The 100 States of America

[Antonio the Sixth]

Maryland

The Eastern part of the RL state, encompassing the Baltimore area and the Delmarva Peninsula. It goes without saying that these two regions would rarely see eye-to-eye politically. With the former outvoting the latter, the end result is a reliably but not overwhelmingly Democratic state. Since 2000, its PVI has fluctuated between D+5 and D+11, putting it more or less on par with states like RL New Jersey, Washington or Oregon. Unlike those other states, though, Maryland's Democratic lean is nothing new. The only time it had a Republican PVI was in 1972, when McGovern bombed hard in the state (probably a reflection of the period's fraught racial politics, combined with Agnew's favorite son status). On the other extreme, you have Carter's abnormally strong showing there in 1980, when he actually improved on his 1976 margin and brought the state to a whopping D+18 PVI. Aside from those cases, MD's PVI usually stayed in the range it has occupied in more recent elections. 2012 and 2016 seem to suggest a recent Democratic trend, but it's too early to know how significant it is.

Capital: Let's leave it at Annapolis. Baltimore would work just as well, but if it ain't broke don't fix it.

House Seats (1963): 9
House Seats (2013): 8

VAP Demographics: 65% White, 26% Black

PVI 2008: D+6
PVI 2012: D+11
PVI 2016: D+11

Congressional Representation: MD keeps its original classes, so the Senators would have been elected in 2016 and 2018. It's very hard to see Republicans winning in either year, especially since they almost certainly wouldn't have the incumbency (even in 2010, Mikulski was probably too entrenched to lose). In Congress, I could see Democrats going for a gerrymander, but even the nastiest would have to provide for at least one Republican vote sink, and probably two. A fair map would be 5-3 or even 4-4, since the political geography heavily favors Republicans here.

Local Government: Hogan won that part of the state by 20 points in 2014, but he probably wouldn't have run in the first place since he's from the DC area. Indeed, the state's recent political history would probably be severely upended, given that Bob Ehrlich would have comfortably won a second term in 2006. This leaves 2010 wide open, a contest between the state's natural partisanship and the strongly Republican national environment. 2014, in turn, would hinge on how 2010 went, and 2018 on how 2014 went. Still, all considered, the odds are stacked in the Democrats' favor in 2018. Unless a popular GOP incumbent was running for reelection that year (which is possible but not very likely), Democrats would have the upper hand. At the legislative level, you can expect Democratic majorities, but not overwhelming ones. Figuring out the makeup of the MD HoD was an absolute pain in the ass, but in the end, my calculations suggest that Democrats currently hold a 48-30 majority in this part of the state, and held a 44-34 one back in 2015. These aren't big majorities, but they're solid enough for Democrats to have kept control throughout the decade. So, a Democratic trifecta is more likely than not.


Potomac

This odd snake-shaped state covers a strip of land along the left bank of the river it's named after. Most of this territory is covered by suburbs of what is known IRL as Washington, DC - but which would now be known as Washington, PT, since it's also incorporated into the state. Finally, you really have to feel for the strongly Republican counties at the Northwestern edge of the state, which have to be included in it for compactness reasons, but would be very much at odds with its politics. Indeed, it will surprise no one to hear that Potomac is a Titanium-D state. With Washington acting as a heavy Democratic anchor, there is very little Republicans could do to prevail here. Nixon just barely squeaked by in his 1972 landslide, winning a paltry 51%, and no Republican since him has even come close. With Prince George's and Montgomery counties increasingly voting like the city they surround, Democrats have steadily continued to gain ground since. Between 1964 and 1980, PT's PVI hovered between D+16 and D+20. Since 1984, it's always been over D+22. Since 2000, every new election there has marked a new high. Democrats will probably hit their limit here soon, but they have already effectively achieved one-party status. Potomac is also a majority-minority state, with the highest Black VAP share of any new state (and the second-highest after MS). Given Black voters' importance to the Democratic coalition, they could acquire significant clout in state politics.

Capital: It has to be Washington. IRL, of course, having the same city be both the federal and state capital would be a mess. In this scenario however, I've decided to move the federal capital closer to the country's population center. To make it a sufficiently large city, let's say St. Louis, MO (it's too off-center to be MO's capital anyway).

House Seats (1963): 8
House Seats (2013): 8

VAP Demographics: 47% White, 34% Black, 11% Hispanic

PVI 2008: D+41
PVI 2012: D+45
PVI 2016: D+49

Congressional Representation: Obviously two Democratic Senators, at least one of whom is Black. As for the House, geography probably prevents a full Democratic sweep. It would be really hard, even just technically, not to keep the four Northernmost counties together, which pretty much guarantees a Republican-leaning district. The other 7 could easily be gerrymandered for the Democrats, though.

