How can Democrats overcome their structural disadvantages in the long term?

[ProgressiveModerate]

The only political divide I can confidently say will stick around for a while is the urban-rural divide where Democrats do significantly better with urban voters and Republicans do better with rural voters. In the EC, rural states are overrepresented in the EC. In house districts, many urban areas vote like 95% Democrat whereas rural areas vote more 70R-30D, which makes drawing a bunch of solid D districts wher half the votes are wasted and R districts that have just enough Rs to reliably win very easy. Look at OH, the old NC map, Michigan, Wisconsin. In the senate, Ds typically win large states, but all states get 2 senators no matter what. There are no small states (States with less than 6 EVs) that I can confidently say will be in the Democrats column in 2020. Most of the states where Democrats are making gains are grwoing, and growing fast, like GA, TX, AZ, but most R trending states are loosing population, and there are far more of them (MN, WI, IA, NH, ME, VT). Just look at the current senate; Ds won the PV in 2016, won in a landslide in 2018, and it'll take them another landlside to maybe get a slim majority in the senate in 2020. To me, it seems like the house and senate go to Rs by default, and the only way they lose are huge wave years against them and/or the Republicans have to screw up by putting up terrible canidates. Heck, in 2018, the Republicans could've flipped, WV, MT and OH, and held onto AZ if they did a better job, whereas the only D race that was truly savable was FL. I could see a situation down the road where Rs have a lock on congress no matter what happens basically. What should Democrats do about this problem?

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

There are no small states (States with less than 6 EVs) that I can confidently say will be in the Democrats column in 2020.

In 2020, there are several of these - DE, HI and VT. I'm not quite ready to call NM safe D yet, but polling may persuade me to shift it into that column if the trends there are anything like Colorado's.

The structural disadvantages you point to are far worse in the Senate than the EC in the long term. If trends allow Democrats to narrowly win e.g. Texas while losing in the midwest by miles, they could eventually gain a narrow EC advantage. One path to solving their Senate problem would be some sort of constitutional amendment passed with the support of Republicans who'd like to eliminate a Democratic EC advantage in return for eliminating a Senate Republican advantage, but the Senate advantage is probably going to be so much greater that they will reject this option.

When was the rural->R trend last reversed (at the national level)?

[Sol]

There are no small states (States with less than 6 EVs) that I can confidently say will be in the Democrats column in 2020.

In 2020, there are several of these - DE, HI and VT. I'm not quite ready to call NM safe D yet, but polling may persuade me to shift it into that column if the trends there are anything like Colorado's.

The structural disadvantages you point to are far worse in the Senate than the EC in the long term. If trends allow Democrats to narrowly win e.g. Texas while losing in the midwest by miles, they could eventually gain a narrow EC advantage. One path to solving their Senate problem would be some sort of constitutional amendment passed with the support of Republicans who'd like to eliminate a Democratic EC advantage in return for eliminating a Senate Republican advantage, but the Senate advantage is probably going to be so much greater that they will reject this option.

When was the rural->R trend last reversed (at the national level)?

2008 (outside of the upland South/Louisiana). Certain rural areas swung to Obama in 2012 as well.

[Orwell]

There are no small states (States with less than 6 EVs) that I can confidently say will be in the Democrats column in 2020.

In 2020, there are several of these - DE, HI and VT. I'm not quite ready to call NM safe D yet, but polling may persuade me to shift it into that column if the trends there are anything like Colorado's.

The structural disadvantages you point to are far worse in the Senate than the EC in the long term. If trends allow Democrats to narrowly win e.g. Texas while losing in the midwest by miles, they could eventually gain a narrow EC advantage. One path to solving their Senate problem would be some sort of constitutional amendment passed with the support of Republicans who'd like to eliminate a Democratic EC advantage in return for eliminating a Senate Republican advantage, but the Senate advantage is probably going to be so much greater that they will reject this option.

When was the rural->R trend last reversed (at the national level)?

2008 (outside of the upland South/Louisiana). Certain rural areas swung to Obama in 2012 as well.

I highly doubt that we reach a level of separation where one party is virtually guaranteed a lock on the Senate while another is guaranteed a lock  on the White House, I could see the GOP adopting more a fiscal populace tone while keeping with their social conservatism, but relenting somewhat on issues like immigration and gun control (not enough to scare off their midwestern base) but enough to rope in some Latinx and Suburban voters into their coalition while the Democrats follow a strategy of appealing to the large cities, continuing to hammer home their message in the suburbs, and running psuedo-populists to attempt to cut into rural margins in these midwestern states.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

AZ is the new D state

Senate map 2020

No structural problems

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Kerry in 04, Obama 08 and 2012 would have won a tied PV. The tipping point state both times was CO.

[morgieb]

TBF it was only the most recent election where there was a significant PV/EV disparity. I think it might dissipate if/when the Dems flip Texas and Georgia.

The Senate is more of a problem. Perhaps Dems should look at trying to flip a few small Western states where emigration from larger states is happening (Montana, Alaska) to go some way towards counterating the big small state bias?

[Non Swing Voter]

Not convinced this is a long term problem. 

Regarding the Senate: There are a lot of small states that vote Democrat too: Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Nevada, Rhode Island, Delaware, New Mexico.  I don't share the common xo wisdom that New Hampshire and Maine will eventually flip because they're rural. 

Regarding the House: Republicans are starting to pack themselves into rural districts the way democrats pack into Urban ones.  It's pretty clear that the battlefield for the foreseeable future will be middle ring suburbs.  Not suburbs right across the line from cities, but the next counties over.  The problem for Republicans is that these seem to be going 60-40 Democrat lately.  I also expect that after the 2020 census, numerous rural districts cease to exist due to population loss.

Regarding the White House: The upper midwest flipped before the sunbelt did but those states are going to flip.  If Democrats start winning California + New York + Texas then they have an enormous structural advantage which will force a realignment as the current GOP coalition would become untenable.