Sunday, October 14, 2012

The Electoral College Map (10/14/12)

In the four Sunday poll releases from four states there was not a whole lot at which to look. Of the four states, only one -- Florida -- is even remotely competitive. The other three are all in the Strong category in one direction or another and one -- Idaho -- is like Hawaii and Rhode Island were a week ago, but in the opposite direction: an afterthought in the presidential race.

But hey, it is always nice to have data to back that up.

New State Polls (10/14/12)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Obama
Romney
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Florida
10/12-10/14
+/- 3.4%
791 registered voters
48
49
3
+1
+0.74
Georgia
10/8-10/11
+/- 5.0%
--- likely voters
43
51
5
+8
+10.01
Idaho
10/8-10/10
+/- 4.0%
625 likely voters
27
63
--
+36
+34.50
New Mexico
10/9-10/10
+/- 3.8%
658 likely voters
49
39
5
+10
+10.24

Polling Quick Hits:
Florida:
Just yesterday FHQ was commenting on the preponderance of +1 margins in Ohio polling. Before the first presidential debate that had been the case in Florida as well. Since that time, however, the margins have drifted in varying degrees toward Romney. The raw average of the eight post-debate polls in Florida is Romney +1.875 with the median being Romney +2.5. The PPP survey above falls below both, post-debate, and while the data point may feel like something from the period before the October 3 debate, the poll-over-poll shift from the last PPP survey was +3 toward the former Massachusetts governor. And that is pretty consistent with the debate shift overall.

Georgia:
Up north of Florida in the Peach state, things are pretty settled. The Romney +8 from the AJC is certainly more in line with the state of the race for Georgia's 16 electoral votes than the last poll from Insider Advantage (Romney +21). This one nailed Romney's share of support; at least as compared to the FHQ weighted average for the governor. But it was slightly bullish on Obama's share of support relative to the FHQ measure. A strong red state is a strong red state, though.

Idaho:
Speaking of strong red states, the Gem state looks like it is safely in the Romney column. The only linger question may be whether Obama can best the 28% Al Gore garnered in Idaho in 2000. Obama is threatening.

New Mexico:
New Mexico in 2008 and 2012 just was not/has not been the toss up state it was in 2000 and 2004. It is perhaps strange to link the two, but New Mexico is to Mitt Romney what Georgia is to Barack Obama. Both are strong states for their respective candidates and really haven't shown any indication in the 2012 polls of the contrary. On a slightly different note, when we compare this poll from the Albuquerque Journal to the September poll the paper sponsored, Obama actually gained five points relative to Romney. Most of that change was between the undecideds and Obama. Former New Mexico governor, Gary Johnson, like Romney stayed pretty stable, only losing a point since the last poll.


Typically one toss up state poll and three strong state polls together are not a recipe for change, and that is the case with the polls released today. The map remained unaltered as did the Electoral College Spectrum. Somewhat surprisingly for sporadically surveyed strong states, there was no shuffling on the Spectrum. Georgia and New Mexico held their lines and Idaho didn't really have anywhere to go. Even a +36 couldn't push the average past Wyoming or Utah. Florida, meanwhile, has dug into its spot on the Obama side of North Carolina in the order, but it is tracking toward the Romney side of the partisan line.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
VT-3
(6)2
WA-12
(158)
NV-6
(257)
MT-3
(159)
MS-6
(58)
HI-4
(10)
NJ-14
(172)
OH-183
(275/281)
IN-11
(156)
KY-8
(52)
RI-4
(14)
CT-7
(179)
IA-6
(281/263)
GA-16
(145)
AL-9
(44)
NY-29
(43)
NM-5
(184)
VA-13
(294/257)
SD-3
(129)
KS-6
(35)
MD-10
(53)
MN-10
(194)
CO-9
(303/244)
SC-9
(126)
AR-6
(29)
MA-11
(64)
OR-7
(201)
FL-29
(332/235)
NE-5
(117)
AK-3
(23)
IL-20
(84)
PA-20
(221)
NC-15
(206)
ND-3
(112)
OK-7
(20)
CA-55
(139)
MI-16
(237)
AZ-11
(191)
TX-38
(109)
ID-4
(13)
DE-3
(142)
WI-10
(247)
MO-10
(180)
WV-5
(71)
WY-3
(9)
ME-4
(146)
NH-4
(251)
TN-11
(170)
LA-8
(66)
UT-6
(6)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.