Local Government: Even without considering DC, Hogan lost the relevant MD counties by a full 18 points in 2014 and by 4.5 points in 2018. There is just no path for a Republican to win statewide here. As for the legislature, the relevant parts of MD are represented by 51 Democrats and 12 Republicans in the HoD, and with DC included that supermajority would grow even bigger.

[Del Tachi]

My take on some of the Southern names/capitals:

AL-North:  Cumberland (CL); Decatur (half-way between The Shoals and Fort Payne; Birmingham didn't boom until the turn of the century, Huntsville not until the 1950s)
AL-South:  Alabama (AL); Montgomery
FL-North:  Apalachicola (AP), Dixie (DX) could be a cool, alternative if your list gets too heavy on Native American names; Tallahassee
FL-East:  St. Johns (SJ); Titusville (very central and big enough)
FL-West:  Manatee (MA?  make Massachusetts "MC"?); St. Petersburg (oldest of Gulf Florida's historic port cities)
FL-South:  Miami (MI); Miami (uncreative, but it works given the historic importance of the city/lake/river)
GA-North:  Chattahoochee (CH); Atlanta
GA-South:  Georgia (GA); Macon (most central of the "big-three" in Middle Georgia)
KY-East:  Kentucky (KY); Lexington
KY-West:  Jackson (JA); Bowling Green
LA-East:  Louisiana (LA); New Orleans
LA-West:   Natchez (NA); Alexandria
IN-North:  Tippecanoe (TP); Lafayette (who doesn't love a college town/state capital combo?)
IN-South:  Indiana (IN); Bloomington (see above)
NC-East:  Catawba (CA); Hickory (half-way between Asheville and Charlotte, big enough)
NC-Middle:  Tryon (after William Tryon; TY); Raleigh (isn't very central anymore, but I love RTP too much to move it to Greensboro)
NC-West:  North Carolina (NC); Fayetteville
TN-East:  Franklin (FR); historic capital is Jonesborough, but I like Knoxville
TN-West:  Tennessee (TN); Jackson (half-way between Memphis and Nashville)
SC-North:  Piedmont (PE); Greenville
SC-South:  South Carolina (SC); Charleston
VA-East:  Virginia (VA); Williamsburg (now way more centrally located than OTL Virginia)
VA-West:  Shenandoah (SH); there are some great, smaller, more centrally-located cities but I can't see it anywhere other than Charlottesville

The state that was the hardest to name was LA-West.  Names like Acadiana and Atchafalaya seem to give undue weight to the southern, swampy part of this new state; however, alternative names like Caddo or Ouachita overweight the similary distinct northern half.  I settled on Natchez because, even though the tribe's historical area was pretty small, its pretty centrally-located. 

[Antonio the Sixth]

Thanks! I really appreciate the suggestions. Let me go through this in order.

AL-North:  Cumberland (CL); Decatur (half-way between The Shoals and Fort Payne; Birmingham didn't boom until the turn of the century, Huntsville not until the 1950s)
AL-South:  Alabama (AL); Montgomery

For some reason the Alabama name felt more relevant to the Northern part of the state than the Southern. And I really wanted to call the Southern part "King" because I like the idea of MLK being the only non-President or founding father to get a state named after him. Of course, I'm not sure if the state's white majority would like that very much. I also thought Birmingham could be the Northern state's capital; it's off-center but the whole state is compact and small enough that it doesn't seem like much of a problem. I don't feel strongly about either call, though, so feel free to convince me.

FL-North:  Apalachicola (AP), Dixie (DX) could be a cool, alternative if your list gets too heavy on Native American names; Tallahassee
FL-East:  St. Johns (SJ); Titusville (very central and big enough)
FL-West:  Manatee (MA?  make Massachusetts "MC"?); St. Petersburg (oldest of Gulf Florida's historic port cities)
FL-South:  Miami (MI); Miami (uncreative, but it works given the historic importance of the city/lake/river)

I really like Apalachiola, Manatee (awkward that every single letter you could use to abbreviate it is already taken, lol) and Miami. Also agreed on all their capitals. Not sure about St. Johns though, I feel like there's gotta be something more culturally or geographically significant. Maybe Seminole or Okeechobee? And for the capital, isn't Orlando just as central?

GA-North:  Chattahoochee (CH); Atlanta
GA-South:  Georgia (GA); Macon (most central of the "big-three" in Middle Georgia)

Perfect on all counts.

