A red wall led by the upper Midwest?

[Unelectable Bystander]

Based on the new electoral maps, is the following a viable long term GOP path in a neutral or D+2 environment: Trump 2020 + WI, MI, PA, NV, ME at large - NC? By my count, this would equal 271 EV, and is based on the following assumptions:

-Accelerated trends put GA, AZ, and NC out of reach

-The rust belt trio, which was to the right of the nation for two straight elections, stays put or continues a slow rightward trend due to WWC

-Clark becomes competitive as educational polarization continues

-ME district 2 becomes so lopsided that the entire state tilts R. This has less of a historical backing, but is based on the premise of generational turnover. Polls show that the oldest age cohort is far to the left of the state, possibly even to the left of 18-29. I believe Maine (and maybe Iowa) are the only states that would drift right in the future even if nobody changed their voting habits simply due to generational turnover?

-TX doesn’t flip with NC for two reasons. First, Trump ran significantly behind essentially all other Texas republicans, which was not necessarily true in North Carolina. This could suggest that the state’s rightward lean was being somewhat masked by a dislike of Trump. Second, Texas has a far greater margin of raw vote difference currently. If I recall correctly, dems would need to win Hayes, Williamson, Denton, Fort Bend, Tarrant, and Collin in landslides while cutting into Ellis, Montgomery, etc just to break even. Keep in mind that some of those objectives will be stunted simply by the environment shifting slightly right from D+4. In North Carolina meanwhile, a Forsythification of the exurbs might be enough for a flip if it is not countered with rural or beach town growth

-Many of these aforementioned states are also currently showing horrible Biden approvals

-FL, IA, OH seem poised to keep shifting right if anything

Is there a 1-2 cycle scenario where these states are all 5-7 points to the right of the nation before Texas becomes truly competitive? Or are these assumptions an ignoring some important factors (Trump’s unique coalition, Las Vegas pandemic hatred, etc)?

[RINO Tom]

My two issues with these lines of thought:

1) The "Upper Midwest" (and the Midwest and West in general) do not share the cultural uniformity or "us against the country" attitudes that both the Northeast and the South do.  We look back at shifts in New England and the Deep South during the Twentieth Century for inspiration for future political trends, and I think this is fundamentally foolish.

2) There is even less ideological cohesiveness between "college grads" and "non-college grads."  Going to a frickin' college does not create some life-changing ideological bond.  We saw "college grads" voting extremely Republican at a time when it took a very upper-middle class status to go to college in the first place, and then we saw that status quo play out until generational displacement took place.  We are now seeing a combination of a (minority) group of GOP voters abandoning the party over cultural shifts combined with a more diverse group of college voters each year.  Millennials and younger generations are significantly more likely to have gone to college, and they are significantly more likely to be Democrats for OTHER reasons.  We will likely continue to see "college grads" shift Democratic, but it won't be because there is some inherent ideological bond they all share like being an "Evangelical Christian."

[RaphaelDLG]

My two issues with these lines of thought:

1) The "Upper Midwest" (and the Midwest and West in general) do not share the cultural uniformity or "us against the country" attitudes that both the Northeast and the South do.  We look back at shifts in New England and the Deep South during the Twentieth Century for inspiration for future political trends, and I think this is fundamentally foolish.

2) There is even less ideological cohesiveness between "college grads" and "non-college grads."  Going to a frickin' college does not create some life-changing ideological bond.  We saw "college grads" voting extremely Republican at a time when it took a very upper-middle class status to go to college in the first place, and then we saw that status quo play out until generational displacement took place.  We are now seeing a combination of a (minority) group of GOP voters abandoning the party over cultural shifts combined with a more diverse group of college voters each year.  Millennials and younger generations are significantly more likely to have gone to college, and they are significantly more likely to be Democrats for OTHER reasons.  We will likely continue to see "college grads" shift Democratic, but it won't be because there is some inherent ideological bond they all share like being an "Evangelical Christian."

Agree with one, disagree somewhat with #2 - there is some sort of cohesiveness of identity (if not ideology) within educational lines.  Also, people by and large get their ideology and their voting preferances from identity, not the other way round.

College socializes you to be, for lack of a better term, "woke," which means that you are socialized to identify with and vote for the Democratic Party in its current incarnation.  Symbiotically, the Republican Party plays into the resentment of non-college people (even quite wealthy ones) against the cultural prominence of the college educated elite, thereby creating a cohesive "anti-elite" identity.

Of course, this is not a universal or totally determinate process, and you yourself are a counterexample of this, but there is a lot of truth there imo.

