Could the Massachusetts State Senate or Wyoming State Senate become all D/all R soon?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:15:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Could the Massachusetts State Senate or Wyoming State Senate become all D/all R soon?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Could the Massachusetts State Senate or Wyoming State Senate become all D/all R soon?  (Read 1897 times)
Mexican Wolf
Timberwolf
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,298


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 14, 2021, 06:32:11 PM »

Before the 2018 midterms, Massachusetts Republicans controlled 7 out of the 40 State Senate seats. Now they only control 3 seats.

Likewise, before the 2010 midterms, Wyoming Democrats controlled 7 out of the 30 State Senate seats. Now they only control 2 seats.

Given these trends, is it likely that either the Massachusetts Democrats or the Wyoming Republicans could win every seat in their respective Senates?

The last time this happened was when Hawai'i Democrats swept all 25 State Senate seats in the 2016 elections. Before that, I think the last time one party had complete control of all senate seats were Alabama and Louisiana Democrats in the late 1970s.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,711
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2021, 07:02:36 PM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 
Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2021, 07:11:36 PM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 

Wyoming:

2000- 68/28 (R+40)
2004- 69/29 (R+40)
2008- 65/33 (R+32)
2012- 69/28 (R+41)
2016- 67/22 (R+45)
2020- 70/27 (R+43)

Really strong D trend there.

Massachusetts:

2000- 60/33 (D+27)
2004- 62/37 (D+25)
2008- 62/36 (D+26)
2012- 61/38 (D+23)
2016- 61/33 (D+28)
2020- 66/32 (D+34)

Man, that R trend is crazy.
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2021, 07:21:41 PM »

Hawaii's more likely to have an all D legislature than either Massachusetts (or Wyoming's chances to have either House become all R.)
Logged
Roll Roons
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,985
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2021, 07:28:50 PM »
« Edited: February 14, 2021, 07:59:19 PM by Roll Roons »

Of the two Democratic state Senators in Wyoming, one represents most of Teton County, which went for Biden with 67%. The other one represents Laramie, home of the University of Wyoming. And we all know how college towns vote. So I think both of them are probably safe for now.

And I think Biden's performance was probably the Democratic ceiling in Massachusetts, so it's hard to see the MAGOP losing much more ground in the legislature.
Logged
mpbond
Rookie
**
Posts: 71


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2021, 09:34:47 PM »

The MA GOP currently holds three seats. Two of them could go to the Dems in the near term. The First Essex & Middlesex district contains the city of Gloucester and many northern outer Boston Suburbs. It likely voted for Biden by over 20 points. It is held by Bruce Tarr who is locally popular and if he retires, it would be a nearly guaranteed D Flip. The Plymouth and Norfolk District contains several very wealthy Boston suburbs on the South Shore, which is a historically Republican region due to its wealth. Biden likely won it by double digits as well. If the suburban realignment trickles down ballot, as it has in the rest of the Boston suburbs, this seat will flip. The third seat is The Worcester & Norfolk district, located in the conservative Blackstone valley. This region is one of the truly conservative regions in Massachusetts, however as the Worcester and Boston suburbs grow into this area, it is shifting towards the Democrats as well. Biden narrowly won this seat as well. However down ballot Dems likely wont be competitive here for a couple of cycles. So, if current suburban trends continue, Bruce Tarr retires, and Dems hold all their competitive seats (theres a few), they could hold all the seats at some point. Barring some aggressive D Gerrymander, I would say this could happen by the end of the decade, but everything would have to go perfectly for the Dems.
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2021, 10:03:43 PM »

Democrats could absolutely win the three remaining seats in MA; however, this would be because of either a fluke or an unusually Democratic year. I don't see that being the permanent situation any time soon.
Logged
I’m not Stu
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,747


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2021, 12:20:28 PM »

I don't think Wyoming will be all R.
Logged
neostassenite31
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 564
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2021, 12:53:30 PM »

The third seat is The Worcester & Norfolk district, located in the conservative Blackstone valley. This region is one of the truly conservative regions in Massachusetts, however as the Worcester and Boston suburbs grow into this area, it is shifting towards the Democrats as well.

