Democrat's path to victory in 2024 will run through...

[ProgressiveModerate]

In 2020, most people thought that the Democrat's easiest path to victory was through the rust belt, with the sun belt states being back ups just incase. Even though Biden did flip back the big 3, the margins were quite narrow, and we saw states like GA and AZ also flip to Democrats. I think it's also pretty clear that Democrat's path to victory no longer runs through OH or IA.

I can see the case being made both ways.

The case for the rust belt strategy: Biden won back the big 3 against a Republican incumbent who had a unique appeal to the region, which is quite hard to do by itself, especially considering how close the election ended up being. If Trump isn't on the ballot in 2024, we'll see a bit of reversion in trends, with Democrats having a bit of an easier path in the rust belt by winning back a few rural voters, however, at the same time, the GOP will continue to make inroads with Hispanic voters and stop the suburban bleeding in places like TX. Trump was literally the worst possible fit for AZ of any Republican, and he probably would've won it if it weren't for the whole John McCain thing. We saw neighboring NV trend rightwards this cycle despite COVID-19 hitting the state hard. Also; despite doing better nationally in 2016, Democrats didn't make up much ground in NC and FL; heck Biden did worse than Clinton in FL, and you can't win the election through a sunbelt strategy with only GA and AZ.

The case for the sunbelt strategy: Democratic primary voters selected Biden because of his appeal to rust belt voters, but at the end of the day, his margins in the rust belt were quite narrow considering all the fundementals working in his favor; it'll be hard to replicate high turnout in shrinking urban metros, holding ground in the suburbs, and to stop the rural bleeding in 2024. Republicans will likely continue down a path of Trumpism, and still have quite a bit to gain in rural WI and MI especially. Meanwhile in the sun belt, AZ and GA are just becoming more Demographically favorable to Democrats long term, and Biden won both states despite his struggle with minority voters nationally and not investing in GA until the final months. We have to remember that both AZ and GA voted pretty much in line with WI. It's also unclear where the GOP will gain in states like AZ, GA, and TX; they're pretty much maxed out in rural white areas, it's unclear if they're gains with Hispanics is sustainable, and they've done a poor job at reaching out to cities. FL was just a one time thing; Trump was a unique fit for the state and other Republicans will struggle to replicate his performance in the Miami area.

I personally think their easiest path in 2024 is the Hillary 2016 states + AZ, GA, and PA, though they should still definately invest in WI, MI, FL, NC, and TX.

[Sir Mohamed]

A combination of both. If the election is relatively close, Dems need to win at least 1 or 2 states in both regions. Keeping MI and PA would be critical, at least one of them. That would require to hold AZ and/or GA, potentially flipping NC (these 3 are more likely than FL or TX).

That said, Dems shouldn't take NV and, to a lesser extent, MN for granted.

[OSR stands with Israel]

a combination of both:

They must win GA, MI and either PA or AZ

[cwh2018]

I am pretty sure a winning map for a democrat will require Michigan and not sure after that, probably Georgia and Pennsylvania ahead of Arizona but Arizona could be ahead of 1 of those two.

[Skill and Chance]

The minimum Dem victory shoudl be either this map:

Or this map if the pro-GOP trend with Hispanic voters really picks up:

I could see this being the minimum Dem win by 2028:

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Both. Basically, the ballgame is win 3 of AZ, GA, MI, and PA. Sure, NC and WI offer alternative pathways but I'd be surprised if they are (left of) the tipping-point state.

[S019]

Both

[pbrower2a]

I already have the 2024 Presidential election handicapped based upon a 2020-like result adjusted for margins and state electoral behavior assumed on the 'average' challenger in a similar election, with Biden as a 'middling' President. Those themselves are huge assumptions, but I must assume something: 

Blue is for the Republicans; red is for Democrats.

sat

90 fuhgeddaboudit
70 about a 99% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
60 about a 95% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
50 about an 80% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
40 about a 70% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
30 about a 60% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
20 about a 55% chance of a win by the losing Party of 2020

If you wonder how I have Florida, Iowa, and Texas in the same category... Florida has a well-entrenched machine that can swing the state in a close election when such matters, Iowa has more recent heritage of voting for Democrats at multiple levels, and Texas still has a powerful machine capable of making a Democratic win more difficult than demographics would suggest. 

[Nightcore Nationalist]

Winning 2 of these three: AZ, GA and PA.

[Crumpets]

Biden can hold his Sun Belt gains and afford to lose some ground in the Rust Belt. But he can't lose all the big three unless he gains elsewhere (most likely NC or TX). I think a tipping point map might look something like this, although the EV totals would change following reapportionment.

[EastwoodS]

I already have the 2024 Presidential election handicapped based upon a 2020-like result adjusted for margins and state electoral behavior assumed on the 'average' challenger in a similar election, with Biden as a 'middling' President. Those themselves are huge assumptions, but I must assume something: 

Blue is for the Republicans; red is for Democrats.

sat

90 fuhgeddaboudit
70 about a 99% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
60 about a 95% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
50 about an 80% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
40 about a 70% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
30 about a 60% chance of a win by the winning Party of 2020
20 about a 55% chance of a win by the losing Party of 2020

If you wonder how I have Florida, Iowa, and Texas in the same category... Florida has a well-entrenched machine that can swing the state in a close election when such matters, Iowa has more recent heritage of voting for Democrats at multiple levels, and Texas still has a powerful machine capable of making a Democratic win more difficult than demographics would suggest. 

I’m sorry but I can’t really see Wisconsin going blue; all it would take is the slightest shift nationwide to the right to push it over and if we compare 2008 and 2012 why wouldn’t that happen? I think Georgia is the only exception; it’s no longer Georgia, it’s Caliegeorgia and Atlantawood now

[Oregon Eagle Politics]

I think the tipping point will be in the rust belt (probably mich or pa).

here's my prediction. https://www.yapms.com/app/?m=5igh

leans are <5%

[ElectionsGuy]

The Democrats still need at least one state in the rustbelt if they are to win, unless they can pick off North Carolina. So at this point, the answer is both, but it's actually more reliant on the rust belt.

[SN2903]

They won't win in 2024.

[sofaboi]

They won't win in 2024.

[EastwoodS]

They won't win in 2024.

Imagine thinking the Democrats govern at the center to deserve power

[MT Treasurer]

I generally agree with the GA/MI/AZ consensus, but of those three, GA is the only one which I think would undoubtedly signal a Republican national victory if Democrats weren’t able to hold it.

Basically Skill and Chance's maps.