The next Virginia/Colorado

[PragmaticPopulist]

Virginia and Colorado appear to be trending Democratic, at least in presidential elections, and are falling out of reach of the GOP. They were fairly safe GOP states in 2004, and became tossups after 2008. What state or states do you think will go through this cycle in the next 8 to 16 years?

I myself think at least Arizona will be a tossup by 2020. Georgia might be a tossup by then too. I don't see Texas voting for a Democrat in a presidential election at least until 2024, unless its suburbs take another huge swing towards Democrats.

South Carolina was mentioned in some circles as competitive in 2016, but still swung towards Republicans. This appears to be because Greenville and Spartanburg are still pretty Republican, while Charleston and Columbia aren't as Democratic as other southern cities. I don't see it going Democratic in at least 16 years.

[Technocracy Timmy]

The only one I can definitely say won't be lean Dem is South Carolina. The state already has a strong income divide and the suburbs are much more conservative than the rural areas. It's also been incredibly inelastic (look at its trend maps from 1988-2016, 2000-2016, 2012-2016, etc.)

[MT Treasurer]

Georgia is destined to become the next VA. Once it flips, it will be gone.

AZ and TX will vote Democratic eventually, but they should remain competitive for some time after that (especially TX).

[The_Doctor]

GA + NC? Or AZ + TX? Or both?

I feel that definitely, all four states are moving towards the Democratic Party, compared to 2000. GA + NC started trending in the Obama 2008 election, and TX + AZ have begun their march in the aftermath of the Hillary loss. I feel all four states are good candidates to emerge as potential medium blue states.

It really all adds up to a Democratic Party that is increasingly rooted in the South and Sunbelt regions (with their heavy minority presence and populist elements). 

[PoliticalShelter]

Mississippi and Alaska are two potential wildcards for this type of transformation.

[Virginiá]

Mississippi and Alaska are two potential wildcards for this type of transformation.

One thing about Virginia is that its transformation has rather closely tracked what the idea of generational replacement would suggest. Much more Democratic younger voters growing up are contributing a lot to its pro-Democratic shift, and each year they gobble up a little more of the next age bracket. It's actually one of the few states to follow that theory so neatly. Others like North Carolina aren't so clean and leave more questions than answers.

My point being that I'm not sure MS or AK have that same dynamic. I don't think we have enough exit polls to see exactly where they are going. I've seen it mentioned that older Mississippians are contributing a lot to its Republican lean and just by aging of its young people should trend Democratic somewhat, but I'm not sure to what degree.

[PoliticalShelter]

Mississippi and Alaska are two potential wildcards for this type of transformation.

One thing about Virginia is that its transformation has rather closely tracked what the idea of generational replacement would suggest. Much more Democratic younger voters growing up are contributing a lot to its pro-Democratic shift, and each year they gobble up a little more of the next age bracket. It's actually one of the few states to follow that theory so neatly. Others like North Carolina aren't so clean and leave more questions than answers.

My point being that I'm not sure MS or AK have that same dynamic. I don't think we have enough exit polls to see exactly where they are going. I've seen it mentioned that older Mississippians are contributing a lot to its Republican lean and just by aging of its young people should trend Democratic somewhat, but I'm not sure to what degree.

Not sure what you mean by this considering how states like North Carolina and Georgia have millennial voters that are more democratic than Virginias millennial. Virginian millennials seem to have similar numbers that democrats get with millennials overall.

[Xing]

Maybe Arizona or Georgia, but I don't think either will change that quickly.

[NOVA Green]

Mississippi and Alaska are two potential wildcards for this type of transformation.

I was going to throw Alaska into the mix, although don't see Mississippi coming anywhere close to a toss-up in the next 2-4 election cycles, unless somehow Northern MS Whites (Non-Plantation Zone) start reverting back to their traditional economically Populist ways, and somehow wealthier Anglo retirees on the Gulf Coast starting to swing more like other relatively upper-income voters elsewhere, and....

