The Electoral College Map (8/14/08)

The upside to waiting until late in the day to update our electoral college projections is that there is a chance to incorporate all or most of the polls from that day. The downside is that you have to incorporate all those new polls. And when you are already behind adding in the new polls into the existent averages, you make meeting a goal of "I'll have an update up later tonight" that much more difficult to attain. [At least I had that 2004 material up. 2004!?!] Regardless of the timing, there have been 17 new polls released in 14 states since Sunday. Six of those 14 states are toss ups by FHQ's measure and one more state moved into that category with the addition of new polling.

New Polls (Aug. 10-13)
State	Poll	Margin (With Leaners/ Without Leaners)
Alaska	Moore	+3
Alaska	Hays	+5
Colorado	Public Policy Polling	+4
Florida	Insider Advantage	+4
Iowa	Rasmussen	+5/+5
Kansas	Rasmussen	+14/+15
Kentucky	Survey USA	+18
Nevada	Rasmussen	+3/+3
New Jersey	Quinnipiac	+10
North Carolina	Survey USA	+4
Oregon	Rasmussen	+10/+10
Pennsylvania	Franklin & Marshall	+8 /+5 (reg.)/(likely)
Virginia	Insider Advantage	0
Virginia	Rasmussen	+1/+1
Virginia	Survey USA	+1
Washington	Survey USA	+7
Wisconsin	Strategic Vision	+5

That should serve as a hint that, surprisingly, it was not Nevada that moved over to McCain as a result of the Rasmussen poll that gave the Arizona senator a slight lead in the Silver state. And hey, it was less than 24 hours ago that I lamented the fact that Nevada had not been polled in almost a month. I still think that Nevada has been under-polled given how close it appears. Let's sink some of the resources that have been sunk into (over-)surveying New York and put that into Nevada. The Empire state ain't movin' folks. I expect it to be an easy win for Obama on November 4. Nevada, however, is a close state. By our measure, it is now the closest state, surpassing Ohio to claim that distinction. But I'll save that discussion for when we get to the Electoral College Spectrum below.

Changes (Aug. 10-13)
State	Before	After
Alaska	McCain lean	Toss Up McCain

With that small rant over, let's shift the focus to Alaska. The Last Frontier (I'm not a Star Trek fan, but I have to fight my subconscious every time I type that. Alaska is not, in fact, the Final Frontier.) on the weight of two new polls moves into the toss up category. That Ivan Moore poll from late July slipped under the radar somehow, but at least I wasn't the only one to miss it. Of course Nate Silver is reporting that poll as having a 2.4 point margin. His link to the poll is dead now and everyone else seems to be reporting it as a 3 point margin. Pushing that point aside for the moment, Alaska is now close enough to be considered a toss up. Yikes if you're McCain. This is a state that Bush won by 25 points in 2004. That's over 20 points that Alaska as slid since November 2004. Now, just to be clear, Alaska still favors McCain but has inched closer to Obama based on these two polls. Bush's approval (of lack thereof) and the Stevens' indictment have put a distinct blemish on the Republican brand in the state and that has translated into the presidential trial heats drawing closer together. [Just for the sake of transparency -- or at least accurate reporting -- I should note that the Moore poll was released a full week before that indictment was handed down.]

[Click Map to Enlarge]

Alaska moved and Nevada didn't, so the shift I expected when I saw the new Silver state poll (but before I imputed it into the state's weighted average) didn't actually happen. As a result the electoral vote tallies for each candidate remain unchanged. McCain, though, loses three more electoral votes from the lean plus strong state total that is, by our estimation, safer for the moment. That total comes to 154 electoral votes for McCain which is over twenty electoral votes fewer now than what Obama has in just his strong category (175 EVs). And that brings into even starker contrast the difference between where McCain-Obama stand in regard to the Electoral College Spectrum (ECS) and where Bush and Kerry were four years ago at this time. The intensity of support for Bush has certainly given way to a far different picture for the Republican standard bearer in 2008. If Obama can force McCain to play defense in those eight states (86 EVs), McCain will be at a distinct disadvantage as we near the heart of this campaign. I have no idea what Obama's schedule is coming off his vacation -- he does have a running mate to name -- but would a quick trip to Alaska be that out of the way? That sort of move could turn 5 point poll leads in the state into more than just an outlier. Granted, driving back from my own vacation in late July, I saw a truck with Alaska tags that sported a "NObama!" bumper sticker. That isn't representative of the entire state but I'm willing to err on the side of caution and give the GOP some credit in a state that has only voted for a Democratic presidential candidate once in its history (LBJ in 1964).