Clinton and Markey (in 2014) both lost this district by less than 2 points, so it's probably not "truly conservative" in the national sense but only by the standards of Massachusetts 
Logged
mpbond
Rookie
**
Posts: 71


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2021, 12:28:43 PM »
« Edited: February 19, 2021, 12:34:20 PM by mpbond »

The third seat is The Worcester & Norfolk district, located in the conservative Blackstone valley. This region is one of the truly conservative regions in Massachusetts, however as the Worcester and Boston suburbs grow into this area, it is shifting towards the Democrats as well.

Clinton and Markey (in 2014) both lost this district by less than 2 points, so it's probably not "truly conservative" in the national sense but only by the standards of Massachusetts  

Your'e absolutely right, by Massachusetts standards it's conservative, but not so much by national standards. As with anything New England this means it's also like Charlie Baker/Mitt Romney conservative rather than Trump Conservative. The Blackstone valley has always been conservative compared to the rest of the states, however the Worcester suburbs are outweighing it more and more as time goes on. I forgot about this in my original post but this isn't even the most Republican seat, theres a neighboring district in the western Worcester County that voted for Trump by 10pts in '16 but it's held by a Dem (although I think Biden may have narrowly flipped it last year). Goes to show that the right Dem could definitely win any of these districts.
Logged
AGA
Atlas Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,267
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -5.39

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2021, 05:14:24 PM »

The Teton County district is Titanium D. Massachusetts is more likely to become unanimous, but under the current lines, the most Republican district still goes Republican by double digits, so it would be a very tall order. This all depends on redistricting, of course.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,714
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 20, 2021, 01:17:17 AM »

I doubt it. The remaining districts are just too solid.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 20, 2021, 02:20:17 AM »

The Teton County district is Titanium D. Massachusetts is more likely to become unanimous, but under the current lines, the most Republican district still goes Republican by double digits, so it would be a very tall order. This all depends on redistricting, of course.

Funnily enough the Teton district was R held as recently as 2018.
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 20, 2021, 03:03:12 AM »

The Teton County district is Titanium D. Massachusetts is more likely to become unanimous, but under the current lines, the most Republican district still goes Republican by double digits, so it would be a very tall order. This all depends on redistricting, of course.

Funnily enough the Teton district was R held as recently as 2018.

It was held by moderate republican, IIRC.. With every passing year there are fewer and fewer of them... And they are (just as their moderate counterparts in Democratic party) are, usually, doubly endangered: to ideologized idiots in primaries, and (as their districts are, usually, very swingy) to other party candidates in general elections.
Logged
Alcibiades
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,851
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -6.96

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 20, 2021, 05:35:46 AM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 

Zaybay has already shown that, if anything, the opposite is true for Massachusetts’ trend, but this is also a very odd way to frame its political demographics. The reason that it is so D, and not going to change anytime soon, is that it is the most college-educated state in the nation, and a fairly secular one (IIRC, Boston shockingly actually has one of the lowest % of practising Catholics of any of the historically white ethnic major cities).
Logged
slothdem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 20, 2021, 01:14:09 PM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 

Zaybay has already shown that, if anything, the opposite is true for Massachusetts’ trend, but this is also a very odd way to frame its political demographics. The reason that it is so D, and not going to change anytime soon, is that it is the most college-educated state in the nation, and a fairly secular one (IIRC, Boston shockingly actually has one of the lowest % of practising Catholics of any of the historically white ethnic major cities).

This is a relatively new development. Throughout the later half of the 20th century, Boston was considered the most socially conservative of the big Northeastern cities, largely because of the Catholic Church's influence. The priest molestation scandals significantly diminished the Church's prestige and credibility there. I would say that it is probably the most secular of the Northeastern cities now.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,711
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2021, 09:33:44 AM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 

Zaybay has already shown that, if anything, the opposite is true for Massachusetts’ trend, but this is also a very odd way to frame its political demographics. The reason that it is so D, and not going to change anytime soon, is that it is the most college-educated state in the nation, and a fairly secular one (IIRC, Boston shockingly actually has one of the lowest % of practising Catholics of any of the historically white ethnic major cities).

I still stand by my claim that the states are trending in rather opposite directions.  Top-line trends towards Democrats in Massachusetts are mostly the result of D swings in populous Boston and its suburbs, but parts of Western Mass and Bristol Co trended toward Trump in both 2016 and 2020.  In the current alignment, I think Massachusetts will abandon being so idiosyncratically Democratic and fall into the usual, national trend of urban/suburban - exurban/rural political divergence.  That doesn't mean I think MA will be remotely competitive anytime soon, but I think later this decade and into the 2030s it won't be unusual for non-metro parts of the state to prefer sending Republicans to the state house.     