Alaska on the other hand is still essentially a Moderate Republican State, receptive towards Democratic statewide candidates, and which will be most negatively impacted compared to virtually any other state under the Republicans proposed Health Care plan(s)....

The impact of employment in the Petro sector has been overstated (As I posted in another thread), and regardless of any regulatory changes Alaskan Crude still will continue to flow from the Northern Slope, and the five existing oil refineries in Alaska will continue to operate, as well as several other refineries in the West Coast in Washington and California that deliver high quality fuel to specs to West Coast population centers.

There are more local Alaskan jobs, as opposed to out-of-state roughnecks (Non-Voters) tied directly to tourism, fishing, and related sectors than there are Petro jobs.

[Virginiá]

Not sure what you mean by this considering how states like North Carolina and Georgia have millennial voters that are more democratic than Virginias millennial. Virginian millennials seem to have similar numbers that democrats get with millennials overall.

It's not necessarily about how deeply Democratic they vote, it's about whether they keep voting that way the more they age. In Virginia, there seems to be little slippage, as the 30-39 year olds in 2012 helped make the 40-49 bloc majority Democratic in 2016 as 4 years' worth of those voters shifted into the 40-49 category. If you applied the same to North Carolina, the 30-39 group should be a lot more Democratic than it was in 2016, but it isn't. I don't think population migration is enough to explain this in either state.

[PoliticalShelter]

Not sure what you mean by this considering how states like North Carolina and Georgia have millennial voters that are more democratic than Virginias millennial. Virginian millennials seem to have similar numbers that democrats get with millennials overall.

It's not necessarily about how deeply Democratic they vote, it's about whether they keep voting that way the more they age. In Virginia, there seems to be little slippage, as the 30-39 year olds in 2012 helped make the 40-49 bloc majority Democratic in 2016 as 4 years' worth of those voters shifted into the 40-49 category. If you applied the same to North Carolina, the 30-39 group should be a lot more Democratic than it was in 2016, but it isn't. I don't think population migration is enough to explain this in either state.

Uhh, the exit polls say that Hillary improved amongst the 40 - 49 by one percentage point compared to obamas percentage in 2012 in Virginia, which is completely meaningless and doesn't really tell us anything.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Georgia.

Henry, Douglas, Rockdale, and Newton counties have become reliably Democratic over the past decade. Gwinnett and Cobb will follow. I think that plus decreasing the margins in Forsyth and Cherokee Counties and increasing turnout in Muscogee, Bibb, Richmond, and Chatham can get them to victory.

[PoliticalShelter]

In fact looking at the Virginia exit polls I noticed that Hillary collapsed amongst 18 to 24 year old Virginians compared to Obama, getting around 51%.

In fact Virginias' young voters are actually closer to the various Midwestern millennial voting patterns, than its is to other sunbelt states like North Carolina, Georgia and Florida (although that state has a unusual divide amongst older miellnals and younger millennials, probably just bad exit polling).

[Virginiá]

Uhh, the exit polls say that Hillary improved amongst the 40 - 49 by one percentage point compared to obamas percentage in 2012 in Virginia, which is completely meaningless and doesn't really tell us anything.

And Obama won that group by 1% as opposed to Clinton's 6 point win. That is a substantial increase that could easily be explained by what I was saying. Further, if you go back to 2008, Obama's numbers margin 30 - 44 and 45 - 64 is small and not that impressive, which despite his large wins again suggests what I am saying.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hillary had well known problems with young voters. To that, Trump didn't actually increase his margin over Romney, which suggests that Clinton's decrease was mostly her own issues.

[PoliticalShelter]

And? Hillary also did better with 40 to 49 year old North Carolina voters which doesn't disprove my point that Virginia is not somehow unique amongst the sunbelt states with its youth patterns (and isnt even really the strongest example anyway).

Also trump was also a terrible candidate for young voters, even by GOP standards (losing them in the primaries for example).

[Virginiá]

And? Hillary also did better with 40 to 49 year old North Carolina voters which doesn't disprove my point that Virginia is not somehow unique amongst the sunbelt states with its youth patterns (and isnt even really the strongest example anyway).

