What year do you expect a red Minnesota?

[Samof94]

When do you expect Minnesota to flip red??? This is based on how it nearly did in 2016 and has some of the right demographics outside its main metro area.

[Jamison5]

I chose 2036 but I really have no idea. Minnesota is always such a tease it seems. So close in 1984. So close in 2000. Close in 2004. Close PVI in both 2008 and 2012. So close in 2016, even voting to the right of the NPV. Constantly electing Republican Senators throughout that time period. The thing is... relative to the NPV 2020 was still the closest it was other than 2016 and 2000, and in both cases that could be accounted for by third party votes. The long term trend may still favor Republicans but that could easily change if Hennepin, Ramsey, Dakota, and Olmstead trend blue more and grow. The Republicans' margins in the rural areas and the iron range seem like they should be able to grow quite a bit still though as they do not resemble rural areas in the rest of the country in terms of their margins.

[_.]

When do you expect Minnesota to flip red??? This is based on how it nearly did in 2016 and has some of the right demographics outside its main metro area.

There are extreme circumstances that could cause Minnesota to flip to the Republicans, but it is not likely to occur anytime soon. The main reason is the fact that the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area is both becoming bluer and is growing faster than the rest of the state, and the non-Minneapolis parts of the state aren't red enough to keep it competitve.


Just look at the numbers:

At the time of the 2010 census, the parts of the Minneapolis metro area which were in Minnesota totalled 3.22 million people, making up 60.7% of Minnesota's population (which was 5.30 million).

And in 2019, the parts of the Minneapolis metro area in Minnesota were estimated to hold 3.51 million people, making up 65.3% of the state's population (at 5.64 million).

So this shows that the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area is growing as a percentage of Minnesota's population, very rapidly in fact.


To top it off, the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area is also becoming more Democratic (calculations below are only including counties in Minnesota and are using two-party vote share only):

• In 2012, Minneapolis's metro area voted for Obama 56.4% - 43.6% (margin of 12.8%).
• In 2016, Minneapolis's metro area voted for Clinton 57.6% - 42.4% (margin of 15.2%).
• In 2020, Minneapolis's metro area voted for Biden 60.6% - 39.4% (margin of 21.2%).

Both of these statistics show that increasing Republican margins in the non-Minneapolis areas of Minnesota won't be enough for a win because the metro area, as well as increasing its share of the population, is becoming more Democratic. This strikes in sharp contrast with the rust belt states Michigan and Ohio, where the Detroit and Cleveland metro areas are both shrinking and becoming more republican.


There are two factors Republicans must change to win Minnesota.

The first thing that must happen is that Republican margins in the non-Minneapolis parts of the state must increase. This strategy, combined with keeping Democrats from making large gains in Minnesota, led Donald Trump to perform well in Minnesota in 2016. Just take a look at the statistics below:

• In 2012, Minnesota exc. Minneapolis voted for Romney 50.2% - 49.8% (margin of 0.4%).
• In 2016, Minnesota exc. Minneapolis voted for Trump 60.4% - 39.6% (margin of 20.8%).
• In 2020, Minnesota exc. Minneapolis voted for Trump 58.3% - 41.7% (margin of 16.6%).

As you can see, Donald Trump was able to turn non-Minneapolis Minnesota towards himself in 2016, which made Minnesota unexpectedly close, and it is theoretically possible for a Republican candidate to improve on Trump's margins in non-Minneapolis Minnesota.

The issue is, though, that Republicans cannot rely on this strategy alone, as was exemplified in 2016. Even with Donald Trump's massive gains in the non-Minneapolis parts of Minnesota, he wasn't able to win because he couldn't decrease the Minneapolis metro's Democratic margins, which actually swung somewhat towards Clinton.


This brings us to our second factor which must change for a Republican victory in Minnesota, decreasing Democrat margins in the Minneapolis metro.

This is especially imperative because this part of the state is growing faster than the state as a whole and makes a majority of the state's population already. I find this quite unlikely, though, without a large realignment taking place.


What Republicans should be targeting is getting their percentage margins in non-Minneapolis Minnesota to be double the Democrats' percentage margins in the Minneapolis metro.

[Bootes Void]

If Reagan couldn't win it then it will be always be the one state that got away for republicans

[Chips]

I believe there's an 85% chance that MN goes red before 2040, 15% chance it does not.

If Biden or Harris wins in 2024, I think there's a good chance that the GOP could pick up one or more of the statewide offices.

[DS0816]

It will be with the next year on record in which a United States presidential election outcome switches the White House from the Democratic to the Republican column.

