Democrats Need To Focus On 13 States In 2024

In thinking about the upcoming presidential election, Democrats have two considerations to keep in mind. First and foremost, they must ensure that President Joe Biden is reelected. Secondly, and closely related to the first consideration, they need to think about how to deal with the extremely daunting Senate map they face in 2024.

Of the 34 Senate seats that will be on the ballot, Democrats are defending 23 (a total which includes three independents who caucus with the Democrats). Of the 11 Republican seats which are up for election in 2024, nine are in deeply red states where Democrats simply cannot win a statewide race these days, and the other two (Texas and Florida) offer Democrats odds which are well under 50%.

On the flip side, Democrats will be defending as many as 11 seats where Republicans have a legitimate chance to win, although certainly some of those states offer Democrats odds above 50%. With Democrats holding a 51-49 advantage in the Senate, they can only afford to lose one seat, but three of the seats they must defend are in states that Donald Trump won by landslide margins (8% or greater) in the last two elections (Ohio, Montana and West Virginia). Unless Democrats can somehow figure out how to hold on to two of those three seats, and all the others they currently hold–or win in either Texas or Florida–they will lose the Senate in 2024.

The reason that presidential and Senate consideration are closely related in 2024 is because ticket-splitting in presidential and Senate races is at an all-time low. Over the last two presidential elections, states have voted for the presidential candidate and Senate candidate of the same party 68 times out of 69 (a 98.6% correlation rate). The lone exception was the 2020 reelection of Republican Susan Collins in Maine, which Biden carried–and even Collins had her closest Senate race ever.

As such, President Biden has to think about campaigning not just in the states that he needs to hold on to in order to prevail in the Electoral College, but also in some states where he might not have a great chance to win. If he loses Ohio by 8% again, or Montana by 16%, Senators Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jon Tester (D-Montana) are likely to lose. At the very least, Biden will have to significantly shrink his margin of defeat in those two states–or compete seriously in Texas and/or Florida–if Democrats are to retain control of the Senate after 2024.

FIRST-TIER STATES

As we look at the electoral map, it is very clear that there are two absolute must-win states for Biden: Pennsylvania (19 electoral votes) and Michigan (15 electoral votes) are irreplaceable keystones of a Democratic Electoral College win. As it happens, both states have Senate races in 2024 as well, and Michigan’s Senate race will have no incumbent, because Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow is retiring after four terms.

BOTTOM LINE: The Democrats must do whatever is necessary and spend whatever funds are required to hold onto Pennsylvania and Michigan. They cannot afford to lose either state.

SECOND-TIER STATES

The second tier for Democrats includes the three states that Biden won by less than 1% each in 2020: Georgia (16 electoral votes), Arizona (11 electoral votes) and Wisconsin (10 electoral votes), and one state he won by 2%, Nevada (6 electoral votes). If he holds Pennsylvania and Michigan, Biden only needs to retain one of Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin to be reelected. Of these three states, only Georgia has no Senate race in 2024. Democrats will have tough holds in Senate races in Arizona and Wisconsin. As such, Arizona and Wisconsin should be considered slightly higher priorities than Georgia, though Georgia cannot be ignored, because the Peach State’s demographic trends make it a far more promising state for Democrats going forward than either Arizona or Wisconsin. Biden must also ensure he hangs on to Nevada to ensure that Democrats retain that Senate seat.

BOTTOM LINE: The smart strategy here is to go all-out in Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada–sparing no expense–but to take a slightly less aggressive approach in Georgia, which Biden can afford to lose if he wins either Arizona or Wisconsin, and where Democrats are not defending a Senate seat.

“REACH” STATES

The third group of states where Biden and the Democrats must consider playing includes four states that voted twice for Donald Trump. But here, the strategy depends on whether it is considered smarter to defend incumbent Democratic senators in two states where Republicans now have a considerable advantage (Ohio, Montana), or to try to take out incumbent Republican senators in states that are not quite as red as the other two (Texas, Florida). Another factor to keep in mind is that Texas and Florida are extremely expensive states to campaign in due to their large populations and multiple big media markets. Ohio is not a cheap, low-population state, either, but Democrats can get more bang for their buck in Ohio, and certainly in sparsely populated Montana, than they can in Texas or Florida.

