The Electoral College Map (8/21/16)

Latest Update

New State Polls (8/21/16)
State	Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Clinton	Trump	Undecided	Poll Margin	FHQ Margin
Iowa	YouGov/CBS	8/17-8/19	+/- 4.0%	987 likely voters	40	40	7	+0	+1.82
Ohio	YouGov/CBS	8/17-8/19	+/- 3.9%	997 likely voters	46	40	4	+6	+2.30

Polling Quick Hits:
For the third Sunday running YouGov has another series of battleground state polls. This time the stops are in the midwest in Iowa and Ohio. Both states have been proximate to each other on the Electoral College Spectrum, but have moved in opposite directions during August. While the margin in Ohio has ticked upward (and toward Clinton), Iowa has gotten closer and closer.


Iowa:
FHQ has gotten some flak over the last week or so about Iowa. More explicitly, there has been some pushback on the idea of Iowa being to the Clinton side of Nevada on the Electoral College Spectrum. This was more noteworthy, perhaps, when Nevada was barely on the Trump side of the partisan line  before a recent polling update in the Silver state. Compared to other sites tracking the state of the race to 270 -- particularly those accounting for demography/demographic changes on the state level -- FHQ has consistently had Nevada in redder territory. That is mainly a function of the fact that FHQ only utilizes polling data, and the polls in Nevada have shown a much tighter race.

However, as I argued early last week, the question may be less about the order of Iowa and Nevada and more about how proximate one is to the other on the Spectrum. Yes, during the Obama era, Nevada has been to the Democratic side of Iowa. But in each case, the two states ended up pretty close to each other. And though Iowa was on one side of the partisan line and Nevada the other until very recently, the two have been converging on one another in the post-convention period. That is true on the Spectrum, but is increasingly true in terms of the average margins as well. Nevada is virtually tied and Iowa is also inching closer to that distinction. Having tied polls and nothing more than a two point advantage for either candidate since the conventions will do that. And this new poll from YouGov fits right in.


Ohio:
Meanwhile in the Buckeye state, it is hard to fathom that this poll from YouGov is just the third overall there since the convention. That obviously is not a lot of data on which to go, but all are pointing in the same direction: toward Clinton. The lingering question, then, concerns by just how much is Clinton ahead. A six point lead is not only the largest of the post-convention period for Clinton in Ohio but the largest since a couple of primary season surveys there. There is probably enough recent data to suggest Clinton is ahead in Ohio, but probably not by six points. That is, at least until there is more similar data released.

Neither Iowa nor Ohio budge from their positions (next to each other) on the Spectrum below. Both remain firmly within the Toss Up Clinton category with neither on the Watch List.

NOTE: A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2016 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
HI-42 (7)	NJ-14 (175)	VA-133 (269 | 282)	MO-10 (155)	TN-11 (58)
MD-10 (17)	DE-3 (178)	NH-43 (273 | 269)	AK-3 (145)	LA-8 (47)
RI-4 (21)	WI-10 (188)	FL-29 (302 | 265)	UT-6 (142)	SD-3 (39)
MA-11 (32)	ME-4 (192)	NC-15 (317 | 236)	KS-6 (136)	ND-3 (36)
VT-3 (35)	NM-5 (197)	OH-18 (335 | 221)	TX-38 (130)	ID-4 (33)
CA-55 (90)	MI-16 (213)	IA-6 (341 | 203)	IN-11 (92)	NE-5 (29)
NY-29 (119)	OR-7 (220)	NV-6 (347 | 197)	MS-6 (81)	AL-9 (24)
IL-20 (139)	CT-7 (227)	AZ-11 (191)	AR-6 (75)	OK-7 (15)
WA-12 (151)	CO-9 (236)	GA-16 (180)	MT-3 (69)	WV-5 (8)
MN-10 (161)	PA-20 (256)	SC-9 (164)	KY-8 (66)	WY-3 (3)
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 or she won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Trump won all the states up to and including Virginia (all Clinton's toss up states plus Virginia), he would have 282 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Clinton's number is on the left and Trumps's is on the right in bold italics. To keep the figure to 50 cells, Washington, DC and its three electoral votes are included in the beginning total on the Democratic side of the spectrum. The District has historically been the most Democratic state in the Electoral College. 3 New Hampshire and Virginia are collectively the states where Clinton crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. If those two states are separated with Clinton winning Virginia and Trump, New Hampshire, then there would be a tie in the Electoral College.

NOTE: Distinctions are made between states based on how much they favor one candidate or another. States with a margin greater than 10 percent between Clinton and Trump are "Strong" states. Those with a margin of 5 to 10 percent "Lean" toward one of the two (presumptive) nominees. Finally, states with a spread in the graduated weighted averages of both the candidates' shares of polling support less than 5 percent are "Toss Up" states. The darker a state is shaded in any of the figures here, the more strongly it is aligned with one of the candidates. Not all states along or near the boundaries between categories are close to pushing over into a neighboring group. Those most likely to switch -- those within a percentage point of the various lines of demarcation -- are included on the Watch List below.