KY-East:  Kentucky (KY); Lexington
KY-West:  Jackson (JA); Bowling Green

Jackson is exactly the name I had in mind for the Western state! Once again, all good to me.

LA-East:  Louisiana (LA); New Orleans
LA-West:   Natchez (NA); Alexandria

The state that was the hardest to name was LA-West.  Names like Acadiana and Atchafalaya seem to give undue weight to the southern, swampy part of this new state; however, alternative names like Caddo or Ouachita overweight the similary distinct northern half.  I settled on Natchez because, even though the tribe's historical area was pretty small, its pretty centrally-located. 

That's a good point. "Acadia" was the name I was going for myself, but I was aware that it wasn't ideal for this very reason. I'll consider Natchez while also thinking about potential alternatives. Agreed on all counts otherwise.

IN-North:  Tippecanoe (TP); Lafayette (who doesn't love a college town/state capital combo?)
IN-South:  Indiana (IN); Bloomington (see above)

Tippecanoe works very well! I'll go with that. Not sure about the capitals, though. Indianapolis is a little off-center in the new IN, but not too badly so, and it would feel kind of weird not to have it as the state capital given the name. And for TP, South Bend would be far to the North (ironically), but not actually too far from the population center since there's not much in the Southern part of the state. I'll keep considering it.

NC-East:  Catawba (CA); Hickory (half-way between Asheville and Charlotte, big enough)
NC-Middle:  Tryon (after William Tryon; TY); Raleigh (isn't very central anymore, but I love RTP too much to move it to Greensboro)
NC-West:  North Carolina (NC); Fayetteville

I think it makes more sense to keep the Eastern portion as North Carolina, and call the Western one Cherokee, no? I don't have a good name for the central one, but Tryon feels... wrong. Why would you name it after a minor British general who fought against independence (and apparently advocated targeting civilians... yeesh). That seems most unpatriotic. The capitals are all reasonable picks, though I think we can make a slight concession to Greensboro and move the capital of the central state to Durham (following your  point on college towns ).

TN-East:  Franklin (FR); historic capital is Jonesborough, but I like Knoxville
TN-West:  Tennessee (TN); Jackson (half-way between Memphis and Nashville)

I like Franklin! It felt missing in the pantheon of Founding Fathers-based states. Great choice. I also like your capitals.

SC-North:  Piedmont (PE); Greenville
SC-South:  South Carolina (SC); Charleston

Agreed on the capitals. "Piedmont" for the Northern state sounds a little generic, though. I was considering "Madison" (which would have the same problem as Manatee, but whatever), since he was arguably just as important as a Founding Father as others.

VA-East:  Virginia (VA); Williamsburg (now way more centrally located than OTL Virginia)
VA-West:  Shenandoah (SH); there are some great, smaller, more centrally-located cities but I can't see it anywhere other than Charlottesville

I was actually thinking to leave the Western state with the Virginia name (since it keeps Richmond and most of the land that used to be VA's) and go with Chesapeake for the Eastern, coastal one. I could see arguments either way, though. Also, by not Lynchburg instead of Charlottesville? It's both bigger and more centrally located.

[Del Tachi]

Wanted to get back to you on a few things:

1)  The Alabama River flows through the southern half of OTL Alabama (from Montgomery to Mobile), so I think its a better name for AL-South.  Cumberland is also too good a name to go to waste, IMO.

2) I don't see any reason why Indianapolis has to be the capital of IN-South; Kansas City isn't the capital of Kansas, Jersey City isn't the capital of New Jersey; New York City isn't the capital of New York, etc.

3) I definitely meant to keep NC-East as "North Carolina", since to me it seems like the coastal states would be the most likely to keep their original "colonial" names.  That's the same reason by I defaulted to keeping VA-East as "Virginia".

4) For NC-Middle I went with Tryon just due to the plethora of American places already carrying the moniker (mostly in NC and NY).  I don't think it's any less patriotic than the U.S. State name of "Georgia" or "Louisiana".  Tryon was my personal favorite of all the names I came up with, FWIW; just because I think its different and rolls off the tongue better than a lot of colonial/American Indian names. 

Of course, this is an amazing project and all of these are totally your call.  Keep up the good work!

[Antonio the Sixth]

1)  The Alabama River flows through the southern half of OTL Alabama (from Montgomery to Mobile), so I think its a better name for AL-South.  Cumberland is also too good a name to go to waste, IMO.

D'oh, my bad. You'd think I would have looked up the river but somehow I never did. All right, I'll go with your suggestions.

2) I don't see any reason why Indianapolis has to be the capital of IN-South; Kansas City isn't the capital of Kansas, Jersey City isn't the capital of New Jersey; New York City isn't the capital of New York, etc.