The Electoral College Spectrum*
HI-4 (7)**	WA-11 (165)	NH-4 (252/290)	NC-15 (357/196)	LA-9 (67)
VT-3 (10)	MN-10 (175)	PA-21*** (273/286)	FL-27 (384/181)	ID-4 (58)
RI-4 (14)	DE-3 (178)	OH-20 (293/265)	SC-8 (154)	NE-5 (54)
MD-10 (24)	OR-7 (185)	NV-5 (298/245)	SD-3 (146)	WY-3 (49)
IL-21 (45)	NJ-15 (200)	VA-13 (311/240)	TX-34 (143)	AR-6 (46)
CT-7 (52)	IA-7 (207)	ND-3 (314/227)	GA-15 (109)	TN-11 (40)
NY-31 (83)	WI-10 (217)	IN-11 (325/224)	MS-6 (94)	KY-8 (29)
CA-55 (138)	NM-5 (222)	MT-3 (328/213)	WV-5 (88)	AL-9 (21)
ME-4 (142)	MI-17 (239/316)	MO-11 (339/210)	AZ-10 (83)	UT-5 (12)
MA-12 (154)	CO-9 (248/299)	AK-3 (342/199)	KS-6 (73)	OK-7 (7)
*Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum. **The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, McCain won all the states up to and including Colorado (all Obama's toss up states, but Michigan), he would have 299 electoral votes. Both candidates numbers are only totaled through their rival's toss up states. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and McCain's is on the right in italics. ***Pennsylvania is the state where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That state is referred to as the victory line.

Alaska jumps both Florida and North Carolina on the ECS in the process of becoming a toss up, but with so many new polls being released there were a few shake ups, though, nothing major. Nevada is so close to being a tie now that it jumped Ohio, becoming the least blue state. Those two, along with Virginia are the most closely contested states at this point according to our weighted averages. And even with three polls, Virginia held steady; now firmly within the area that would put the state on the Watch List. Outside of that Pennsylvania is the only other state of note. The Keystone state nearly ceded its position as the Victory Line to New Hampshire. The two are separated by only two one-hundredths of a point. However, I should add one caveat since Pennsylvania is part of the discussion. Franklin and Marshall reported both their likely voter numbers and registered voter numbers in their Pennsylvania poll. Most are reporting that poll as a 5 point Obama advantage, but FiveThirtyEight has decided to use the registered voter numbers and is reporting the 8 point margin among that sample group. Here's the thing: I don't particularly want to wade into this debate here, but I will be open about how each of those results affects the average. With the likely voters 5 point margin, Pennsylvania is not as close to New Hampshire's average (two tenths of a point instead of two one-hundredths), but the 8 point, registered voter margin pushes the commonwealth's average right up against the Granite state's.

The Watch List*
State	Switch
Alaska	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Florida	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Georgia	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Minnesota	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Mississippi	from Strong McCain	to McCain lean
Nevada	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
New Mexico	from Obama lean	to Toss Up Obama
North Carolina	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Ohio	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
Virginia	from Toss Up McCain	to Toss Up Obama
Washington	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Wisconsin	from Obama lean	to Toss Up Obama
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Pennsylvania, though, is comfortably within the range of toss up states, but it is trending away from the Partisan line and thus not close enough to be included on the Watch List. The states most likely shift to categories (or across partisan distinctions) have added two states since Sunday. Alaska's new polls put the state on the Watch, but only barely so. Actually, Alaska's presence on the list depends on whether you use the 3 point margin in the Moore poll or the 2.4 point margin (mentioned above) that Nate Silver has reported. The 2.4 point margin would lower the average enough to pull Alaska off the list entirely. As it is, with the three point margin, the Last Frontier is right on the line between categories. Wisconsin slips on to the Watch as well. That five point Obama advantage in the latest Strategic Vision poll out of the Badger state continues a pattern of tighter, yet comfortably Obama, polls. Wisconsin has hovered around the line between lean and toss up for most of this cycle, so this isn't a shock. The state is getting tighter though.

At some point I'd like to address how wide the gaps are between some of these categories, but that point isn't today. Since I've brought in the Wednesday polls to this update, I may have created less work for myself on the weekend update. If that proves to be true I'll make some statements about those spreads then. It would certainly help our understanding of both the Electoral College Spectrum and the Watch List.


Recent Posts:
2008 vs. 2004, Part II: What Happened in the Final 100 Days in 2004 and What That May Mean for the Rest of This Campaign

2008 vs. 2004, Part I: What Things Would Have Looked Like 4 Years Ago This Time

The Electoral College Spectrum

2008 vs. 2004, Part II: What Happened in the Final 100 Days in 2004 and What That May Mean for the Rest of This Campaign

Now that we've seen that John Kerry's state-level poll leads over Bush in 2004 were similar in the aggregate to the electoral college vote distribution we see currently in the 2008 race, we can focus more on what appears to have happened over the final 100 or so days of the race four years ago. By extension, then, we may be able to make some educated guesses as to what we may have in store between now an November. Here again is the map that shows how the electoral college would have looked in mid-August if FHQ's weighted average methodology were used on the polling from 2004.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

