Of the many self-inflicted dooms besetting the Democratic Party, the blue state exodus gets talked about far less than Trump Derangement Syndrome or the radical wokeness destroying the party (along with everything else it touches). But for a party that once crowed about “demographic destiny” making them the “permanent majority party,” the shifting demographics of people fleeing blue states due to lousy governance, and the resulting shift in electoral votes, is going make Democrats winning the presidency much more difficult in 2032.
“There is a year that should absolutely terrify Democrats. It’s not 2024 or 2026 or even 2028. It’s 2032.”
“The population movement right now is a flashing red warning sign for Democrats. The reason is the 2030 reapportionment. Every ten years, the US conducts the census. One big thing done with that data is the recalculation of how many seats each state gets in the House of Representatives, and how many votes it gets in the Electoral College. And those numbers move in tandem. You gain two House seats. You gain two electoral votes. If you lose a House seat, you lose an electoral vote.”
“Democratic states are losing population and Republican states are gaining.”
“Here’s one way to think about it. In 2020, Joe Biden won* a 306 to 232 victory in the Electoral College. Then, after 2020, the census was finished and representation was reallocated for the 2022 midterms and 2024 presidential election. Under the new map, winning those same states would have shrunk Biden’s victory margin by six electoral votes to 303 to 235.”
“The next census will happen in 2030, and the map will again change for the 2032 presidential election. And right now, the outlook for that map is a disaster for Democrats.”
“Blue states like California and New York shedding House seats and electoral votes, and red states like Texas and Florida gaining four new electoral votes and House seats each.”
“In 2024, Donald Trump won a 312 to 226 victory in the Electoral College. Under this projection, the exact same state and vote breakdown would swell that margin by 20 electoral votes to 322 to 216.”
“Right now the wind is absolutely blowing away from Democratic controlled states and towards Republican controlled ones. And it’s worth asking why.”
“The red areas of the country are becoming a bigger and bigger share of the pie, and it gets to a flashing red problem for Democrats, both for their political survival and brand identity.”
“For the most part, it is expensive as hell to live in a blue area governed by Democrats. The data is clear eight of the ten states with the highest rent prices are solid blue states, and eight of the ten states with the highest cost of living index are also solid blue states.”
“Having a high GDP or on-paper prosperity doesn’t mean much when most people can’t afford their lives.”
“So why are blue cities and states in such an affordability crisis right now? Well, to start, obviously we’re all thinking it 1, 2, 3: taxes. It’s just the fact that Democratic controlled states tend to impose higher tax rates. Sometimes that means taxes that some GOP states don’t even have, like the income tax.”
“Culture is another part. By now it’s clear that Covid in 2020 presented a particular challenge for blue states and cities. Many of which, took a much softer approach to urban disorder and unrest and are still trying to reverse the damage.”
“On a lot of stuff, Democrats also just tend to be more lax or more compassionate, depending on your point of view.”
“The upside might be that a homeless person is treated with more dignity, or you won’t get thrown in jail just for having a bag of marijuana. But the downside might be that now a public park is inaccessible to families wanting to use it, or people are doing hard drugs on the street without the law intervening, which isn’t actually compassionate to anyone.”
“But more than taxes or culture or anything else. The overwhelming majority of this issue stems from one big fact: housing. It has just become really expensive for people to buy or rent a place to live in many blue states. By any conceivable metric, the US overall is in an affordable housing crisis right now. The average renting American now spends over 30% of their income on rent. The ratio of income to housing prices is at a record high right now, and at its highest in blue states.”
“And we have clear data showing us that this has now become a direct drag on Democrats. An NBC analysis of the 2024 presidential race found that Trump made his biggest gains in the counties that have the worst housing markets. Remember those top ten most expensive states and how eight of them were blue states? Five of those eight were also in the ten states that swung the most towards Trump in 2024.”
“And even when people don’t move out of a blue city or state, the people that stay are increasingly reacting to the high cost of living. By losing faith in the Democratic Party. Again, especially middle and working class people. It’s not a coincidence that Trump’s biggest gains in 2024 were in diverse, working class congressional districts in California and the New York City area, places where the Democratic Party has full control and has failed to address the cost of living.”