It is now.

I dunno, these kinds of capitals-that-aren't-capitals always bothered me. And again, Indianapolis is not that far off-center, especially since the overall North-South distances are a lot smaller. I will reconsider Bloomington when I do Indiana's writeup, but I think there should be a strong presumption for keeping the capital at Indy unless there's an overriding reason not to.

3) I definitely meant to keep NC-East as "North Carolina", since to me it seems like the coastal states would be the most likely to keep their original "colonial" names.  That's the same reason by I defaulted to keeping VA-East as "Virginia".

I agree in general, and that was the rule I intended to follow all across. The difference with Virginia is that the Eastern state is such a narrow strip of land that it feels wrong to reduce the once-great Commonwealth to such a tiny area. The fact that a good part of the state is in Washington's orbit also makes it feel less like Virginia's core. And again, the Western state encompassing the historical capital should count for something IMO.

4) For NC-Middle I went with Tryon just due to the plethora of American places already carrying the moniker (mostly in NC and NY).  I don't think it's any less patriotic than the U.S. State name of "Georgia" or "Louisiana".  Tryon was my personal favorite of all the names I came up with, FWIW; just because I think its different and rolls off the tongue better than a lot of colonial/American Indian names.

Sorry, but I really don't like the name either phonetically or for what it represents. Neither George II nor Louis XIV actively fought against American independence, so I don't think your parallel holds here. And tbh I'm shocked that there are any places at all named after him, but a state seems particularly ill-suited.

I'm annoyed because I don't have a good name for this state, so I should probably just take your suggestion, but I wish there was another option. Unfortunately I'm out of founders, framers and major historical presidents. I guess I could give this one to MLK (since we're not going by where the relevant people actually lived anyway).

Of course, this is an amazing project and all of these are totally your call.  Keep up the good work!

Thanks! And don't let my argumentativeness stop you from continuing to share your opinions - they're very much appreciated.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Chesapeake

So, yes, this is the state that covers the coastal part of Virginia. As hinted above, this state is dominated by two demographic centers at its two geographic extremities: NoVa (or rather NoChe in this scenario!) to the North, and the Hampton Roads to the South. This is certainly an awkward marriage, since the two areas have a very different culture and history, but it seemed better to me than the available alternatives (NoVa+Shenandoah Valley or NoVa+Richmond). Regardless, the state's political evolution is in large part a reflection of the interaction between these two poles. Back in 1960, it narrowly voted for JFK, largely on the back of his strong performance in the Hampton Roads. As that  area trended right in the post-Civil Rights era, however, so did the state. From 1964 to 2000, it had a Republican PVI, albeit one small enough that Southern Democrats like LBJ, Carter and Clinton in 1996 were able to carry it. Starting in the 1990s, and especially the 2000s, the combination of strong Democratic trend and rapid demographic growth in NoVa (the three "core" counties and related cities made up 15.5% of the state's population in 1960 but 49.7% of it in 2010) bolstered Democrats' fortunes there. In 2004, it narrowly voted for Bush, but by a single point, giving it the first Democratic PVI in four decades. After that milestone, the shift was quick: Obama twice and then Clinton carried it by double-digit margins. And the trend, which has been steady for Democrats since 1992, shows no sign of slowing.

Capital: The state's geography makes any choice here awkward for one part of it or another. I'll stick with Williamsburg, since the Hampton Roads area weighed more heavily earlier in the state's history. If the choice was made today, Fredericksburg would be a more logical choice.

House Seats (1963): 8
House Seats (2013): 11

VAP Demographics: 60% White, 19% Black

PVI 2008: D+8
PVI 2012: D+10
PVI 2016: D+17

Congressional Representation: Even Mark Sexgod Warner wouldn't have needed to break a sweat here: he won this part of the state by 9 points. Two safe Democratic Senators. For the House, there would be at least 5 districts entirely within NoVa that after 2018 would safely be in Democratic hands, plus at least 3 in the Hampton Roads. With a very favorable national environment, I could see Democrats pushing their luck to a 9-2 or even 10-1 split.

Local Government: Similarly, whether CP would choose to hold its elections in 2017 or 2018, either year is almost guaranteed to sweep a Democratic Governor into office. Republicans actually held a slight majority (something like 30-27) in HoD seats covering this area before 2017, but that majority was built on a gerrymander they might never have had a chance to draw in the first place. After this year's elections, of course, Democrats hold at least two thirds of the seats.


