I hardly ever visit.

[Person Man]

Well its because the Sun Belt and Rust Belt have two very different cultures.

Florida is a bit of both.

For someone that has been to Florida a lot, and a gf from FL. It's not really.

There are a lot of Rust Belt people down here. I guess it really depends on where you are.

She's from Orlando. I usually go to Central Florida (Orlando/Tampa) whenever I go there. Plus I sometimes drive through Northern FL. Miami I hardly ever visit.

There really isn't any industry down here but there is a lot of light stuff and limestone mining. There are a lot of rust belt people, though. I think a good analogy about the people is that north of I-4, it's more of the Bible Belt, between I-4 and Lake a Okeechobee, its more of a Rust Belt feel, and below that its like the Big Northern City.

It's really hard to define Florida and it should be split down the middle, but the Democrats down here are "hard to organize". 

[🕴🏼Melior🕴🏼]

I think we should focus on retaining the Rust Belt in 2020.