AZ might be slipping away from the GOP a lot faster than we think

[ProgressiveModerate]

Post-2020, I feel like there was a lot of talk that Trump was a particularly toxic fir for AZ due to his attacks of John McCain and generally being a turnout to Independents in the suburbs, which AZ has many of. At it's core, AZ was still an R leaning state.

Then 2022 rolled around, and Kelly won re-election by 5, Dems own the Gov, SOS, and probably AG, and almost won the state legislature, and again I see a lot of people pointing to Kimberly Yee as a sign that a "normal" Republican would've done better.

The issue for the AZ GOP is that historically most of their vote netting was out of the Pheonix suburbs, and holding whiter areas closer to downtown close. Similar to Colorado, AZ is an extremely urban/suburban state so in order for any party to be competitive, they have to be doing well in urban areas.

The GOP has recently been in free fall in most suburbs not only in AZ, but around the country with little sign of significant reversion.

But I think what's killing the GOP in AZ is growing liberal white populations in both Phoenix and Tucson that previously didn't exist. The new AZ-04 is probably the classic example of this, going from a Romney 2012 seat to a narrow Clinton seat, to a double-digit seat, to Stanton outrunning Biden in 2022, and I expect it to continue to get bluer. It's just really hard to see where the GOP finds the votes to cancel out these sorts of communities in AZ long term, similar to how in Colorado, GOP gains in rural eastern parts of the state were nowhere near enough to counteract bluing Denver suburbs.

At least in a state like GA, there is a significant religious conservative rural white population that will always been there for the GOP unless coalitions dramatically change and should give them a decent floor for a while. It just seems like in AZ, there's much greater chance the floor can just be pulled out from under the GOP.

[Roll Roons]

Bear in mind that Schweikert and Ciscomani won their districts at the same time that Kelly/Hobbs/Fontes all did. Since you mentioned Yee, she won Maricopa by double digits and managed to carry Stanton's district.

The state is not yet a complete lost cause for the GOP like Colorado, but it's clear that only a certain kind of Republican can win now. In a vacuum, it does seem like the "McCain R" types prefer non-MAGA Republicans over Democrat, but they will vote for a Democrat over a MAGA Republican. It's just that the state GOP has become very MAGA-oriented in recent years.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Bear in mind that Schweikert and Ciscomani won their districts at the same time that Kelly/Hobbs/Fontes all did. Since you mentioned Yee, she won Maricopa by double digits and managed to carry Stanton's district.

The state is not yet a complete lost cause for the GOP like Colorado, but it's clear that only a certain kind of Republican can win now. In a vacuum, it does seem like the "McCain R" types prefer non-MAGA Republicans over Democrat, but they will vote for a Democrat over a MAGA Republican. It's just that the state GOP has become very MAGA-oriented in recent years.

Good pointz.

AZ today gives me a bit of New Hampshire vibes. NH tends to lean D on the federal level at this point, but Rs still have a strong brand in the state and do quite well at the state level considering. The main difference is it seems like the AZ Republican Primary voters are not very good at actually nominating these candidates.

I think as for Ciscomani and Sweitkart, yes they won, but it's nothing to write home about. Their margins of victory were both extremely narrow, Dems didn't invest in AZ-06 and only a little bit at the end in AZ-01, and both AZ-01 and AZ-06 were basically ties in 2020 Pres numbers.

Part of AZ's political future also has to do with how the state Dem party brands itself. In Colorado for instance, I think state Dems have done a good job at both being a liberal party but staying in touch with the state, and knowing where Colorado stands on the issues. This can be seen on Polis being one of the first Dem Governors to roll back some of the more ridiculous Covid restrictions that were just carried on for too long in other states, or still having a decent respect for gun rights in a state that has a notable gun culture.

Now that Dems actually have the Governorship in AZ, Katie Hobbs really gets the chance to start defining the AZ Dem party, and how she does that will be very important.

[Torie]

Unless the Pubs make more progress in attracting persons of color, what is slipping away is their competitiveness as a party in general. The jury is out on whether that will happen.

[Central Lake]

Well not necessarily D+14 Colorado levels, but over past few weeks I was thinking along similar lines in the context of a Republican's path to 270 in 2024 presidential election.

Walker got 48.5% in GA and Masters got 46.5% in AZ.

