Democrats' opposition to pipeline in Minnesota could cost them the state's electoral college votes in 2020

Savannah Shoemake:

...
Every election cycle, Minnesota becomes more of a battleground state and the Republicans have a shot at turning it red in 2020 (as Trump mentioned just last week). But if the Democrats want to succeed, they must be careful to avoid potential political minefields in the state that could have negative implications during the campaign.

One such minefield is opposing a pipeline called Line 3 that’s being rebuilt and replaced in Minnesota. While it hasn’t garnered much attention on the national stage yet, it could very well become the next Dakota Access or Keystone XL fight in the months ahead and just in time for the 2020 election. Democratic contender Bernie Sanders jumped into the debate early on by releasing a video in January opposing Line 3, and just last week Elizabeth Warren came out against the pipeline in a tweet prior to her rally in St. Paul, which drew criticism from local construction union members.

Just as we saw with Warren, Democrats need to be cautious about blindly joining this fight for a few important reasons. First, the project is supported by local labor unions and leaders, as well as lawmakers in both parties in the state. Second, as we’ve seen from past protests over pipelines, they usually have a costly and negative impact on local residents, taxpayers, law enforcement and government – and therefore a negative impact on any politician who is supporting the protests.
...

Opposing pipelines should not be a winning issue.  There are already signs of dissatisfaction with Democrats in the state and this will only add to that.   The unions in part of the state are already moving toward Trump because of his trade policies.