Electoral College without the Hart-Celler Act/1920s Style Immigration Laws

[Huey Long is a Republican]

It is a well known fact that the 1965 Hart-Celler Act vastly changed the immigration laws of the United States and also radically shifted its focus from Europe and the First World to the Second and Third Worlds. This obviously affected how the politics would go as most immigrants began to, en masse, support the Democrats in states like California, Nevada, New Mexico, etc, etc, while the White population of the states vastly shifted to the Right. Now, the main question I'm posing here isn't what would the politics of this Hart-Cellerless America where the law was simply never passed or something akin to the 1920s immigration laws passed by Coolidge would be like, but what would the electoral college look like on a state by state basis, as in what electoral votes would each state have? While the effects of the legislation didn't take effect until 1968 and seemed to have been negligible, there was some impact in the 1980s, if only a tiny amount, but quickly skyrocketed to the present day, so without the legislation as it was OTL, what would the electoral college look like in the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, 2010s, and 2020s?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Hart-Cellar was irrelevant to Latin American immigration patterns (in fact, it placed a cap on them); its main effects were spikes in Asian and Eastern European immigrants. So, about the same number of Latinos but significantly fewer Asians and Soviet Jews if we simply imagine an America where said bill is never passed.

If you never get the 1924 bill that changes quite a bit more, and America has significantly more Italians, Jews (especially those who see the writing on the wall in the 1930s), and Eastern Europeans, but in the long run European immigration was always going to slow down for the same reasons that Hart-Celler failed to bring in the Irish and Italians it intended to bring in--as Europe rebuilt, moving to America for economic reasons became less attractive for working-class Western Europeans. 

[MATTROSE94]

Hart-Cellar was irrelevant to Latin American immigration patterns (in fact, it placed a cap on them); its main effects were spikes in Asian and Eastern European immigrants. So, about the same number of Latinos but significantly fewer Asians and Soviet Jews if we simply imagine an America where said bill is never passed.

If you never get the 1924 bill that changes quite a bit more, and America has significantly more Italians, Jews (especially those who see the writing on the wall in the 1930s), and Eastern Europeans, but in the long run European immigration was always going to slow down for the same reasons that Hart-Celler failed to bring in the Irish and Italians it intended to bring in--as Europe rebuilt, moving to America for economic reasons became less attractive for working-class Western Europeans. 

I agree. I would say that the Holocaust would have a lower death toll if the 1924 Immigration Act never passed.

Also more Italian and Irish immigration I think would have helped the Republicans long term considering that Italian Americans and Irish Americans have been overwhelmingly Republican since the 1970 midterm elections or 1972 Presidential election. Maybe that would have been enough for Donald Trump to have won Connecticut, New Jersey, and Rhode Island in 2016 (all three would be safe for Trump in 2024 and beyond) and Donald Trump winning Queens county in New York, a few counties in Massachusetts, and increasing his margins in Richmond county in New York and Monmouth and Ocean counties in New Jersey.

[ModerateRadical]

Hart-Cellar was irrelevant to Latin American immigration patterns (in fact, it placed a cap on them); its main effects were spikes in Asian and Eastern European immigrants. So, about the same number of Latinos but significantly fewer Asians and Soviet Jews if we simply imagine an America where said bill is never passed.

If you never get the 1924 bill that changes quite a bit more, and America has significantly more Italians, Jews (especially those who see the writing on the wall in the 1930s), and Eastern Europeans, but in the long run European immigration was always going to slow down for the same reasons that Hart-Celler failed to bring in the Irish and Italians it intended to bring in--as Europe rebuilt, moving to America for economic reasons became less attractive for working-class Western Europeans. 

I agree. I would say that the Holocaust would have a lower death toll if the 1924 Immigration Act never passed.

Also more Italian and Irish immigration I think would have helped the Republicans long term considering that Italian Americans and Irish Americans have been overwhelmingly Republican since the 1970 midterm elections or 1972 Presidential election. Maybe that would have been enough for Donald Trump to have won Connecticut, New Jersey, and Rhode Island in 2016 (all three would be safe for Trump in 2024 and beyond) and Donald Trump winning Queens county in New York, a few counties in Massachusetts, and increasing his margins in Richmond county in New York and Monmouth and Ocean counties in New Jersey.