Also trump was also a terrible candidate for young voters, even by GOP standards (losing them in the primaries for example).

And since 2008, a year where Obama overperformed Hillary statewide, his 4% win among 30-44 year olds was bested bigly by first himself in 2012 (4% in 2008 --> 9% in 2012, even despite a smaller statewide win), then by Hillary's 13% win among 30-44 year olds. The answer is because another generation is taking over and is substantially more Democratic than the one before them. This clear trend of generational replacement isn't reflected as evenly in other states.

In North Carolina, Obama won 18-29 year olds by 74% in 2008, 67% in 2012 and yet the same voters that 8 years later would mostly occupy the 30-39 age group managed to only give Clinton a 4% win among 30-39 year olds. That is a steep drop-off that suggests many of those voters gladly voted Trump/Republican later on, whereas Virginia they mostly kept their old voting habits. Differences in turnout among subgroups and pop. migration can't explain such a huge drop, imo.

Look, I don't know how else to explain that but if you disagree then we'll just have to agree to disagree. Suffice to say I'm a big believer that most voters tend to form partisan loyalties early on in their youth and do not easily change throughout life. Virginia is an example of that, NC not so much, unless there is something I'm missing here. My point regarding MS/AK was that I'm not sure if there is a generational component to support them being another 'Virginia.' Since I see generational change as the reason for CO/VA shifting (more so for VA), I'm not sure if MS/AK could do the same so rapidly.

[MT Treasurer]

Yes, we have little data to work with when it comes to AK. There are exit polls for 2008 and 2014, and they don't really suggest a strong Democratic trend at all, but I wouldn't read too much into these two results. In the long term, the state will probably continue to trend Democratic (and the GOP definitely underperformed in 2012 and to a lesser extent 2016), but I'm not sure how fast this is going to happen. I could see Alaska going the opposite way of Maine eventually (it kinda already behaves that way in down-ballot races), if that makes any sense. But it'll take some time until it finishes its transition into another "Virginia" or "Vermont".

[Beet]

I can't believe any of the hype because North Carolina was hyped for a decade, only to fizzle. And when it did, we just stopped talking about it and started moving onto Georgia, South Carolina, yada yada I mean you might as well be shooting fish in a barrel these days. What about Florida? That should've trended Dem long ago but it never happened. In 2020-2024, the Dems should try and retake Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, etc. and reassemble the Obama coalition, period. Hug those states tight at all costs.

[Virginiá]

What about Florida?

Florida at least has some decent explanations, but North Carolina seems a little trickier. Democrats seemed to have the potential to make more progress there - they did win a lot more voters at one point, but it seems over the Obama years they lost them, or at least Clinton did, and perhaps another Democrat can make it up.

A steady stream of aging Boomer retirees, a slow-to-change Cuban population and a higher Democratic share of white support (which gave Democrats more room to fall, for numerous reasons, including their rural collapse) explains Florida.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

What about Florida?

Florida at least has some decent explanations, but North Carolina seems a little trickier. Democrats seemed to have the potential to make more progress there - they did win a lot more voters at one point, but it seems over the Obama years they lost them, or at least Clinton did, and perhaps another Democrat can make it up.

A steady stream of aging Boomer retirees, a slow-to-change Cuban population and a higher Democratic share of white support (which gave Democrats more room to fall, for numerous reasons, including their rural collapse) explains Florida.

In North Carolina, people who recently moved to NC actually voted more like NC natives than people who moved there a while ago, which suggests that the same retiree factor with Florida may also be happening there.

[PragmaticPopulist]

What about Florida?

Florida at least has some decent explanations, but North Carolina seems a little trickier. Democrats seemed to have the potential to make more progress there - they did win a lot more voters at one point, but it seems over the Obama years they lost them, or at least Clinton did, and perhaps another Democrat can make it up.

A steady stream of aging Boomer retirees, a slow-to-change Cuban population and a higher Democratic share of white support (which gave Democrats more room to fall, for numerous reasons, including their rural collapse) explains Florida.