All of this pretty much applies in the opposite partisn direction in Wyoming. 
Logged
Alcibiades
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,851
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -6.96

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 22, 2021, 09:58:20 AM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 

Zaybay has already shown that, if anything, the opposite is true for Massachusetts’ trend, but this is also a very odd way to frame its political demographics. The reason that it is so D, and not going to change anytime soon, is that it is the most college-educated state in the nation, and a fairly secular one (IIRC, Boston shockingly actually has one of the lowest % of practising Catholics of any of the historically white ethnic major cities).

I still stand by my claim that the states are trending in rather opposite directions.  Top-line trends towards Democrats in Massachusetts are mostly the result of D swings in populous Boston and its suburbs, but parts of Western Mass and Bristol Co trended toward Trump in both 2016 and 2020.  In the current alignment, I think Massachusetts will abandon being so idiosyncratically Democratic and fall into the usual, national trend of urban/suburban - exurban/rural political divergence.  That doesn't mean I think MA will be remotely competitive anytime soon, but I think later this decade and into the 2030s it won't be unusual for non-metro parts of the state to prefer sending Republicans to the state house.     

All of this pretty much applies in the opposite partisn direction in Wyoming. 

I haven’t got access to the town trend map because I’m not a member of the Atlas, but just eyeballing the 2016 and 2020 maps, it seems that the vast majority of rural towns in those areas trended towards Biden. I just don’t think there’s any hard evidence that Massachusetts is trending R in its rural areas, let alone the state as a whole, having actually trended towards both Clinton and Biden (and if the suburbs are out-trending the rural areas, then obviously the state overall is trending in the former’s direction). I don’t think there’s any reason to think that national rural trends can be applied to New England’s very idiosyncratic rural areas (there’s a reason why they bounced back hard to Biden, whereas those in the Midwest didn’t), except in ME-02. Ultimately, though, education levels are the number one predictor of trends in the current alignment, and in that respect, there isn’t a worse state for the GOP.

Logged
Zaybay
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,076
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.25, S: -6.50

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2021, 01:02:47 PM »

Now, I cannot speak about the WY State Senate, and based on the discussion so far it sounds like its impossible due to the safe Teton county seat.

What I can speak for is the MA State Senate. Now, on paper, the MA state senate could become all D, but in practice, I have my doubts.

Lets start with the districts that make up the state. Using the 2016 election as a baseline, Trump was only able to win 3 districts in the state. These seats are (and fair warning, Massachusetts uses names based on counties):

Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire and Middlesex: 51/40 Trump +11
Worcester and Norfolk: 47/45 Trump +2
1st Plymouth and Bristol:48/46 Trump +2

Clinton was able to win all the other 37 seats.

Now, whats interesting is that, of the three Trump-won seats, Republicans actually only hold one of them, Worcester and Norfolk held by Ryan Fattman. The Trump +11 seat is held by a Democrat, as is the 1st Plymouth and Bristol.

So what seats make up the Republican delegation? Besides Worcester and Norfolk, the GOP hold two additional seats, those being:

1st Essex and Middlesex: 39/53 Clinton +14
Plymouth and Norfolk: 39/53 Clinton +14

So overall, the GOP delegation is concentrated in a seat that barely went to Trump in 2016, and two double-digit Clinton seats. On paper, its completely possible that the entire state senate could be flipped D, especially since Biden likely won all but the Trump +10 seat, and even then it was likely a seat that Trump barely won.

In practice however, this is easier said than done. These Republican incumbents, along with the Democratic incumbents in the Trump seats, are very entrenched and hold a great degree of popularity.

Lets look at the 2020 state senate elections to illustrate this, since the Democrats made a semi-serious attempt to take down the 4 Republican state senators that the state had at the time:

Dem Held
Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire and Middlesex (Trump +11 in 2016): Dem Senator +6

GOP Held
Worcester & Norfolk (Trump +2 in 2016): GOP Senator +20
Plymouth & Norfolk (Clinton +14 in 2016): GOP Senator +10
1st Essex and Middlesex(Clinton +14 in 2016): GOP Senator Unopposed in the general

The only Republican the Dems took down was Dean Tran of Worcester and Middlesex (Clinton +9), and the only reason he even became a rep was because he won a special election. 2020 was his first general election, and even then he only lost by 1%.