“But we also know that there is a way to address this in cities, mainly because many blue cities in red states have done it. Take Austin, which is the seat of a county that voted for Kamala Harris by almost 40 points. It’s seen explosive growth over the past 15 years, partly because the city and state have been very successful in making housing more affordable. That’s not because every landlord there suddenly became a socialist or because they banned Blackrock, but because they fundamentally just built more housing, making more space and lowering the prices.” The City of Austin government proper had very little to do with that, though I’m sure it’s several orders of magnitude easier to build apartment buildings here than in San Francisco, and you see them going up all the time. But Austin is surrounding by bedroom communities in far more growth-friendly counties, and Texas beats the hell out of California for pro-growth policies.
“That’s the kind of thing that makes families move there, companies open there, students stay there. And remember, each one of those people is a tiny little piece of building another electoral vote every ten years. By contrast, cities like New York and LA and San Francisco and Boston are in an absolutely different spot. It is simply incredibly expensive to live there.”
“The Democratic Party sees its political power decrease when fewer people live in the states that it controls, but it is the policies of its own politicians which are preventing more people from living in them.”
The only “growth” that blue state politicians seem to embrace is that of their own bank accounts and the ranks of illegal aliens—the same illegal aliens that drive up the cost of housing for ordinary, non-subsidized citizens. The bluer the city or state, the more likely they are to pursue actively anti-growth policies on the assumption that more people equal more destruction of the environment. And how can Democrats create safe cities when the Soros-backed Democrats they elect are determined to keep violent felons on the street as long as they hail from designated victim groups?
How can Democrats pursue pro-growth policies when so many core ideological constituents are anti-growth?
Reading Jonathan Chait’s piece on the Abundance Agenda, the one thing we know is that most of the Democrats controlling the big blue states won’t sign on to that Agenda, and thus those states will continue to lose.
Pessimists say that many of those migrants are “blue locusts” who will turn their new red state homes blue, but the data suggest that such individuals are refugees and not missionaries. Here in Florida, Republican voter registration overtook the Dems in 2021 for the first time ever, and have since opened a margin of over 1.2 million. Even in blue states with voter registration by party, such as Pennsylvania, the GOP is catching up. And a while back I read that in the Texas 2018 senate election, Beto O’Rourke won the vote among native Texans, but Ted Cruz overwhelmingly won among migrants to the state.
I don’t know if it’s mentioned in the video, but it could get exponentially worse for the Dems if only citizens are counted in the 2030 census. Counting illegals has buffered the disastrous effects of Dem policies in blue states. Without that cushion, the loss of Congressional and Electoral College seats will likely be even worse.
“But more than taxes or culture or anything else. The overwhelming majority of this issue stems from one big fact: housing. It has just become really expensive for people to buy or rent a place to live in many blue states.”
In the “post-industrial” Midwest, housing is reasonably priced. You can buy a home in Detroit or Cleveland at a steep discount compared to Las Vegas or Boise.
Yet no one is rushing to trade in their “overvalued” Sunbelt home in exchange for housing in the frigid North. No one moves north to retire or migrates to the he Midwest to find a good job.
You can only afford as much housing as your income allows and high pay jobs are increasingly located in the South. The GM Lordstown assembly plant was shut down but Toyota, Mercedes Benz, Hyundai and others built new facilities in Alabama and the Carolinas.
Detroit, Gary, Toledo, Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown Erie and Buffalo are just not worth the bother of tearing down shuttered production facilities to build anew over ancient ruins.
Amidst this economic gloom, Columbus, Ohio has featured a strong housing market, primarily as a result of favorable conditions for the insurance industry. Ohio State University offers these employers a wealth of opportunities to recruit young talent. Together, these factors allow for the formation of families who will purchase starting starting homes and then “trade up” as their earnings increase.
By contrast, young industrial workers in nearby Dayton and Springfield will likely be looking at stagnant wages, as has been the case since the early 70s.
Until industrial policies are developed that that encourage capital accumulation similar to that of Columbus, low-paying jobs and depressed housing markets will remain the norm throughout Ohio and other Rust Belt states.
“Until industrial policies are developed that that encourage capital accumulation similar to that of Columbus, low-paying jobs and depressed housing markets will remain the norm throughout Ohio and other Rust Belt states.”
The Columbus, OH housing market is decidedly inferior to Indianapolis’. Both are hot markets due to the concentration of government employees and parasites in these two state capitols, not your capital accumulation fantasies. Both Ohio and Indiana have highly centralized state government operations.
