Hot take: Texas is Likely R in 2024

[OSR stands with Israel]

First of all that doesnt mean I think The GOP candidate wins Texas by more than 8 points in 2024, as I am defining Likely R as basically a state that requires the Dems to win an 2008 style win to carry the state. I think thats a good definition of Likely as that means in the vast majority of scenarios the GOP carries Texas and in the vast majority of scenarios its not a 2008 style win either.


So about the question of Trends

1. First of all trends dont go in a straight line and definitely not in the same speed

- For example of this look at the trends in VA/CO from 2004-2008 compared to 2008-2012 and you will see that trends slowed down considerably in 2012 compared to 2008. The same is true with WI/MI/PA in the Trump era where trends slowed down considerably in 2020 compared to 2016.

- The reason for this is many of the times the trends that happened in the year you took the White House was more due to opposition to the previous administration in charge which made them trend faster than they would have. This makes its slow down naturally when your party is in power.


2. Texas in 2020 was in many ways still a Safe R state as it still voted 10 points more Republican than the nation as a whole did meaning even in a 2008 style Democratic win , Texas still wouldnt be within a point and a half(and if you go off uniform swing then Texas still goes Republican by 2.8 points).

- In a state the size of Texas if a party cant get within a point and a half in Texas in a 2008 style win then the state is basically safe

- So Texas being winnable in a 2008 style win means it still has trended D


3. Texas has counter trends going on that are not good for the party holding the white house

- Unlike Trends that favor you, trends that went against you when you were a fresh new candidate have recently resulted them in them trending further away from you in the years you are in the White House and for your reelection bids. Think About Affluent Coastal suburbs for W which trended D in 2000(didnt swing D due to the fact the nation swung 8 points to the right) trended even further D in 2008 , Appalachian counties which trended R in 2008 trended even further R in 2012 and the same with Sunbelt burbs in 2016 trended further D in 2020.

- This is a problem for the Dems in Texas specifically(and could potentially be a huge problem in NV too but thats a different story) is the group that trended R in 2020 were Hispanic voters and if they even continue to trend R or even stay where they were in 2020, winning Texas will be basically impossible .

- The reason this has happened in recent years makes logical sense as if groups trended against you when you were a fresh candidate , why would they like it more when instead of just running on those policies they dislike you try to implement them. If its the rhetoric they disliked then why would they like that rhetoric more after hearing it constantly 4 years vs just being one of many for 18 months(and one of two for 6 months).

- Now again I think unlike the other 3 its possible Hispanics to trend back D a little which is why I have Texas as Likely R instead of Safe R.

[Skill and Chance]

I think this is reasonable.  There is still a backdoor path to a Dem Texas through dominating the I-35 suburbs, but it will take until the 2030's if the Hispanic R trend continues. 

[Devils30]

First of all that doesnt mean I think The GOP candidate wins Texas by more than 8 points in 2024, as I am defining Likely R as basically a state that requires the Dems to win an 2008 style win to carry the state. I think thats a good definition of Likely as that means in the vast majority of scenarios the GOP carries Texas and in the vast majority of scenarios its not a 2008 style win either.


So about the question of Trends

1. First of all trends dont go in a straight line and definitely not in the same speed

- For example of this look at the trends in VA/CO from 2004-2008 compared to 2008-2012 and you will see that trends slowed down considerably in 2012 compared to 2008. The same is true with WI/MI/PA in the Trump era where trends slowed down considerably in 2020 compared to 2016.

- The reason for this is many of the times the trends that happened in the year you took the White House was more due to opposition to the previous administration in charge which made them trend faster than they would have. This makes its slow down naturally when your party is in power.


2. Texas in 2020 was in many ways still a Safe R state as it still voted 10 points more Republican than the nation as a whole did meaning even in a 2008 style Democratic win , Texas still wouldnt be within a point and a half(and if you go off uniform swing then Texas still goes Republican by 2.8 points).

- In a state the size of Texas if a party cant get within a point and a half in Texas in a 2008 style win then the state is basically safe

- So Texas being winnable in a 2008 style win means it still has trended D


3. Texas has counter trends going on that are not good for the party holding the white house

- Unlike Trends that favor you, trends that went against you when you were a fresh new candidate have recently resulted them in them trending further away from you in the years you are in the White House and for your reelection bids. Think About Affluent Coastal suburbs for W which trended D in 2000(didnt swing D due to the fact the nation swung 8 points to the right) trended even further D in 2008 , Appalachian counties which trended R in 2008 trended even further R in 2012 and the same with Sunbelt burbs in 2016 trended further D in 2020.