So, to summarize, on paper the task is very possible. In practice, however, its a very difficult battle.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2021, 03:57:45 PM »

The Teton County district is Titanium D. Massachusetts is more likely to become unanimous, but under the current lines, the most Republican district still goes Republican by double digits, so it would be a very tall order. This all depends on redistricting, of course.

It seems hard not to end up creating a couple of safe R districts in the middle of the state/Cape Ann area in an optimal MA redistricting plan for incumbent Democrats?
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 25, 2021, 05:35:55 PM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 

Zaybay has already shown that, if anything, the opposite is true for Massachusetts’ trend, but this is also a very odd way to frame its political demographics. The reason that it is so D, and not going to change anytime soon, is that it is the most college-educated state in the nation, and a fairly secular one (IIRC, Boston shockingly actually has one of the lowest % of practising Catholics of any of the historically white ethnic major cities).

I still stand by my claim that the states are trending in rather opposite directions.  Top-line trends towards Democrats in Massachusetts are mostly the result of D swings in populous Boston and its suburbs, but parts of Western Mass and Bristol Co trended toward Trump in both 2016 and 2020.  In the current alignment, I think Massachusetts will abandon being so idiosyncratically Democratic and fall into the usual, national trend of urban/suburban - exurban/rural political divergence.  That doesn't mean I think MA will be remotely competitive anytime soon, but I think later this decade and into the 2030s it won't be unusual for non-metro parts of the state to prefer sending Republicans to the state house.     

All of this pretty much applies in the opposite partisn direction in Wyoming. 

The only parts of Western Mass that swung towards Trump in 2020 are Hispanic urban cores and a few random towns in Berkshire County. There are some more places that trended towards Trump, but not by much and they were mostly low-population rural areas. Rural Massachusetts (a) is a very small percentage of the state's population, and (b) has way too many people who aren't "culturally rural" enough to vote Republican.
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: March 08, 2021, 08:07:55 PM »

SD-17 in Wyoming is entirely within Teton County and Biden won it by slightly over a 30% margin and it trended left from 2016.

SD-9 is entirely within the city of Laramie and was won by a much more slender margin but the city is trending left probably because that's where the University of Wyoming is located.
Logged
mpbond
Rookie
**
Posts: 71


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: March 10, 2021, 07:38:10 PM »

Wyoming is unlikely because I think the two seats represented by Ds are significant Native areas. 

There’s also the point that both Wyoming, a very urban mountain state, and Massachusetts, a pretty catholic white ethnic state, are trending towards being more competitive, not less. 

Zaybay has already shown that, if anything, the opposite is true for Massachusetts’ trend, but this is also a very odd way to frame its political demographics. The reason that it is so D, and not going to change anytime soon, is that it is the most college-educated state in the nation, and a fairly secular one (IIRC, Boston shockingly actually has one of the lowest % of practising Catholics of any of the historically white ethnic major cities).

I still stand by my claim that the states are trending in rather opposite directions.  Top-line trends towards Democrats in Massachusetts are mostly the result of D swings in populous Boston and its suburbs, but parts of Western Mass and Bristol Co trended toward Trump in both 2016 and 2020.  In the current alignment, I think Massachusetts will abandon being so idiosyncratically Democratic and fall into the usual, national trend of urban/suburban - exurban/rural political divergence.  That doesn't mean I think MA will be remotely competitive anytime soon, but I think later this decade and into the 2030s it won't be unusual for non-metro parts of the state to prefer sending Republicans to the state house.     

All of this pretty much applies in the opposite partisn direction in Wyoming. 

The only parts of Western Mass that swung towards Trump in 2020 are Hispanic urban cores and a few random towns in Berkshire County. There are some more places that trended towards Trump, but not by much and they were mostly low-population rural areas. Rural Massachusetts (a) is a very small percentage of the state's population, and (b) has way too many people who aren't "culturally rural" enough to vote Republican.

The people who live in the Pioneer Valley of western Mass would fit in better in San Francisco than they would in any other non-New England rural area. There are several factors to this, including an economy based on higher education, art, and tourism, but even the areas not near universities or tourism are still rock-solid democratic due to the areas high rates of people with college educations and the overall secularism of the region. As you said, it's just a completely different culture to other rural areas.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 11 queries.