The oldest joke about Pennsylvania politics is that the state is Philadelphia and Pittsburgh separated by Kentucky. Nevada, where tonight’s Republican debate is being held, has a similar dynamic: Las Vegas and Reno separated by Utah. Pennsylvania has shown itself to be a phony swing state, one that looks like it might be up for grabs (at least delusional campaign consultants convince themselves it is) but lately looks a lot like New Jersey when it comes to Republicans’ White House aspirations.

What about Nevada?

It’s a pretty good bellwether. (The usual caveat about over-generalizing the significance of historical trends applies.) Nevada didn’t like Garfield in 1880, twice refused to get behind a victorious William McKinley (elections of 1896 and 1900), and preferred People’s party candidate James Weaver over Grover Cleveland in 1892. In 1908 it backed Bryan over Taft. Since then, Nevada has backed the winner in every presidential election with the exception of 1976, when it joined the western bloc against Carter. Which is to say, a bold stand for Gerald Ford in 1976 represents the only time Nevada has failed to back the winner since before World War I.

Another interesting thing about Nevada: Its large Hispanic population (28 percent) gets a lot of attention from campaign strategists, but its most remarkable demographic transformation in recent years has been the doubling of its Asian population, driven largely by an influx of Filipinos, who make up more than half of the state’s Asians. Only Hawaii (with its whopping 38 percent Asian population share), California, New Jersey, and New York have proportionally larger Asian populations. Catholic churches offer regularly scheduled Tagalog masses. Nevada’s Asian population lives almost exclusively in Clark County (Vegas and environs) where its members make up as much as 25 percent of some state senate districts.

And who are Nevada Republicans leaning toward lately? There’s a big building with his name on it down the street from tonight’s debate venue.