Virginia

What's left of the Old Dominion, now landlocked but still holding on to most of the former state's territory and its capital. While the Richmond is demographically significant and is trending Democratic (as are other urban enclaves like Charlottesville), most of the state is fairly rural, which in this day and age means Republican. There would be an interesting coexistence between the Appalachian foothills to the West and North of the state, and the more old-school Dixiecrat Southern region, but neither of region would offer Democrats much hope. Unlike other parts of the South, however, the State's Republican politics are nothing particularly new. In fact, the state has never voted for a Democratic nominee in any election I have data for (my best guess looking at the maps is that the last time it did was 1948). After a brief period of relative swinginess in the Carter years, the state has been remarkably steady since 1988, with its PVI only fluctuating between R+12 to R+15. Differential trends in rural and urban areas are largely canceling each other out, but the end result is a Likely-R state.

Capital: Lynchburg strikes me as the natural choice.

House Seats (1963): 10
House Seats (2013): 9

VAP Demographics: 76% White, 18% Black

PVI 2008: R+12
PVI 2012: R+13
PVI 2016: R+14

Congressional Representation: This state is not completely unwinnable for Democrats: Kaine came within 1 point of beating Stewart there. But the fact that he still didn't beat a candidate as flawed as him (even though Kaine is from this part of the state and Stewart isn't) should make it clear what a tall order it is. Two Republican Senators are by far the likeliest outcome. The GOP would also hold most House seats, although even with a skillful gerrymander they would probably have to draw at least two safe-D and one swing seat which would probably go Democratic in 2018.

Local Government: Similarly, I could see the right Democrat winning a gubernatorial race (if it could happen in KY and LA, it definitely can happen here), but the odds certainly aren't in their favor. A Republican legislature, meanwhile, is pretty much a given, and there's probably a nasty gerrymander in place to make sure it stays that way. So, a Republican trifecta is the most likely scenario.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

I prefer the NOVA + Shenandoah route honestly.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/03d21319-4312-42eb-82c4-eea43ff095c1

[Antonio the Sixth]

I prefer the NOVA + Shenandoah route honestly.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/03d21319-4312-42eb-82c4-eea43ff095c1

That's defensible, but I really don't like it personally. The Southern state is very nice and cohesive, but Shenandoah and NoVa are just too different politically and culturally to belong in the same state. Local politics would be a permanent clash between the two, and that's just not healthy.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Sorry for the long hiatus, I had a pretty hectic end of the quarter. Anyway, I hope there's still interest in this project! Here's a big update for you.


North Carolina

This is the Eastern, coastal portion of the original state. Of the three states formed out of it, it's the most rural, lacking the large urban expanses that dominate the areas further inland. It's also the one with the heaviest African-American presence, at over a quarter of the VAP. It won't surprise you to know that these two demographic characteristics work in opposite directions. Today, these factors result in a likely-R state, a few points to the right of its RL counterpart. Historically, however, this used to be one of the most Democratic states in the entire South. JFK won over 2/3 of the vote there, and with the exception of 1972, NC has had a Democratic PVI continuously until 1992. In 1996, it finally flipped (although Clinton since managed to carry it by a hair), and since then it has remained steadily in the likely-R range. 2008 and 2012 seemed to mark a Democratic trend that would potentially carry the state toward a more competitive status, but that trend reversed itself in 2016. In the absence of a major urban area, and barring exceptional Black turnout, this state presents serious challenges for Democrats.

Capital: Fayetteville would be the obvious choice, but I don't like that it's so far away from the coast and the other population center of the state. I think I prefer Jacksonville instead. It's a bit smaller, but has a nice central and coastal location.

House Seats (1963): 7
House Seats (2013): 7

VAP Demographics: 62% White, 27% Black

PVI 2008: R+8
PVI 2012: R+6
PVI 2016: R+10

Congressional Representation: NC inherits the real NC's classes, so it elected its Senators in 2014 and 2016. I don't see a Democrat winning either race, barring some unforeseeable butterflies. In the House, Republicans could easily keep Democrats down to 2 seats if they were in a position to gerrymander the map, which they probably would. They might even try to go for a 6-1 map, but that might run into trouble with VRA, so 5-2 is the safe choice.

Local Government: Cooper lost this part of the state by 6 points IRL, despite being native of it. Considering that he was already lucky to face an unpopular incumbent, we can pretty safely assume that the GOP candidate would be heavily favored in a gubernatorial election held that year. A Democratic incumbent might have been able to hang on, but it's doubtful they could have been elected in a year as polarized as 2012 either. Furthermore, Republicans almost certainly controlled the state legislature in 2011 and used it to gerrymander themselves into a permanent majority. In both 2016 and 2018, Republicans won 21 out of 36 NC House seats in this area.


