My girl and I plan to. Massachusetts is the idea right now. We've had a good decade of Louisiana but it gets dumber and hotter every year. I'll be damned if I see the next President here.
They won't for the same reason nobody says 'Screw this country, I'm moving to Mexico!' and asking them to do so is stupid. Personal example - West Virginia isn't exactly a bustling hub of biotech and clinical research. Though it would make a great epidemiological case study for mass addiction to opiates.
It's not all bad. Can you telecommute? Swing states have more affordable housing, less traffic, awesome parks, etc. Amazon (who I personally think sucks though I still use them from time to time), Netflix, etc. can deliver entertainment and more straight to your house. Taxes are lower. Blah. Blah. Blah. I mean shit, on the short list of places the wife and I were entertaining to move to if Trump won (even though it was fanciful thinking on our end) were Surinam, Bhutan, and Iceland. All are probably a step down from any of the 48 continental states in many ways. But they're still livable. Swing states infinitely moreso. Madison, Cincinnati, Des Moines, Indianapolis, etc. are all wonderful cities with diverse businesses, good people, and more affordable housing than places like New York City, San Francisco, DC, Seattle, etc. They still offer great things like amazing museums, a variety of events throughout the years. and on and on. Best yet, you can live about 30-45 minutes outside of any of those cities, find things even nicer and cheaper places to live, and you can still head to the city on the weekends when you need to fill a certain itch. All in all, if you're able to be mobile and are looking for a change of pace, you might not be sacrificing much. In fact, you might come out ahead. So no, it's not like asking someone to move to some third world country.
I didn't say it was all bad. But none of what you listed is convincing enough argument to get me to move to those places. It's not a question purely of amenities. It's a question of values. I grew up with more fire and brimstone than is appropriate for Michigan. I have no interest in trying to live in and among fire and brimstone people in the hope of moderating their behavior/beliefs, or else sacrificing my desire to live where I work to try and put more blue in red states. There is no incentive for what you're asking to happen. 'Move away from prosperous areas because the poor folks need moderating influences' is basically the hope when you ask people to do this, right?
Honestly? I posted this article because I thought it was a flawed yet interesting idea worth discussing, and here we are. Let me get back at this later tonight, because in all honesty, I've been having a hard time thinking clearly for the past two weeks, everybody's doom and gloom reaction to this election season has left me feeling very frustrated, and I want to try to make a clear, emotionless argument as best as possible. That said, I do believe that embracing mobility, meeting new people, sharing ideas and viewpoints, and spreading material and intellectual prosperity are all very good values to have. So I do stand by that sentiment.
Here is how it could work: State Elect. Votes Trump Clinton Difference Florida 29 4,605,515 4,485,715 119,800 Pennsylvania 20 2,912,941 2,844,705 68,236 Wisconsin 10 1,409,467 1,382,210 27,257 Georgia 16 2,068,623 1,837,300 231,323 North Carolina 15 2,339,603 2,162,074 177,529 Arizona 11 1,017,166 933,655 83,511 Michigan 16 2,279,221 2,267,798 11,423 Totals 117 719,079 At the very least, would need around 120-150,000 people to move to PA, WI and MI for an additional 46 EV. Or, even better, get a candidate with a more outward personality that honestly cares for people. This does not solve the problem of state congresses, which are 70% controlled by Republicans. My feeling is that we need to rebuild from the ground up.