Functionally, moving to a purple state makes a notable difference. The reason the Michigan Supreme Court race recently mattered so much was because of the courts confirming potentially gerrymandered maps. If enough people move to purple states that they shifted blue, then it could impact Federal elections which could potentially impose legislation against gerrymandering at a federal level. They could even potentially withhold federal funding, in some instances, should states refuse to use non-gerrymandered maps.
Firstly, I think you’re talking about the Wisconsin SC. Secondly, that remains to be seen. Thirdly, Wisconsin’s Senators illustrate the problem with this hypothesis - they seem capable of electing both Republican and Democrat Senators (and Governors) depending on the winds of the political moment.
Moving to Wisconsin won’t tilt the state blue because you’ll be exposed to all the same socio-economic forces everyone else in Wisconsin is enduring.
Not when enfranchisement is dictated by the entrenched government.
Functionally, moving to a purple state makes a notable difference. The reason the Michigan Supreme Court race recently mattered so much was because of the courts confirming potentially gerrymandered maps. If enough people move to purple states that they shifted blue, then it could impact Federal elections which could potentially impose legislation against gerrymandering at a federal level. They could even potentially withhold federal funding, in some instances, should states refuse to use non-gerrymandered maps.
Firstly, I think you’re talking about the Wisconsin SC. Secondly, that remains to be seen. Thirdly, Wisconsin’s Senators illustrate the problem with this hypothesis - they seem capable of electing both Republican and Democrat Senators (and Governors) depending on the winds of the political moment.
Moving to Wisconsin won’t tilt the state blue because you’ll be exposed to all the same socio-economic forces everyone else in Wisconsin is enduring.