I think TX will be the key battleground state in the 30s with Alaska turning blue. By this point, FL and OH will be safe/lean R. TX and FL are the biggest winners while the Midwest and CA all lose electoral votes. CA could be turning purple
IMO, this is not a believable map. There are too many "wrong" numbers among the 50 states in this map. You've got fully 26 of the states - a majority of the 50 - changing their House apportionment (and hence, their ECVs) from the 2021 reapportionment. That's extremely rare to have that many states change their apportionment of seats in the House in just one decade. And, out of all 50 numbers I see on that map, 13 of them are downright unbelievable, because the new apportionment you are giving them would be based on drastic changes to the rate of population growth/decline in those 13 states (during the 2020s, compared to population changes in previous decades).
Here are the 13 numbers that I do not believe are the slightest bit realistic:
- Connecticut, Missouri, and Tennessee are each losing one seat
- neither Pennsylvania nor Rhode Island are losing a seat
- Kansas, Montana, and New Mexico are each gaining one seat
- Colorado and Oregon are both gaining two more seats
- Florida and Georgia are both gaining three more seats
- most unrealistic of all, Arizona is losing two seats
In order to assume that these changes could occur, you'd have to be making assumptions about changes to the rate of population growth/decline in those states that are
extremely unlikely. For example, in order to believe that neither PA nor RI would lose any seats during the 2031 reapportionment, you'd have to see a drastic increase in the rate of population growth in both of them during this decade - a much higher rate of growth than either of those states has seen in the past several decades. Population growth in both of those states would have to be pretty darn close to the nationwide rate of population growth; it would be a rate of growth much higher than in any of the past 80-90 years. Why would either of those states start growing now as fast as the whole nation? For Florida to gain three more seats in the 2031 reapportionment, its rate of population growth would have to be similar to - but just slightly less than - its rate of growth 4 and 5 decades ago, but in reality Florida's rate of growth during the last 1-3 decades has been much slower than 4-5 decades ago. In order for CT, MO, and TN to each lose a seat next decade, those three states would have to experience a net population loss, probably tens of thousands fewer people than the 2020 census. Most outlandish of all, in order for Arizona to lose two seats, it would have to lose anywhere from 750k to about 1 million people - maybe even more - during this decade! What could cause population loss of that magnitude in Arizona?
Not all of the apportionment numbers you've put in that map are implausible, but the numbers for those 13 states certainly are very implausible.