Based on Florida (or at least on Kerry's edge in the average there in August), Kerry held an advantage over the incumbent president in the August electoral college projection. Florida, though, wasn't the only mover between August and November. It was however, among a group of states that shifted their electoral votes from one side of the partisan line to the other -- Iowa and New Mexico were the other two. Below are the final results from the 2004 election. Each state was color coded based on the final vote percentage margin four years ago. California, for example, was firmly within Kerry's column throughout 2004, but the final percentage margin (9 points) put the Golden state in a position to be deemed a Kerry lean state. While Florida, Iowa and New Mexico were the only three states to have shifted sides, there were twelve overall movers when comparing the August projection to the final results.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

Let's isolate those twelve states just to get a visual on where exactly the movement occurred. Not only do Florida, Iowa and New Mexico turn red, but several states became more intensely red and all twelve moved toward Bush including the two blue states on the map, California and Minnesota. The momentum seems to have been squarely on the incumbent president's side coming down the stretch. Bush made his biggest gains -- moving across two categories -- in Florida and New Mexico and seems to have outperformed state-level polling average through August most consistently in the peripheral South and in border states.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

That momentum translated into a shift of 39 electoral votes over the final three months of the 2004 campaign and into an electoral college victory for Bush. So what does any of this have to do with the current race for the White House? It should serve as a cautionary tale for all you President Kerry enthusiasts and Obama supporters. Much can change and likely will over the course of the next two plus months, and though, in 2004 that meant a shift toward the incumbent, in 2008 it may mean something different. One pattern that has emerged in this current race is that things often return to normal after a "shock" to the system. Obama wins the Democratic nomination and gets a bounce that trailed off in some states. McCain punches back while Obama is abroad and upon his return and draws closer to the Illinois senator. But even that has given way to a regression toward the mean. You see different pictures of this depending on where you look. Real Clear Politics shows Obama rising ever so slightly while McCain dips since last week. Over at Pollster the picture is a bit different with both candidates trending upward, but McCain is doing so at a quicker rate.

Granted that focuses on the national picture and Alan Abramowitz has already covered that. One thing that we can note of 2004 is that half of those movers from August on were toss up states. We can then feel comfortable that that is where most of the action will be from now on. That's 13 states as of FHQ's most recent accounting of the electoral college. [I'll have an update up tonight. Yeah, I know -- late.] Of the big hitters, Pennsylvania is trending toward Obama, Virginia and Ohio are holding steady but very close, Michigan and Colorado are closing a bit, and Florida, after moving hard toward Obama has held steady like North Carolina at a distance just outside of Obama's reach. One thing that should be noted is that both Indiana and Nevada have not been polled very recently and are certainly in need of updating. With that said, one thing that struck me in going over the data from 2004 was how big the uptick in polling was once September started. We have been lucky to have had as much information during this cycle as we've had, but it should really start to pick up after the GOP convention during the first week in September.

I should also put in a request to all FHQ readers. I have access to an incomplete set of the polling from 2000 and would like very much to do a similar sort of analysis with that data. If anyone knows where that data can be found just let me know in the comments section below. Thanks.


Recent Posts:
2008 vs. 2004, Part I: What Things Would Have Looked Like 4 Years Ago This Time

The Electoral College Spectrum

The Electoral College Map (8/10/08)

2008 vs. 2004, Part I: What Things Would Have Looked Like 4 Years Ago This Time

Just last week, Alan Abramowitz posted on Sabato's Crystal Ball an examination of how the 2004 presidential race looked in early August. I've been sitting on the state polling data from 2004 for most of the summer, but have yet incorporate it in this forum. I don't particularly like to jump on a bandwagon, but if I've got to follow someone, Abramowitz is a good person to follow up on. His focus was primarily on polling from the national perspective, so an investigation from the state level dovetails nicely with that and augments our understanding of the overlapping dynamics in both races as well as their differences.

In this first part, I want to treat 2004 as if it was the election FHQ was currently examining twice every week. To put it slightly differently, this post applies both the format and methodology of the electoral college projection posts to the state level polling of 2004. Given polling conducted prior to August 12, 2004, what did things look like on August 13 four years ago? Which states were in play? Who held an advantage in the electoral college?

[Click Map to Enlarge]

In the aggregate at least, the Bush-Kerry race looks an awful lot like McCain-Obama does now. Four years ago, Kerry would have held a 44 electoral vote lead over George W. Bush. Over the course of the summer, Barack Obama has had a 298-240 electoral vote edge over John McCain. Notably, Florida and Ohio have switched places in the interim: Florida turning pink and Ohio going light blue. Like Ohio since 2004, Colorado and Nevada have gone blue as well. Other than those four states -- all of which remain toss up states in 2008 -- everything is exactly as it was four years ago.

So should John McCain be feeling pretty good about his position in the 2008 race?

