The 2024/2028 battleground

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

This is what I see the battleground looking like after the 2020 census:

Safe D: 180
Strong D (could flip in a landslide): 28 (208 total)
D-leaning battleground: 56 (264 total)

Most likely tipping-point: PA (19)

Safe R: 69
Strong R (could flip in a landslide): 55 (124 total)
R-leaning battleground: 131 (255 total)

The "default path" is what you see above. But there are some other likely close election scenarios:

Close Dem victory, Midwest path:

Democrat: 274
Republican: 264

Close Republican victory, Midwest path:

Republican: 273
Democrat: 265

Close Democrat victory, Sunbelt path:

Democrat: 273
Republican: 265

Moderate, Western Republican gets a close win:

Republican: 275
Democrat: 263

Moderate Southern Democrat defeats a Western moderate Republican:

Democrat: 271
Republican: 267

Fire-breathing populist Democrat loses to old-school Southern Republican

Republican: 270
Democrat: 268

[Hope For A New Era]

for the 34528958290226th time, Minnesota will remain D leaning for a very long time

[Nightcore Nationalist]

This is what I see the battleground looking like after the 2020 census:

Pretty good, but I would keep MN lean D and put MI a toss-up.  Maybe put IA likely GOP and VA as safe.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

for the 34528958290226th time, Minnesota will remain D leaning for a very long time

They said that about Wisconsin.

[Hope For A New Era]

for the 34528958290226th time, Minnesota will remain D leaning for a very long time

They said that about Wisconsin.

Minnesota has a level of consistency (steady Republican floor of ~42% and ceiling of ~48%) that Wisconsin doesn't.

Realignment is trading rural areas for MSP suburbs.

By the way, Milwaukee's suburbs are still very R. If they start shifting, we may see the state rebound back to the left, at least for a little while.

[S019]

My guess for a 2024 battleground map

My guess for 2028

[Roll Roons]

My guess for a 2024 battleground map

My guess for 2028

I could easily see this. And in the 2030s, CT, DE, IL, NJ, RI and maybe VT all become swing states, as MI and PA become R-leaning and TX becomes D-leaning. Even NY and MA start shifting to the right a bit (though not enough to become truly competitive), as LA trends D along with MS and SC.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

for the 34528958290226th time, Minnesota will remain D leaning for a very long time

They said that about Wisconsin.

Minnesota has a level of consistency (steady Republican floor of ~42% and ceiling of ~48%) that Wisconsin doesn't.

Realignment is trading rural areas for MSP suburbs.

By the way, Milwaukee's suburbs are still very R. If they start shifting, we may see the state rebound back to the left, at least for a little while.

Trump did particularly badly in WOW, but they didn't care much for Trump as a candidate, nor Trump's style of populism. However, knowing this area like I do, I expect them to resist the leftward shift you see in other suburban areas. They are conservative through and through, and will vote for anyone carrying the pro-life, small government, low tax, pro-business banner.

The problem facing Democrats in Wisconsin is the once reliably progressive rural west of the state shifted way to the right when they voted for Trump. If that signals a permanent shift, WI is now pretty reliably just to the right of the nation. Greater Madison is pretty much tapped out, and gains in WOW won't offset losses in the rural west.

Rural southeastern Minnesota, western Wisconsin, and eastern Iowa were all once a reliable source of Democratic support. This raises two questions concerning Minnesota:

1. Is the entire rural Upper Mississippi Valley still moving to the right?
2. Can Democratic gains in MSP offset this? Especially in the suburbs, especially in a very close national popular vote?

If the answer to both of these is no, I can see Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Michigan moving left of Minnesota.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

What's really bonkers is that if TX and AZ move to dead center, Democrats can lose all of the following states and still win the electoral college:

Wisconsin
Michigan
Ohio
Pennsylvania
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Florida
Georgia

And even if Minnesota does move right of center (which, as East of Eden argued, won't happen), Democrats don't even need it, either.

Democrats get 268 in this map currently, but after the 2020 census, it adds up to 270:

That is bonkers. Democrats need Senators from these states, but they don't need Presidential electors if they have AZ+TX

Trumpian populism will not be enough for Republicans to hold the White House. They will have to build a center-right coalition that appeals to the new values of suburbia.

[Non Swing Voter]

What's really bonkers is that if TX and AZ move to dead center, Democrats can lose all of the following states and still win the electoral college:

Wisconsin
Michigan
Ohio
Pennsylvania
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Florida
Georgia

And even if Minnesota does move right of center (which, as East of Eden argued, won't happen), Democrats don't even need it, either.

Democrats get 268 in this map currently, but after the 2020 census, it adds up to 270:

That is bonkers. Democrats need Senators from these states, but they don't need Presidential electors if they have AZ+TX

Trumpian populism will not be enough for Republicans to hold the White House. They will have to build a center-right coalition that appeals to the new values of suburbia.

Yes and that map is really awful for Republicans in terms of the House too.  The senate field is the only thing keeping them in the game (in their current form) for the next 10 years or so.  They need to decide if they want to adjust to the population or if they want to be a party hell bent on slowing down change with it's relative strength in the Senate.