[Cyrusman]

I don't think this is the case with a Republican who has no Trump ties. When was the last time the GOP had a nominee run a statewide race in AZ who was not tied to Trump? Meaning not "MAGA" or not always at rallies with him. Mark Brnovich? John McCain? Doug Ducey? McSalley was a Trump endorsed candidate who appeared at rallies with him. Masters and Lake were full MAGA.
AZ Republicans need these "moderate, RINO" Republicans in Maricopa to win. These people detest anything linked to Trump.

If the GOP nominates a "normal, non Trump" candidate who has a personal brand that is not tied to Trump, they can very much still win. Dems still have a low floor in AZ. Dems need to still win independents by close to a 2-1 margin, while peeling at least 9-10% of the GOP vote.

[Tintrlvr]

I think Arizona 2022 is basically at the same place as Colorado 2006. Which means that Arizona is headed relatively quickly towards being safe D, but it's at least a decade or a bit more where the Republicans can still compete to some degree. And the Republicans are even today marginally competitive in Colorado statewide.

[Nyvin]

I don't think this is the case with a Republican who has no Trump ties. When was the last time the GOP had a nominee run a statewide race in AZ who was not tied to Trump? Meaning not "MAGA" or not always at rallies with him. Mark Brnovich? John McCain? Doug Ducey? McSalley was a Trump endorsed candidate who appeared at rallies with him. Masters and Lake were full MAGA.
AZ Republicans need these "moderate, RINO" Republicans in Maricopa to win. These people detest anything linked to Trump.

If the GOP nominates a "normal, non Trump" candidate who has a personal brand that is not tied to Trump, they can very much still win. Dems still have a low floor in AZ. Dems need to still win independents by close to a 2-1 margin, while peeling at least 9-10% of the GOP vote.

This strategy is really fighting against the headwinds though.   The national party is what people hear about in the news and it's what drive the environment overall at the state level.   

Iowa had a bunch of moderate bland D's both in the legislature and at the state level in the early 2000's and even up to the last 4-6 years.   Just saying "they could've held everything if they just ran normal candidates!" is a heck of a lot easier said than done.   

New candidates are always going to be almost instantly associated to the national party,  it's really just established incumbents who already develop a name for themselves in the state that can bypass this.   

[Cyrusman]

I don't think this is the case with a Republican who has no Trump ties. When was the last time the GOP had a nominee run a statewide race in AZ who was not tied to Trump? Meaning not "MAGA" or not always at rallies with him. Mark Brnovich? John McCain? Doug Ducey? McSalley was a Trump endorsed candidate who appeared at rallies with him. Masters and Lake were full MAGA.
AZ Republicans need these "moderate, RINO" Republicans in Maricopa to win. These people detest anything linked to Trump.

If the GOP nominates a "normal, non Trump" candidate who has a personal brand that is not tied to Trump, they can very much still win. Dems still have a low floor in AZ. Dems need to still win independents by close to a 2-1 margin, while peeling at least 9-10% of the GOP vote.

This strategy is really fighting against the headwinds though.   The national party is what people hear about in the news and it's what drive the environment overall at the state level.  

Iowa had a bunch of moderate bland D's both in the legislature and at the state level in the early 2000's and even up to the last 4-6 years.   Just saying "they could've held everything if they just ran normal candidates!" is a heck of a lot easier said than done.  

New candidates are always going to be almost instantly associated to the national party,  it's really just established incumbents who already develop a name for themselves in the state that can bypass this.  

I get that, but I mean a state like AZ is not too far in either direction to where the national environment would really hurt the GOP unless the GOP is getting beat by 08 levels. AZ is still a center right state that loves moderate republicans and detests Trump and Trumpism. Heck, you don't  even need to be that "moderate", just don't be Trumpy. Ducey is pretty conservative ideology wise. Republicans still did pretty well with the congressional vote.

Georgia has been front and center of the national GOP party the last few years and just elected 4 Republicans to statewide offices, with Mr. Walker being the one loser.
I think the left trend of AZ is somewhat overblown IMO. Yes, it isn't 2010/2012 Arizona, but I don't think think is Colorado all over again. AZ has just been AWFUL when it comes to their candidates the last 4-6 years, like arguably the worst state in the nation in terms of who the GOP nominates. I think that has been their biggest issue. Fortunately for them, Kelli Ward will not be back.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I don't think this is the case with a Republican who has no Trump ties. When was the last time the GOP had a nominee run a statewide race in AZ who was not tied to Trump? Meaning not "MAGA" or not always at rallies with him. Mark Brnovich? John McCain? Doug Ducey? McSalley was a Trump endorsed candidate who appeared at rallies with him. Masters and Lake were full MAGA.
AZ Republicans need these "moderate, RINO" Republicans in Maricopa to win. These people detest anything linked to Trump.

