Blue states that could trend R

[Roll Roons]

There's plenty of talk on here about Democrats gaining ground in Arizona, Georgia and Texas, despite the fact that those states were solidly Republican not too long ago. But what goes up must come down. Post-Trump, what are some blue states where Republicans might make inroads?

[Heebie Jeebie]

I think every state in the northern half of the country will trend R.

[Gracile]

Maine and Minnesota are the obvious answers in the foreseeable future. They are almost certainly unwinnable this year, but I think their R-trend from 2016 will continue. 2022 could be a greatly challenging year for Democrats in both of those states as well.

[MT Treasurer]

I think the next Republican President will have to make major inroads into NM, maybe even win the state outright. It’s possible it trends Republican under Biden presidency, although it’s obviously less likely than MN and ME.

Vermont is another good bet, as is Rhode Island.

[S019]

Maine and basically all of the Rust Belt

I think the next Republican President will have to make major inroads into NM, maybe even win the state outright. It’s possible it trends Republican under Biden presidency, although it’s obviously less likely than MN and ME.

Vermont is another good bet, as is Rhode Island.

I don't see NM, as if the GOP makes the inroads among Hispanics to flip it, they've already won both AZ and TX.

A New England state (CT/RI) or Delaware are wild cards

[YE]

Maine
Rhode Island
Minnesota (though Dems have Minneapolis to counter)
Connecticut
Vermont

Though some of this list depends how long Trump era trends persist and past 2024 or so, I have some doubts it will (though a lot depends on how much Biden does in ofice). I could also see New Mexico given there's already evidence Dems are doing somewhat worse in rural Hispanic places in the state and I see them much more open to voting R in the long term than Hispanics in Las Vegas or Phoenix, though I'm not sure if/when it'll be able to flip the state outright.

[Calthrina950]

It would be ironic if Vermont, which was a Republican stronghold for generations prior to 1964, were to trend back towards that Party in due course.

[Hope For A New Era]

Not Vermont. The state has a unique political culture.


I think Hawaii is an interesting possibility if the party can gain some ground among minorities. Maybe even get Tulsi to switch parties someday.

[Annatar]

I think the Midwest sans Illinois will trend Republican, it is quite likely Biden might be like Bill Clinton and will manage to hold enough non college white voters in the Midwest like Clinton held enough white voters in the south and then in 2024 like 2000 in the upper south there could be a huge shift in the Midwest towards Republicans.

[Red Wall]

All of midwest and New England plus Washington and Oregon. Current wwc regional breakdown from most to least gop:

South - 85% R
Plains - 80% R
Mountain - 75% R
Pacific - 65% R
Midwest/Atlantic - 55% R
New England - 50% R

If the last two vote like Pacific wwc Democrats are doomed in the midwest and most of new england would become competitive or at least would see its margins go down to Oregon levels. Only reason Pacific states aren't R are college whites and this will still be true for most of New England except ME, NH, CT and RI will be lean D. But for the midwest this won't be true so only IL will be a dem state. And if WA and OR WWC start voting like their mountain counterparts they'll be competitive, especially Oregon.

[MT Treasurer]

I think the next Republican President will have to make major inroads into NM, maybe even win the state outright. It’s possible it trends Republican under Biden presidency, although it’s obviously less likely than MN and ME.

Vermont is another good bet, as is Rhode Island.

I don't see NM, as if the GOP makes the inroads among Hispanics to flip it, they've already won both AZ and TX.

The reasons behind the recent Republican collapse in Arizona and Texas go way beyond the Hispanic/non-white vote. Republicans could make major inroads with Hispanics in rural/small-town (and even urban, to a lesser extent) areas and still fall short of winning back AZ and TX, where they’re not only bleeding white support due to generational replacement/migration/etc. but also more reliant on racking up large margins in the suburban areas. There’s a reason NM didn’t trend Democratic in 2016 even as Republican support cratered in AZ and TX.