2 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, Romney won all the states up to and including Ohio (all Obama's toss up states plus Ohio), he would have 281 electoral votes. Romney's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and Romney's is on the right in italics.

3 Ohio is the state where Obama crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line.

The Watch List did not witness too much change either. Georgia inched right up to the line, but did not push on to the list. Statistically, Oregon made the cut even without a new poll. The average there eased just north of the 8% mark and is on the list. The Beaver state is one of those, like, say, Minnesota, where it might be nice to have some post-debate data. Things have likely closed some there as elsewhere. That said, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Ohio are still the half of this list most worth watching. How and if they shift has implications for the ultimate electoral college calculus if not breakdown on election night.

The Watch List1
State
Switch
Florida
from Toss Up Obama
to Toss Up Romney
Indiana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Minnesota
from Lean Obama
to Strong Obama
Montana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Nevada
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
New Hampshire
from Lean Obama
to Toss Up Obama
Ohio
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
Oregon
from Lean Obama
to Strong Obama
1 The Watch list shows those states in the FHQ Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. The List is not a trend analysis. It indicates which states are straddling the line between categories and which states are most likely to shift given the introduction of new polling data. Montana, for example, is close to being a Lean Romney state, but the trajectory of the polling there has been moving the state away from that lean distinction.

Please see:



Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.
Posted by Josh Putnam at 11:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |

Saturday, October 13, 2012

The Electoral College Map (10/13/12)

For a rather pedestrian Saturday just over three weeks out from election day, there were actually a handful of meaningful polls released that refined our outlook in a couple of states. The remainder offered results that were out of step with where the FHQ weighted averages now stand. All told there were four new polls from four states and FHQ added a dated survey from South Dakota as well.

New State Polls (10/13/12)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Obama
Romney
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Arizona
10/4-10/10
+/- 4.4%
523 registered voters
42
40
13
+2
+6.35
Minnesota
10/7-10/8
+/- 4.38%
500 likely voters
47
43
--
+4
+8.63
Ohio
10/12-10/13
+/- 3.3%
880 likely voters
51
46
3
+5
+3.46
South Dakota
8/29-9/6
+/- 4.3%
512 likely voters
38.7
53.9
--
+15.2
+10.73
South Dakota
10/1-10/5
+/- 3.55%
762 likely voters
41.1
51.6
7.2
+10.5
--

Polling Quick Hits:
Arizona:
Why not start with one of those polls that is not consistent with the picture built throughout a year's worth of polling? President Obama has led in exactly one poll in the Grand Canyon state in 2012. That was back in April and also came from Behavior Research -- the last poll the firm conducted there. The count then? Yeah, Obama edge Romney in that one too by the very same 42-40 margin. That is coincidence and that's fine. What isn't is the idea that there are still 13% of Arizonan who have not decided in this race. Outlier. Moving on.

Minnesota:
Changes (October 13)
StateBeforeAfter
MinnesotaLean ObamaStrong Obama
South DakotaLean RomneyStrong Romney
Up in the Land of 10,000 Lakes, NMB Research weighs in with its first publicly available survey of the cycle; one that differs somewhat from the survey PPP that partially overlapped with this poll in the field. NMB finds a tighter race than PPP did, and one with the narrowest margin in any poll there all year. The poll shifts Minnesota over the Strong/Lean line into the Lean Obama category, but only barely. As FHQ has mentioned in the past instance(s) when Minnesota has ventured over into Lean Obama territory, this jibes well (or better) with our broader conception of the state's place in the overall ordering of states. It is a little to the left of neighboring Michigan and Wisconsin, but "looks better" in the same category with those states. The truth is that Minnesota has hovered on the Strong/Lean line since the thresholds were lowered at the beginning of October. This is more a cosmetic change than anything else.

Ohio:
The latest from PPP in Ohio is one of those polls that doesn't "feel right" given the post-debate shift nationally and in the Buckeye state. However, PPP is not alone in showing Obama north of the 50% mark in the state following the October 3 Denver debate. CNN and Marist have also indicated similar response shares for Obama and leads over Mitt Romney. Of the now nine post-debate polls conducted in Ohio after the first presidential debate, a third of them have shown this type of lead for the president while the rest have the race +1 for either candidate. The point is that while +/- 1 is perhaps closer to the reality of the race, there is some evidence to suggest the margin is still slightly more toward the president. Of course, two-thirds of the post-debate data...

