The 2012 Map
One of the more illuminating entries in WaPo’s Pundit Contest, was Jeremy Haber’s first entry.
We are on the verge of acknowledging a powerful demographic and political movement long underway — the shift of congressional districts, and hence critical electoral votes, from safe Democratic states to safe Republican states. On the presidential level, Democrats will lose the equivalent of a safe blue state the size of Oregon, and it’s not going purple — it’s turning ruby red. According to Census Bureau estimates, eight states (Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania) will lose one congressional seat. Five states (Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada and Utah) stand to gain one seat and Texas will add three.
This population shift from the Northeast to the South and Southwest has enduring political implications. Six of the eight states slated to gain congressional seats were won by John McCain. The two exceptions, Florida and Nevada, can only fairly be described as “purple.” President Obama carried all of the states losing seats, except Louisiana.
In reality, the President has fewer hurdles than John Kerry’s 2004 electoral map. Republicans should be concerned that electoral strength will mask their structural demographic problem with growing segments of the populace choosing Democrats solidly over Republicans.
However, this does mean that some crucial states are going to be even more important: Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, and Indiana. That, in turn, doesn’t look good for the climate bill.
I can’t resist saying this, if Democrats want to start getting serious, they need to find ways to grow blue states. Maybe by dealing with the wealthy but utterly ungovernable states of NY, NJ, and CA. Or they need to start turning red states purple and so far, so not good.
It won’t be enough for Democrats to count on demographic changes and a 50-state strategy to stay on top or stay competitive. The Republican party may be down but in the past 150 years they’ve always found some way to come back.
I’m sorry, but did you really just say “They need to start turning red states purple and so far, so not good?”
As you yourself say, Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana (to which I would also add Colorado and Nevada), WERE turned purple!
The fact of the matter is that Dems have won 18 states+DC in each of the last five elections, totaling a current 248 electoral votes. By comparison, the GOP has won 13, totalling 96 EVs. Where would you rather start?
norwaynoah said this on November 9, 2009 at 2:55 pm |
I didn’t think I was that unclear but I meant like actual red states, not already purple states.
VA/CO/NV/NC/IN are all fairly purple but my point was that the Democrats are going to need to find more battleground states – to reduce their vulnerabilities. Which is…true.
Your electoral counts don’t take into account the post-Census change, do they?
My point isn’t that it’s easy for the Republicans but that the post-Census picture increases Democratic liabilities by making them more dependent on swing states at the expense of safe blue states.
The so far, so good comment was pointed at their inability to make gains in states beyond the ones Obama turned, like Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, etc….
Kyle said this on November 9, 2009 at 8:07 pm |