King

So this is the state I've decided to name after MLK. It has very little cultural connection to the man, but then again, neither do other states named after people. Still, it does make some sense to associate this name to one of the rare Democratic-leaning Southern states. KG's Democratic lean is a recent development, though. As late as 2004, the state had always had a Republican PVI except when Carter was on the ballot. That didn't mean it wasn't competitive (Clinton won it in 1992, for example), but it was clearly Republican. The Democratic trend, powered by the fast-growing urban areas of the Research Triangle and Greensboro, has been swift and sustained over the past two decades. From R+12 in 1996, the PVI had shrunk to R+4 in 2004. Then, Obama carried the state by slightly more than his national margin in both 2008 and 2012, and Clinton only improved on this performance. The best parallel is OTL Virginia, of course, but KG is if anything more Democratic at this point, and I doubt that T***p would contest the state in 2020.

Capital: Durham. College towns FTW! :P

House Seats (1963): 6
House Seats (2013): 9

VAP Demographics: 67% White, 21% Black

PVI 2008: D+1
PVI 2012: D+1
PVI 2016: D+6

Congressional Representation: Senators were last up in 2016 and 2018. A GOP incumbent in 2018 would be a walking dead, unless they were extremely personally popular. Even in 2016, the odds of a Republican victory would be slim given Clinton's solid win in the state. A split delegation is certainly possible, but two Democrats seem more likely. As for the House, I doubt Democrats would have been in a position to enact a gerrymander in 2011, but Republicans can only do so much in a state that's trending away so fast. In a favorable year like 2018, I could see 6 of the 9 seats falling to the Democrats. 5 at the very least.

Local Government: Cooper won this part of the state by a whopping 12 points in 2016. It's hard to extrapolate too much from that race, but we can assume that Democrats would at least be favored to win an open gubernatorial race in 2016. If KG instead decided to shift its gubernatorial elections to midterm cycles, it's all but guaranteed that a Democrat sail through on the back of the Democratic suburban wave of 2018. In the legislature, meanwhile, it's possible that the aforementioned was strong enough to break the gerrymander that Republicans enacted in 2011. That is what happened IRL, after all: Democrats went from a narrow 20-21 deficit to a 23-18 majority of State House seats from this area. Still, given the slimness of the margins involved, it is possible that the GOP kept control of one of the two houses.


Cherokee

Finally, we have the more historically Republican state of this trio. Most of Cherokee is geographically and culturally part of Southern Appalachia, and thus shares much with East TN or Northern SC. Like those states, therefore, it is reliably Republican. Only in 1964 and 1976 did it cast its votes for the Democratic candidate, and only in the latter and 1980 did it have a Democratic PVI (and even then, just barely so). Since 1984, it has been fairly consistent, ranging between R+13 and R+22. Unlike with KG, there's no noticeable Democratic trend on the horizon. Growing Democratic strength in the Charlotte area is more than counterbalanced by overwhelming Republican dominance in the Appalachian core of the state. These countervailing trends probably mean deeply strained relationships between the state and its largest city (and there's no doubt that Charlotte would fit much better in a state like KG, but unfortunately population balance doesn't allow it).

Capital: Gotta go with Asheville here. It's not exactly central, but it's the only decent-sized city that isn't Charlotte, so it'll do.

House Seats (1963): 7
House Seats (2013): 9

VAP Demographics: 76% White, 14% Black

PVI 2008: R+14
PVI 2012: R+14
PVI 2016: R+15

Congressional Representation: Two Republican Senators are almost guaranteed, barring a Jon Tester-tier Democratic incumbent standing for reelection in 2018. And in the House, a vicious GOP gerrymander probably guarantees them 7 seats (8 would probably be a bridge too far for VRA reasons).

Local Government: I doubt Democrats would find much luck here even at the gubernatorial level, whether in 2016 or 2018. Cooper did decently here, losing by a mere 7 points. But that seems close to the ceiling for Democrats in this state, barring extraordinary circumstances. The State Legislature is similarly safely in Republican hands, bolstered by gerrymander. Republicans lost significantly in this part of the state in 2018, going from a commanding 32-11 majority to a more reasonable 26-17 one. Still, with these numbers, they don't have to worry about losing control in the near future.


And finally, here's the PVI chart where you can see the political evolution of the three states together:

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

RE: IN-North: Fort Wayne is a significantly larger city than Lafayette and is also a college town. Bad part is this is a very rural state and most of the principal cities in IN- North are not in the middle of the state. Kokomo and Lafayette are the southernmost cities while Ft Wayne is Northeast, Elkhart, Mishawaka, and South Bend are too cozy with the Michigan border. Do I need to even mention the cluster that is in the northwest corner?

