Democrats Need to Relax about the 2030 Census

When it comes to electoral politics, I have read, forever, about how one party will get an inherent advantage that will consistently last in the electoral college.  From the Reagan coalition to the Clinton coalition to the Obama coalition, from the Blue Wall to the collectively blue-then-red American South, the single laziest (and most perpetual) take in American politics is that one party is going to gain an insurmountable advantage in the electoral college.

The latest of these takes has been based on a 2025 Census Bureau population estimate that showed (if exactly accurate, which it won't be) that Harris states would lose 11 electoral votes compared to Donald Trump's.  The biggest thing that was part of this is that this would mean the famed "blue wall" where if you won all of Hillary Clinton's states plus WI/MI/PA (aka the Blue Wall) would no longer be enough to stave off Trump, as it would move that coalition from 270 electoral college votes down to 257 electoral votes.

I will own that this isn't a great look for Democrats.  For starters, not a single Harris state appears on-track to gain a seat next cycle, which was not the case in 2020 (when Colorado & Oregon both gained seats).  It is no Democrat (including my) definition of a good thing that reliably blue states like New York, California, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Illinois, & Oregon appear on-track to lose electoral college power in 2032.  But it's also a case where the panic feels completely unwarranted, and I think looking at 2004 would be a good reason why.

In 2004, George W. Bush beat John Kerry in the electoral college 286-252 (really it's 251 because of a faithless elector but for the sake of this article, we'll go with 252 because that's how many Kerry won electorally).  At the time, seven states (Wisconsin, Iowa, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, & Nevada) were decided by less than 3-points, a relatively close election, and one that, in many ways, felt like Trump/Harris (i.e. Kerry lost a race many assumed he'd be able to pull off).  Democrats felt despair, until four years later Bush (as popular as a hangnail) wiped out John McCain's chances at ever being president and we ushered in the Obama coalition.

This is worth pointing out because basing a lot of your suppositions about what a "safe" seat would be based on 2004 numbers would look pretty silly when you'd compare it to what would happen in 2012.  That year Obama won 332 electoral votes to Mitt Romney's measly 206.  That year only three states (Florida, North Carolina, & Ohio) were decided by less than 3-points.  

But in the process, several states that had gone for Bush in 2004 had basically become blue states.  New Mexico, which had been one of Bush's most marginal victories, wasn't even a swing state in 2012 it was so blue.  Virginia & Colorado, which hadn't been one of the seven closest states in 2004, were now easy portions of the Obama coalition, as were marginal blue states for Kerry (like Oregon & New Jersey).  People get married to the idea that states can't change perspectives, and they can't really change their tune, and that's in part grounded in the fact swing states the last three presidential cycles staying a relatively similar list...but that is in large part because Donald Trump was the Republican nominee all three cycles.  That won't be the case in 2028 and certainly won't be the case in 2032.

There's ample evidence that new swing states or other states might make up a future Democrat's coalition, and as a result would make the worry about the electoral college premature (at best).  The nation swung three-points to the right in 2024 compared to 2020, so any state whose margin was less than a three-point swing against the Republicans would indicate a state that got "bluer" relative to the nation.  This includes swing states like Georgia, North Carolina, & Wisconsin, as well as hard-red states like Kansas & Utah (and nearly Alaska).  It also includes some historically purple states like Minnesota.  It's worth noting that if a state like, say, North Carolina or Georgia were to become the next Virginia or Colorado, we'd be in a very similar situation to what we are now-relying on that blue wall, because NC/GA would have made up the difference from the census.

This is all to say-Democrats need to get ahold of themselves before they once again fall for the oldest trick in the book: assuming that electoral college coalitions don't shift.  In the post-Trump era that we're soon going to enter, there are states we assume are safely blue and safely red now that will become in-play, and maybe switch sides entirely.  No Democrat should be celebrating the census change...but anyone panicking is doing so for no real reason.