Politics wonks have long known that our modern (im)migration regime helps Democrats gain power. The reason is simple: 85-90 percent of our (im)migrants hail from the Third World. And upon naturalization, a majority of that portion of them vote Democratic. Yet there’s another type of migration, one that, say some observers, may deep-six the Democrats’ near-term political fortunes.

That is, American citizens have been fleeing “blue” (liberal) states like 40 going north.

In fact, five “liberal bastion” states alone have seen a net loss of 13 million residents in recent decades. The trend reflects why economic activity has been migrating southward in recent times — and ensures that this shift will continue. This greater economic power is attended by greater political power, too, as higher populations mean more electoral clout. The end result is, if the analyses are correct, that Democratic states will become relatively poorer and politically impotent.

Writing about this today, commentator Kevin Finn states the obvious. Many Americans have been migrating to conservative states, attracted by lower taxes, smaller government, economic liberty, and law and order. In contrast, the left-wing states they’re fleeing are characterized by exorbitant taxation, onerous regulation, and social breakdown.

(As to lack of liberty, a 2023 Cato Institute study found that our 10 least-free states are all Democrat-run. The five least free are, in the following order, New York, Hawaii, California, New Jersey, and Oregon.)

As Finn informs, providing details:

The magnitude of this exodus is staggering. From 1990 to 2021, blue bastions like California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York have lost a net 13 million residents through domestic migration. This averages over 433,000 people per year. California and New York each shed over 4.5 million people, Illinois lost more than 2 million, New Jersey 1 million, and even Massachusetts saw 800,000 depart, including 50,000 in 2020 during the COVID lockdowns. These aren’t just numbers; they’re families, entrepreneurs, and workers voting against the leftist policies that have rendered their home states unaffordable and unsafe.

One study, using IRS and Census data, revealed red states like Florida, Texas, Tennessee, North and South Carolina, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Nevada, and Utah receiving the majority of blue state refugees. Florida captured over $36 billion in adjusted gross income in a single year, with Texas gaining $12 billion. Meanwhile, California lost nearly $25 billion, New York over $20 billion. One analysis showed red states accounting for 58% of interstate moves, with seven of the top 10 destinations voting Republican in 2024.

Then there are this migration’s political implications. There has been much controversy in recent times over redistricting. (This process gives the party controlling it more winnable congressional districts in a given state.) Yet this debate obscures the deeper population-shift phenomenon. As Tom Rogers at Newsweek points out:

Much has been written about the various attempts to create more Republican House districts through extreme gerrymandering. This column recently discussed a pending Supreme Court case that could strike down the Voting Rights Act’s remedy of creating majority-minority districts and result in the creation of even more Republican House seats.

However, none of these actions affect presidential elections, which are decided in the Electoral College. Electoral College votes reflect the total number of House seats a state has, as determined by the census, conducted every ten years. The next census, which will take place in 2030, will award some states more House seats and take away House seats from others, based on the gains and losses of the population of each state.

So the 2028 presidential election will not be affected by any new census count, but the 2032 presidential election will. Based on a close look at population trends, the upcoming census will not bring good news for the Democrats.

Responding to the above, commentator Silvio Canto, Jr. asserts that, consequently, getting

to 218 in the U.S. House or 270 in The Electoral College is going to be hard for Democrats.

It’s the numbers, stupid. Or more specifically, the numbers of moving vans leaving blue zones and going to red states.

The usual suspects will lose congressional seats the next time around. They are California, New York, and Illinois. The same will be gaining seats, such as Texas, Florida, and South Carolina. What’s the result of these losses and gains? The losses are blue and the gains are red.

Of course, we may now hear that old grumble: “Yeah, but these blue-staters bring their voting habits with them and move their new locales left.” Maybe, though, not so much anymore.

As The Associated Press pointed out in 2023, Americans are increasingly making their moves based on ideology. That is, self-segregating, conservatives are going to conservative states and liberals to liberal ones.

Then again, the Democrats still have a few tricks up their sleeve. For one thing, their awareness of the congressional-seat-population factor is precisely why they’ve been importing illegals into their states. (Note: Congressional apportionment is determined by the total number of a state’s “persons,” not citizens. Ergo, sanctuary cities and states. You didn’t think Democrats were hosting these illegals out of the goodness of their hearts, did you?) As Representative Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.) admitted in a video that resurfaced last year:

When I hear colleagues talk about, you know, the doors of the inn being closed — ah, no room at the inn — I’m saying I need more people in my district just for redistricting purposes.

Realize as well that should the Democrats retake the executive branch in 2028, the illegal-alien-importation scheme will resume. That’s not all, either.

It was revealed in 2022 that the U.S. Census Bureau, under the Biden administration, overcounted the populations of eight states.

All but one of them was liberal.

The agency also undercounted six states.

All but one was conservative.

These “errors” mean that three to five congressional seats, and hence electoral votes, shifted from conservative to liberal states. Remember this if the GOP loses the ’28 presidential election by such a margin.

Consider, too, that many critics don’t view these counting discrepancies as coincidences. (Curiously, electoral “mistakes” virtually always seem to favor the Democrats.)

The point is that if the Democrats do win the next presidential election, they will be controlling the 2030 census. And, then, what are the chances there won’t be more oddly convenient counting “errors”? It’s the new woke math, I guess.

So what are the Democrats’ real near-term electoral chances? Well, all the above underlines the problem with many predictions: People too often just project current trends into the future. But our is a fluid world, not a static one.

What we can know is that a given political party’s chances will fluctuate. But as long as one trend continues — that is, moral decay — America’s chances will only go in one direction.