I have heartily disliked Colin Woodard's division of America into eleven regions, still preferring Joel Garreau's Nine Nations of North America, for three reasons: First, Woodard relied on the word of academics in the regions to explain to him where the boundaries were and who the people were. I don't know if he still does that, but it used to be so, and it led him to accept explanations that people would like to be true, but remain unproven; second, he just loves the historical New Netherlands and its values, ignoring the values and treatment of the natives of the er, other places the Dutch settled; third, he's a condescending prick whenever he is describing groups he doesn't like. I have long preferred the Garreau's divisions. And tone.
However, Woodard's analysis of the 2016 election by region seems very strong, and his model may indeed supersede Garreau's 1980's version, much as I wish it were not so.