Mississippi

[SingingAnalyst]

Mississippi is one of the most inelastic states; however, its Black percentage of the population bottomed out in the 1980s at 35% and is rising again. In a few counties (Hinds, Oktibbeha, Rankin), White voters maybe are becoming marginally less monolithically Republican-- but this may be counterbalanced by growing Republicanism among Black voters. The gap between MS and AL has grown steadily since 2000.

When will MS flip? I say in the 2030s, as part of a Dem landslide.

[Bootes Void]

Unless there is alot of migration to Mississippi or if polarization breaks apart, I'd say never.

[Alben Barkley]

Unless there is alot of migration to Mississippi or if polarization breaks apart, I'd say never.

Polarization could very well break apart as old racists white voters die out and younger less racist white people don't vote as a monolith the way previous generations did.

[SingingAnalyst]

Unless there is alot of migration to Mississippi or if polarization breaks apart, I'd say never.

Polarization could very well break apart as old racists white voters die out and younger less racist white people don't vote as a monolith the way previous generations did.

Interesting. I can see the Jackson and Oxford/University areas leading the way in this regard, while if anything the rural areas (George, Itawamba, Tishomingo Counties) dig in their heels and become even more Republican, even they are already practically maxxed out.

[Frodo]

If Republicans really want to depolarize the country (at least on race), and base their coalition primarily on rural and exurban Americans without a college degree regardless of their racial or ethnic background, then making a play for rural black votes would be a good start.  They are already well on their way to doing so with rural Latinos in the Rio Grande valley in Texas (and maybe eventually in New Mexico), so it logically follows they should expand their appeal to African Americans in the hinterlands, especially in the deep South.  If they do so, they should be able to hang on to their monopoly on power in Mississippi for at least as long as Democrats did after the end of Reconstruction.  Combined with younger whites with relatively liberal racial views (but otherwise conservative), we could see a true biracial coalition in the state that we haven't seen in a decade.  

[Schiff for Senate]

It will definitely eventually go blue, but not in the 2020s or 2030s, so I voted 2040s or later. I find the concept that it will never again go Democratic laughable. You can't say that for any state or any county, actually. It may take very, very long, perhaps past your lifetime, but said state/county (most counties, anyway; I can see some staying with one party until it collapses) will eventually flip. Imagine in 2019 if there was a question about when Starr County would flip; I'm sure many would vote never. Yet now it's quite possible Starr flips in 2028 or even 2024. That being said, it flipping in the 2020s or 2030s is ludicrous. SC might flip sometime in the 2030s, but not MS. So the obvious answer is 2040s or later. I'm surprised a majority of voters did not back that option.

[Del Tachi]

I'm increasingly convinced that by the time Black Mississippians are numerous enough to constitute an electoral majority in the state (sometime during the 2040s, if current trends hold) the Democrat's monopoly on the rural Black vote will have already broken down

[Vice President Christian Man]

I'm not sure, but I don't think before 2040 is likely barring a landslide, but I'd be curious to have someone revive/look back at this form when Mississippi actually votes Dem. I remember reading on a circa. 2003 form that people didn't believe Virginia was going to vote Dem until the next ice age and look at it now, you never know. I would've never expected Texas to vote to the left of Ohio or Georgia to flip looking at the recent past.

[Skill and Chance]

I'm not sure, but I don't think before 2040 is likely barring a landslide, but I'd be curious to have someone revive/look back at this form when Mississippi actually votes Dem. I remember reading on a circa. 2003 form that people didn't believe Virginia was going to vote Dem until the next ice age and look at it now, you never know. I would've never expected Texas to vote to the left of Ohio or Georgia to flip looking at the recent past.

People only look back 10-20 years. 

On a longer timescale, the only things that would be truly surprising are DC and MD voting R or UT/ID/WY voting D.

[Roll Roons]

I'm not sure, but I don't think before 2040 is likely barring a landslide, but I'd be curious to have someone revive/look back at this form when Mississippi actually votes Dem. I remember reading on a circa. 2003 form that people didn't believe Virginia was going to vote Dem until the next ice age and look at it now, you never know. I would've never expected Texas to vote to the left of Ohio or Georgia to flip looking at the recent past.

