The number of “Swing” states in a Presidential election are becoming fewer in each four year cycle, and locking in the Electoral College outcome, to a much greater extent than ever before.
At this point, for the 2016 Presidential Election, it can be said there are ONLY ten states that are truly up for grabs, barring some unforeseen events:
These states are:
Florida
Ohio
Virginia
North Carolina
New Hampshire
Iowa
Indiana
Colorado
New Mexico
Nevada
Even these ten states are not truly ten, as North Carolina for now is more likely to go Republican; New Hampshire and Iowa are more likely to go Democratic; Indiana is more likely to go Republican; and New Mexico is almost certainly Democratic!
So only Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, and Nevada are truly “swing’ states for 2016, and most of the campaigning in the general election period will be in those five states, plus the other five more certain to be in one political camp over the other.
The Northeast and New England, with the exception of New Hampshire, are locked up for the Democrats, as are the Upper Midwest and Illinois, and the three Pacific Coast states and Hawaii!
The Great Plains states, the Mountain West except for the three states mentioned above, and the South, with the exceptions of the three states mentioned above, and West Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, and Alaska seem locked up for the Republicans, making for more states than the Democrats, but many of them low electoral vote states. And when Texas and Georgia evolve, with more Hispanic-Latino voters in the next decade, the Electoral College will be locked up for the Democrats for the long haul, unless the GOP can convince many states’ voters to swing over from the Democrats, highly unlikely!
The move to allow states to vote by congressional district, as is so in Nebraska and Maine in theory, if it spreads to major states, such as Pennsylvania, where it has been proposed, COULD change the whole dynamic, and make for a much more competitive Electoral College race in the future!
This is all because, since after the 1980s, the average amount of states carried between the elections of Bill Clinton (1992, 1996), George W. Bush (2000, 2004), and Barack Obama (2008, 2012) were 29. (That’s 6 election cycles from 178 cumulative carried states.) That amounts to 58 percent of available states. We are in a period where a presidential winner, and his/her party, will carry around 3 of every 5 states—and 2 of every 5 states won’t carry. So, that’s why this leaves one to make a Top 10 list of perceived states that are persuadable.
I think what has happened is that both parties have opted to leave approximately 20 states on the table and just go after the ones which tend to carry closely to national margins (relative the U.S. Popular Vote’s percentage margin). This way, the parties’ presidential campaigns do not have to go to all 50 states. They can just figure “The Swing States” will be the decisive ones to elect a president. (It’s their approach to where to spend the campaign funds in relation to the national picture.)
Reality is, there isn’t much a separation in shifts, nationwide, and individual states. In a party-pickup year, beyond 40 states will shift toward the party that will a pickup of the presidency. (All 50 states shifted Democratic in the Democratic pickup year of 1976. There were 49 states which shifted Republican in the Republican pickup year of 1980. Once again, there were 49 states which shifted Democratic in the Democratic pickup year of 1992. And, of course, there were 49 states which shifted Republican in the Republican pickup year of 2000. With a little less impact, there were 45 states which shifted Democratic in the Democratic pickup year of 2008.) And, sometimes, you can get the majority of states shifting away from the incumbent White House party and, if you don’t get a strong enough shift, state-after-state, your party’s nominee will not unseat the incumbent president. That was the case, in 2012, when Mitt Romney saw 44 states shift in his party’s direction; however, the level of margin he needed, state-after-state, was only strong enough in nine states: Illinois; his Republican pickup in Indiana; Missouri; Montana; North Dakota; South Dakota; Utah; West Virginia; and Wyoming. That was why Mitt Romney wasn’t able to win a Republican pickup of the U.S. Popular Vote; he didn’t shift double-digit, electoral-vote, Republican base states like Texas, Georgia, Arizona, and Tennessee far enough—let alone string together victory in the Electoral College. Going back to 1988, an open-seat race resulting in a Republican hold of the presidency, all states except one [Tennessee] shifted Democratic; but, of course, the shift wasn’t far enough for Michael Dukakis to win a Democratic pickup over incumbent Republican vice president George Bush.
As for Ronald’s list (addressing it specifically): Colorado (9 electoral votes), Florida (29), Ohio (18), and Virginia (13) are the most influential. They’re on pace to carry for presidential winners for quite some time. Nevada (6) historically carries the same as New Mexico (5). Since New Mexico’s first participating presidential election, back in 1912, they carried differently from each other only once: in 2000, the split outcomes in the U.S. Popular Vote and Electoral College. (Al Gore won a narrow Democratic hold of New Mexico; George W. Bush won a narrow Republican pickup of Nevada.) They are about three to five percentage points in spread. (Had Bush won a Republican pickup of the U.S. Popular Vote by the same amount he lost, which was 0.52 percent, New Mexico would’ve flipped for him in 2000. He had to wait for re-election in 2004.) And, with 2008 and 2012, Nevada has produced a Democratic tilt built into that bellwether status. (In percentage margins, it carried better, in both 2008 and 2012, than Pennsylvania. And Pennsylvania has had a Democratic tilt in every presidential election since after the 1940s!) Nevada, along with New Mexico, may be transitioning from a bellwether to a Lean Democratic state. (New Mexico bolstered better margins, in both 2008 and 2012, than not only Pennsylvania but other Democratic base states Minnesota and Wisconsin. It’s average, over those two election cycles, was very close to that of Michigan. And Michigan tends to carry either 5 or 6 percentage points more Democratic than the nation.)
North Carolina will be the next bellwether state. It has inched away from the Republicans in each of the last three election cycles. In 2000, it was 13 percentage points more Republican than the nation. Then it went down to 10 points (in 2004), 7 points (in 2008, when Barack Obama won a Democratic pickup to carry the state), and 6 points (2012, with Mitt Romney’s Republican pickup there). If a Democrat is winning the U.S. Popular Vote by 5 percentage points, North Carolina is on the cusp. If the margin is 6 percentage points, good chance North Carolina will carry.