The Watch List1
State	Switch
Alaska	from Lean Trump	to Toss Up Trump
Arizona	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Arkansas	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Delaware	from Strong Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Georgia	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Indiana	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Missouri	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Nevada	from Toss Up Clinton	to Toss Up Trump
New Hampshire	from Lean Clinton	to Toss Up Clinton
New Jersey	from Strong Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Wisconsin	from Lean Clinton	to Strong Clinton
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (8/18/16)

The Electoral College Map (8/17/16)

The Electoral College Map (8/16/16)

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

The Electoral College Map (8/18/16)

Latest Update

New State Polls (8/18/16)
State	Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Clinton	Trump	Undecided	Poll Margin	FHQ Margin
Georgia	Opinion Savvy	8/17	+/- 3.6%	730 registered voters	42.8	43.0	3.4	+0.2	+0.87
Nevada	Suffolk	8/15-8/17	+/- 4.4%	500 likely voters	43.8	41.6	7.8	+2.2	+0.33

Polling Quick Hits:
The one thing about the presidential race in the post-convention environment is that the partisan line on the Electoral College Spectrum below has been stuck somewhere in the midst of the Arizona, Georgia and Nevada grouping. For the last week and a half all three have been on the Trump side, but only by the smallest of margins. However, the point in raising this is not those margins. Rather, it is to suggest that if the most competitive states are states that ended up Lean Romney states in November 2012, then the battleground has shifted against Republicans in the intervening four years.

Sure, Nevada is more competitive than is was in 2012, but most of the rest of the states have remained proximate to the positions each was in order (given the polling data available thus far in 2016). In light of that fact, even picking up Nevada would be small consolation if most of the rest of the order remains intact. As of now -- in mid-August 2016 -- cycle-over-cycle stability is the take-home. The above is the Obama map plus North Carolina (or that minus Nevada).

In any event, two of those most competitive states cited above saw new poll releases today.


Georgia:
The post-convention story in Georgia remains the same: There is a range of results from tied to about Trump +5. And the latest from the Peach state from Opinion Savvy does nothing to change that. It fits right in on the lower end of that range. It should be noted also that the firm had Trump ahead only three points in its last survey of Georgia in May. Consistent with the movement in this race in the time since, then, things have moved in Clinton's direction.

Georgia holds its position on the Spectrum and remains on the Watch List, though the average margin is pushing one point.


Nevada:

Changes (August 18)
State	Before	After
Nevada	Toss Up Trump	Toss Up Clinton

In the Silver state, the polling has been more volatile. The established range in a small number of late spring and summer polls is around ten points, running from Clinton +5 to Trump +5. Split the difference there and one gets something close to a tie. And that is exactly where Nevada has been stationed for much of the summer. The addition of the new Suffolk survey does not change that -- Nevada is still a virtual tie -- but the balance has changed. The fraction of a difference between the two nominees has been tilted toward Trump. Now, however, on the weight of this poll that has changed to an ever so slight advantage for Clinton. Of course, quibbling over where the partisan line is is less meaningful when Clinton has in her strong and lean states enough electoral votes to clinch the White House. In other words, Nevada is a need for Trump, but a want for Clinton. And if they are battling over Nevada, Arizona and Georgia, then the outlook in the overall war is less than rosy.

NOTE: A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2016 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
HI-42 (7)	NJ-14 (175)	VA-133 (269 | 282)	MO-10 (155)	TN-11 (58)
MD-10 (17)	DE-3 (178)	NH-43 (273 | 269)	AK-3 (145)	LA-8 (47)
RI-4 (21)	WI-10 (188)	FL-29 (302 | 265)	UT-6 (142)	SD-3 (39)
MA-11 (32)	ME-4 (192)	NC-15 (317 | 236)	KS-6 (136)	ND-3 (36)
VT-3 (35)	NM-5 (197)	OH-18 (335 | 221)	TX-38 (130)	ID-4 (33)
CA-55 (90)	MI-16 (213)	IA-6 (341 | 203)	IN-11 (92)	NE-5 (29)
NY-29 (119)	OR-7 (220)	NV-6 (347 | 197)	MS-6 (81)	AL-9 (24)
IL-20 (139)	CT-7 (227)	AZ-11 (191)	AR-6 (75)	OK-7 (15)
WA-12 (151)	CO-9 (236)	GA-16 (180)	MT-3 (69)	WV-5 (8)
MN-10 (161)	PA-20 (256)	SC-9 (164)	KY-8 (66)	WY-3 (3)
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 or she won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Trump won all the states up to and including Virginia (all Clinton's toss up states plus Virginia), he would have 282 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Clinton's number is on the left and Trumps's is on the right in bold italics. To keep the figure to 50 cells, Washington, DC and its three electoral votes are included in the beginning total on the Democratic side of the spectrum. The District has historically been the most Democratic state in the Electoral College. 3 New Hampshire and Virginia are collectively the states where Clinton crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. If those two states are separated with Clinton winning Virginia and Trump, New Hampshire, then there would be a tie in the Electoral College.