If the GOP nominates a "normal, non Trump" candidate who has a personal brand that is not tied to Trump, they can very much still win. Dems still have a low floor in AZ. Dems need to still win independents by close to a 2-1 margin, while peeling at least 9-10% of the GOP vote.

This strategy is really fighting against the headwinds though.   The national party is what people hear about in the news and it's what drive the environment overall at the state level.  

Iowa had a bunch of moderate bland D's both in the legislature and at the state level in the early 2000's and even up to the last 4-6 years.   Just saying "they could've held everything if they just ran normal candidates!" is a heck of a lot easier said than done.  

New candidates are always going to be almost instantly associated to the national party,  it's really just established incumbents who already develop a name for themselves in the state that can bypass this.  

I get that, but I mean a state like AZ is not too far in either direction to where the national environment would really hurt the GOP unless the GOP is getting beat by 08 levels. AZ is still a center right state that loves moderate republicans and detests Trump and Trumpism. Heck, you don't  even need to be that "moderate", just don't be Trumpy. Ducey is pretty conservative ideology wise. Republicans still did pretty well with the congressional vote.

Georgia has been front and center of the national GOP party the last few years and just elected 4 Republicans to statewide offices, with Mr. Walker being the one loser.
I think the left trend of AZ is somewhat overblown IMO. Yes, it isn't 2010/2012 Arizona, but I don't think think is Colorado all over again. AZ has just been AWFUL when it comes to their candidates the last 4-6 years, like arguably the worst state in the nation in terms of who the GOP nominates. I think that has been their biggest issue. Fortunately for them, Kelli Ward will not be back.

While I do agree that while Arizona and Colorado may have some similarities, it's never a good idea to compare any 2 states future trajectory.

But this whole narrative around "well a non-Trumpy R would do well" is just unfounded. I do think there's a *specific* type of Republican who does well in the state. This cycle Yee just sort of cruised to re-election as a non-controversial incumbent who was already a known quantity.

A great example of where a "normal D v R" means R win could be disproven would be the 2018 AZ SOS race where Hobbs actually ran against a non-Trumpy "normal" Republican, but he was not an incumbent and hence had no pre-existing brand in the state.

Also, at the federal level, Rs aren't just going to suddenly try and tailor their messaging just to AZ, that's just not how it works.

[David Hume]

I don't think this is the case with a Republican who has no Trump ties. When was the last time the GOP had a nominee run a statewide race in AZ who was not tied to Trump? Meaning not "MAGA" or not always at rallies with him. Mark Brnovich? John McCain? Doug Ducey? McSalley was a Trump endorsed candidate who appeared at rallies with him. Masters and Lake were full MAGA.
AZ Republicans need these "moderate, RINO" Republicans in Maricopa to win. These people detest anything linked to Trump.

If the GOP nominates a "normal, non Trump" candidate who has a personal brand that is not tied to Trump, they can very much still win. Dems still have a low floor in AZ. Dems need to still win independents by close to a 2-1 margin, while peeling at least 9-10% of the GOP vote.

This strategy is really fighting against the headwinds though.   The national party is what people hear about in the news and it's what drive the environment overall at the state level.   

Iowa had a bunch of moderate bland D's both in the legislature and at the state level in the early 2000's and even up to the last 4-6 years.   Just saying "they could've held everything if they just ran normal candidates!" is a heck of a lot easier said than done.   

New candidates are always going to be almost instantly associated to the national party,  it's really just established incumbents who already develop a name for themselves in the state that can bypass this.   

R has a special opportunity: If DeSantis beats Trump in a hard fight primary, it would help AZGOP to rebrand from the damage of Trump.

[Pericles]

Bear in mind that Schweikert and Ciscomani won their districts at the same time that Kelly/Hobbs/Fontes all did. Since you mentioned Yee, she won Maricopa by double digits and managed to carry Stanton's district.

The state is not yet a complete lost cause for the GOP like Colorado, but it's clear that only a certain kind of Republican can win now. In a vacuum, it does seem like the "McCain R" types prefer non-MAGA Republicans over Democrat, but they will vote for a Democrat over a MAGA Republican. It's just that the state GOP has become very MAGA-oriented in recent years.

Schweikert barely won, it was a pretty unimpressive result for an established incumbent.