All the rest on the list are ones I agree with.
We’ve had 57 U.S. presidential elections. 1789 was the first. In 1792 began the schedule of presidential election cycles in leap years. If one were to pretend a candidate won all the Swing States (or Battlegrounds or Bellwethers or what-have-you), they obviously wouldn’t be enough to win. The historical record of a percentage of states having been carried is at 69.81 percent. (This counts 1824. That year, despite the controversy, doesn’t disqualify having to count it for states’ participation. And, given 1824 was the first year of the U.S. Popular Vote, it counts in terms of the history of United States presidential elections.) That means, by today’s standard, a presidential winner has carried a historical average of 34 states. There are 30 states, coincidentally enough, which have carried for the winner 69.81 percent or more. Scoring them (with a half-credit point given for elections in which a state voted with the popular-vote winner while other states get full credit; applicable in 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000) with ranking and percentages, I can present the following:
01. New Mexico (24.5 of 26 cycles): 94.23%
02. Illinois (41.5 of 49 cycles): 84.69%
03. California (34.5 of 41 cycles): 84.14%
04. New York (47 of 56 cycles): 83.92%
05. Ohio (44 of 53 cycles): 83.01%
06. Pennsylvania (47 of 57 cycles): 82.45%
07. Nevada (31 of 38 cycles): 81.57%
08. Wisconsin (32.5 of 42 cycles): 77.38%
09. Arizona (20 of 26 cycles): 76.92%
10. West Virginia (29 of 38 cycles): 76.31%
11. Indiana (38 of 50 cycles): 76.00%
12. Minnesota (29.5 of 39 cycles): 75.64%
— Oregon (29.5 of 39 cycles): 75.64%
14. Missouri (37 of 49 cycles): 75.51%
15. New Hampshire (43 of 57 cycles): 75.43%
16. Iowa (31.5 of 42 cycles): 75.00%
17. Michigan (33.5 of 45 cycles: 74.44%
18. Florida (30.5 of 41 cycles): 74.39%
19. Montana (23 of 31 cycles): 74.19%
20. New Jersey (42 of 57 cycles): 73.68%
21. Utah (22 of 30 cycles): 73.33%
22. Washington (22.5 of 31 cycles): 72.58%
23. Rhode Island (40.5 of 56 cycles): 72.32%
24. Colorado (25 of 35 cycles): 71.42%
25. Tennessee (38.5 of 54 cycles): 71.29%
26. Connecticut (40.5 of 57 cycles): 71.05%
27. Idaho (22 of 31 cycles): 70.96%
— North Dakota (22 of 31 cycles): 70.96%
29. Oklahoma (19 of 27 cycles): 70.37%
30. North Carolina (38.5 of 55 cycles): 70.00%
U.S. Presidential Elections (57 cycles from 3979.43272 cumulative carried states): 69.81%
31. Maryland (39.5 of 57 cycles): 69.29%
32. Virginia (38 of 55 cycles): 69.09%
33. Kansas (26 of 38 cycles): 68.42%
34. Maine (33.5 of 49 cycles): 68.36%
35. Hawaii (09.5 of 14 cycles): 67.85%
36. Wyoming (21 of 31 cycles): 67.74%
37. Massachusetts (38.5 of 57 cycles): 67.54%
38. Delaware (37.5 of 57 cycles): 65.78%
39. Vermont (36.5 of 56 cycles): 65.17%
40. Nebraska (24 of 37 cycles): 64.86%
41. Kentucky (36 of 56 cycles): 64.28%
— Louisiana (31.5 of 49 cycles): 64.28%
43. Arkansas (26 of 43 cycles): 60.46%
44. Texas (24 of 40 cycles): 60.00%
45. Georgia (33 of 56 cycles): 58.92%
— South Carolina (33 of 56 cycles): 58.92%
47. South Dakota (18 of 31 cycles): 58.06%
48. Alaska (08 of 14 cycles): 57.14%
49. Mississippi (25.5 of 47 cycles): 54.25%
50. Alabama (25.5 of 48 cycles): 53.12%
One can extrapolate from the list what it may or does mean. But, if you notice, the overwhelming majority of Old Confederacy states are really on the low side for their reliability in carrying for presidential-election winners historically. (Only three of Top 30 are from the Old Confederacy. The best performer, at No. 18, is Florida.) States in the Rust Belt have a far better record. And if you compare today’s No. 1 and No. 2 most-populous states—California and Texas—you can see a stark difference. The last presidential election winner not to carry either state goes back to 1880 and winning Republican James Garfield. (He was the first from his party not to carry California. George W. Bush, in 2000, became the second.) Since 1884, one or both states has always carried. (Back then, California and Texas were nowhere near the top status in population rank.) Given their partisan-identification, we know they’ll still continue to carry—if it’s a winning Republican, it’s Texas; if it’s a winning Democrat, it’s California—but, no matter, the party having the better slate of base states is the one not from the Old Confederacy. Given California-vs.-Texas: It’s Texas which has performed historically below the overall average while it’s California which has performed historically above the overall average of states picking presidential winners.
WOW, what a detailed and impressive analysis! I am in total awe, and it makes me wonder if you are a scholar, a professor, as I am, because this discussion is so impressive, and adds so much to the knowledge base on Presidential elections. Thanks so much, and continue to comment in this manner on other blog entries!
DS0816 is also “D.”
I think Ronald knows that.
D, I was thinking you might be the same person, but did not want to say so. You are fantastic in your analyses, but never clear to me if you are a scholar and professor, as I am. Thanks so much again for your contributions!