[Non Swing Voter]

I think the next Republican President will have to make major inroads into NM, maybe even win the state outright. It’s possible it trends Republican under Biden presidency, although it’s obviously less likely than MN and ME.

Vermont is another good bet, as is Rhode Island.

Hilarious analysis.

[Alcibiades]

New England may trend Republican, but not enough for the party to flip any states (except for possibly Maine and NH). This is because the GOP can make inroads among the region’s working class whites, currently the most Democratic anywhere in the nation, but face a high Democratic floor; New England is one of the most educated regions of the US, which does not bode well for any future GOP gains if current trends hold.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Depends on what direction the GOP goes, but MN and ME are likely bets. I think GOP is likely to make inroads with hispanic voters as well esp. in certain states, and will keep those states competitive, but likely not enough to keep NM and CO competitive. I also believe states that dislike socialism will trend back to the GOP and that's the entire south. The division will likely grow, and I can see VA, NC and FL trend back if Dems went into a socialist direction AND if GOP makes inroads with diverse populations.

It's however more likely that we will enter an era of Democratic domination, and that the real fight for the presidency might be the Democratic primaries where the far-left is trying to seize power. The battle for the soul of the GOP is also one to watch. Will the party go back to it's roots or enter a Trumpist direction, and if it goes into a Trumpist direction, will it become more open to non-religious issues where state GOP parties might split on issues (like GOP parties in the south staying deeply religious), but people like Josh Hawley and Donald Trump Jr. ruling the party. while in the Northeast people like Bill Weld, Phil Scott, Larry Hogan and Charlie Baker clearly distance theirselves from the GOP and might split off and create a local New England Republican Party to stay competitive in New England elections.

[Roronoa D. Law]

As far as the NE goes I only see RI, ME, DE, and maybe VT becoming Republican. NH, CT, and MA are too educated to be part of the GOP in this current realignment. NY and NJ are too diverse.

The Midwest has been talked about enough. IL will remain in the D column. I think MN pulls a GA were it goes from being one of the Democrats best states historically but drift toward the Republicans for a decade or two and come back to the Dems when places like Carver, Scott, and Anoka become more favorable for them.

The South is already Republican and VA is gone. GA, NC, and TX are ticking time bombs. SC could get interesting.

The West I think Republican has a good chance of getting NV back. Oregon can get interesting. AZ and CO are trending the other way. As for NM I think it will stay Democratic I don't know if anybody else knows this but NM white population is actually very educated even more than MN and NH.

[Xing]

ME and MN (if they still count as “blue”) are the most obvious. I think it would take longer for a state like RI to really become competitive, but it could happen. WA/OR aren’t trending Republican in the current alignment.

[Gass3268]

Looking at the voter registration numbers for Minnesota, I struggle to see the state going red. The Twin Cities area has gained almost 2 new votes for every 1 vote in the rest of the state since 2016. It's possible Minnesota could go the way of Illinois.

[Tiger08]

I used the new NBC/Cook simulator to find what I see as the potential map for future GOP ceiling (or close to it) in the midst of what I view as a current realignment. 75% R WCW, 60% D college educated whites, 80% D among Black voters, 60% D among Hispanic voters, and 63% D among Asian/other. Using 2016 turnout levels, the GOP wins the whole Trump map + ME, NH, NV, and MN. Here are the states within 5 points:


NV (R+4.
PA (R+4.7)
NE-2 (R+3.6)
NH (R+3.4)
ME (R+1.9)
MN (R+1.7)
NM (D+0.4)
CO (D+2.1)
VA (D+1.4)
DE (D+4.