- This is a problem for the Dems in Texas specifically(and could potentially be a huge problem in NV too but thats a different story) is the group that trended R in 2020 were Hispanic voters and if they even continue to trend R or even stay where they were in 2020, winning Texas will be basically impossible .

- The reason this has happened in recent years makes logical sense as if groups trended against you when you were a fresh candidate , why would they like it more when instead of just running on those policies they dislike you try to implement them. If its the rhetoric they disliked then why would they like that rhetoric more after hearing it constantly 4 years vs just being one of many for 18 months(and one of two for 6 months).

- Now again I think unlike the other 3 its possible Hispanics to trend back D a little which is why I have Texas as Likely R instead of Safe R.

Yeah, even with a 2-3% Dem trend that means Biden would have to win the popular vote by 7-8% to carry Texas. Possible? Yes. Likely? Not if the past 20 years are any indication.

[Skunk]

This is one of the coldest takes you could have on this forum.

[Utah Neolib]

I kinda agree

[S019]

I strongly disagree, Trump is in all likelihood going to maintain his grip on the GOP, this means the trends will probably not slow down to the extent that you expect. Also the RGV vote share is minimal compared to the four big metros (San Antonio, Austin, Houston, and Dallas), if those keep trending Dem, the GOP's days of winning the state are numbered

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If the Pandemic is like it is now of course it is, but if it's much improved by then, then it isn't

Matthew Mcconaughey leads by 12 pts but hasn't announced no internet on running, he can beat Greg Abbott he leads by 12 I would be nervous ABOUT McCounghey if I were Abbott if he runs as a Dem leaning Independent

But we haven't heard anything

[Chips]

 Very reasonable. I actually have it as a toss between lean and likely but I have it as lean.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I think this is reasonable.  There is still a backdoor path to a Dem Texas through dominating the I-35 suburbs, but it will take until the 2030's if the Hispanic R trend continues. 

Yah I agree so basically texas trends I’d say have been like this :

1992: Lean R(Perot being here makes it Lean instead of Likely)
1996: Safe R
2000-2016: Titanium R
2020: Safe R
2024: Likely R
2028: Lean R
2032: Tossup

I strongly disagree, Trump is in all likelihood going to maintain his grip on the GOP, this means the trends will probably not slow down to the extent that you expect. Also the RGV vote share is minimal compared to the four big metros (San Antonio, Austin, Houston, and Dallas), if those keep trending Dem, the GOP's days of winning the state are numbered

Hispanics just didn’t trend R in RGV which is why Harris barely shifted left in 2020

[Pericles]

Is 3. actually true or if Dems do great in the suburbs and friendly urban areas and those areas are maximized as a share of the electorate, could TX barely flip anyway?

Anyway, TX is a very similar margin to GA in 2016-while of course being further to the right of the nation-, and WI and MI in 2016 appeared to be harder flips based on the 2012 margin. However 1. may be true.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

This take isn't as bold as you think it is.

[CookieDamage]

Likely R is reasonable but i think lean is more realistic. People seem to think a lean rating is the same as tilt or tossup, it's not. Lean D/R means that the state is favored to vote for that party, there's just more than an outside chance that it doesnt.

[Progressive Pessimist]

How is this a hot take? Texas is not flipping this decade. I do still think it flips eventually though, but a lot is going to need to go right for the Democratic Party, much like Florida (which is also likely R), and will stay within six points for the national GOP victor.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Is 3. actually true or if Dems do great in the suburbs and friendly urban areas and those areas are maximized as a share of the electorate, could TX barely flip anyway?

Anyway, TX is a very similar margin to GA in 2016-while of course being further to the right of the nation-, and WI and MI in 2016 appeared to be harder flips based on the 2012 margin. However 1. may be true.

You mean the number 1 point right about trends slowing down in the president term in office . Yah it is mostly true as trends in places like VA/CO did slow down considerably in 2012 from how they trended in 2008. Same thing happened in the rust belt in 2020 with trends slowing down considerably.Also Texas isn’t really that comparable to Georgia given that in Georgia republicans are basically required to get 70%+of the white vote there or they lose the state as there is no where else for republicans to make gains in Georgia while that isn’t the same in Texas .

Also unlike in Georgia, republicans do not hold the White House which makes those types of swing extremely difficult. In the case of WI and MI remember WI only voted two points to the left of the nation in 2012 and MI that was 5 while Texas voted 10 points to the right of the nation in 2020.

