The Panhandle has not always been heavily Republican. According to the Almanac of America Politics 1970 (p. 188) discussing the Idaho 1st Congressional District: "The northern half [of the 1st] is made up of the Idaho panhandle which, economically and sociologically, is part of the adjacent 'Inland Empire' of eastern Washington. Residents here have always supported public power developments on the Columbia River and its tributaries. Moreover, since many of the people here are of Scandinavian and Irish descent , the panhandle is the most consistently Democratic part of Idaho." For confirmation, see the map at http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=16&year=1968 Not all the Panhandle went for Humphrey, but the *only* counties in Idaho that went for Humphrey were in the Panhandle. Again, in 1976, the only counties Carter carried in Idaho were in the Panhandle.
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=16&year=1976 Indeed, as late as 1992, Bill Clinton carried most of the counties in the Panhandle. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/datagraph.php?fips=16&year=1992&off=0&elect=0&f=0
Indeed, without the Panhandle, Barry Goldwater would have carried Idaho in 1964: "[Idaho] was by far the weakest state that Johnson carried in the election. Johnson carried the state by a margin of 5,363 votes, or 1.83%, making Idaho’s vote about 20.75% more Republican than the national average. Johnson’s strongest performances were in Clearwater and Lewis counties where he took over 76% of the vote in both counties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Idaho,_1964 See http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/datagraph.php?fips=16&year=1964&off=0&elect=0&f=0 LBJ's margin in Nez Perce County alone (5,333 votes) provided virtually all his margin in the state.
In short, without the Panhandle, Idaho becomes for most of its history a more conservative (and of course more Mormon) state.
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=16&year=1976 Indeed, as late as 1992, Bill Clinton carried most of the counties in the Panhandle. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/datagraph.php?fips=16&year=1992&off=0&elect=0&f=0
Indeed, without the Panhandle, Barry Goldwater would have carried Idaho in 1964: "[Idaho] was by far the weakest state that Johnson carried in the election. Johnson carried the state by a margin of 5,363 votes, or 1.83%, making Idaho’s vote about 20.75% more Republican than the national average. Johnson’s strongest performances were in Clearwater and Lewis counties where he took over 76% of the vote in both counties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Idaho,_1964 See http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/datagraph.php?fips=16&year=1964&off=0&elect=0&f=0 LBJ's margin in Nez Perce County alone (5,333 votes) provided virtually all his margin in the state.
In short, without the Panhandle, Idaho becomes for most of its history a more conservative (and of course more Mormon) state.
"More Mormon" doesn't mean "overwhelmingly Mormon." Estimates of the current Mormon population of Idaho range from 19% http://utahvalley360.com/2015/07/13/top-10-states-mormons/ to 26%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_C..._Saints_membership_statistics_(United_States) Even without the Panhandle, this is not enough to make a Mormon majority. Parts of southeast Idaho are very heavily Mormon, but that is not true for example of Ada County (Boise and suburbs) where Mormons are only about 16 percent of the total population. http://www.city-data.com/county/religion/Ada-County-ID.html
Of course by 2004 the Panhandle had become sufficiently conservative that Gergoire is presumably doomed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_gubernatorial_election,_2004 (Leaving aside butterflies, of course...)
Little Red Bean
Banned
Washington would stay a swing state for about a decade longer than we did IOTL. More importantly, state politics would be controlled by the Republicans. The State Senate already is, and the State House is very close. A modern Washington with the Idaho Panhandle would have a solid GOP majority in the Senate and probably a majority in the House too. A few of our recent gubernatorial elections would have gone to the GOP with those borders. We probably wouldn't have our undeserved reputation as a "progressive" state ITTL.
And of course a more conservative electorate might prevent the likes of Scoop Jackson or Warren Magnuson from ever getting elected, which would have profound impacts on the economic development of our state.
And of course a more conservative electorate might prevent the likes of Scoop Jackson or Warren Magnuson from ever getting elected, which would have profound impacts on the economic development of our state.