“The Columbus, OH housing market is decidedly inferior to Indianapolis’.”
As usual, your observations are irrelevant, pedantic and lend nothing to the discussion. Why don’t you go construct a recursive analysis governing the relationship of Guatemalan avocados to Parisian fashion trends?
It will demonstrate your powerful maths and lend credence to your self-assigned economic expertise.
Several major insurance companies have their corporate headquarters in Columbus: Nationwide, Grange Insurance, State Auto, and Encova. Also, Ohio is second in number of insurance agents for all 50 states.
You may be unfamiliar with the phenomenon of insurance premiums. Insurance companies accept money from policy holders who want to hedge against risk of financial loss. These funds are placed in a risk pool, which is to say that capital is accumulated.
When several major insurance companies locate their headquarters
“Incidently, Ohio’s per capital income exceeds that of Indiana, so how is it that Ohio is suffering from “centralization” compared to Indiana?”
You have a reading comprehension deficit.
Indiana is a much more compact state than Ohio, so its high wage government and service industries have concentrated in its state capital. Ohio is larger, with more topography, so its state employees and service workers are more broadly distributed. Indiana does not have a Cleveland or Detroit type metro region larger than its state capitol.
Ohio’s per capita income is slightly larger than Indiana’s, but by less than a quarter sigma. Statistical insignificance. The negligible difference is explained by significantly larger family sizes in Indiana.
Zillow ranks Buffalo (“not worth the bother”) as America’s hottest housing market in 2025. They rank Indianapolis second. Columbus, OH is twelfth. Dallas is the hottest Texas market according to Zillow, at 30th.
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Illinois still lead the nation in manufacturing on a per capita basis. Indiana is the powerhouse. Include petroleum refining and petrochemicals in the definition of manufacturing and Louisiana becomes second to Indiana. Indiana leads due to its low cost of living, which demands lower wages, and its favorable tax structure.
“ The Columbus, OH housing market is decidedly inferior to Indianapolis’. Both are hot markets due to the concentration of government employees and parasites in these two state capitols, not your capital accumulation fantasies. Both Ohio and Indiana have highly centralized state government operations.”
Not sure where you’re getting this, but as someone who was born in Ohio, lives in Indiana, graduated from THE Ohio State University, and deals with both states, I can tell you this is not even remotely true. Indiana is far more centralized than Ohio. In Indiana, EVERYTHING runs through the legislature. Everything. Whether it’s the type of government a city may have, how big a city council may be, or whether a town can regulate fireworks. It takes only a simple majority to override a governor’s veto in Indiana, and though the Indiana Code has something it calls “home rule”, there is actually no such thing. Not compared to Ohio. Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati all have very, very different governing structures. For the longest time, Cincinnati had a weak mayor and was run by a city manager. Columbus now sprawls over three different counties because it abused its control over water rights … er, it was allowed to annex territory outside its county. Indiana would require legislative action. Paying taxes in Ohio requires dealing with multiple governmental units and can be quite confusing. Indiana is actually simpler by running everything through the state department of revenue. There really is no comparison here. Indiana has a primate city in Indianapolis, but while Columbus is technically the largest city in Ohio, that is only a function of the aforementioned annexation. Cleveland is hemmed in by suburbs and Lake Erie, but it’s media market remains the largest in Ohio by far. The diffusion of Ohio into multiple large urban areas – and very different urban areas at that – means centralized government in Ohio is simply impossible.
‘The 10 Hottest Housing Markets for 2025’ on the Zillow web site, written by Susan Kelleher, posted 14 January 2025.
“Indiana is far more centralized than Ohio. In Indiana, EVERYTHING runs through the legislature. Everything. ”
My point on centralization was the physical concentration of high wage state employees and their hangers on in the state capitols, but this does naturally lead to centralized decision making. Indiana’s state government is more concentrated than Ohio’s, which in turn is much more concentrated than Michigan’s and Wisconsin’s.
Please reread my comment:
“Indiana is a much more compact state than Ohio, so its high wage government and service industries have concentrated in its state capital. Ohio is larger, with more topography, so its state employees and service workers are more broadly distributed. Indiana does not have a Cleveland or Detroit type metro region larger than its state capitol.”
