How each state trended from 1992-2012

[OSR stands with Israel]

30% shade: 0-3 pt change
50% shade: 3-7 pt change
70% shade: 7+ pt change

[OSR stands with Israel]

These are the states that most people are making a huge deal about Trends now:

Out of these states more states have not had their 92-12 trend hold up compared to the ones that did

[Annatar]

Well I think what this clearly shows is over any defined time period you can basically get any trend you want, 1992-2000 vs 1992-2004 or 2000-2016 or 1996-2012, whatever time period you use you will get states trending differently. Which means one can make an argument for most states trending one way or the other based off the time period one choose to look at.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Here's 96-12 for those "important states" (Leaving KS out due to it being Dole's home st)

[Epaminondas]

But 92 and 2012 were completely different elections.

The only reasonable trend map is 2000-2016: similar margin, same outcome.

[OSR stands with Israel]

But 92 and 2012 were completely different elections.

The only reasonable trend map is 2000-2016: similar margin, same outcome.

No 2000 and 2016 is not reasonable either , just look at the two nominees . In 2000 the Republicans nominated an Evangelical Neo Liberal  from the Dallas suburbs while in 2016 Republicans nominated a bombastic socially moderate economic nationalist from the North East.


HW and Romney on the other hand are pretty similar and while there were differences between Obama and Clinton many of the perceptions were similar as well . Also 92-12 was the Blue Wall Dem Coalition era

[Antonio the Sixth]

Here is it in standard Atlas shades, for those of us who are annoyed at amateur trend maps that don't make use of the lighter shades:

1992-2012

[MT Treasurer]

Well I think what this clearly shows is over any defined time period you can basically get any trend you want

No, what this clearly shows is that you can get the trends you want by comparing two completely different elections with entirely different characteristics in order to push your desired narrative when all the other data points aren’t supporting the argument you’re trying to make.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

But I thought 2016 trends were irreversible and that suburban conservatives are now #progressives for life who will vote D no matter what???

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Like, obviously a district that went 60-39 for Romney and 49-47 for Clinton is Safe D even with a self proclaimed socialist on the ballot because of trends right??

[cvparty]

But I thought 2016 trends were irreversible and that suburban conservatives are now #progressives for life who will vote D no matter what???

lol this doesn’t disprove any of that? trends are based on demographics not states. besides, 1992 texas is not remotely the same as the state with 28 million people today

[Former President tack50]

I wonder if using 1996-2016 as opposed to 1992-2012 would show something different or not. Trends saw a massive change or acceleration between 2012 and 2016

[Non Swing Voter]

I am surprised Florida is red and Georgia is blue.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I wonder if using 1996-2016 as opposed to 1992-2012 would show something different or not. Trends saw a massive change or acceleration between 2012 and 2016