Yeah. I was tempted to add Florida to the poll, but it's a bit of an outlier. Its population trends seem to be canceling each other out. My guess is it will continue to be a swing state, and possibly get so many electoral votes that it renders Ohio obsolete as the ultimate bellwether, as sad as it may sound.

North Carolina, on the other hand, seems a bit like a combination of Virginia and Florida. The suburbs or Charlotte, Durham, Raleigh, etc. still give Republicans decent margins, while Northern Virginia and Richmond's suburbs are becoming more Democratic by the year.

[Mr. Smith]

Arizona and Georgia.

Arizona definitely could've been won if the attention given to NC went there instead, even with the Obamacare hikes.

And Georgia seems little different from Colorado a decade ago.

[Annatar]

Personally I think Georgia is more likely to become a state that is a 50/50 or leans slightly democratic owing to the fact that younger voters in Georgia seem to be much more democratic, Trump lost 18-29 year old voters by 18 points in Arizona, whilst winning 65+ voters by 13 points whereas he lost 18-29 year old voters in Georgia by 30 points whilst winning 65+ voters by 36 points. The massive age gap in Georgia 66 points as compared to just 31 in Arizona suggests to me that Arizona is likely to be much more republican then Georgia going forward.

Also, the GOP does not have the ability to make the same gains with the white vote in Georgia that they do in Arizona, Trump won 54% of the white vote in Arizona, whereas he won 75% in Georgia, going forward, the GOP can still make gains with white voters and Hispanic voters in Arizona whereas in Georgia, once the share of the white vote drops another 4 to 5 points, the GOP will have to make gains with the African American vote or risk losing Georgia.

[Lachi]

Georgia, and Ariziona are by far the most likely, but some other states like, as has already been mentioned, Alaska, Mississippi might come around and really surprise us.

[NOVA Green]

Firstly, I want to commend Pragmatic Populist for being a top-tier poster. We have experienced a major influx of new posters since the Georgia Primary, and you add significantly to the content, quality, and over contribution to Atlas. Thank You!

Secondly, I need to make a full confession----

I was the individual/idiot that voted "Other--- Alaska".

Now before the baying hounds start biting at my heels, let me explain the rationale or logic behind that vote, and not simply voting to be contrarian.

So when I read the original question as posed: "Which GOP-leaning state(s) will become tossups, and eventually lean DEM in the 2-4 presidential elections?" there are obviously ways to separate that into two parts----

1.) Which states will become tossups AND
2.) Eventually Lean Dem (2-4 Election Cycles)

So the obvious answer to Part I is that GA and AZ might potentially be considered tossups currently considering the '16 Presidential Election results. In the case of GA '08 needs to be added to the mix as well.

A.)  Georgia--- So the case for GA being a tossup is a bit flaky, in that it is premised upon a continued high level of Democratic support in the Atlanta suburbs, and high level of turnout among Millennial and African-American Voters.

At this point we have no evidence that "demographics are destiny" and that the major swings against Trump in the 'burbs of Atlanta are transferable, let alone that post Obama Democrats will be able to deliver the same level of support and turnout among African-American and Millennial voters.

Several of our resident Georgia experts have already cautioned that GA is not nearly an elastic state as many believe, and that a "normal" Centrist Conservative Republican will likely be able to regain ground lost in Metro Atlanta.

So, although we might consider GA to move into a toss-up realm in 2020 and possibly beyond, we have yet to see any evidence that Georgia will move into a "Lean Democratic" category within the next 4 Presidential Election cycles.

2.) Arizona--- We definitely have a bit more evidence that Arizona might well be a true "tossup" state in 2020 and beyond....

Rapidly growing Latino population of voting age, after several decades of Anti-Latino rhetoric from Republican lawmakers in the State, are effectively pushing Latino voters into the arms of the Democratic Party.... This is a phenomenon which could potentially mirror what happened in California that was a Republican State, until Pete Wilson decided to scapegoat Latino-Americans with a draconian "collective punishment" that caused many Republican leaning Latinos to start voting Democrat in massive numbers a few short years later.