[CookieDamage]

No idea. If urban growth stalls and GOP continue expanding margins in the rural areas it could be in the 2030s. But if the Twin Cities continue growing and suburbs keep going blue, 2040s or later.

[RINO Tom]

Minnesota will not be like Virginia or Colorado or Georgia or Missouri where they complete some long march toward being a state loyal to the other party, IMO.  As of 2016 (last time I updated my spreadsheet!), Minnesota's population broke down like this:

1. Twin Cities Metro: 3,421,769 (61.99%)
- Twin Cities: 716,049 (12.97%)
- TC Suburbs: 2,705,720 (49.02%)
2. Southeast MN: 693,288 (12.56%)
3. Other Central MN: 632,658 (11.46%)
4. Northland: 325,082 (5.89%)
5. Southwest MN: 276,461 (5.01%)
6. Northwest MN: 170,694 (3.09%)

Of these regions, at least as far as counties won, the GOP dominates Other Central MN, Northwest MN and Southwest MN.  Those areas total about 19.56% of the state's population.  The Democrats dominate the Twin Cities and Northland (overlapping the Iron Range), which together account for 18.86% of the population.  The remaining regions (accounting for 38.42% of the population) are relatively competitive, with the TC Suburbs region moving from the state's GOP stronghold to a battleground and Rochester providing a good vote total for Democrats in the Southeast MN region.  All this is to mostly say that elections in Minnesota are likely to be decided by margins in the suburbs for at least the next few cycles.  I'm not familiar with the geographic terminology used in the 2020 exit polls (which VERY closely match the actual 52.6%-45.4% Biden win), but these were the region breakdowns:

Twin Cities Core (33%): 71% DEM, 27% GOP
Eastern TC Suburbs (24%): 50% DEM, 48% GOP
North MN (26%): 58% GOP, 39% DEM
South MN (17%): 56% GOP, 42% DEM

Even though "universal swing" isn't a thing, even a 3% shift uniformly across each region STILL yields a Democratic win of 49.71% to 48.03%.  To win Minnesota, a Republican would need a good national environment (where the popular vote is VERY close, as MN voted just left of the nation) and a candidate who is both holding rural gains and recovering in the suburbs.  Pretty much any candidate that is ever floated as someone who could possibly do this is immediately attacked and tarnished by Atlas Democrats as no better than any other icky Republican (see Ron DeSantis), but if the environment is right, it can be done.  Minnesota isn't some super special state that is just so unique from anywhere else.  If a GOP candidate is offending too many "suburban" voters OR not properly enthusing "rural" voters, they will simply not win the state.  However, in a good national environment for Republicans, it's POSSIBLE to win Minnesota (not saying likely).  Imagining, say, a DeSantis/Haley ticket that is mostly capitalizing on an unpopular Biden administration running an even more unpopular Harris as its successor, something like this is within the realm of possibility, if not likely:

Twin Cities Core (33%): 69% DEM, 29% GOP (+2% GOP swing)
Eastern TC Suburbs (24%): 51% GOP, 47% DEM (+3% GOP swing)
North MN (26%): 64% GOP, 34% DEM (+6% GOP swing)
South MN (17%): 62% GOP, 36% DEM (+6% GOP swing)

That's a victory for Republicans of 48.99% to 48.75%, with HARDLY unrealistic swings.  The key would be that they would obviously need the national environment to favor them in the first place.  With that said, I do not think Minnesota will vote Republican in 2024 (even if I predict Republicans to win), and predicting past that is too difficult right now.

[_.]

Minnesota will not be like Virginia or Colorado or Georgia or Missouri where they complete some long march toward being a state loyal to the other party, IMO.  As of 2016 (last time I updated my spreadsheet!), Minnesota's population broke down like this:

1. Twin Cities Metro: 3,421,769 (61.99%)
- Twin Cities: 716,049 (12.97%)
- TC Suburbs: 2,705,720 (49.02%)
2. Southeast MN: 693,288 (12.56%)
3. Other Central MN: 632,658 (11.46%)
4. Northland: 325,082 (5.89%)
5. Southwest MN: 276,461 (5.01%)
6. Northwest MN: 170,694 (3.09%)

Of these regions, at least as far as counties won, the GOP dominates Other Central MN, Northwest MN and Southwest MN.  Those areas total about 19.56% of the state's population.  The Democrats dominate the Twin Cities and Northland (overlapping the Iron Range), which together account for 18.86% of the population.  The remaining regions (accounting for 38.42% of the population) are relatively competitive, with the TC Suburbs region moving from the state's GOP stronghold to a battleground and Rochester providing a good vote total for Democrats in the Southeast MN region.  All this is to mostly say that elections in Minnesota are likely to be decided by margins in the suburbs for at least the next few cycles.  I'm not familiar with the geographic terminology used in the 2020 exit polls (which VERY closely match the actual 52.6%-45.4% Biden win), but these were the region breakdowns:

Twin Cities Core (33%): 71% DEM, 27% GOP
Eastern TC Suburbs (24%): 50% DEM, 48% GOP
North MN (26%): 58% GOP, 39% DEM
South MN (17%): 56% GOP, 42% DEM

Even though "universal swing" isn't a thing, even a 3% shift uniformly across each region STILL yields a Democratic win of 49.71% to 48.03%.  To win Minnesota, a Republican would need a good national environment (where the popular vote is VERY close, as MN voted just left of the nation) and a candidate who is both holding rural gains and recovering in the suburbs.  Pretty much any candidate that is ever floated as someone who could possibly do this is immediately attacked and tarnished by Atlas Democrats as no better than any other icky Republican (see Ron DeSantis), but if the environment is right, it can be done.  Minnesota isn't some super special state that is just so unique from anywhere else.  If a GOP candidate is offending too many "suburban" voters OR not properly enthusing "rural" voters, they will simply not win the state.  However, in a good national environment for Republicans, it's POSSIBLE to win Minnesota (not saying likely).  Imagining, say, a DeSantis/Haley ticket that is mostly capitalizing on an unpopular Biden administration running an even more unpopular Harris as its successor, something like this is within the realm of possibility, if not likely:

Twin Cities Core (33%): 69% DEM, 29% GOP (+2% GOP swing)
Eastern TC Suburbs (24%): 51% GOP, 47% DEM (+3% GOP swing)
North MN (26%): 64% GOP, 34% DEM (+6% GOP swing)
South MN (17%): 62% GOP, 36% DEM (+6% GOP swing)

That's a victory for Republicans of 48.99% to 48.75%, with HARDLY unrealistic swings.  The key would be that they would obviously need the national environment to favor them in the first place.  With that said, I do not think Minnesota will vote Republican in 2024 (even if I predict Republicans to win), and predicting past that is too difficult right now.

I agree with your general analysis that the GOP should focus on the suburbs and rural areas to win the state but your math seems off on your two scenarios.

Assuming when you talk about swings, you're talking about them relative to the 2020 Presidential Election, I don't think it makes very much sense that a 3% uniform swing (to the GOP) across the state of Minnesota would result in a 1.68% win for Democrats. After all, Biden won the state by 7.12%, you'd think a 3% uniform swing would give the Democrats a win of 4.12%, right?

As for the second scenario, the maximum swing to Republicans in any region is only 6%. Once again, it doesn't make sense for a Republican victory here considering that Biden won by 7% statewide.

[RINO Tom]

^ I might have my terminology wrong (I still forget what "Swing" or "Trend" mean), but I simply added 3% to the GOP and took 3% from the Democrats in such a scenario.

[sting in the rafters]

Thing is in 2016 it mostly trended R because Clinton's support cratered and the 3rd party vote expanded. Biden made up that ground in 2020 by cutting the margins ever so slightly in the rural regions and making tremendous gains with suburban voters.

Another factor is DFL remains one of the strongest state Democratic parties in the land.

[neostassenite31]

There are two main ways of approaching margin decomposition in swing states. One is to go by geography and the other is by breakdown of the major demographic groups statewide.

The geographical method is usually much more flawed because it can lead to unrealistic predictions about urban, suburban, exurban and rural swings based on preconceived qualitative stereotypes/schemas about how a certain rural or urban area "should" change. Geographical differences in voting patterns can almost always be explained by the underlying demographics of people living there: race, education, religiosity, age, etc.

The path of a GOP victory in MN isn't as hard as it seems, it's simply that it's one thing to create an immaculate-looking plan and another thing entirely to competently execute it.

The actual race x education breakdown in 2020 by Edison is
White College (39%): 62%D - 35%R
White No Degree (48%): 57%R - 42%D
Nonwhite (13%): 68%D - 29%R

GOP Path through the white working class:
7/0.48 = 14.6%; the GOP needs to increase their margin with whites with no college degree by 15 points to flip the state (win around ~64% of this group as opposed to 57%)

GOP Path through recovering among white college voters:
7/0.39 = 18%; the GOP could flip the state if they win 35+9= 44% of the white college vote.

Republicans could also win through some combination of both and/or by getting a higher turnout with white no college voters.

Both major parties nowadays use an exclusively demographic based approach to targeting voter blocs. It's simply that the end result grossly approximates and looks like a geography-based operation: the DFL go heavy on turnout operations in the Twin Cities core and inner rings, while the the GOP is everywhere in the third ring suburbs and exurbs, etc.