Which is likelier to happen in the 2024 election?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

.

[Frenchrepublican]

Minnesota voting for the GOP candidate is more plausible, I mean, assuming the GOP candidate doesn't lose Hennepin by +40 points and assuming the non metro areas continue to trend right, he would actually stand a good chance in the state.

[neostassenite31]

Iowa is a pipe dream for Democrats

[Alben Barkley]

Iowa is a pipe dream for Democrats

Minnesota has been much more of a pipe dream for much longer for Republicans.

Minnesota voting for the GOP candidate is more plausible, I mean, assuming the GOP candidate doesn't lose Hennepin by +40 points and assuming the non metro areas continue to trend right, he would actually stand a good chance in the state.

VERY bold assumption about Hennepin. And it ain’t gonna happen as long as the GOP is on the crazy train. Educated places like the Twin Cities metro will just continue to zoom left, more than outweighing any rightward movement in the rural areas.

[VAR]

Iowa is not going to flip back. The state is close to ancient history for Democrats, so Minnesota by default.

[Alben Barkley]

Iowa is not going to flip back. The state is close to ancient history for Democrats, so Minnesota by default.

I agree it’s almost certainly not going to flip back. But ancient history? It voted left of the nation in every election from 1984 to 2012, only once from 1988 onward (2004) not voting D, and even then just barely. As recently as 2018, we won 3/4 of its House seats. At least with Iowa, it’s theoretically possible that Trump had unique appeal to the state and low propensity WWC voters there who won’t turn out without him on the ballot helped the GOP overperform. With Minnesota, the GOP can’t win even with those same kinds of voters turning out in the rural areas. And it just lurched left in 2020 despite much hype from Republicans, voting almost as strongly D as Iowa was R. GOP hasn’t won the state since Nixon’s 1972 landslide. THAT is “ancient history.”

[VAR]

Iowa is not going to flip back. The state is close to ancient history for Democrats, so Minnesota by default.

I agree it’s almost certainly not going to flip back. But ancient history? It voted left of the nation in every election from 1984 to 2012, only once from 1988 onward (2004) not voting D, and even then just barely. As recently as 2018, we won 3/4 of its House seats. At least with Iowa, it’s theoretically possible that Trump had unique appeal to the state and low propensity WWC voters there who won’t turn out without him on the ballot helped the GOP overperform. With Minnesota, the GOP can’t win even with those same kinds of voters turning out in the rural areas. GOP hasn’t won the state since Nixon’s 1972 landslide. THAT is “ancient history.”

I said close to ancient history.

Not addressing your other points because I simply don’t think they’re relevant (Democrats may have won 3/4 of the House seats, but it’s IA-04 that makes the state red), but Democrats couldn’t knock off a truly unremarkable incumbent governor (Kim Reynolds) in what was a very D friendly year where the Democratic message on healthcare somewhat resounded with rural/working class voters. And the WWC turnout was nice and low. This says a lot about D prospects in the state.

I’ll also leave this here:

IA-01, 2016

Rod Blum (R, inc.) 206,903 - 53.7%
Monica Vernon (D) 177,403 - 46.1%

IA-01, 2018

Abby Finkenauer (D) 169,496 - 50.9%
Rod Blum (R, inc.) 153,077 - 45.6%

Finkenauer, who won by 5 points, got 8 thousand less votes than Monica Vernon, who of course lost by nearly double digits. Meanwhile, Blum lost 54 thousand votes. Finkenauer didn’t gain anything and instead lost a pretty large number of votes. Keep in mind all of this happened before 2020.

The problem for Democrats in IA goes way beyond ‘Trumpists turning out when the cult leader is on the ballot.’ It’s mostly that the Democratic brand is generally toxic in rural/WWC areas (much moreso in this state), and persuadable voters are close to non-existent. And honestly, there’s no reason for this to change.

[If my soul was made of stone]

Iowa is not going to flip back. The state is close to ancient history for Democrats, so Minnesota by default.

I agree it’s almost certainly not going to flip back. But ancient history? It voted left of the nation in every election from 1984 to 2012, only once from 1988 onward (2004) not voting D, and even then just barely. As recently as 2018, we won 3/4 of its House seats. At least with Iowa, it’s theoretically possible that Trump had unique appeal to the state and low propensity WWC voters there who won’t turn out without him on the ballot helped the GOP overperform. With Minnesota, the GOP can’t win even with those same kinds of voters turning out in the rural areas. GOP hasn’t won the state since Nixon’s 1972 landslide. THAT is “ancient history.”

I said close to ancient history.

Not addressing your other points because I simply don’t think they’re relevant (Democrats may have won 3/4 of the House seats, but it’s IA-04 that makes the state red), but Democrats couldn’t knock off a truly unremarkable incumbent governor (Kim Reynolds) in what was a very D friendly year where the Democratic message on healthcare somewhat resounded with rural/working class voters. And the WWC turnout was nice and low. This says a lot about D prospects in the state.