South Dakota:
FHQ won't dwell on South Dakota other than to say that the scant level of polling in the Mount Rushmore state had indicated a closer race there than in some of its neighboring states. That has now been remedied with the addition of a couple of Nielson Brothers surveys with Mitt Romney up double digits. That stretches the average out to over 10 points and brings the state in line with Montana, Nebraska and North Dakota; all states bordering South Dakota.


With the changes to Minnesota and South Dakota, the map has a couple of changes but perhaps not where folks would expect; in the underlying electoral vote count. That tally has remained intact since the very first run in this series of posts back in mid-July. Given those changes on the map, there are some attendant shifts on the Electoral College Spectrum below. South Dakota jumps six positions deeper into the Romney side of the ledger. Again, it is now in line with several neighboring states. Arizona, on the strength of the one outlier poll, drew closer and is now the closest of the Lean Romney states. Granted, none of those states is within reach for the president. In fact, the three lean states that are left on Romney's side have all been stationed there with little or no movement for quite a while now. The only other state that might have moved was Minnesota. And while it is shaded differently than it was, the Land of 10,000 Lakes holds the line in between New Mexico and Oregon.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
VT-3
(6)2
WA-12
(158)
NV-6
(257)
MT-3
(159)
MS-6
(58)
HI-4
(10)
NJ-14
(172)
OH-183
(275/281)
IN-11
(156)
KY-8
(52)
RI-4
(14)
CT-7
(179)
IA-6
(281/263)
GA-16
(145)
AL-9
(44)
NY-29
(43)
NM-5
(184)
VA-13
(294/257)
SD-3
(129)
KS-6
(35)
MD-10
(53)
MN-10
(194)
CO-9
(303/244)
SC-9
(126)
AR-6
(29)
MA-11
(64)
OR-7
(201)
FL-29
(332/235)
NE-5
(117)
AK-3
(23)
IL-20
(84)
PA-20
(221)
NC-15
(206)
ND-3
(112)
OK-7
(20)
CA-55
(139)
MI-16
(237)
AZ-11
(191)
TX-38
(109)
ID-4
(13)
DE-3
(142)
WI-10
(247)
MO-10
(180)
WV-5
(71)
WY-3
(9)
ME-4
(146)
NH-4
(251)
TN-11
(170)
LA-8
(66)
UT-6
(6)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.

2 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, Romney won all the states up to and including Ohio (all Obama's toss up states plus Ohio), he would have 281 electoral votes. Romney's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and Romney's is on the right in italics.

3 Ohio is the state where Obama crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line.

While Minnesota did not change slots on the Spectrum, it has shifted on the Watch List. Instead of being on the Strong Obama state with the narrowest margin, Minnesota is now the Lean Obama state with the widest margin. It continues to hover on that line. Further south, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Ohio are all closer states that bear watching as the race approaches the three week mark.

The Watch List1
State
Switch
Florida
from Toss Up Obama
to Toss Up Romney
Indiana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Minnesota
from Lean Obama
to Strong Obama
Montana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Nevada
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
New Hampshire
from Lean Obama
to Toss Up Obama
Ohio
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
1 The Watch list shows those states in the FHQ Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. The List is not a trend analysis. It indicates which states are straddling the line between categories and which states are most likely to shift given the introduction of new polling data. Montana, for example, is close to being a Lean Romney state, but the trajectory of the polling there has been moving the state away from that lean distinction.

Please see:


Posted by Josh Putnam at 11:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , ,
Share |

Friday, October 12, 2012

The Electoral College Map (10/12/12)

The polling releases on the day following the vice presidential candidate showdown in Danville last night were fairly light. Light or not, they continued to show if not movement toward Romney, then a narrowing of the margin between the two candidates. The truth is that it is a combination of the two.

Here are the seven new surveys from six states almost all in the middle -- most competitive -- column on the Electoral College Spectrum below.