People only look back 10-20 years. 

On a longer timescale, the only things that would be truly surprising are DC and MD voting R or UT/ID/WY voting D.

I think Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma or either of the Dakotas voting Dem would all be much more surprising than Utah doing so.

[Xing]

I honestly think Mississippi is overrated as a potential future pick-up for Democrats. While Democrats might gain a bit among white voters there, they're not going to start voting like white voters in the Midwest or Northeast, and I do think Republicans will gain at least marginally among black voters, so it likely remains in the 10-20% R win range.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I honestly think Mississippi is overrated as a potential future pick-up for Democrats. While Democrats might gain a bit among white voters there, they're not going to start voting like white voters in the Midwest or Northeast, and I do think Republicans will gain at least marginally among black voters, so it likely remains in the 10-20% R win range.

Democrats don't need them to vote like Midwest whites.

MS whites voting at 80% Republican (still most Republican in the nation I think at that level) with strong black turnout is a 50-50 state.

58*.20 = 11.6   
38*.97= 36.86
4*.60=2.40
           50.86%

Even if you decrease the black vote into the 80s for Democrats, it only moves about 2% on the baseline. The turnout level matters far more as does the different between whites voting 90% Republican and 80% Republican. That is the gap between the ~40% Democrats get and the 50% they would get in this scenario. Half of the increase is from the doubling of white support to 20% and the other half from getting turnout to census levels consistently.

The White population has declined by about 2% each decade as well and that is only going to accelerate as the white population skews older and the black population skews younger. Furthermore, the Republican support among whites skews strongly towards boomers and silents and ebbs with Generation X, Millennials and so on. 

[Adam Griffin]

Nine years ago, Republicans only managed to win the under-65 vote in the presidential election by 5 points in MS. Based on simple life expectancy in the state, MS should already be a state in the single-digits in presidential campaigns (if not a swing state outright). Obviously this has broken down: in part because Democrats are shaving off black vote share, in part because it's likely that the flow of out-migration among left-of-center types has accelerated.

It's going to take a huge change for MS to become competitive in the next 20 years presidentially. Obviously we have seen more than one statewide race be relatively competitive since 2018 (MS-SEN, MS-GOV), but there's no current evidence to suggest that will continue to improve in favor of Democrats. An Obama '08-style shift might be enough to put it into contention, but who knows when or how that will manifest - and it still likely won't be enough.

If the bulk of white Ds are leaving and the demographic shift in favor of black voters is being more or less siphoned off by Rs improving in black vote-share, then you end up with a 10-15 point presidential scenario in perpetuity (for at least the next 10+ years).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Nine years ago, Republicans only managed to win the under-65 vote in the presidential election by 5 points in MS. Based on simple life expectancy in the state, MS should already be a state in the single-digits in presidential campaigns (if not a swing state outright). Obviously this has broken down: in part because Democrats are shaving off black vote share, in part because it's likely that the flow of out-migration among left-of-center types has accelerated.

It's going to take a huge change for MS to become competitive in the next 20 years presidentially. Obviously we have seen more than one statewide race be relatively competitive since 2018 (MS-SEN, MS-GOV), but there's no current evidence to suggest that will continue to improve in favor of Democrats. An Obama '08-style shift might be enough to put it into contention, but who knows when or how that will manifest - and it still likely won't be enough.

If the bulk of white Ds are leaving and the demographic shift in favor of black voters is being more or less siphoned off by Rs improving in black vote-share, then you end up with a 10-15 point presidential scenario in perpetuity (for at least the next 10+ years).

756,764
700,714
710,746    


539,398
485,131
562,949

Democrats lost 80,000 votes between 2012 and 2016 almost, meanwhile Trump's raw vote was actually under that of Mitt Romney by 10,000. In 2020, Trump gained 50,000 while Biden gained back about the same. 

I think Trump juiced white turnout in 2016 and 2020, and combined with a failure of Democratic turnout, masked the underlying trend temporarily.