Well, yes and no. It is true that the numbers look eerily similar [Democrats are getting that nervous feeling again.] to the ones in 2004. However, there's more to it than just reds and blues on a map. If we shift our focus to the Electoral College Spectrum, we can get a better idea of exactly how intensely red or blue those states were (ranked from most Democratic to most Republican). This is where the two races look totally different. Bush had at least a 5 point lead (lean or strong states) over Kerry in 22 states with 187 electoral votes. McCain on the other hand isn't as strong overall with strong and lean states (19 of them) totalling 157 electoral votes. In a tight race 30 electoral votes is a big difference. On the flip side, John Kerry's strong and lean state electoral vote tally summed to 198, whereas Obama's total of similar states adds up to 222. From 2004 to 2008, then, the intensity has shifted from the right to the left. But primary season really already told us that. Higher turnout for and a higher number of new registrants participating in the 2008 Democratic primaries are fairly good indicators of that.

The Electoral College Spectrum*
MA-12 (15)**	ME-4 (168)	WI-10 (264/284)	CO-9 (166)	AL-9 (79)
RI-4 (19)	HI-4 (172)	FL-27*** (291/274)	NC-15 (157)	TX-34 (70)
NY-31 (50)	WA-11 (183)	OH-20 (311/247)	SC-8 (142)	OK-7 (36)
CT-7 (57)	MN-10 (193)	NV-5 (316/227)	GA-15 (134)	AK-3 (29)
VT-3 (60)	NM-5 (198)	WV-5 (321/222)	KY-8 (119)	ND-3 (26)
IL-21 (81)	MI-17 (215/340)	MO-11 (332/217)	LA-9 (111)	NE-5 (23)
CA-55 (136)	NH-4 (219/323)	AR-6 (338/206)	SD-3 (102)	ID-4 (18)
MD-10 (146)	OR-7 (226/319)	VA-13 (351/200)	IN-11 (99)	MS-6 (14)
NJ-15 (161)	PA-21 (247/312)	TN-11 (187)	KS-6 (88)	WY-3 (8)
DE-3 (164)	IA-7 (254/291)	AZ-10 (176)	MT-3 (82)	UT-5 (5)
*Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum. **The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Bush won all the states up to and including New Hampshire (all Kerry's toss up states, but Michigan), he would have 323 electoral votes. Both candidates numbers are only totaled through their rival's toss up states. In those cases, Kerry's number is on the left and Bush's is on the right in italics. ***Florida is the state where Kerry crosses (or Bush would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That state is referred to as the victory line.

As always, these presidential races come down to what happens in those states competitive enough to be considered swing states. In mid-August of 2004, John Kerry needed every last one of those states in shades of blue and Florida to even hypothetically cross over 270 electoral votes. 2008 and 2004 differ on the spectrum in the fact that in 2008, Barack Obama's toss up states push the partisan line beyond the victory line. The Illinois senator has two states in Nevada and Ohio that he could cede to McCain and still top 270 electoral votes. Kerry's lead in 2004 was much more tenuous. The junior senator from Massachusetts didn't have a similar cushion. In fact, four years ago, the partisan line and the victory line would have converged on Florida. All Bush had to do then was to swing the Sunshine state a little less than a percentage point and the election would have been his. As it turned out, he just had to show up in the state during a hurricane season that ravaged the Florida coast to accomplish that. Sure, both Ohio and Nevada were close enough to have been put on the mid-August Watch List in 2004. And Bush certainly had to work to keep the Buckeye state from turning blue.

The Watch List*
State	Switch
Arizona	from Bush lean	to Toss Up Bush
Florida	from Toss Up Kerry	to Toss Up Bush
Michigan	from Toss Up Kerry	to Kerry lean
Minnesota	from Kerry lean	to Toss Up Kerry
Nevada	from Toss Up Bush	to Toss Up Kerry
New Hampshire	from Toss Up Kerry	to Kerry lean
New Mexico	from Kerry lean	to Toss Up Kerry
Ohio	from Toss Up Bush	to Toss Up Kerry
South Carolina	from Strong Bush	to Bush lean
Tennessee	from Bush lean	to Toss Up Bush
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

As you look at the Watch List, you'll note that seven of the ten states were on lines that would have put them close to switching in Kerry's direction. Part II will show that those shift didn't come to fruition for Kerry and that something entirely different happened between August and November 2004.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Spectrum

The Electoral College Map (8/10/08)

On VP Announcement Timing and Graphic Naming -- Some Housekeeping

The Electoral College Spectrum

The graphic that has come to be referred to as the Electoral College Spectrum has been a work in progress since FHQ added it to the bi-weekly electoral college posts a couple of weeks ago. The names of the various parts of the table and other suggestions have been incorporated to give us what we now have below. What started out as a simple graphic has since become more intricate, but (I hope) without detracting from its aesthetic value.