New State Polls (10/12/12)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Obama
Romney
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Colorado
10/9-10/10
+/- 4.0%
614 likely voters
45
46
5
+1
+1.76
Florida
10/8-10/11
+/- 4.0%
600 likely voters
46
49
4
+3
+0.78
Florida
10/11
+/- 4.0%
750 likely voters
47
51
2
+4
--
Michigan
10/11
+/- 4.5%
500 likely voters
52
45
1
+7
+5.71
New Hampshire
10/9-10/11
+/- 4.0%
600 likely voters
46
50
3
+4
+4.18
North Carolina
9/29-10/10
+/- 4.0%
605 registered voters
46
45
6
+1
+1.29
Virginia
10/11
+/- 4.0%
750 likely voters
47
49
3
+2
+2.66

Polling Quick Hits:
Colorado:
There have been six polls conducted in Colorado since the Denver debate, and Mitt Romney has led in four of them. In three of those surveys the lead has been only one point. That is the case in this Survey USA poll as well. And that has a lot to do with the type of change witnessed in the Centennial state. The gap is drawing closer, but continual Romney +1s are going to make that change slow in coming about in the FHQ weighted averages.

Florida:
The picture is slightly different in the Sunshine state. FHQ mentioned yesterday that Colorado in some respects looks now an awful lot like Florida did before the debate. There were some blips on the radar, but most of the polls were +1 in one direction or another. Florida has, like most states, slid a bit to the right -- toward Romney -- in the time since that first debate, so that now instead of Obama and Romney trading slight leads from poll to poll, Romney has a pretty consistent one to three/four point lead. If that persists, we'll be talking about when Romney has the lead in the FHQ averages in Florida not if.

Michigan:
The Great Lakes state, too, has seen the polling margins shrink post-debate. But that probably is not in a way that is going to allow Romney to take advantage; at least not in terms of winning Michigan's 16 electoral votes. Michigan seems like a state where Romney can perhaps force the Obama campaign to use some resources -- which is certainly strategically useful -- but will continue to be just out of reach on election day. FHQ could be wrong, but Michigan has been, for the most part, a Lean Obama state all along, but one that hovers close enough to the toss up line to warrant attention.

New Hampshire:
New Hampshire continues to be underpolled for as close as it has been or if not for as close as it has been then considering the company of states it has clustered around in the rank ordering of states here at FHQ. We have just two post-debate polls from the Granite state and they both indicate a close race. Unlike the Rasmussen survey -- which saw a three point Romney lead turn into a tie after the first debate -- the ARG poll shows a decided shift toward the former Massachusetts governor. A 50-45 Obama advantage has now almost completely turned in the opposite direction (50-46, Romney). But that still is not a lot in the way of data in the Granite state. It is some, but not a lot to build confidence in the true measure of the state of play there right now.

North Carolina:
Context matters in the latest offering from High Point in the Tarheel state. The survey was in the field for almost two weeks and at least four of those days were prior to the first debate. North Carolina is close and Obama has held the occasional lead in there, but it has been in Romney's column consistently and the days of Obama advantages in the polls there seem to have slipped away for good now. Then again, perhaps that is wishful thinking considering FHQ has been saying that -- here, in state -- for quite a while now. [Note to self: Follow the data; don't make predictions.]

Virginia:
Virginia, like Colorado and Florida, is one of those red on one side, blue on the other states in the poll table above. There have been six polls released from the commonwealth since the debate, and like Colorado, four of those six have tipped toward Romney. And half of those four have been one point leads for the governor. There is more (and clearer) evidence of a shift in Virginia than in, say, New Hampshire, but the change is slow in the averages given the extent of the margins. Poll-over-poll, this Rasmussen survey shows Obama losing a point since last week and Romney holding steady. That is hardly anything outside of the "it's just statistical noise" argument. But again, this is a state where, if the data persists, it will track closer and closer to parity and/or a slight Romney advantage.


None of the seven survey releases today did much of anything to change the FHQ graphics, but the trajectory of underlying change continues. The race is tightening and the space between states and/or various groups of states that had developed prior to the first debate is disappearing as the FHQ weighted average margins compress.

As the race moves closer to election day, one thing to eye is the extent to which daily polls differ from the FHQ averages. There is, for instance, a lot of red versus blue on several of those lines in the poll table at the top. This comes back to an issue that I have raised in the past: the trade-off between measuring a true change in any given state and (over-)responsiveness to new polling data. It is pretty clear that Mitt Romney has gained quite a bit of ground in Virginia-Florida group of states in the Electoral College Spectrum below. And by gained quite a bit of ground, I mean that in some cases -- on other sites that do similar poll aggregating -- those states have tipped over into Romney's column. Again, FHQ enjoys its conservative posture on this issue; when a change occurs here, it is evidence of a lasting change. But at the same time, I'm sympathetic to the argument that, "Hey, this just isn't that responsive to changes on the ground in this race." It is a fair criticism.

