There is a downside to economic success. When your state has a great economic environment, people move there because they can get jobs. Those states usually had more conservative policies, and the newcomers replacing them do not necessarily understand why it is that there are jobs in the new place but not in the old. Vermont and New Hampshire were very Republican states not long ago, but New York started moving into Vermont beginning in the '60s and Massachusetts started moving into NH in the '70s - in both cases abetted by Connecticut. My family and about half my closest friends are from Massachusetts, so I'm not opposed to all of them by a long shot. But as a trend, it hasn't worked out entirely well for New Hampshire.
California elected Ronald Reagan governor, remember, and Richard Nixon to Congress. CA voted for Nixon for president in 1960, '68, and '72; voted for Reagan in 1980 and '84. Since then it has become less business friendly, and people are leaving every year. They are going to Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, and especially Texas, which are all becoming more liberal.
I noted under culture that moving to another place involves a certain cutting oneself off from tradition and thus is more usually undertaken by people less tied to tradition. Those are tendencies only, mind you. Yet when people move to a new state, they move to the cities or immediate suburbs, and even in conservative states the cities are blue. Austin, Nashville, Houston, and Atlanta don't seem very southern anymore. Or so I am told.
Keep that in mind when you listen to that brand of libertarian who thinks that open borders will be entirely a boon. People who move for free-market reasons may not have the faintest clue that they are doing so, and bring their less-free ideas with them.
I will note again that I don't use the word capitalism, preferring the phrase free market. In this era, it is more accurate, as capital is not the sole foundation it once was; while many are defiantly proud of the term, it is a negative to others, and I don't like to alienate them for no reason; thirdly and relatedly, its critics always use capitalist rather than free-marketer, and I refuse to let them dictate the terms.
I find that many puzzling criticisms of capitalism by people who are among its most obvious downstream beneficiaries can often be better understood if one just substitutes the word "adulthood." There. Fixed it for ya. All clear now.