The Electoral College Spectrum
HI-4 (7)*	WA-11 (165)	NH-4 (252/290)	FL-27 (381/184)	KS-6 (64)
VT-3 (10)	MN-10 (175)	PA-21** (273/286)	AK-3 (157)	ID-4 (58)
RI-4 (14)	DE-3 (178)	NV-5 (278/265)	SC-8 (154)	NE-5 (54)
MD-10 (24)	NJ-15 (193)	OH-20 (298/260)	SD-3 (146)	WY-3 (49)
IL-21 (45)	OR-7 (200)	VA-13 (311/240)	TX-34 (143)	AR-6 (46)
CT-7 (52)	IA-7 (207)	ND-3 (314/227)	GA-15 (109)	TN-11 (40)
NY-31 (83)	WI-10 (217)	IN-11 (325/224)	MS-6 (94)	KY-8 (29)
CA-55 (138)	NM-5 (222)	MT-3 (328/213)	WV-5 (88)	AL-9 (21)
ME-4 (142)	MI-17 (239/316)	MO-11 (339/210)	AZ-10 (83)	UT-5 (12)
MA-12 (154)	CO-9 (248/299)	NC-15 (354/199)	LA-9 (73)	OK-7 (7)
*The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, McCain won all the states up to and including Colorado (all Obama's toss up states, but Michigan), he would have 299 electoral votes. Both candidates numbers are only totaled through their rival's toss up states. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and McCain's is on the right in italics. **Pennsylvania is the state where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That state is referred to as the victory line.

So what do all these numbers mean?

Well, let's treat this post as a "How to" on reading the Electoral College Spectrum.

1) Each state is ranked from the most Democratic (upper left corner) to the most Republican (bottom right corner) based on FHQ's weighted average of the polls in each state. The background color for each state corresponds to the color you'll see the map two times each week. Though DC is not shown, it is assumed to be ranked above Hawaii as the most Democratic "state." On the other end of the spectrum, Oklahoma is the most Republican state.

2) The Partisan Line: The point at which states with averages favoring Obama transition to states more favorable to McCain is referred to as the Partisan Line. In other words, this is the line between the least Democratic (light blue) state and the least Republican (pink) state according to our averages.

3) The Victory Line: The state where each of the candidates passes over or would pass over the 270 electoral vote threshold is called the Victory Line. At the moment Pennsylvania represents the victory line. If the states electoral votes are tallied sequentially based on their weighted averages, Obama would cross that barrier by adding Pennsylvania's 21 electoral votes to the 252 electoral votes the states ranked from DC to New Hampshire sum to. Likewise, if McCain won all the states in shades of red, he would net 240 electoral votes. If you continued to add states -- Obama states -- to his total, the Arizona senator would need to pick off Ohio, Nevada and Pennsylvania (in order based on their ranking) to crack 270 electoral votes.

It is assumed that the states fall in line behind their respective candidates sequentially based on their averages. However, FHQ is not blind to the idea that other combinations of states could help each of the candidates reach 270 electoral votes. That explains the presence of the other numbers.

4) The number to the right of each state's postal abbreviation is that state's number of electoral votes.

5) The numbers in the parentheses below each state and its number of electoral votes is the tally of electoral votes for each candidate through that state. If Obama won just the states in dark blue -- the Illinois senator's strong states -- he would have 175 electoral votes to his credit. If McCain won both his strong (dark red) and lean (red) states he would net 157 electoral votes. You'll also notice an extra number in each of the toss up state categories. The number on the left is the number of electoral votes Obama would have if he won all the states up to and including that state. The number on the right -- in bold and italicized -- is McCain's total of electoral votes including that state.

Together these numbers help us to visualize other potential combinations of states that would be necessary to get to 270 electoral votes. As was discussed in the comments to yesterday's electoral college projection, McCain could cede Nevada to Obama and win by pulling Ohio and Pennsylvania (41 electoral votes) or Ohio and Michigan (37 EVs) to his side. He could also pull even with Obama in the electoral college by swinging Ohio and Colorado (29 EVs) or Ohio, Nevada and New Hampshire (29 EVs).

The Electoral College Spectrum, then, gives us a glimpse into not only the ordering of the states but also an idea of which states are most likely to be swung from one side to the other, or more to the point, which states should be targetted by each of the campaigns.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (8/10/08)

On VP Announcement Timing and Graphic Naming -- Some Housekeeping

What Would Happen If...

The Electoral College Map (8/10/08)

After this past week's look into the hypothetical, let's return to the non-truncated version of state trial-heat polls data and glance at the electoral college outlook. Despite eleven new polls out in 9 states, little changed in FHQ's projections of how the electoral college would breakdown.

