1) If you've watched my interview with Doug Wade, which I'm assuming you have given the deluge of new followers since yesterday, you may have heard me refer to starting any analysis or predictions off with a baseline. Everyone does that if they try, but maybe not with precision.

2) Well, the map on the first tweet of the thread is my baseline for the election, which I drew up beforehand so I could make accurate predictions. I was accurate in 2016 on 51/51.

3) Now, I'll explain the map through each of the 7 categories covering the 51 elections (w/ DC).

4) This will be key for keeping up with anything else I post - as I intend to show various graphics and trend maps.

5) You may have noticed - I like to present information to speak for itself. After all, what we are after is clearness and transparency. We need a discussion.

6) Therefore, all assumptions on my map are based on the premise that earlier elections that made up these trends are consistent and clean (which they may not be)

7) I do not use polls. I will consider them maybe at a county level, and then only by someone like @Peoples_Pundit

It is also key to note that presidential elections are not usually impacted by the results of a previous midterm. President Romney can certainly attest to this; what I mean by this is that a close Senate race in 2018 in Texas does not mean that the state will flip in 2020.

8) The most time-honored methods of prediction, often related to circumstances like war/economy/prosperity, are voter registration by party, as well as the historically established voting patterns of a given state.

9) These trends are usually confirmable by watching where ...

campaigns spend time, energy, and money.

10) Without further ado - Solid Dem/Solid Rep - barring a sea change, these states are not changing. This map does not factor the split electoral votes of NE or ME. No changes on the horizon - the only hiccup in 32 years is IN in 2008.

11) Increasing Dem - CO and VA. CO is confirmable not only through recent results, but with voter registration numbers. It is one of just a few states that register by party that is favorable for Ds. The GOP there is horribly run - which is why I told you all to support...

12) @tgeitner - because he can breathe new life into that party with new ideas. Follow him if you haven't. VA doesn't register by party - it has trended away thanks to northern refugees, but also the end of bureaucrat GOPers - who have changed parties.

However, I think the VA race warrants a look for a variety of reasons, none of which I will discuss in this post.

13) Increasing Rep - FL and NC. Both confirmable by heavy voter registration trends in favor of GOP not only under DJT, but even before him. FL followed its...

registration trend this year and went by a large (for FL) number to DJT. NC somehow managed to progress another 4 pts. in GOP registration but was barely held on to by Trump; still, it was won, so it is not focal. More on that later.

14) Tightening Dem - lots of places - the only ones thought to be in play this year were NV, and as a dark horse, NM. However, what many aren't following, is that a GOP candidate strong in the Rust Belt is also strong in Upstate NY, NJ, and in some parts of New England.

15) Before you challenge me on this, go see how Bush 41 did in 1988 in New England and NJ, then how things have gone since 1992 rolled around, and the GOP lost the ability to speak to working class/irreligious populations.

16) Tightening Rep - GA, TX, and AZ...

A series of "urban conservative" states who have governors who can't resist dumping big tech all over their states, then wonder why margins get tighter. I think in a pendulum election, with a bad candidate on the red and a dynamo on the blue, those states are vulnerable.

17) I am not into Blue Texas panic, think the worst it would get given its underlying culturally conservative base and also the movement of Hispanic working class to the right, is something like Florida - competitive, but likely to defer to Rs at state leadership level.

At this rate, with the horrific strain of national Republican that comes from Arizona and with the growth of big tech and a California Exodus on a much-smaller-than-Texas population, Arizona is well on the way to becoming Colorado, and was thought of as a challenge in 2020.

18) The six states in purple - those were the true tipping point states in the election. IA and OH were never close, not for a day, but the other 4 were thought to be the deciding hand. What is unique about them is that they are stagnant in population growth...

and are likely to lose electoral votes to NC, GA, TX, AZ. Get to the point - why does it matter? I will show another graphic later - because you don't have a horse race scenario of a growing state, in which both parties should be gaining voters (TX, FL, etc.)...

...it means that one party making substantial gains is doing so because a coalition shift is in play, and voters from the shrinking party are being added to the ascendant party. Such has been the trend in the purple states since 2008...

19) Go and see for yourself - The Dem peak in those states was in 2008, the moment the newly elected president stepped off the victory platform. They have lost raw votes (not just margin, actual votes) since 2008 - and registration trends in PA suggested the same in 2020.

20) Because those states stayed in the incumbent column in 2012, most didn't observe a trend. But every one of them trended to the right, and then flipped in 2016.

They could have done that in 2012 had the GOP nominee actually stood for anything people wanted to support.

21) This is the end of my first thread - if you have questions, feel free to ask them - I will do my best to get to them. I will refer back to this as I post other graphics.

Remember, this is not polling-based. It is based on history (our most accurate predictor) and trends.

#IntelPatriot