Long term, what red states do Democrats have potential in?

[ProgressiveModerate]

I agree with Texas, Alaska, Utah, Kansas, and Montana.

One longshot possibility is that West Virginia could become Lean R or Likely R within the next three or four decades, if exurban development for the DMV reaches the north Shenandoah Valley in Jefferson and Berkeley Counties (which, considering it's already consumed Frederick County...) and population loss in the rest of the state doesn't slow down.

I think that's quite a stretch; there's still quite a large gap between where Suburbs end in Loudon County and WV and frankly WV is too far out to realistically be part of the metro.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Texas - This one is pretty obvious but there are several large cities that are rapidly growing, Democrats gaining in the suburbs, and relatively low turnout already among key Dem constiuencies. Even if Rs make gains with Hispanics, that likely just stalls the inevitable

Alaska - Alaska is a very small state in terms of population and Dems have been making some pretty big gains in Anchorage and Fairbanks. It's really "exurbs" with heavy oil industry influence keeping the state so R but the oil industry is overall on the decline. Furthermore, Dem gains with travel communities which there are a few of in AK def helps

Kansas/Nebraska - I lumped these 2 together because both states a very simillar geopolitically, Nebraska just a few points to the right due to Shawnee being so liberal in KS. In both states, growth has largely been concentrated to the cities and college communities which we have seen get a lot bluer. Furthermore, both states are relatively urban in teh sense most of the population in concentrated in these cities, it's just the rural areas vote so heavily R they currently more than cancel out these votes.

As I said in another thread, I don't think this is something that will happen by "default", especially since Nebraska is currently pretty R and it'd require Dems to gain a lot more ground in Wititcha where their gains have been less impressive, but still something to keep an eye on.

Montana - I feel like this is a bit cliche at this point since it feels like Montana is getting redder but if one of Missoula/Helena/Bozeman booms, it could really have an imapct given how relatively small the state is population wise. Furthermore, Dems currently have a lot of upside in Billings

Wyoming - Simillar reason to MT. It would likely take a long time, but it's not impossible to see something Laramie become akin to Fort Collins. This is the smallest state in the country population wise so again it would take less than you think, though still unlikely imo

Utah - LDS is losing influence, the population is heavily concentrated in the valley which is slowly but surely become more of a "normal" educated metro in the sense it's not just full of LDS folks. The state has shifted very hard left recently and while some of that could be due to Trump, I think a lot of it is perminanent. As some here have said, Utah is like Colorado with LDS, which is kinda true to some degree.

After that, i think most R states on the eastern half of the US, despite some having growing metros, just have rurals that are too dense to ever be outvoted and/or countertrends with depopulating black populations or retirees. Sure Indianapolis metro has a lot of upsides for Dems but it's only 1/5th of the state or so and given there are few other Dem communities in the state of substance, it's hard to see it flipping the state.

I mean we've seen this in Ohio too where Dems have really crashed despite Columbus.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Montana is overrated for this. It became more Republican in the Trump era. Its voters are elastic so 2008 Obama came close, but it's like 60% Whites without a college degree.

Texas is the obvious answer, but it's somewhat amusing that this would happen because of educated White Northerners moving into Dallas and Austin rather than the Hispanic population becoming rabidly Dem like was once thought.

Utah basically consists of a single educated urban conglomeration so it stands to trend D sharply. Kansas and Nebraska are also surprisingly urbanized and educated.

Alaska is diversifying pretty quickly too, it could be a sleeper.

Most states have some quality that makes people think they could become Democratic. See how this forum talks about Tennessee. Most of the states that could have become Dem have. Georgia, Virginia, Colorado all have realized their trendz already. North Carolina was false hope. Texas, Florida, and North Carolina are the only states that could be contested in a reasonably neutral environment this decade that Biden didn't win.

I agree with this post, but I disagree with the notion that NC is a "lost hope"

Dems still got very favorable swings out of the metros like Charlotte and Raleigh, more than they probably could've asked for.

However, unlike states like VA, CO, and GA, the state still has notable countertrends due to how dense the western appalachian part of the state is, keeping the shift relatively neutral overall. A state like Colorado on the other hand is almost entirely urban/suburban communities, many of which have high educational attainment.

If you snipped off everything West of Charlotte, NC would actually be nearly identical to VA politically, geographically, and demographically.

It is entirely possible Republicans have reached their limit in growing Appalachia and urban shifts overpower it. It's also possible we start to see countershifts within urban areas causing the state to shift right as a whole. I do think NC will eventually begin to swing one way or another though as the narrow balance that has kept it's shifts neutral are unlikely to continue forever.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The problem with Nebraska is that it's going to lose a district in 2030 so even if NE-02 flips before then and is a pretty consistent D district (likely) it won't be winnable after a ton of rural areas get added. Sure an Omaha to Lincoln district could be drawn but that's basically a D gerrymander and not happening.

However Idaho should gain a district the same Census and that might open up a pretty solid D seat around Boise.

I don't think it's going to lose a district anytime soon? But even if that were the case, over half of the added areas would come from suburban Sarpy alone. It would only be Trump +3 in 2020

It's the least populated 3 district state. In fact it's right ahead of Idaho in population. Idaho will definitely overtake it by 2030. Although Nebraska's population growth was exactly that of the country at large, so if it continues that it may not lose it and both it and Idaho will be three district states.

Looks like both Nebraska and Idaho will overtake New Mexico though...maybe that'll be the state to lose one instead.

Tbf there are only 2 3 district states nationally. Long term, NM and NE are at risk of seat loss but prolly not in 2030 barring dramatic population change. Most potential seat loss will likely come from rust belt states, especially more populus ones and ones that haven’t lost a seat for a cycle or 2. I suspect come 2030, MI, PA, IL, OH, IN, and WI would all be at high risk.

We’ll have to see if the northeast really is rebounding a bit or if 2020 census was a bit of a mirage, but states like CT, RI, and NY could also lose seats.

Rmbr though that in recent census cycles, not all that many seats have had to change just from the country being so large.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I agree with this post, but I disagree with the notion that NC is a "lost hope"

Dems still got very favorable swings out of the metros like Charlotte and Raleigh, more than they probably could've asked for.

However, unlike states like VA, CO, and GA, the state still has notable countertrends due to how dense the western appalachian part of the state is, keeping the shift relatively neutral overall. A state like Colorado on the other hand is almost entirely urban/suburban communities, many of which have high educational attainment.

If you snipped off everything West of Charlotte, NC would actually be nearly identical to VA politically, geographically, and demographically.

It is entirely possible Republicans have reached their limit in growing Appalachia and urban shifts overpower it. It's also possible we start to see countershifts within urban areas causing the state to shift right as a whole. I do think NC will eventually begin to swing one way or another though as the narrow balance that has kept it's shifts neutral are unlikely to continue forever.

The swings which prevented NC from voting for Biden weren't concentrated in the Western part of the state:

Not specifically 2016-2020 but just overall. 2020 was prolly the first Pres election in a while where Appalachia trends truly stalled