New Polls (Aug. 6-9)
State	Poll	Margin (With Leaners/ Without Leaners)
Alabama	Capital Survey Research Center	+13
Massachusetts	Rasmussen	+16/+15
Michigan	Rasmussen	+4/+7
Missouri	Rasmussen	+6/+7
New Jersey	Rasmussen	+10/+8
New York	Quinnipiac	+21
New York	Rasmussen	+19/+20
Oregon	Survey USA	+3
Washington	Rasmussen	+12/+12
Wisconsin	Rasmussen	+7/+4
Wisconsin	Wisconsin Policy Research Institute	+6

It is difficult to say definitively whether this set of polling is more favorable to McCain or Obama, but what we can discern is that, on the whole, they maintain the status quo in FHQ's weighted averages. If, for the sake of parsimony, we focus on this data and count the Rasmussen polls "with leaners," none of these state polls break more than three points from our average with the exceptions of Alabama and Oregon. It is odd though that both polls echo the previous polls in those states by the same firms. Capital Survey Research Center's late June poll in Alabama showed the same 13 point McCain advantage that it does now. Likewise, the Oregon poll from Survey USA has the exact same 3 point Obama edge that the firm's mid-June poll in the Beaver state had. In both cases the polls show significantly smaller margins than the combination of other polls show. Other than the Zogby poll in June (11 point McCain lead) and the June poll from Rasmussen, no Alabama poll has had a margin less than 18 points since February. In Oregon, no poll other than Survey USA has shown the state to be any closer than eight points since late March. These two polls then are out of the ordinary compared to most of the other polls from both states while at the same time being consistent with past polls conducted within the last two months in these states by the same firms.

Of the remaining states where polling data has been released since Wednesday, Michigan and Missouri are also of note given that the pair of states is within the toss up category. In Missouri, the polling results have been erratic since mid-May, but still comes out closer to McCain than Obama currently. Of the ten polls since that point, six have favored McCain and the other four have given the edge to Obama. May is also the month to note in Michigan polling as well. The three polls released in the Wolverine state in May all showed McCain ahead by small margins. Once the calendar turned to June (and Obama claimed the Democratic nomination), the polling margins moved in Obama's direction. The Illinois senator's bounce there peaked in late June and early July before a series of polls showed a tighter race there (yet one that still favors Obama). Incidentally, Michigan has been blue since just after Obama wrapped up the nomination. Based mostly on those May polls showing McCain ahead, Michigan had moved into and stayed in the red (during the span of FHQ electoral college projections from April 30 through June 11). Long story short, Michigan is a toss up state that favors Obama while Missouri is a toss up state that favors McCain.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

With no changes to the map, the underlying 298-240 electoral college tally remains static. Obama maintains that 58 electoral vote advantage based in large part on the number of electoral votes in states in which he holds a solid advantage over McCain. As I mentioned in the hypothetical look at what our averages would be by including just polls conducted since June, this is not unlike the delegate advantage that Obama held over Clinton following his post-Super Tuesday sweep of contests during February. That provided him with the cushion necessary to effectively win the nomination. Are we looking at a similar scenario here? We cannot definitively say, but that 81 electoral vote advantage in "strong" states is the difference at the moment. How the toss up states break will have a great deal to say about who ultimately wins this election, but if those states are divided approximately evenly between both McCain and Obama, then it looks as if Obama will likly have enough electoral votes to claim victory.

The Electoral College Spectrum
HI-4	WA-11	NH-4	FL-27	KS-6
VT-3	MN-10	PA-21*	AK-3	ID-4
RI-4	DE-3	NV-5	SC-8	NE-5
MD-10	NJ-15	OH-20	SD-3	WY-3
IL-21	OR-7	VA-13	TX-34	AR-6
CT-7	IA-7	ND-3	GA-15	TN-11
NY-31	WI-10	IN-11	MS-6	KY-8
CA-55	NM-5	MT-3	WV-5	AL-9
ME-4	MI-17	MO-11	AZ-10	UT-5
MA-12	CO-9	NC-15	LA-9	OK-7
* Pennsylvania is the state where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That state is referred to as the victory line.

Having said that, though, our Electoral College Spectrum (states ranked from most pro-Obama to most pro-McCain) still shows a two state spread between the partisan line and the victory line (where the candidates pass or would pass the 270 electoral vote threshold) with the latter just within the blue states that signify Obama advantages. McCain, given the current FHQ averages, has the least amount of work to do in Ohio and Nevada to swing those states in his direction. Given the current trends, Colorado and/or Michigan are likely to supplant Pennsylvania as the victory line state. Since June, only Rasmussen has shown anything less than a 7 point margin in the Keystone state, while Colorado and Michigan have had, on average, tighter margins during the same period. Regardless of the victory line, McCain's best bets for switches are the six toss up states in light blue.

The Watch List*
State	Switch
Florida	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Georgia	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Minnesota	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Mississippi	from Strong McCain	to McCain lean
Nevada	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
New Mexico	from Obama lean	to Toss Up Obama
North Carolina	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Ohio	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
Virginia	from Toss Up McCain	to Toss Up Obama
Washington	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Turning our attention the the Watch List (states most likely to switch categories), Nevada and Ohio remain the only two states among those six that are at all close to moving into the red. And while McCain can play offense in those two states, the Arizona senator likely has to play defense in Virginia to prevent Obama from picking off the Old Dominion. Of the remaining states on the list, only Florida and New Mexico are bordering on coming into play.