If you want a central location the most ideal would Peru.

[JG]

Due to my dismal level of knowledges, I have nothing interesting to add except to tell you to keep up the good work. It makes for a fascinating read!

[Antonio the Sixth]

RE: IN-North: Fort Wayne is a significantly larger city than Lafayette and is also a college town. Bad part is this is a very rural state and most of the principal cities in IN- North are not in the middle of the state. Kokomo and Lafayette are the southernmost cities while Ft Wayne is Northeast, Elkhart, Mishawaka, and South Bend are too cozy with the Michigan border. Do I need to even mention the cluster that is in the northwest corner?

If you want a central location the most ideal would Peru.

I think I'll prioritize population and go for Fort Wayne or South Bend, tbh. South Bend has my preference, since at least it's central in the East-West axis.

Due to my dismal level of knowledges, I have nothing interesting to add except to tell you to keep up the good work. It makes for a fascinating read!

Thank you! Any message to this effect is genuinely appreciated (as are Recommends - I do actually look at those).


South Carolina and Madison coming soon, I promise.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Madison

The most natural way to divide South Carolina would be in 3 parts: an Appalachian Piedmont region centered on Greenville-Spartanburg, a central region around Columbia, and a coastal region around Charleston. Sadly, SC doesn't even come close to qualifying for a 3-state split (it barely qualifies for a split at all) so we're left having to partition the central region into the two states anchored on each edge. The most coherent way I've found was to put the Columbia area in the Piedmont-anchored state. This certainly has the effect of reducing its Appalachian identity (and making it a bit less Republican than it otherwise would be). Nevertheless, Madison remains Republican stronghold. It went Democratic twice, in 1960 and in 1976, but since 1984 no Democrat has come close to carrying it. The Republican trend here is not even that recent: by 1988 already, it had a R+22 PVI. JM (let's use this for an abbreviation, since every possible letter combination from "Madison" is already taken) even holds the distinction of being the only state to give Bush an absolute majority in 1992.

Capital: Greenville

House Seats (1963): 5
House Seats (2013): 6

VAP Demographics: 70% White, 22% Black

PVI 2008: R+23
PVI 2012: R+21
PVI 2016: R+22

Congressional Representation: Two Republican Senators, obviously. One Democratic CD centered on Columbia is probably unavoidable due to the VRA, but the other 5 are almost certainly gerrymandered to be safe-R (not that that would take much work).

Local Government: JM is one of the last states I could see electing a Democratic governor, and Republicans have probably held supermajorities in the legislature since the 1990s. Easy Republican trifecta.


South Carolina

What's left of South Carolina includes the wealthy and traditionally conservative Atlantic coast of the state as well as its rural Black Belt in the near hinterland. The latter prove surprisingly influential in the state's makeup: SC's Black percentage of the VAP is only a few points behind MS'. SC Whites aren't quite as monolithically Republican as MS' either, but they are quite Republican. The end result is a state just on the edge of competitiveness. The right Democrat in the right circumstances could carry it (both Clinton in 1996 and Obama in 2008 came tantalizingly close), but they probably don't bother to put much resources into it, and in normal circumstances Republicans have little to fear. Like with JM, this has been the status quo for a while, with no discernible trend since 1988. Before then, though, this is a state with a strange political history: for example, it supported Nixon in 1960 (even as JM went for Kennedy), then was an almost-perfect 3-way tie in 1968 (Nixon prevailed by 0.03 points!), but narrowly stuck with Carter in 1980. Quite a unique, yet typically Southern, political trajectory.

Capital: Charleston

House Seats (1963): 5
House Seats (2013): 6

VAP Demographics: 63% White, 31% Black

PVI 2008: R+9
PVI 2012: R+7
PVI 2016: R+9

Congressional Representation: SC, like its namesake, elected Senators in 2014 and 2016. Neither leaves Democrats any realistic chance of victory. It's quite possible that they held the Class 2 seat from 2009 to 2015, but a one-term Democratic incumbent wouldn't have survived 2014. As for the House, the VRA would mandate at least two majority-Black districts in this state, and that's probably as many Democrats as are going to win here. I guess there could be a coastal suburban seat that a Democratic candidate like Cunningham could pull an upset in, but I have a hard time seeing it given that how many Democratic votes are being siphoned into the VRA seats.

