Do you believe in Blalaska? If so what year do you think it will go Blue at the presidential level?

[Canis]

Very interesting article and video
https://youtu.be/wgnIfmDffFk
https://davtalkslocalpolitics.medium.com/blalaska-2ccb5a974ce6

[Skill and Chance]

It's quite plausibly the next Dem flip.  Much smaller population to persuade/change turnout and no big countertrend areas like Texas. 

[Chips]

Sometime in the 2030's presumably I think.

[bagelman]

I don't like the word Blalaska.

[TDAS04]

2028 is possible.

[Ferguson97]

2036 at the earliest.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

I’ve said for a long time Alaska has looked like the inverse of West Virginia circa 1996. A state that demographically (race, religion, union membership, lots of government employees) should be a Democratic stronghold, but is run by an entrenched local GOP.
Well we saw how dramatically WV fell and all a state as small as this needs is a little push

[DS0816]

Re: Do you believe in Blalaska? If so what year do you think it will go Blue at the presidential level?

Alaska, along with some other states, are part of the Dream Maps of self-identified Democrats wishing to win over states long-established as aligned for the Republicans. The biggest one is, of course, Texas.

Since 1992, no presidential-election winner has carried more than 32 states.

If Texas and Alaska could flip and carry Democratic—and, since it has voted the same as the Lone Star State since 1972, go ahead and add South Carolina—what about states, long-established as aligned for the Democrats, being able to flip and carry Republican?

If Republicans are going to lose their Nos. 19 (South Carolina), 20 (Alaska), and 23 (Texas) best states, from 2020, wouldn’t their future win on their Dream Maps be made possible flipping a few states which are, say, between Nos. 16 to 20 for the current Democrats?

[Chips]

I don't like the word Blalaska.

Yeah it sounds silly in my opinion.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Re: Do you believe in Blalaska? If so what year do you think it will go Blue at the presidential level?

Alaska, along with some other states, are part of the Dream Maps of self-identified Democrats wishing to win over states long-established as aligned for the Republicans. The biggest one is, of course, Texas.

To be fair, the only "dream maps" involving Blue Alaska came during 2008 right before McCain picked Palin & in the last few months after Trump won Alaska by the closest margin since 1992 (And Biden getting the best percentage for a Democrat since 1964)

[If my soul was made of stone]

A winning Democratic coalition like Walker's will fall into place given another decade or so of Anchorage becoming more cosmopolitan, the economy diversifying away from natural resources, and maybe a shock energy collapse and/or climate-related disaster. I'd love to see blue Alaska, but the conditions for its arrival may not be ideal as far as environmental woes are concerned.

[Xing]

I don’t think we’re that far from “purplaska”, which I imagine will be the case in 2028 or 2032.

[MATTROSE94]

Probably 2028 or 2032, though I do have Dan Sullivan losing to Al Gross in 2026 (Trump or DeSantis midterm).

[Schiff for Senate]

No, not exactly, or at least not for the next 20 years or so. Yes, Democrats are gaining ground, but it's important to note that just becase AK shifted 15 points to the left between 2008 and 2020, this trend won't be repeating itself; I feel like Democratic votes are somewhat close to being maxed out even in urban/suburban areas like Anchorage. Maybe Alaska can trend bluer and elected Democrats to the House/Senate/Governership, but as far as presidential elections go, I feel like even if Democrats continue their gains (which is likely), there will be a "stopping point" that occurs well before Alaska is a solid or even lean Democratic state. Perhaps it will give the GOP a 5-point margin, but the Republicans likely won't slip below that, unless there is as rapid a demographic/partisan ship as there was in Atlanta (GA-06 shifted 21.5 points to the right from 2012 to 2016). Some kind of seismic shift will have to occur for Alaska to actually go blue. Democrats are celebrating when Alaska is 'just' ten points, and while that is a solid improvement from even 2012, there's no reason for the Alaska Democrat train to accelarate at this pace - it will slow down, and most probably stop, well before it crosses the finish line and Alaska finally votes blue. But I do think that in other races, like the House and the Senate, Democrats could have a victory, especially if they nominate a strong/populist candidate in the mould of Lisa Murkowski and Sarah Palin (not ideologically but in terms of their "populist" aura). The reason AK is more conservative nationally is, like it was mentioned in the video, Alaskans aren't appealed by the mainstream Democrats (and mainstream Republicans) in the House and Senate; they prefer populist, local candidates who focus more on Alaska and its issues than partisanship. If they run a candidate like they do in states like Massachusetts, Oregon and other such states, they won't win; if they run a populist, regional, anti-establishment candidate who adheres to quasi-liberal (but not fully liberal) principles, they have their best shot at winning. That doesn't happen presidentially because voters in the primary (and the candidates themselves) aren't going to suddenly campaign in Alaska and strike a populist, moderate tone to win Alaska's 3 electoral votes - they're more focused on Georgia's 16 votes, and Pennsylvania's 20 votes.

[If my soul was made of stone]

No, not exactly, or at least not for the next 20 years or so. Yes, Democrats are gaining ground, but it's important to note that just becase AK shifted 15 points to the left between 2008 and 2020, this trend won't be repeating itself; I feel like Democratic votes are somewhat close to being maxed out even in urban/suburban areas like Anchorage.

Anchorage is maxed out? If anything, it's still very conservative for an urban area so diverse, and getting far less white with time (from 79% non-Hispanic white in 1990 to 63% in 2010, with sizable populations of most Census-recognized minorities). I'd imagine that much of this underperformance is related to educated white voters in the petrochemical industry skewing more conservative, which may change with demographic realignment and the inevitable coming changes to that industry.

[Schiff for Senate]

No, not exactly, or at least not for the next 20 years or so. Yes, Democrats are gaining ground, but it's important to note that just becase AK shifted 15 points to the left between 2008 and 2020, this trend won't be repeating itself; I feel like Democratic votes are somewhat close to being maxed out even in urban/suburban areas like Anchorage.

Anchorage is maxed out? If anything, it's still very conservative for an urban area so diverse, and getting far less white with time (from 79% non-Hispanic white in 1990 to 63% in 2010, with sizable populations of most Census-recognized minorities). I'd imagine that much of this underperformance is related to educated white voters in the petrochemical industry skewing more conservative, which may change with demographic realignment and the inevitable coming changes to that industry.

No, it isn't maxed out yet, and it may lead to Alaska trending a few points bluer, but I don't think it's going to go blue (or become big) enough for Alaska as a state to vote blue. Maybe it'll make Alaska give the GOP 5-point margins (similar to TX in 2020), but I don't think it'll necessarily shift Democratic enough for Alaska as a whole to vote Democratic, unless the Democratic nominee is highly popular or from Alaska (not that I know many current Alaska Democrats holding any high office).

[Samof94]

Re: Do you believe in Blalaska? If so what year do you think it will go Blue at the presidential level?

Alaska, along with some other states, are part of the Dream Maps of self-identified Democrats wishing to win over states long-established as aligned for the Republicans. The biggest one is, of course, Texas.

Since 1992, no presidential-election winner has carried more than 32 states.

If Texas and Alaska could flip and carry Democratic—and, since it has voted the same as the Lone Star State since 1972, go ahead and add South Carolina—what about states, long-established as aligned for the Democrats, being able to flip and carry Republican?

If Republicans are going to lose their Nos. 19 (South Carolina), 20 (Alaska), and 23 (Texas) best states, from 2020, wouldn’t their future win on their Dream Maps be made possible flipping a few states which are, say, between Nos. 16 to 20 for the current Democrats?

Like Michigan that one time?