Here is a map of what I consider to be the "blue wall", at least at the federal level barring extreme circumstances. The lighter states are debatable and/or have potential to join in the near future.
These states total 253 EVs on current apportionment numbers which is pretty close to 270.
The issue for the GOP in a lot of these states is some combination of either:
1. The state is just too blue to realistic become competitive federally anytime soon (CA, VT, MA)
2. The state is a demographic nightmare for the GOP (CA, NY, MD)
3. The state has growth patterns/shifts that heavily favor Dems (GA, VA, CO)
I think many on the GOP side don't realize how close they are to an EC lockout if they don't expand their coalition or try to invest in new communities they haven't previously.
Imo, the only ones above that I could see getting redder by the end of the decade barring some *MASSIVE* re-alignment are NM and ME. In New Mexico, the heavily R and oil influenced southeast corner of the state is growing, and tbh ALBQ isn't doing all that great in terms of population. Also, if the GOP really does find a way to make gains with rural/small town Hispanics, that could be meaningful here.
In ME, polling already suggests generational turnover may actually benefit the GOP. Furthermore, Maine has already shifted decently right since the Obama era, and doesn't have the same demographic challenges as a lot of these other states.
Some may argue NH, but I think the GOP's issue there is historically their base/vote nets have been those relatively dense suburbs along the MA border where they've collapsed in recent cycles. Some rural gains in Coos county isn't going to make that up. ME is far more rural and disconnected from the NE corridor which is why I think it's a better target, even if it technically is slightly bluer right now.
Another state others may argue for is MN but the issue for Rs there is the rural areas are just shrinking relative to MSP. Even if they gain further in rurals, they need to counteract population loss by default so it's not all that helpful to them. MN really didn't swing all that right from the Obama era despite Dems pretty extreme losses in rural parts of the state.
Illinois is possible, but Chicago needs to depopulate faster than the rest of the state which was happening pre-2020 census but according to the 2020 census, rural IL is shrinking faster which kinda puts them in that MN problem. Also in a lot of rural areas, especially in downstate Illinois, it's not like there's a ton more to squeeze out.
Ik others have suggested DE, RI, and NJ elsewhere, but practically all those states are pretty blue as is, pretty urban, and still dominated by the northeast corridor to become genuinely competitive federally anytime soon. Greater Providence and Wilmington should be able to outvote the rest of the state even if rural areas become ruby red. In NJ, part of the reason we saw NJ-Gov 2021 as close as it was was because of piss poor 10% turnout in Dem areas like JC and Newark which won't happen in a federal year. I go into further detail about why Rs will struggle to win NJ in a Pres Year in the NJ-2024 Senate thread.
AZ and GA are still pure swing states and not "blue wall" by any stretch of the imagination.