That being said, Latinos make up only a fraction of the Arizona electorate at this time, and is still a state heavily dominated by older, wealthier, and more significantly California retirees.

Ok--- fair enough... I could well see Arizona moving to tossup status and eventual Lean Dem in 4 Pres election cycles (As opposed to GA, where that is harder to imagine).

Still--- the dramatic increase in Latino votes in '16 are only a small sliver of a much bigger story.... Much of the reason why AZ was so close in '16 had to do with a rejection of Trump among relatively wealthy retirees in Metro-Phoenix....

So similar to GA (Metro-Atlanta) will these voters switch back and start voting Republican again for President without Trump at the top of the ticket, once they get a "normal" Republican President?

It is interesting that even in some of the wealthiest Anglo parts of Maricopa County that "Sheriff Joe" got shot down in a blaze of glory, looking at precinct level results.

Assuming that the enthusiasm and grassroots organizing from '16 continues, it is not unfathomable that these classic Anglo SoCal retirees are rejecting the Anti-Latino racism and bigotry that pervades their new adopted State.

Time will tell.... money talks and money walks and something tells me these same voters will flip back Post Trump. There are a lot more Middle-Class Anglo retirees coming from SoCal over the next decade or so.

3.) Texas--- Bit of a cross between AZ and GA when it comes to predicting demographic change.

I lived in Texas (Houston Area) for four years, so definitely get the concept that Texas *might* become a tossup in '20/'24, but definitely don't see it moving "Lean Dem" anytime soon.

In order for Texas to move into Toss-Up status it would be predicated upon the following variables:

A.) Continued and expanding voter turnout levels among Working-Class Latinos (80-20 Dem). Is this sustainable in a post-Trump era if the Republican Party moves away from stereotyping Latino Voters?

B.) Equally importantly---- Middle Class Latinos in Texas tend to only vote Democratic narrowly on the margins, but they tend to vote much more frequently. *IF* the dramatic swings from '16 continue, this is a giant Red Flag for Texas Republicans, considering the overall level of support for George W. in '00/'04, as well as other subsequent Republican Presidential candidates in '08/'12.

C.) Anglo suburban voters---- This is obviously the key to the Lone Star State.... Are the dramatic 20% swings among wealthy Anglo voters in the 'burbs of Houston/DFW/SA/Austin sustainable in the Post-Trump era? I have serious doubts on that question, but again a fast moving and dynamic state where 80% of the Population resides in large Metro Areas, so anything is possible depending upon how new voters moving in go a few decades down the line.

4.) South Carolina--- Not seeing it there.... Sure Northern transplants to Coastal SC are potential swings, through in country-club areas outside of Richmond, and maybe some gains in the 'burbs of Charlotte, but NW-SC Whites would need to start shifting dramatically in order to make this state a "tossup" let alone "Lean Dem".

5.) Alaska--- Heck Trump only got 51% of the vote here in '16, in a state that has been shifting Democratic gradually over the past 3 election cycles.

Unlike GA and AZ, Alaska is not dependent upon the votes of fickle Upper Middle-Class Anglo suburbanites...

Unlike AZ & TX, Alaska is not dependent upon a massive Latino surge to somehow make the State competitive.

If any of the states listed will become "Lean Democratic" at a Presidential level by 2032, I wold pick Alaska rather than rolling through the CW of AZ & GA....

Alaska is much more elastic, and although there is state revenue and paychecks going to every resident from Alaska as part of a negotiated deal with the Oil Industry, the whole deal with Alaska is that they are independent...

The cost of just about everything is higher in Alaska than anywhere else in the US (Frequently 3x the cost), food, medicine, rural health care....

Demographics are not destiny, recent election returns don't represent the totality, so I chose to make a wild bet and go with Alaska as a "Lean Dem" state by 2032 (AZ and GA much more skeptical on).

Feel free to shoot my argument full of holes.... that's what I love about Atlas.