[…] “Working and middle-class American families are leaving places like California, New York and Illinois by the hundreds of thousands, often relocating to conservative regions.” Just like I talked about earlier this week. […]
[…] Party operatives, and it’s easy to see why. Securing Texas’ 40 (and soon to be 43 or 44) electoral votes would go a long way toward ensuring presidential election dominance for the […]
Reading Jonathan Chait’s piece on the Abundance Agenda, the one thing we know is that most of the Democrats controlling the big blue states won’t sign on to that Agenda, and thus those states will continue to lose.
Pessimists say that many of those migrants are “blue locusts” who will turn their new red state homes blue, but the data suggest that such individuals are refugees and not missionaries. Here in Florida, Republican voter registration overtook the Dems in 2021 for the first time ever, and have since opened a margin of over 1.2 million. Even in blue states with voter registration by party, such as Pennsylvania, the GOP is catching up. And a while back I read that in the Texas 2018 senate election, Beto O’Rourke won the vote among native Texans, but Ted Cruz overwhelmingly won among migrants to the state.
I don’t know if it’s mentioned in the video, but it could get exponentially worse for the Dems if only citizens are counted in the 2030 census. Counting illegals has buffered the disastrous effects of Dem policies in blue states. Without that cushion, the loss of Congressional and Electoral College seats will likely be even worse.
“But more than taxes or culture or anything else. The overwhelming majority of this issue stems from one big fact: housing. It has just become really expensive for people to buy or rent a place to live in many blue states.”
In the “post-industrial” Midwest, housing is reasonably priced. You can buy a home in Detroit or Cleveland at a steep discount compared to Las Vegas or Boise.
Yet no one is rushing to trade in their “overvalued” Sunbelt home in exchange for housing in the frigid North. No one moves north to retire or migrates to the he Midwest to find a good job.
You can only afford as much housing as your income allows and high pay jobs are increasingly located in the South. The GM Lordstown assembly plant was shut down but Toyota, Mercedes Benz, Hyundai and others built new facilities in Alabama and the Carolinas.
Detroit, Gary, Toledo, Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown Erie and Buffalo are just not worth the bother of tearing down shuttered production facilities to build anew over ancient ruins.
Amidst this economic gloom, Columbus, Ohio has featured a strong housing market, primarily as a result of favorable conditions for the insurance industry. Ohio State University offers these employers a wealth of opportunities to recruit young talent. Together, these factors allow for the formation of families who will purchase starting starting homes and then “trade up” as their earnings increase.
By contrast, young industrial workers in nearby Dayton and Springfield will likely be looking at stagnant wages, as has been the case since the early 70s.
Until industrial policies are developed that that encourage capital accumulation similar to that of Columbus, low-paying jobs and depressed housing markets will remain the norm throughout Ohio and other Rust Belt states.
Congress needs to pass a law this session that only citizens will be counted for the purposes of apportionment.
Mollie Hemingway estimates that Democrats currently have up to 27 extra House seats due to the counting of illegals alone.
“Until industrial policies are developed that that encourage capital accumulation similar to that of Columbus, low-paying jobs and depressed housing markets will remain the norm throughout Ohio and other Rust Belt states.”
The Columbus, OH housing market is decidedly inferior to Indianapolis’. Both are hot markets due to the concentration of government employees and parasites in these two state capitols, not your capital accumulation fantasies. Both Ohio and Indiana have highly centralized state government operations.
“The Columbus, OH housing market is decidedly inferior to Indianapolis’.”
As usual, your observations are irrelevant, pedantic and lend nothing to the discussion. Why don’t you go construct a recursive analysis governing the relationship of Guatemalan avocados to Parisian fashion trends?
It will demonstrate your powerful maths and lend credence to your self-assigned economic expertise.
Several major insurance companies have their corporate headquarters in Columbus: Nationwide, Grange Insurance, State Auto, and Encova. Also, Ohio is second in number of insurance agents for all 50 states.
You may be unfamiliar with the phenomenon of insurance premiums. Insurance companies accept money from policy holders who want to hedge against risk of financial loss. These funds are placed in a risk pool, which is to say that capital is accumulated.
When several major insurance companies locate their headquarters
…in a city like Columbus, there is significant capital accumulated. This is both real and true. It is not fantastical. It is not imaginary.