Irish-Americans have definitely not been "overwhelmingly Republican" in any sense. Democrats still regularly win some of the most Irish areas in the country by blowout margins (even in some towns and cities that are over 80% white). Irish-Americans aren't as strongly Democratic as they might've been in the early 1960's, but they're still one of the most reliably-Democratic white ethnic groups.

Can't say I know too many specifics for the Italian-American vote, but I'm fairly sure Dems were winning a ton of non-college Italian-Americans in the Northeast right up until 2016.

[MATTROSE94]

Hart-Cellar was irrelevant to Latin American immigration patterns (in fact, it placed a cap on them); its main effects were spikes in Asian and Eastern European immigrants. So, about the same number of Latinos but significantly fewer Asians and Soviet Jews if we simply imagine an America where said bill is never passed.

If you never get the 1924 bill that changes quite a bit more, and America has significantly more Italians, Jews (especially those who see the writing on the wall in the 1930s), and Eastern Europeans, but in the long run European immigration was always going to slow down for the same reasons that Hart-Celler failed to bring in the Irish and Italians it intended to bring in--as Europe rebuilt, moving to America for economic reasons became less attractive for working-class Western Europeans.  

I agree. I would say that the Holocaust would have a lower death toll if the 1924 Immigration Act never passed.

Also more Italian and Irish immigration I think would have helped the Republicans long term considering that Italian Americans and Irish Americans have been overwhelmingly Republican since the 1970 midterm elections or 1972 Presidential election. Maybe that would have been enough for Donald Trump to have won Connecticut, New Jersey, and Rhode Island in 2016 (all three would be safe for Trump in 2024 and beyond) and Donald Trump winning Queens county in New York, a few counties in Massachusetts, and increasing his margins in Richmond county in New York and Monmouth and Ocean counties in New Jersey.

Irish-Americans have definitely not been "overwhelmingly Republican" in any sense. Democrats still regularly win some of the most Irish areas in the country by blowout margins (even in some towns and cities that are over 80% white). Irish-Americans aren't as strongly Democratic as they might've been in the early 1960's, but they're still one of the most reliably-Democratic white ethnic groups.

Can't say I know too many specifics for the Italian-American vote, but I'm fairly sure Dems were winning a ton of non-college Italian-Americans in the Northeast right up until 2016.

Interesting. It seems that Irish Americans overall are kind of a swing voter group overall. They were split 50-50 in 2016 and voted for Joe Biden by about 3% in 2020. In the area where I live, they are overwhelmingly Republican however, though a lot of Irish Americans near where I live are also very religious Catholics, so maybe that’s why they are Republican.  My mothers is also Irish on her mothers side and her mothers family all started voting Republican in 1940 and strongly supported Richard Nixon over John F. Kennedy in 1960.

Italian Americans, on the other hand, seem to have switched en mass to the Republican Party during the early part of Nixon administration, though there were some pockets of Democratic support within Italian American communities in states like New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island through the Obama years. In the town where I live, Italian Americans seem to have switched over the the Republican Party as early as 1940 (maybe due to World War 2) though and only defected to the Democrats in 1960, 1964, 1968, 1976, 1996, 2000, and 2012.  The town where I live is also majority Italian American and is similar demographically to Staten Island overall.

Other groups from Southern Europe like Portuguese Americans, European Hispanic Americans, and Greek Americans are also groups that likely voted majority Democratic from the New Deal era up until the early part of the Nixon administration as well, but still had some pockets of Democratic support in certain areas until Donald Trump announced his run for the Presidency in 2015.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Yeah, I think something worth considering here is that partisan patterns would be different in this scenario. America would probably be a more conservative nation, but trying to extrapolate specific state by state or candidate predictions to a world in which blacks are less than 8% of the population, the Asian population is near homogenously Japanese or Vietnamese and a third of the size, and both HWs and NHWs are a far bigger % of the population is a fools errand.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

One thing worth considering, separately, is that the mention of New Mexico (and to a lesser extent Nevada and California) as having immigration shaped distinctly by immigration law changes is wrong -- 1920s immigration laws would probably have resulted in a larger Hispanic population and immigration to the US than otherwise. The effects of the US not passing immigration reform would, generally speaking, be way more NHW immigration, slightly more Hispanic immigration, slightly less black immigration (possibly far less -- I'm not sure how Haitian and West Indian immigration would be affected in this timeline. African immigration would definitely be cut down, however) and way less Asian immigration. I would also strongly dispute the idea that there was any substantial rightwards swing in some of those states you mentioned as a result of the repeal of Hart Cellar.