Number 3 it is absolutely true and has been true for the previous 3 presidents and 4 of the last 5(with Clinton being sorta of the exception in large parts due to the Perot factor effecting things )

Likely R is reasonable but i think lean is more realistic. People seem to think a lean rating is the same as tilt or tossup, it's not. Lean D/R means that the state is favored to vote for that party, there's just more than an outside chance that it doesnt.

Depends on how you define lean or likely. I define likely as a state that would only have a chance of flipping in an 08 style win , while Lean doenst require that

[TDAS04]

It could see Texas as being what Arizona was to Democrats a decade or so ago.  Seemingly fool’s gold for a couple or so more cycles, but ultimately flips.

[EastwoodS]

It could see Texas as being what Arizona was to Democrats a decade or so ago.  Seemingly fool’s gold for a couple or so more cycles, but ultimately flips.

I don’t really think AZ is gone for the GOP by any means in 2024..

[TDAS04]

It could see Texas as being what Arizona was to Democrats a decade or so ago.  Seemingly fool’s gold for a couple or so more cycles, but ultimately flips.

I don’t really think AZ is gone for the GOP by any means in 2024..

I didn’t say that.  It’s now a very competitive state now, as I think Texas will be.  I don’t think Texas will be securely Democratic too soon.

[AGA]

That isn't a hot take at all.

[pbrower2a]

Let's put it this way: a Democrat who wins Texas is getting at least 360 electoral votes. North Carolina goes D before Texas does. Texas used to straddle 400 electoral votes for about thirty years.

[sting in the rafters]

[DzSider]

Those are indeed very valid and reasonable points (Especially the one that suggests that Ds only carry Texas in 2008 (D+7) types of landslides (Since the state is around R+10 relative to the nation).

But I disagree with the assumption that the speed of D trends in the Suburban counties (At least the sunbelt ones) are subject to whether or not theres a backlash againts an R Incumbent but rather whether or not the candidate that it's a the top of the ticket can temporarily slow them down or due to another very unique circumstance.

                         Margin relative to the Nation

                 2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020
    Collins     -49     -41     -33      -35     -19       -9
                              +8      +8        -2     +16     +10

                 2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020
Williamson     -41     -29     -20      -25     -12       -3
                              +12      +9        -5     +13     +9

As you can see the trend is pretty similar accross every election however when theres a candidate with what seems a unique appeal (Romney 2012) the trends temporarily halt, but at the next election trend twice as hard (Maybe that's why New England saw a big swing towards Biden? A reversal to the mean?).

Of course I could be very wrong on this and I could be seeing the wrong pattern here but this seems what the date indicates.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Those are indeed very valid and reasonable points (Especially the one that suggests that Ds only carry Texas in 2008 (D+7) types of landslides (Since the state is around R+10 relative to the nation).

But I disagree with the assumption that the speed of D trends in the Suburban counties (At least the sunbelt ones) are subject to whether or not theres a backlash againts an incumbent party but rather whether or not the candidate that it's a the top of the ticket can temporarily slow them down or due to another very unique circumstance.

                          Margin relative to the Nation

                  2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020
     Collins     -49     -41     -33      -35     -19       -9
                               +8      +8        -2     +16     +10

                  2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020
Williamson     -41     -29     -20      -25     -12       -3
                               +12      +9        -5     +13     +9

As you can see the trend is pretty similar accross every election however when theres a candidate with what seems a unique appeal (Romney 2012) the trends temporarily halt, but at the next election trend twice as hard (Maybe that's why New England saw a big swing towards Biden? A reversal to the mean?).

Of course I could be very wrong on this and I could be seeing the wrong pattern here but this seems what the date indicates.

Well 2012 is the only time that a Dem reelection bid this century and the number one point I am making is that trends usually slow down in a presidents reelection bid. 2004 and 2020 had Republicans in the White House and 2000, 2008, 2016 were open elections which are the most prone to huge variations.

As for 2000-2004 overall trend in Texas how much of it is the Nader factor being gone in 2004 cause I think Bush won by a larger marin in 2000 but got a higher % of the vote in Texas in 2004. Texas overall really didnt trend much democratic at all from 2000-2012 if you add in the Nader factor into this.


2000: Bush beat Gore+Nader in Texas by 19.17 points and lost by 0.5 points in the popular vote meaning Texas voted around 19.67 points more Republican the nation


2012: Romney beat Obama in Texas by 15.78 points and lost by 3.9 points nationally meaning Texas voted around 19.68 points more Republican than the nation.

