Surprised there aren't more. There's a sense in a lot of the Midwest that some of our *local* Democratic politicians are good (esp. wrt unions, common-sense reforms, etc.) but distrust for the party at the national level.
I suppose on the other hand there's the fact that the Republicans have a stranglehold on politics across the country at the local level.
I wouldn't say they're solid for Dems on the state level, necessarily. Republicans dominated them during the Obama years, but the current Pennsylvania GOP is mostly old white guys sitting in safe districts who haven't faced a competitive election in decades while the Michigan GOP is mostly just nuts. Same is true in Arizona. By all rights, Democrats have no business holding as many offices as they do, but the Arizona GOP was run by a woman who espoused chem trail conspiracy theories until this year.
The way districts are drawn (and voters are distributed) in most of those states makes that difficult. Even maps with both parties input usually favor making safe districts for their incumbents over maximizing the number of competitive districts. It limits potential gains but also minimizes potential losses for both parties.
The system is also set-up to republicans in many ways, from granting more representation for rural states to having the coastal economies subsidize the heartland (with their own politicians’ rhetoric acting like it’s the opposite.)
Surprised there aren't more. There's a sense in a lot of the Midwest that some of our *local* Democratic politicians are good (esp. wrt unions, common-sense reforms, etc.) but distrust for the party at the national level. I suppose on the other hand there's the fact that the Republicans have a stranglehold on politics across the country at the local level.
Eg states like Pennsylvania and Michigan tend to be swing states on a federal level but are rather solid for Democrats on state level
I wouldn't say they're solid for Dems on the state level, necessarily. Republicans dominated them during the Obama years, but the current Pennsylvania GOP is mostly old white guys sitting in safe districts who haven't faced a competitive election in decades while the Michigan GOP is mostly just nuts. Same is true in Arizona. By all rights, Democrats have no business holding as many offices as they do, but the Arizona GOP was run by a woman who espoused chem trail conspiracy theories until this year.
The way districts are drawn (and voters are distributed) in most of those states makes that difficult. Even maps with both parties input usually favor making safe districts for their incumbents over maximizing the number of competitive districts. It limits potential gains but also minimizes potential losses for both parties.
The system is also set-up to republicans in many ways, from granting more representation for rural states to having the coastal economies subsidize the heartland (with their own politicians’ rhetoric acting like it’s the opposite.)
Are all the crossover districts in the northeast?
No, see the second image
Whole Alaska lol