Why do you deny the reality of this? And what does Indianapolis have to do with Columbus insurance companies??
Incidently, Ohio’s per capital income exceeds that of Indiana, so how is it that Ohio is suffering from “centralization” compared to Indiana?
Or does centralized Ohio give Indianapolis advantage over Columbus?
“Incidently, Ohio’s per capital income exceeds that of Indiana, so how is it that Ohio is suffering from “centralization” compared to Indiana?”
You have a reading comprehension deficit.
Indiana is a much more compact state than Ohio, so its high wage government and service industries have concentrated in its state capital. Ohio is larger, with more topography, so its state employees and service workers are more broadly distributed. Indiana does not have a Cleveland or Detroit type metro region larger than its state capitol.
Ohio’s per capita income is slightly larger than Indiana’s, but by less than a quarter sigma. Statistical insignificance. The negligible difference is explained by significantly larger family sizes in Indiana.
Zillow ranks Buffalo (“not worth the bother”) as America’s hottest housing market in 2025. They rank Indianapolis second. Columbus, OH is twelfth. Dallas is the hottest Texas market according to Zillow, at 30th.
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Illinois still lead the nation in manufacturing on a per capita basis. Indiana is the powerhouse. Include petroleum refining and petrochemicals in the definition of manufacturing and Louisiana becomes second to Indiana. Indiana leads due to its low cost of living, which demands lower wages, and its favorable tax structure.
“ The Columbus, OH housing market is decidedly inferior to Indianapolis’. Both are hot markets due to the concentration of government employees and parasites in these two state capitols, not your capital accumulation fantasies. Both Ohio and Indiana have highly centralized state government operations.”
Not sure where you’re getting this, but as someone who was born in Ohio, lives in Indiana, graduated from THE Ohio State University, and deals with both states, I can tell you this is not even remotely true. Indiana is far more centralized than Ohio. In Indiana, EVERYTHING runs through the legislature. Everything. Whether it’s the type of government a city may have, how big a city council may be, or whether a town can regulate fireworks. It takes only a simple majority to override a governor’s veto in Indiana, and though the Indiana Code has something it calls “home rule”, there is actually no such thing. Not compared to Ohio. Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati all have very, very different governing structures. For the longest time, Cincinnati had a weak mayor and was run by a city manager. Columbus now sprawls over three different counties because it abused its control over water rights … er, it was allowed to annex territory outside its county. Indiana would require legislative action. Paying taxes in Ohio requires dealing with multiple governmental units and can be quite confusing. Indiana is actually simpler by running everything through the state department of revenue. There really is no comparison here. Indiana has a primate city in Indianapolis, but while Columbus is technically the largest city in Ohio, that is only a function of the aforementioned annexation. Cleveland is hemmed in by suburbs and Lake Erie, but it’s media market remains the largest in Ohio by far. The diffusion of Ohio into multiple large urban areas – and very different urban areas at that – means centralized government in Ohio is simply impossible.
>>expensive as hell to live in a
>>blue area governed by Democrats.
According to California Dept of Housing and Community Development “2025 State Income limits”
If you live in San Mateo County, single household and earn $109,700″ you are low income and qualify for benefits.
“Not sure where you’re getting this…”
‘The 10 Hottest Housing Markets for 2025’ on the Zillow web site, written by Susan Kelleher, posted 14 January 2025.
“Indiana is far more centralized than Ohio. In Indiana, EVERYTHING runs through the legislature. Everything. ”
My point on centralization was the physical concentration of high wage state employees and their hangers on in the state capitols, but this does naturally lead to centralized decision making. Indiana’s state government is more concentrated than Ohio’s, which in turn is much more concentrated than Michigan’s and Wisconsin’s.
Please reread my comment:
“Indiana is a much more compact state than Ohio, so its high wage government and service industries have concentrated in its state capital. Ohio is larger, with more topography, so its state employees and service workers are more broadly distributed. Indiana does not have a Cleveland or Detroit type metro region larger than its state capitol.”
[…] “Working and middle-class American families are leaving places like California, New York and Illinois by the hundreds of thousands, often relocating to conservative regions.” Just like I talked about earlier this week. […]
[…] Party operatives, and it’s easy to see why. Securing Texas’ 40 (and soon to be 43 or 44) electoral votes would go a long way toward ensuring presidential election dominance for the […]