One thing that we did in 2008 -- that I've toyed with doing in this race -- is to increase the weight of the most recent poll (or polls sharing the same dates) as a means of making the averages slightly more responsive. [It should be noted that in the past I have discussed this formula alteration in terms of decreasing the weight on the older polls. No matter how I discuss it, the same thing is being done. A change in older polls' weighting is always relative to the more recent poll(s) and vice versa.] Fine, let's check in on what this more responsive weighting formula would look like. The premise is simple: double the weight of the more/most recent poll(s) relative to the older, archived survey data. How does that affect those three states (Colorado, Florida and Virginia) where there is probably enough evidence to suggest a possible change in which candidate is leading there.

  • Things change only minimally in Colorado. A 1.76 point Obama advantage shrinks by only 0.1 points. 
  • In Florida, Obama would continue to lead, but would have a nearly 0.8 point edge reduced by 0.2. Again, only slightly more responsive.
  • For the Old Dominion, the Obama lead is cut by a margin in the neighborhood of 0.15 points.

That compresses things more, retains the current ordering of those three states, but fails to push any of the three over into the Romney column. I don't know if that's right or not, but I did want to give folks a bit of a glimpse into what the averages would look like in a handful of competitive states right now if the formula was changed. And mind you, this was a formula switch that I wanted to have in place just prior to debate season, but held off on. Let's see where things go through the rest of debate season -- as is -- and then if it is necessary to adopt the slightly more responsive formula following debate season, then that change will be made then.

--
Perhaps you can tell that FHQ felt like it had a bit more space to flesh the above out; more space than usual anyway. That is a function of the complete lack of change these polls introduced today. The averages got tighter, but the map and electoral vote tally remained unchanged as did the Electoral College Spectrum below.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
VT-3
(6)2
WA-12
(158)
NV-6
(257)
AZ-11
(167)
MS-6
(58)
HI-4
(10)
NJ-14
(172)
OH-183
(275/281)
MT-3
(156)
KY-8
(52)
RI-4
(14)
CT-7
(179)
IA-6
(281/263)
IN-11
(153)
AL-9
(44)
NY-29
(43)
NM-5
(184)
VA-13
(294/257)
GA-16
(142)
KS-6
(35)
MD-10
(53)
MN-10
(194)
CO-9
(303/244)
SC-9
(126)
AR-6
(29)
MA-11
(64)
OR-7
(201)
FL-29
(332/235)
NE-5
(117)
AK-3
(23)
IL-20
(84)
PA-20
(221)
NC-15
(206)
ND-3
(112)
OK-7
(20)
CA-55
(139)
MI-16
(237)
SD-3
(191)
TX-38
(109)
ID-4
(13)
DE-3
(142)
WI-10
(247)
MO-10
(188)
WV-5
(71)
WY-3
(9)
ME-4
(146)
NH-4
(251)
TN-11
(178)
LA-8
(66)
UT-6
(6)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.

2 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, Romney won all the states up to and including Ohio (all Obama's toss up states plus Ohio), he would have 281 electoral votes. Romney's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and Romney's is on the right in italics.

3 Ohio is the state where Obama crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line.

And guess what? The same is true on the Watch List. The same seven states from yesterday are here again today and Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Ohio are still the four on there that are most worth eyeing moving forward.

The Watch List1
State
Switch
Florida
from Toss Up Obama
to Toss Up Romney
Indiana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Minnesota
from Strong Obama
to Lean Obama
Montana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Nevada
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
New Hampshire
from Lean Obama
to Toss Up Obama
Ohio
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
1 The Watch list shows those states in the FHQ Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. The List is not a trend analysis. It indicates which states are straddling the line between categories and which states are most likely to shift given the introduction of new polling data. Montana, for example, is close to being a Lean Romney state, but the trajectory of the polling there has been moving the state away from that lean distinction.

Please see:


Posted by Josh Putnam at 11:00 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,
Share |
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)