Is NJ now a potential swing state?

[Vosem]

Similarly -- and again note that 2024 results are very much still subject to change -- on present results, here's a 2016-->2024 swing map, which is much more interesting than the very bland 2020-->2024 swing map:

Only 9 states had a result more than 5% off: there were 7 where Trump did more than 5% better than he did in 2016 (HI, CA, MS, FL, IL, NJ, NY), and 2 where Harris did more than 5% better than Hillary (CO and VT). The Plains trending to Democrats very much does show up on this map! (But the Mormons shifting Democratic really don't).

[RBH]

feels like a comparison between NJGov 2021 and NJPres 2024 is in order.. either by county or by municipalities

[GardenStateVoter]

Winners here in the state:

Democrats: Bergen/Burlington/Essex/Hudson/Middlesex/Passaic/Somerset/Union county commissioners, along with many suburban communities, even managing to flip the local councils in places like Rochelle Park (Bergen), even as neighboring Paramus stayed entirely Republican;

Trump: many of the more individual parts of those places...

...which, to me, clearly screams out, into the proverbial "void", that everybody, regardless of individual leanings, is hoping for some "moderation"...

[TheReckoning]

Similarly -- and again note that 2024 results are very much still subject to change -- on present results, here's a 2016-->2024 swing map, which is much more interesting than the very bland 2020-->2024 swing map:

Only 9 states had a result more than 5% off: there were 7 where Trump did more than 5% better than he did in 2016 (HI, CA, MS, FL, IL, NJ, NY), and 2 where Harris did more than 5% better than Hillary (CO and VT). The Plains trending to Democrats very much does show up on this map! (But the Mormons shifting Democratic really don't).

I’m curious to what the 2016 margin would’ve been without McMuffin on the ballot. It makes comparison with Utah hard to do.

[SN2903]

Yes absolutely. No state can be ruled out after what happened Tuesday. Democrats got destroyed. This was the biggest realignment since 1980 or 1964.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Winners here in the state:

Democrats: Bergen/Burlington/Essex/Hudson/Middlesex/Passaic/Somerset/Union county commissioners, along with many suburban communities, even managing to flip the local councils in places like Rochelle Park (Bergen), even as neighboring Paramus stayed entirely Republican;

Trump: many of the more individual parts of those places...

...which, to me, clearly screams out, into the proverbial "void", that everybody, regardless of individual leanings, is hoping for some "moderation"...

I live in Paramus. For one reason or another we're becoming titanium Republican based on NIMBY policies.

[TheReckoning]

Really seems like we should be waiting for at least one more election before trying to divine new trends at the state level when practically the whole country swung right. It doesn't necessarily mean it will stick. The votes had to come from somewhere. If every result like that did, we would have spent at least part of the last 12 years talking about battlegrounds Indiana and North Dakota just based on 2008.

Anybody recall if these convos were had after Bush's performance in 2004?   Was NJ thought to be in play, for instance?   

I think it was; Republicans made a very serious play for the Senate seat there in 2006, although nobody treated it like a swing state in 2008/2012. (And, for the record, it sort of was: as late as 2010, when both parties contested every House seat, Republicans *won* the total New Jersey vote. I think it always remained the sort of place that Republicans could hope for in a landslide; it's just that it has been a very long time since there's actually been a landslide environment). That said, though, Trump is going to do quite a bit better than Bush; he's going to lose NJ by 5 points while winning nationally by 1, not lose by 7 while winning nationally by 2. NJ is more Republican today than it was in 2004, although it's still not a place that Republicans can really depend on or anything.

Many of these numbers are really not finalized, such that I'd expect there to be multiple shifts once we see the "real" map, but here is the current 2004-->2024 swing map:

What do the states belong to each category tend to have in common with each other that led them to swing the way they did, in your opinion?

[GardenStateVoter]

Winners here in the state:

Democrats: Bergen/Burlington/Essex/Hudson/Middlesex/Passaic/Somerset/Union county commissioners, along with many suburban communities, even managing to flip the local councils in places like Rochelle Park (Bergen), even as neighboring Paramus stayed entirely Republican;

Trump: many of the more individual parts of those places...

...which, to me, clearly screams out, into the proverbial "void", that everybody, regardless of individual leanings, is hoping for some "moderation"...

I live in Paramus. For one reason or another we're becoming titanium Republican based on NIMBY policies.

Which is honestly wild, considering the presence, in that very town, of someplace famous among, quite frankly, even some people worldwide, never mind elsewhere in the rest of the country/state; maybe that might be why everybody except for "national brands", for lack of better phrasing, there, seems to be skipping the GS Plaza, and heading to Newport (Jersey City)/Riverside (Hackensack)/Rockaway/Willowbrook (Wayne), or, in Central, (East) Brunswick/Menlo Park (Edison)/Woodbridge, which, at least, have one local Democrat...

(...total council control in EB/Edi/H/WBr; just one Dem in both RW/Wa...)

