2030s electoral college map from 2032-2040 and future trends

[Vosem]

https://twitter.com/politicsmaps/status/1606110079685574656

Depending on what you code as a GOP-leaning or not GOP-leaning state, our best guess is that the 2030 Census represents something like adding an extra Tennessee to the Electoral College. (At these numbers, Trump 2016 without any of MI/PA/WI is still a Republican victory, and for 2020 Trump needed to win any 2 of AZ/GA/WI -- not all three -- to flip the election). Assuming FL/NC/TX are solid -- all big assumptions to be sure -- Republicans after 2030 can win the Presidency with any two of AZ/GA/MI/PA/WI. (AZ/WI is uncertain: 2020, but the GOP flips those states, comes out at 269-269 on the above numbers, so if they're exaggerated that might still be a Democratic victory.)

There is a perception on the Democratic side that once they can reliably flip another Sunbelt state that the GOP will struggle to win nationally, but this to some extent puts the lie to that. Democrats need to keep flipping Sunbelt states to remain competitive nationally at all. And to be fair their recent record in AZ/GA has actually been very strong -- but it remains the case that even under high-turnout conditions they have pretty low floors in both states, particularly AZ.

[Vosem]

https://twitter.com/politicsmaps/status/1606110079685574656
Depending on what you code as a GOP-leaning or not GOP-leaning state, our best guess is that the 2030 Census represents something like adding an extra Tennessee to the Electoral College. (At these numbers, Trump 2016 without any of MI/PA/WI is still a Republican victory, and for 2020 Trump needed to win any 2 of AZ/GA/WI -- not all three -- to flip the election). Assuming FL/NC/TX are solid -- all big assumptions to be sure -- Republicans after 2030 can win the Presidency with any two of AZ/GA/MI/PA/WI. (AZ/WI is uncertain: 2020, but the GOP flips those states, comes out at 269-269 on the above numbers, so if they're exaggerated that might still be a Democratic victory.)

There is a perception on the Democratic side that once they can reliably flip another Sunbelt state that the GOP will struggle to win nationally, but this to some extent puts the lie to that. Democrats need to keep flipping Sunbelt states to remain competitive nationally at all. And to be fair their recent record in AZ/GA has actually been very strong -- but it remains the case that even under high-turnout conditions they have pretty low floors in both states, particularly AZ.

I'm very skeptical of the idea that California will lose 5 (!) House seats in the next apportionment cycle.

If the previous census was problematic and underestimated population movements, the next census will correct it by recording larger moves.

I still think that a loss of 5 seats would imply a degree of miscounting and population loss that would be absolutely unprecedented in American history.

I understand that California is facing its fair share of problems but still.

I agree that a 5-seat loss would be very large and it probably won't be quite as bad (take my note that just flipping AZ/WI probably won't be enough to actually win a presidential election), but I think "large losses" are probably close to baked in. (Oldtimer has a point, but I'm not sure CA was actually overstated much in 2020: my understanding is that happened to Northeastern and Midwestern urban areas, particularly NY and MN.)

CA really is experiencing enormous domestic out-migration, and it's tough to say how much of this is a COVID effect. The number I'm actually most skeptical of is FL gaining 4: FL had a large COVID-era inflow and it's hard to say whether it'll continue.

A 5-seat loss wouldn't be unprecedented at all: New York lost 5 seats in the 1980 Census. Even bigger gains have been recorded (for instance, CA gained 8 seats in 1960); usually at the state level the pace of gain tends to be faster than the pace of loss.