[BlueSwan]

Even with current trends continuing, Texas doesn't look like a real pick-up opportunity for Democrats in an overall even election until sometime in the 2030's. A few of us got a bit carried away with Beto and some good polls for Biden, but Texas is still around +10 Republican at the moment and that is not something that is easily turned around in 4 or 8 years. So probably 2032 at the earliest and only if trends continue.

[DzSider]

Those are indeed very valid and reasonable points (Especially the one that suggests that Ds only carry Texas in 2008 (D+7) types of landslides (Since the state is around R+10 relative to the nation).

But I disagree with the assumption that the speed of D trends in the Suburban counties (At least the sunbelt ones) are subject to whether or not theres a backlash againts an incumbent party but rather whether or not the candidate that it's a the top of the ticket can temporarily slow them down or due to another very unique circumstance.

                          Margin relative to the Nation

                  2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020
     Collins     -49     -41     -33      -35     -19       -9
                               +8      +8        -2     +16     +10

                  2000 | 2004 | 2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020
Williamson     -41     -29     -20      -25     -12       -3
                               +12      +9        -5     +13     +9

As you can see the trend is pretty similar accross every election however when theres a candidate with what seems a unique appeal (Romney 2012) the trends temporarily halt, but at the next election trend twice as hard (Maybe that's why New England saw a big swing towards Biden? A reversal to the mean?).

Of course I could be very wrong on this and I could be seeing the wrong pattern here but this seems what the date indicates.

Well 2012 is the only time that a Dem reelection bid this century and the number one point I am making is that trends usually slow down in a presidents reelection bid. 2004 and 2020 had Republicans in the White House and 2000, 2008, 2016 were open elections which are the most prone to huge variations.

As for 2000-2004 overall trend in Texas how much of it is the Nader factor being gone in 2004 cause I think Bush won by a larger marin in 2000 but got a higher % of the vote in Texas in 2004. Texas overall really didnt trend much democratic at all from 2000-2012 if you add in the Nader factor into this.


2000: Bush beat Gore+Nader in Texas by 19.17 points and lost by 0.5 points in the popular vote meaning Texas voted around 19.67 points more Republican the nation


2012: Romney beat Obama in Texas by 15.78 points and lost by 3.9 points nationally meaning Texas voted around 19.68 points more Republican than the nation.

True, given where Nader performed the best he probably took a lot of the vote from Gore but if you give Gore his share of the Vote the national margin gets bigger as well so the trend stays around the same:

Collin (If you give Gore Nader's share of the vote)
D 26 (-47)
R 73

National (If you give Gore Nader share of the vote)
D 51 +3
R 48

Trend: (Without Nader) -50
Trend: With Nader -49

And yeah, the trends in a non-incumbent year are slightly bigger at the state level but sunbelt suburban counties ones don't really differ that much (At least as far as I can see)

(Average state trend)
2020: 2%
2016: 5%
2012: 3%
2008: 5%
2004: 4%
2000: 5%

[Xing]

Not that hot of a take, especially since the TX-06 primary.

1. True, but that doesn't seem to be the case in Texas. The statewide trend seemed to stall because of a new trend in South Texas. The suburbs still swung massively to Biden, and there's no sign that this trend will reverse itself. The fact that trends can slow down doesn't mean that they will, and the CO/VA example isn't as strong as you think, since both states trended quite a bit more Democratic later on.

2. The PV is a flawed metric, since Democrats have consistently had an advantage in the PV recently. An election in which the PV is tied is an election that the Republican is winning easily. A 7-point win for the Democrats certainly isn't out of the question for 2024. Georgia voted 4 points right of the nation in 2020, and that doesn't mean it's still a "Republican-leaning state."

3. As I've said in other threads, the trend was strongest among rural Latino voters. Places like Bexar trended Democratic. While Republicans can get more votes out of the RGV, that's not going to offset gains Democrats make in the suburbs (a trend that's been happening for several cycles now.) If Republicans can't stall the trends in the suburbs, they need urban Latinos to trend their way as well to offset that. Rural white counties in Texas are mostly maxed out for Republicans.

I'd go with Lean R for now. While Texas isn't going to be an easy state for Democrats to flip, Republicans can't afford to get cocky about this state. The ramifications of them losing Texas would be enormous, and they're better off taking it seriously as a competitive state that could flip.