For Biden, it is obvious that he has a better chance to carry Florida–even with its recent rightward trend–than he has to win Ohio. He has perhaps a better chance to win Texas than he has to win Ohio, although Ohio and the Midwest tend to be a little more elastic than Texas and the South. Biden has no realistic chance whatsoever to win Montana.

There is also the fact that Texas (40 electoral votes) and Florida (30 electoral votes) pack much more of a punch in the Electoral College than Ohio (17 electoral votes) or Montana (4 electoral votes), and the two bigger states in recent elections have been more promising for Democrats than either of the two smaller states. An upset win in either Texas or Florida guarantees Biden’s reelection. For that matter, a (less-likely) win in Ohio does the same. Montana makes no difference and isn’t really winnable for Biden anyway. The only reason for Biden to campaign in Montana is to avoid hanging a 16-point anchor around Tester’s neck. So if you’re Biden, you’re probably more interested in the Texas-Florida route than the Ohio-Montana route.

But Democrats do not want to lose Tester or Brown, and as Democratic incumbents, they in some ways have a slightly easier task than the Democrats who will challenge Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rick Scott (R-Florida). Incumbents start with a thumb on the scale.

Not included in this group of “reach” states is West Virginia, where Democratic Senator Joe Manchin will face the most difficult race of his career. It would be futile for Biden to campaign in West Virginia, a state where he is guaranteed to lose by at least 30 percentage points. If Manchin can overcome a 30- to 40-point anchor at the top of the ticket, tip your hat to him. But Democrats can afford to lose Manchin’s seat as long as they win two of the four Senate seats in the “reach” states, and all four of those states are far better bets for Democrats. The Democrats should leave Manchin to fend for himself, which might actually help him in the nation’s second-reddest state.

BOTTOM LINE: Democrats don’t need any of these four “reach” states to keep the presidency, but they do need to win two of these four Senate seats to keep the Senate. They have no chance to win any of them if Biden doesn’t do decently in those states. The best bet is to campaign in all four and hope Democrats can win two of those Senate seats.

“DEFENSE” STATES

Finally, Biden and the Democrats should spend some money and resources in three states where Biden is likely to win, but all of which remain close enough that they could go haywire under the right circumstances. These three states are Virginia (11 electoral votes), Minnesota (10 electoral votes), and Maine (4 electoral votes).

BOTTOM LINE: Democrats are likely to win both the presidential races and Senate races in all three of these states, but they can’t take any chances and must make sure to nail them all down.

SUMMARY

For Joe Biden to win reelection and give his party the best chance at retaining its slim advantage in the Senate in 2024, he must campaign in, and dedicate significant resources to, exactly 13 states, and only those 13 states. There is no utility whatsoever in campaigning in any of the other 37 states, or the District of Columbia, which–with the exception of North Carolina–are all safe for one party or the other.

With North Carolina unnecessary to an Electoral College majority for Biden, and the Tar Heel State having no Senate races on the ballot in 2024, there is no strategic reason to vigorously contest it when the party has more pressing priorities. (Although a similar case can be made about Georgia, which also has no Senate races on the ballot in 2024, the fact remains that Georgia flipped blue in 2020 and North Carolina did not. As such, Georgia could be a backup for Biden in the event that he loses both Arizona and Wisconsin. Strategically, Democrats would do well to leave North Carolina alone in 2024 and revisit it in 2026 and 2028, when it has Senate races on the ballot.)

There will be some talk of trying to challenge Senator Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) or flip an open Republican seat in Indiana, but such talk should be ignored. Democrats will have their hands full in the 13 states where they really need to compete, and spending money and resources in deeply red states like Missouri and Indiana, where Democrats are simply not going to win or even come close, would be foolish, wasteful, and bad strategy. Any money spent in any of these 37 states is money that can’t be spent where control of the White House and the Senate will be decided. Democrats need to keep their eyes on the prize and not go off on wild goose chases in impossible states.