Local Government: Sheheen cane remarkably close to winning here, in 2010 of all years (I still have no idea why Haley underperformed so badly). In a more favorable year, it's far from impossible to see the right kind of Democrat pulling ahead here. It's certainly easier to see than Democrats winning LA and KY as they did last year. Still, that's probably less likely than not. Similarly, state legislative results suggest that Democrats have a real chance of picking up at least one of SC's houses. Republicans are obviously favored for any given office, but I'd say their likelihood of a trifecta is just barely under 50%.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Georgia

The Southern two thirds of the state. Compared to the original Georgia, this new state is much more rural, and more... well, Southern, culturally speaking. Unsurprisingly, it has one of the highest Black VAP shares, behind only MS and PT. Back when the White vote in the Deep South was less overwhelmingly Republican, this was enough to make it a reasonably competitive state, allowing Clinton to carry it twice. Its Republican trend has been pretty steady since 1996, however, and since 2000 its PVI has always been over R+10. With T***pism seemingly playing well in the rural South, this is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Capital: Macon

House Seats (1963): 9
House Seats (2013): 9

VAP Demographics: 60% White, 33% Black

PVI 2008: R+16
PVI 2012: R+14
PVI 2016: R+17

Congressional Representation: If Democrats couldn't win either of the last two Senate races in RL Georgia, they certainly wouldn't in this Georgia either. In the House, the VRA should reasonably require three districts with African-American majorities or strong pluralities. The other 6 are obviously Titanium-R.

Local Government: By the same token, if Kemp won the real GA in 2018, he would have won this GA easily (in fact, he won it by nearly 15 points). Similarly, Republicans in the legislature would probably not have felt compelled to re-gerrymander their maps to protect their majority in 2018. Under the current map, they hold 45 House seats out of the 63 or 64 that cover this state.


Chattahoochee

Conversely, this state encompasses the Atlanta metropolitan area, along with Georgia's Northern Appalachian tip. Must of RL Georgia's demographic boom originates from this part of the state, as Atlanta has grown to become one of America's largest economic and cultural hubs. While less Black than GA, CH is also less White, with ethnicities of more recent extraction like Hispanic and Asians are far more prevalent. It comes as no surprise that this urbanized, diverse and economically dynamic state has proven fertile grounds for Democrats in this political era. Hillary Clinton came tantalizingly close to winning it in 2016, missing the mark by less than half a point (the very Republican Appalachian North made all the difference for T***p). Historically, however, this is a stark reversal from the traditional pattern. With a few obvious anomalies (like 1964, where CH went for LBJ while the Deep-Southern GA supported Goldwater), CH was usually the more Republican of the two states - for example, Bill Clinton never managed to carry it. It was only in 2004 that the gap reversed itself - and even then, CH remained solidly Republican until 2016 came along. While Republicans should be nervous about this state going the same way as KG or even CP, it's not nearly there yet, and trends are not destiny.

Capital: Atlanta

House Seats (1963): 8
House Seats (2013): 16

VAP Demographics: 58% White, 27% Black

PVI 2008: R+10
PVI 2012: R+10
PVI 2016: R+3

Congressional Representation: I've assigned CH to classes 1 (2018) and 2 (2014). The latter is guaranteed to be in Republican hands (before you ask, no, Jim Martin would not have won there in 2008, not even in the first round). The former, however, would probably have given rise to one of the closest Senate races in the country, no doubt attracting a strong Democratic challenger and a ton of campaign money on both sides. It's hard to predict how such a race would have ultimately gone down, but the closest parallel we have is probably Arizona. Since CH is even more of a swing state than AZ at this point, I can see the Democrat pulling ahead there. As for the House, I fully expect Republicans to gerrymander the hell out of the district map, but I can't see them left with more than 10 seats after the 2018 blue wave, and possibly just 9.

Local Government: Abrams defeats Kemp! In this fictional state, at least. Winning by 5 points, she would even avoid a runoff. It's possibly that the local GOP might have run a stronger candidate than Kemp, but even then, I doubt it would have made a difference. In all likelihood (and setting aside massive butterflies), she would be the governor right now. Democrats would also have a decent chance of flipping at least one of the two legislative houses. Under the current (highly gerrymandered) House map, they come a few seats short of a majority. It's certainly possible that Republicans kept control of both houses, but a split legislature is also fairly plausible.

[Sirius_]

This is a serious necropost but this thread was linked in another thread and I found it interesting. I just want to say that as a Greenvillian, I strongly disagree with Greenville being the capital of Madison. Quite simply, the infrastructure for a state capital already exists in Columbia, Greenville doesn't have it. There's no way they'd build another state house in Greenville instead of using the one that already exists. However, in many other aspects, Greenville would be the dominant city, as the more populous metro, center of the private sector economy, transportation hub, and in cultural influence.