Dem
47
GOP
53
Let's switch gears now and think long-term. Do we mean the 2026 midterms? Nah, too short term. So we mean the 2028 presidential election? We are planning a series on possible candidates, but that is not the subject of this item. No, think about 2032. We are not going to predict the Democratic or Republican candidates for that election. That would be a fool's errand. No, we are going to look at the map.
People are on the move. Mostly from the North to the South. And from Blue states to Red states. The Census Bureau has already come up with a tentative map of which states will gain House seats (and electoral votes) after the 2030 census and which ones will lose them. Here is the map based on trends in population:
First off, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Illinois, Minnesota, California, and Oregon—all blue states—are projected to lose a total of 13 House seats (and 13 electoral votes). Idaho, Utah, Texas, Tennessee, and Florida—all red states—are projected to gain 10 House seats and electoral votes. The swing states of Arizona, North Carolina, and Georgia are projected to gain 3 House seats and electoral votes.
Losing 13 House seats and 13 electoral votes could be trouble for the Democrats. On the other hand, demography is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get. We forget which philosopher said that, but we are sure it wasn't Winston Churchill. If all the people leaving New York and causing it to lose 3 EVs move to Florida and cause it to gain 3 EVs, nothing will happen to New York except it will lose some power. But what about Florida? Will those people take their New York values with them or will they blend into Florida's values and just vanish? It is at least conceivable that those 2 million or so New Yorkers will make Florida a swing state again. We don't know. Similarly, if 3 million people move from California to Texas, will that make Texas purple? Again, we don't know.
It is also possible that the map is wrong because the decade is young. Also, maybe all the dissatisfied New Yorkers will move to North Carolina, turning it bright blue, with Florida's gain coming from boomers in Illinois and Minnesota residents who hate the Midwest winters. Maybe all the unhappy Californians will move to Arizona, not Texas, turning it bright blue (although all the new Texans have to come from somewhere).
It is also possible that state policies change the flows. Suppose some states ban all abortions, make homosexual acts a felony, defund the public schools and mandate prayers in what is left of them. That could make some blue staters change their minds about whether they should move at all, and if so, where. Migration into the three swing states could change them from purple to light blue (which is what happened to Virginia). It is all very iffy at this point. The only thing that seems clear is that cold states are losing and warm states are winning. But if climate change causes six gigantic hurricanes that destroy much of Florida in 2025, maybe that changes, too. And if Minnesota gets a balmy climate and Texas temperatures regularly hit three-digits in mid-winter, that could have an impact on migration patterns as well.
And politics is more than population. Other factors could play a bigger role in 2028 and beyond. Just to name one, will all the young Black and Latino men who decided to vote for Donald Trump at the last minute because he is a tough guy and a disrupter decide that Yale-educated lawyer and Silicon Valley venture capitalist Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) is their guy? That could be the $1 billion question for the GOP in 2028 and 2032. (V)