[RBH]

the Pou/Prembeh result was wild when I first saw it.. like did she just win the nomination to replace Pascrell and then sleep through the campaign? although i'm sure it's a thing where Trump's total boosted Prempeh

[Vosem]

Similarly -- and again note that 2024 results are very much still subject to change -- on present results, here's a 2016-->2024 swing map, which is much more interesting than the very bland 2020-->2024 swing map:

Only 9 states had a result more than 5% off: there were 7 where Trump did more than 5% better than he did in 2016 (HI, CA, MS, FL, IL, NJ, NY), and 2 where Harris did more than 5% better than Hillary (CO and VT). The Plains trending to Democrats very much does show up on this map! (But the Mormons shifting Democratic really don't).

Here's the new map after 10 more days of counting -- NV now has a noticeably larger shift right than it did after Election Night (I might've posted that map before Sam Brown took his brief lead), while a number of states have shifted towards Democrats; by enough in AK, IN, VA, and MD to change the overall shape of the swing. (I think we were somewhat misled by Indiana being a relatively early-reporting state and having some swings towards the Democrats; it's pretty clear that, given the national environment, IN actually had an unusually decent result for them.)

There are now 8 states where Trump did 5% or more better than he did in 2016, and still only 2 where Harris did 5% or more better than Hillary (CO and VT). TX and ID -- of all places! -- are both painfully close to that 5% threshold, though.

It remains totally insane that Harris failed to flip any counties from Biden 2020; it's not actually the case that her performance was all that terrible everywhere relative to most recent Democratic nominees. She suffered a pretty narrow defeat.

[Joe McCarthy Was Right]

I think 2024 is the closest the GOP will have come to flipping NJ in the next 5 elections unless the GOP nominates another NY/NJ/FL Republican in the near future. I don't take trends too seriously for the 2024 election; only about 11 states "trended" Republican only because they were mostly high population states. It definitely doesn't mean Iowa was a good sign for Democrats because it "only" swung 5% Republican for example.

Hillary Clinton as the 2016 Democratic candidate stalled a large New York/New Jersey swing.

[Vosem]

Really seems like we should be waiting for at least one more election before trying to divine new trends at the state level when practically the whole country swung right. It doesn't necessarily mean it will stick. The votes had to come from somewhere. If every result like that did, we would have spent at least part of the last 12 years talking about battlegrounds Indiana and North Dakota just based on 2008.

Anybody recall if these convos were had after Bush's performance in 2004?   Was NJ thought to be in play, for instance?   

I think it was; Republicans made a very serious play for the Senate seat there in 2006, although nobody treated it like a swing state in 2008/2012. (And, for the record, it sort of was: as late as 2010, when both parties contested every House seat, Republicans *won* the total New Jersey vote. I think it always remained the sort of place that Republicans could hope for in a landslide; it's just that it has been a very long time since there's actually been a landslide environment). That said, though, Trump is going to do quite a bit better than Bush; he's going to lose NJ by 5 points while winning nationally by 1, not lose by 7 while winning nationally by 2. NJ is more Republican today than it was in 2004, although it's still not a place that Republicans can really depend on or anything.

Many of these numbers are really not finalized, such that I'd expect there to be multiple shifts once we see the "real" map, but here is the current 2004-->2024 swing map:

What do the states belong to each category tend to have in common with each other that led them to swing the way they did, in your opinion?

Eh, across 20 years there are any number of things that can cause a swing. The trend map that 2004-->2024 is most reminiscent of is definitely the 2016 one, so I'd say the most important thing was just Trump, but it's not the only influence, and there are definitely places where 2008 is more significant. Anyway, with counting finished, here's what (I think) is the final 2004-->2024 swing map; this represents about a point of leftward shift in the NPV (America as a whole would be the lightest Democratic color), though in the decisive state this is basically a standstill (PA-2024 is 0.41 points more Democratic than OH-2004):

A number of states have quite Democratic late-counts -- compared to when I posted this map, IL and MA both flipped, and CA and OR have gotten a shade darker. Might be other changes I'm missing, too. Funny to me that Omaha has moved Democratic harder than Utah across this time-period. (On the Republican side of course WV is the champ by far).

[DS0816]

Perhaps if Trump's second term is historically successful, but skeptical it will get tighter in 2028.

Since 1992, no one who won the presidency of the United States has carried more than 32 states. For a Republican to win, and carry 30 or 31 states (which was experienced by 2000 and 2004 George W. Bush and 2016 and 2024 Donald Trump), would require some state trades with the Democrats.

I will also mention that, since 1892, New Jersey has carried the same for U.S. President as Illinois with exception in 1948. While you focus specifically on New Jersey…I also think of Illinois. I reach the conclusion that 2024 New Jersey, the Republicans’s No. 35 best state, performed so well because Doanld Trump pursued to some extent the state.

The above map is my estimate, for today’s Republicans, how they perform electorally when winning the presidency. The states, though not carried, most vulnerable for the Democrats are New Hampshire and Minnesota.

[Linda Van der Hampel]

No, it was just Trump. If Trump ends his second term on a positive note though, it's possible for Vance - or whoever the nominee will be - to keep it 2024-style tight. There's also Trumpism and MAGAism and it will outlive Trump.