One thing to keep an eye on as we head into the new week is how the Olympics will affect the frequency of polling. Will the polling firms opt to scale back their polling operations while at least some of America's (a majority?) attention is shifted to the games in Beijing? We've had bursts of polling recently, but there still appears to be a general underlying trend of about 20 polls every week. If there is a drop below that line over the course of the next two weeks, we'll likely have an easy answer to this question. If there isn't a drop, good for us. More polls.


Recent Posts:
On VP Announcement Timing and Graphic Naming -- Some Housekeeping

What Would Happen If...

The Electoral College Map (8/6/08)

On VP Announcement Timing and Graphic Naming -- Some Housekeeping

There are a couple of unresolved issues that I've been meaning to address but haven't found the time to do so this week.

1) Graphic Naming
I promised that I'd put the names for the new electoral college graphic up for a vote, but in true democratic fashion have tentative adopted a name -- the victory line -- for the state where 270 electoral votes are achieved. This seems strange without exhibit A, so here it is:

The Electoral College State Rankings
HI-4	MA-12	NH-4	FL-27	KS-6
VT-3	MN-10	PA-21*	AK-3	ID-4
RI-4	DE-3	NV-5	SC-8	NE-5
MD-10	OR-7	OH-20	SD-3	WY-3
IL-21	NJ-15	VA-13	TX-34	AR-6
CT-7	IA-7	ND-3	GA-15	TN-11
NY-31	WI-10	IN-11	MS-6	KY-8
CA-55	NM-5	MT-3	WV-5	AL-9
ME-4	MI-17	MO-11	AZ-10	UT-5
WA-11	CO-9	NC-15	LA-9	OK-7
* Pennsylvania is the state where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election.

There are a couple of things at stake here: the name of the graphic in its totality and the name of the state in yellow. The latter has been discussed a bit more than the former, but here are the choices so far for each:

The Graphic Choices:
a) Electoral College State Rankings
b) Electoral College Spectrum
c) ??????

The Yellow State:
a) The Cutting Edge
b) The Breaking Point (Yeah, I'll include this because I've been using it out of habit lately.)
c) The Finish Line
d) Checkers
e) The Victory Line
f) ??????

The comments section is open for voting and further suggestions. I think I'll cut this off at 5p this afternoon and make a decision then. If there are additional names suggested that catch my fancy, I'll put them in above in an update.

2) VP Announcement Timing
Last week's post and subsequent comments discussion had readers speculating on when Obama would announce his vice presidential selection. Here's where that ended up:

Allen: Aug. 14-19
Josh: Aug. 4-5
Rob: Aug. 5-7
Scott: Aug. 7

Mean Date: Aug. 8-9
Median Date: Aug. 6-7

Allen pretty much nailed this one, saying that Obama would vacation first and then name his selection. I'm still moderately surprised that the Obama campaign didn't move prior to the Olympics (He's still got a few hours before the opening ceremonies are televised on tape delay here though. Online video coverage doesn't kick off until 6:30p EST and then it is mostly just badminton, shooting and handball. I'm not saying Obama's going to announce within that window. I'm just saying.). Had I (and Scott and Rob) bought into the momentum of Obama's VP red herrings the last two weeks? No, not the increased chatter among the chattering class, but that it had combined with fairly specific speculation --centered on one person each time -- and a timing constraint represented by the games in Beijing. Last week it was Tim Kaine. This week it was Evan Bayh.

I'm still less concerned with who the choices are on either side than I am with how these things are being timed. So, now that we know Obama's choice likely won't come this week, when does everyone think these choices will be made...now? Allen has won phase one and is owed several rounds of drinks because of it. There are now 19 days between today and when the vice presidential selection speaks at the Democratic convention on August 27. When will Obama move on this and why is that time optimal? Feel free to weigh in in the comments section.


Recent Posts:
What Would Happen If...

The Electoral College Map (8/6/08)

Did Obama or McCain Win July?

What Would Happen If...

...FHQ dropped some of the older state polls that may not be as reflective of the current (or if not current, recent) situation in the presidential race?

I've been asked several times by folks commenting here at FHQ and colleagues here at UGA if I had any plans to phase out any of the Super Tuesday period polls. My standard answer has been no, but once we hit the conventions and get past Labor Day, the traditional general election campaign will get underway and the dynamics of the race will likely change as well. I would expect increased polling and greater total attention from the public/electorate. Whether the latter means "better" responses from survey respondents is up for debate, but in any event we will likely have more representative polling emerging in September, vis a vis the vote in November, than we would with the polls that came out in February or March. Am I permanently dropping those polls from these analyses? No, this is simply a speculative look at how the landscape would appear in their absence.