[Tiger08]

I used the new NBC/Cook simulator to find what I see as the potential map for future GOP ceiling (or close to it) in the midst of what I view as a current realignment. 75% R WCW, 60% D college educated whites, 80% D among Black voters, 60% D among Hispanic voters, and 63% D among Asian/other. Using 2016 turnout levels, the GOP wins the whole Trump map + ME, NH, NV, and MN. Here are the states within 5 points:


NV (R+4.
PA (R+4.7)
NE-2 (R+3.6)
NH (R+3.4)
ME (R+1.9)
MN (R+1.7)
NM (D+0.4)
CO (D+2.1)
VA (D+1.4)
DE (D+4.

EDIT: for some reason the 8s are turning into sunglasses faces

[Never Made it to Graceland]

Not Vermont. The state has a unique political culture.


I think Hawaii is an interesting possibility if the party can gain some ground among minorities. Maybe even get Tulsi to switch parties someday.

Does Tulsi even rep Hawaii like that anymore? I would think people in her district have gotten fed up with her at this point. I don't think she's running for re-election and I don't see her being a standard-bearer for the state's politics like Bernie or Biden have for their states, or Byrd when he was alive. Definitely not to the extent she would flip the state's voters Republican.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

California.

That answer may strike some people as appalling.

It is not.

This would be a longterm strategy should it play out that the Democrats flip and carry Texas—and that Texas would generally trend for the Democrats.

If that were to become the case, and this would be dealing with the topic of realignment, Republicans wanting a future for their political party—with winning the presidency of the United States—would have to counter-realign and become relevant again in, and pursue, California. (And other states similar in voting pattern to California.)

You can’t have a political party be viable for the presidency of the United States while the other of the two major political parties carries the Top 2-ranked populous states in the nation. (The Top 2, nowadays, are California and Texas.)

So, right now, to answer California seems unthinkable in the minds of plenty. But, during the early part of the 2000s, people were dismissing the notion of Democrats being able to carry Virginia. During the early part of the 2010s, people were dismissing the notion of the Republicans being able to carry Michigan. (Those are just two examples.)

They would have to severely limit their addiction to supply-side nonsense if they wanted to have a future in California. The state has very much emerged on the party's left wing in the last 10-15 years. I have no idea why every moderate Republican thinks the answer is lip-service to social issues while pushing for endless corporate tax cuts, it's not going to work in Cali anymore.

[MATTROSE94]

Definitely Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Illinois, and New York. Maybe Connecticut, Delaware, New Jersey, and Massachusetts as well. If Donald Trump declares himself as President for life (which has a 99.99% chance of happening), then all states will trend heavily Republican.

[Samof94]

Oregon having a GOP Governor isn’t unrealistic but other than that, no.

[jaymichaud]

New Hampshire, Maine, Minnesota.

[DC Al Fine]

California.

That answer may strike some people as appalling.

It is not.

This would be a longterm strategy should it play out that the Democrats flip and carry Texas—and that Texas would generally trend for the Democrats.

If that were to become the case, and this would be dealing with the topic of realignment, Republicans wanting a future for their political party—with winning the presidency of the United States—would have to counter-realign and become relevant again in, and pursue, California. (And other states similar in voting pattern to California.)

You can’t have a political party be viable for the presidency of the United States while the other of the two major political parties carries the Top 2-ranked populous states in the nation. (The Top 2, nowadays, are California and Texas.)

So, right now, to answer California seems unthinkable in the minds of plenty. But, during the early part of the 2000s, people were dismissing the notion of Democrats being able to carry Virginia. During the early part of the 2010s, people were dismissing the notion of the Republicans being able to carry Michigan. (Those are just two examples.)

They would have to severely limit their addiction to supply-side nonsense if they wanted to have a future in California. The state has very much emerged on the party's left wing in the last 10-15 years. I have no idea why every moderate Republican thinks the answer is lip-service to social issues while pushing for endless corporate tax cuts, it's not going to work in Cali anymore.

Yeah, the nice moderate Republican method hasn't gone anywhere. Honestly, California seems like it would be a pretty good pick for the Ford 2010 or Harper 2011 playbooks, both of which worked in diverse metros.