[Vice President Christian Man]

Interesting, I like your theory

[MT Treasurer]

2) There is even less ideological cohesiveness between "college grads" and "non-college grads."  Going to a frickin' college does not create some life-changing ideological bond.  We saw "college grads" voting extremely Republican at a time when it took a very upper-middle class status to go to college in the first place, and then we saw that status quo play out until generational displacement took place.  We are now seeing a combination of a (minority) group of GOP voters abandoning the party over cultural shifts combined with a more diverse group of college voters each year.  Millennials and younger generations are significantly more likely to have gone to college, and they are significantly more likely to be Democrats for OTHER reasons.  We will likely continue to see "college grads" shift Democratic, but it won't be because there is some inherent ideological bond they all share like being an "Evangelical Christian."

Like Raphael, I also disagree with this part of your post. Perceived moral superiority can very much function as an 'ideological bond,' and that is the case with a sizable (and vocal, due in no small part to disproportionate/distorted media coverage) cohort of college-educated voters much like it was/is the case with many Evangelical Christians. Where the term 'college-educated' denotes/reinforces status*, lifestyle, and self-worth (especially when continually set against a large[r], more 'amoral'/uneducated/etc. other) more than it encapsulates any change in thinking or a genuinely 'enlightened' worldview, it can indeed function as something of an ideological/social bond. I think this has become a very evident pattern in American and European political discourse (again, media coverage bears much of the blame for this) and has certainly exacerbated the alienation of non-college-educated voters from the Democratic Party. The 'discussion' of COVID-related restrictions has been a prime illustration of this trend — if a particular restriction/policy is most popular among college-educated voters, it is not necessarily because it is inherently more 'scientific' and everyone else isn’t 'educated' enough to comprehend its benefits, but because support for such policies always also is an affirmation of their supporters' self-worth, as it allows them to adhere to the notions of science fed to them by the media while feeling good about protecting society with their (at times) irrational actions/beliefs. In all of these cases, they will feel at the top of the moral/educational/social(/financial) hierarchy, which, more than any ideological/philosophical benefit derived from actual education, is what this really comes down to. It’s a very observable phenomenon even in online forums (pay attention to repeated verbosity, use of 'euphonious' terms that blur the actual content of a post, reference to unrelated topics to infuse a debate with a 'morally charged' components [e.g. never-ending references to 1/6 or unvaccinated people on this forum even when the topic is completely unrelated to either of these], etc.).

There are exceptions to this — I am 'college-educated,' you are too, and we’re not necessarily liberals or people who are obsessed with feeling good about ourselves. We’re also driven by basic ideological beliefs, which influence our party affiliation/voting behavior. However, that’s also where the gender gap comes into play — one that is still very pronounced among college-educated voters.

*This also implies financial/material status but I don’t consider it (no longer, I should say) the driving force behind this unfortunate development.

[Unelectable Bystander]

My two issues with these lines of thought:

1) The "Upper Midwest" (and the Midwest and West in general) do not share the cultural uniformity or "us against the country" attitudes that both the Northeast and the South do.  We look back at shifts in New England and the Deep South during the Twentieth Century for inspiration for future political trends, and I think this is fundamentally foolish.

2) There is even less ideological cohesiveness between "college grads" and "non-college grads."  Going to a frickin' college does not create some life-changing ideological bond.  We saw "college grads" voting extremely Republican at a time when it took a very upper-middle class status to go to college in the first place, and then we saw that status quo play out until generational displacement took place.  We are now seeing a combination of a (minority) group of GOP voters abandoning the party over cultural shifts combined with a more diverse group of college voters each year.  Millennials and younger generations are significantly more likely to have gone to college, and they are significantly more likely to be Democrats for OTHER reasons.  We will likely continue to see "college grads" shift Democratic, but it won't be because there is some inherent ideological bond they all share like being an "Evangelical Christian."

I’m hoping I quoted this properly, sorry if not! This makes sense to me. I suppose I wasn’t so much asking if these states could turn into TN/KY style dark red states and be the base of a new coalition, which is likely not the case due to their lack of an inherent ideological bond as you said. Instead, I’m instead wondering if we could be stumbling into a massive GOP electoral advantage (ie Trump 2016 + 8 or 12 years of trends), that is just not being clearly depicted because we have not yet seen these trends unfold in a neutral environment. This being due to the strange Trump era coalition combinations of several different groups (rural secular whites in the rust belt and Maine, Hispanics in Nevada, Texas not yet being the “new” Texas, Florida becoming a destination for conservative transplants)