Democrats only won the House popular vote in Iowa in 2018 because Steve King hadn't been primaried and thus massively underperformed IA-04's incredibly deep red partisanship, and at the same time Loebsack massively overperformed IA-02's very pale leanings because he was an entrenched and popular incumbent. Meanwhile, in the governor's race, one through three went Dem by less than five points each while IA-04 went crushingly enough for Reynolds to make the rest irrelevant. All of the non-Rob Sand Dems that won statewide were very long-term incumbents, and evidently partisans don't care about Auditors of all people (see Galloway). If that's the state's baseline in a good year for Dems now, it's pretty gone unless Dem messaging can dramatically adapt to rural areas and resist nationalization (unlikely).

While Minnesota has a very strong Dem baseline and seemingly a very inelastic GOP performance, it's easier to imagine continued Iron Range and small-town erosion and poor urban turnout causing a fluke Republican win than Iowa's very uniform demographics swinging back to 90s partisanship.

[Xing]

MN, but that’s about as meaningful as saying that NC-SEN 2022 is more likely to flip than CO-SEN 2022.

[krb08]

Minnesota voting for the GOP candidate is more plausible, I mean, assuming the GOP candidate doesn't lose Hennepin by +40 points and assuming the non metro areas continue to trend right, he would actually stand a good chance in the state.

But why would you assume that, exactly? Hennepin was Biden +43 and the Twin Cities metro is rapidly trending left. Is there a small chance? Yes, but to act like it's a foregone conclusion is frankly hilarious and nothing more than GOP wishcasting.

Also, even if Hennepin is D+39 and rurals continue shifting right in 2024, that's not necessarily enough to win. Biden won MN by over 7, it could take more than that.

[Tekken_Guy]

Iowa is not going to flip back. The state is close to ancient history for Democrats, so Minnesota by default.

I agree it’s almost certainly not going to flip back. But ancient history? It voted left of the nation in every election from 1984 to 2012, only once from 1988 onward (2004) not voting D, and even then just barely. As recently as 2018, we won 3/4 of its House seats. At least with Iowa, it’s theoretically possible that Trump had unique appeal to the state and low propensity WWC voters there who won’t turn out without him on the ballot helped the GOP overperform. With Minnesota, the GOP can’t win even with those same kinds of voters turning out in the rural areas. GOP hasn’t won the state since Nixon’s 1972 landslide. THAT is “ancient history.”

I said close to ancient history.

Not addressing your other points because I simply don’t think they’re relevant (Democrats may have won 3/4 of the House seats, but it’s IA-04 that makes the state red), but Democrats couldn’t knock off a truly unremarkable incumbent governor (Kim Reynolds) in what was a very D friendly year where the Democratic message on healthcare somewhat resounded with rural/working class voters. And the WWC turnout was nice and low. This says a lot about D prospects in the state.

Democrats only won the House popular vote in Iowa in 2018 because Steve King hadn't been primaried and thus massively underperformed IA-04's incredibly deep red partisanship, and at the same time Loebsack massively overperformed IA-02's very pale leanings because he was an entrenched and popular incumbent. Meanwhile, in the governor's race, one through three went Dem by less than five points each while IA-04 went crushingly enough for Reynolds to make the rest irrelevant. All of the non-Rob Sand Dems that won statewide were very long-term incumbents, and evidently partisans don't care about Auditors of all people (see Galloway). If that's the state's baseline in a good year for Dems now, it's pretty gone unless Dem messaging can dramatically adapt to rural areas and resist nationalization (unlikely).

While Minnesota has a very strong Dem baseline and seemingly a very inelastic GOP performance, it's easier to imagine continued Iron Range and small-town erosion and poor urban turnout causing a fluke Republican win than Iowa's very uniform demographics swinging back to 90s partisanship.

Also, David Young came closer to winning his race than Abby Finkenauer did.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

IA goes D, Klobuchar is on the ballot in 2024/ if she thinks she will lose after 2022/ she would take a Cabinet post in Biden Cabinet, but she won't and she will win in a landslide

If D's lose in 2022/ in an R plus 5 Environment 2014/ she, Klobuchar will go for Cabinet

But, it won't be eventhough Rs said we will lose GA like French Republican and we won GA in a Runoff

[Frenchrepublican]

Iowa is a pipe dream for Democrats

Minnesota has been much more of a pipe dream for much longer for Republicans.

Minnesota voting for the GOP candidate is more plausible, I mean, assuming the GOP candidate doesn't lose Hennepin by +40 points and assuming the non metro areas continue to trend right, he would actually stand a good chance in the state.

VERY bold assumption about Hennepin. And it ain’t gonna happen as long as the GOP is on the crazy train. Educated places like the Twin Cities metro will just continue to zoom left, more than outweighing any rightward movement in the rural areas.

To be honest I'm not predicting anything, but it's noteworthy that Lewis who is not exactly a wonderful fit for urban voters did 7 points better than Trump in Hennepin, if the 2024 GOP candidate can overperform Trump by a such margin the state would be very close.