Reading about how swing states are important for the election, I was wondering how safe the "safe states" actually are. So I plugged some numbers into a spreadsheet, and came to some interesting (?) results.
So first, the data. I used the 2020 election results, starting with Turnout_2020G_v1.2.csv (from https://election.lab.ufl.edu/voter-turnout/2020-general-election-turnout/) for number of people eligible to vote (columns D and E). Added the results from https://www.fec.gov/documents/4228/federalelections2020.xlsx (H, I, J, and K calculated from that), and the number of registered voters from https://ballotpedia.org/Partisan_affiliations_of_registered_voters#2021 (F and G). Non-voters L is eligible voters minus total votes (E - L). Democrats M and Republicans N is the bigger of registered and voters (F or H; G or I), to see if that makes a difference in swinginess. Columns P and Q are the results calculated from the table to make sure it works (Maine and Nebraska cancel each other out), row 54 is the sum of the column above.
The results: Columns R are the states where non-voters alone are the biggest group, S adds third party voters to that, resulting in 148 or 156 electors that could vote for anyone. Columns T and U are each of Democrats and Republicans plus non-voters, and here the non-voters could help each party win everywhere, except DC which is safe for Democrats. For funsies I added the last column V that calculates non-voters from the voting-age, not voting-eligible population, resulting in 287 electors for anyone.
Conclusion? Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia could be "rainbow states" that could send electors for any candidate. The rest except for DC could vote for either Democrats or Republicans, making all of them swing states. And maybe the fear of non-citizen voters (which I think is the majority of the difference between voting-age and voting-eligible people) determining the election results is valid. Or maybe that means that a significant amount of people living in the US and thus being affected by its government are not represented by said government.
The End: Of course that completely disregards non-voter demographics, even if they would vote they're not likely to all vote the same. Still, enough motivated ex-non-voters could turn basically any state into a swing state. One vote of someone who thinks their vote doesn't matter won't change much, but the votes of all who think that way certainly can.
That's not true in TX cities. I've lived in DFW, Houston metroplex, and Austin and have never had less than 15 polling places. They might not be next door to your work, but they are within a few monute drive.
TX was also the first state to allow early voting and mandates that polls are open at least 9 hours the first week and at least 12 hours the second week and final day of voting. That's the minimum, not maximum. There were also polling places open on the weekends.
That said, I have heard (although haven't researched it) that some very rural areas are more difficult to vote in with only a couple polling places in the county. So that could be the case if you live in the middle of nowhere, but you'll pass polling places on your way to/from work. Just think of it like you would a doctor appointment and put it on your schedule.
TX is pretty purple and is turning more blue each cycle.
2004: Kerry lost by ~1.9 million votes 2008: Obama lost by ~990,000 votes 2012: Obama lost by ~1.2 million votes 2016: Clinton lost by ~800,000 votes 2020: Biden lost by ~640,000 votes
In 2020, had just 3.5% more of the registered voters cast a ballot for Biden, he would have won. That's about how many people voted each day of early voting in this election.