Fine, what are you dropping then? This, as it turns out, was not an easy decision, though, it may look that way once I've explained. Some electoral college projections use just the most recent poll or the most recent several polls (two or three). In the case of FiveThirtyEight.com, they have used a decay function (a half life equation) to gradually phase out older polls. This is perhaps a good middle ground approach, but I don't want to be accused of aping what is being done over there. Despite that, I looked into where that cut off was on average. In most states, the oldest poll used ranges from mid-April to early May. I considered doing a similar cut off, but opted instead to cut things off at the beginning of the general election campaign, which I placed at the beginning of June. Yeah, Clinton wasn't officially out until June 3-7, but the Rules and Bylaws Committee's decision all but sealed her fate on the final day of May with their Florida/Michigan ruling.

The point here is to accomplish a couple of things. For starters, removing past and potentially inaccurate (at least outdated) polling may prove beneficial. Secondly, this removes the Clinton factor from the equation by focusing on polls conducted just during the general election race. The main criticism I'll get for this is that it is going to skew things in the favor of Obama because the polling cut off point sets the beginning at a point that encompasses his "bounce" during June.

Well, we've set the rules, so how does the map look? I should note now that this is not an official FHQ update of its electoral college analysis (Actually, the color scheme of the map is different so as to serve as a preventative measure on that front. Democratic blues will now be shades of purple and Republican reds will be altered to shades of orange.). This is merely speculative, but at the same time is something of a trial balloon. As I said, the dynamics of the race will change following the conventions, and I plan on officially revisiting our methodology at that time to see if there need to be any changes made. The method used here may be that change, if there is one, or it may not. With that said, to the map!

[Click Map to Enlarge]

If we compare this map to the most recent electoral college map I posted just yesterday, you'll see that there are twelve states that change categories (ie: from McCain lean to strong McCain) and a third of those change sides from Republican to Democratic or vice versa. The result is that Obama has a net gain of 22 electoral votes. Indiana, Montana and Virginia (27 electoral votes) move into Obama's column while Nevada (5 electoral votes) switches to favoring McCain. When each candidate's prospective electoral votes are broken down into categories, the distribution isn't all that different from before. The strong Obama category still holds -- by a large margin -- the most electoral votes, but lean (74D - 81R) and toss up (56D - 64R) electoral vote tallies are largely the same across the two parties.

Looking at the individual states, we see that Michigan, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania move out of the toss up distinction and become more solid for Obama. The movement of those 42 electoral votes is as important as the movement of those formerly Republican toss ups to the Democratic side. Aside from the states that switch from one partisan side to the other, these three states moving further into Obama's side are among the most important shifts. This is a good point to look at this in terms of the rankings we started doing here a few electoral college posts ago. The first thing to note is that Ohio is the new (and this is the last time this will be in quotation marks) "victory line." The Buckeye state is state where each candidate passes (or would pass) the 270 electoral vote threshold to claim victory in the election. The partisan line -- where the states shift from being Democratic to being Republican -- has now, with just the state polls from June on, been pushed further away from the victory line. That is indicative of the gains Obama makes when the cut off point for the polls is shifted. One additional thing to note about the victory line is that Ohio is the first toss up state for Obama. In other words, Obama is nearly to 270 electoral votes with just his lean and strong states. He needs just one of those toss up states to surpass that barrier (with the exception of Montana which would put him just three votes short). Colorado, Indiana or Virginia could be substituted for Ohio if the Buckeye state and the other three toss ups slipped into McCain territory.

The Electoral College State Rankings
HI-4	WA-11	NH-4	ND-3	TN-11
VT-3	MN-10	OH-20*	SD-3	KY-8
RI-4	NJ-15	CO-9	AK-3	WY-3
MD-10	WI-10	VA-13	GA-15	LA-9
NY-31	DE-3	MT-3	TX-34	AL-9
MA-12	OR-7	IN-11	WV-5	ID-4
CT-7	PA-21	NV-5	SC-8	KS-6
CA-55	NM-5	FL-27	AR-6	NE-5
ME-4	IA-7	MO-11	AZ-10	OK-7
IL-21	MI-17	NC-15	MS-6	UT-5
*Ohio is the state where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election.

As I've said, this is, for the time being, simply a glimpse into what things would look like if I decided to drop some of these "older" polls. The shift has been overwhelmingly toward Obama, but as we head into August this alternate version of reality will be something to keep tabs on. Does a shift toward McCain or away from Obama move the needle any more in this than it would in the normal version? The polling between now and the Democratic convention will help us to answer that question not to mention give us an idea of whether a change in methodology is even prudent. I will be keeping up with this now that I have the infrastructure in place, so that it will be an easier transition should we opt to go in that direction following the conventions (and their bounces).


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (8/6/08)

Did Obama or McCain Win July?

About Those Rules: What Obama's New Florida/Michigan Stance Means for 2012 and Beyond