NOTE: Distinctions are made between states based on how much they favor one candidate or another. States with a margin greater than 10 percent between Clinton and Trump are "Strong" states. Those with a margin of 5 to 10 percent "Lean" toward one of the two (presumptive) nominees. Finally, states with a spread in the graduated weighted averages of both the candidates' shares of polling support less than 5 percent are "Toss Up" states. The darker a state is shaded in any of the figures here, the more strongly it is aligned with one of the candidates. Not all states along or near the boundaries between categories are close to pushing over into a neighboring group. Those most likely to switch -- those within a percentage point of the various lines of demarcation -- are included on the Watch List below.

The Watch List1
State	Switch
Alaska	from Lean Trump	to Toss Up Trump
Arizona	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Arkansas	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Delaware	from Strong Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Georgia	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Indiana	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Missouri	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Nevada	from Toss Up Clinton	to Toss Up Trump
New Hampshire	from Lean Clinton	to Toss Up Clinton
New Jersey	from Strong Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Wisconsin	from Lean Clinton	to Strong Clinton
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (8/17/16)

The Electoral College Map (8/16/16)

The Electoral College Map (8/15/16)

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

The Electoral College Map (8/17/16)

Latest Update

New State Polls (8/17/16)
State	Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Clinton	Trump	Undecided	Poll Margin	FHQ Margin
Colorado	Quinnipiac	8/9-8/16	+/- 3.4%	830 likely voters	41	33	3	+8	+7.32
Indiana	Monmouth	8/13-8/16	+/- 4.9%	403 likely voters	36	47	5	+11	+9.24
Iowa	Quinnipiac	8/9-8/16	+/- 3.4%	846 likely voters	41	39	4	+2	+2.01
Michigan	Mitchell Research	8/9-8/10	+/- 2.7%	1303 likely voters	43.6	33.8	8.8	+9.8	+7.91
Mississippi	Magellan Strategies	8/11	+/- 2.9%	1084 likely voters	39	52	6	+13	+10.19
Missouri	Public Policy Polling	8/8-8/9	+/- _._%	947 likely voters	42	45	13	+3	+4.22
Virginia	Quinnipiac	8/9-8/16	+/- 3.5%	808 likely voters	45	34	5	+11	+6.01

Polling Quick Hits:
Things are starting to settle into a rhythm of sorts. Labor Day is approaching and we're now starting to see a pattern of state poll releases; a pattern that tends to have a flood of mid-week polls. Today is one of those days.

Colorado:
There have only been two post-convention polls conducted in the Centennial state and both of them have indicated essentially the same thing: Clinton in the low 40s, Trump in the low 30s and the other candidates in the multi-candidates surveys siphoning off just more than 20 percent support. That bears some resemblance to the 2010 gubernatorial race in Colorado, but mainly because the Republican support was split among two candidates. It is more complicated than that because of the idiosyncrasies in both races, but the same type of pattern exists now as then.


Indiana:
For a state that was close just eight years ago, there really have not been that many polls in 2016 in Indiana. Granted, Indiana was less competitive in 2012 than it was in 2008, but that is not a good excuse for a dearth of survey work in the Hoosier state since April. The time since then represents a window in which the state's governor was chosen as Donald Trump's running mate. In other words, there has been no (publicly available) polling-based way to get a sense of the impact of Mike Pence's selection. However, the answer appears to be not much. The couple of polls that had come out of Indiana had shown the Clinton-Trump race to be in the upper single digits in favor of Trump. This is just one poll -- and one from Monmouth with a small sample size at that -- but it shows a low double digits lead for Trump; a slight increase. However slight, that is a widening of the gap over a period of time in which Clinton's lead has expanded nationally and in the balance at the state level has shifted in her direction as well.

For this time being, this poll was enough to push Indiana in range of jumping over into the Strong Trump category (and thus onto the Watch List below).


Iowa:
Iowa, like Nevada, continues to defy its position in the order of state established during the Obama era elections. While most states have exhibited something approximating a uniform shift -- a small gain for Clinton in the aggregate as compared to Obama in 2012 -- Iowa and Nevada have moved in the other direction. Nevada is essentially tied in the FHQ methodology, and Iowa has spent most of the summer hovering within Toss Up Clinton territory on the Electoral College Spectrum below. The latest poll of the Hawkeye state from Quinnipiac is in line with that. Iowa's margin in the averages had already crept down to about Clinton +2 and this poll only reaffirms that positioning: close, but tipped in Clinton's direction.


Michigan:
Every post-convention survey out of the Great Lakes state has been at or around Clinton +10. As was the case with the Iowa poll, this new survey from Mitchell reinforces the post-convention dynamics in Michigan. It is a state well within the Lean Clinton category, but like a number of other states -- Colorado and Virginia, for example -- Michigan continues to see the average margin inch upward and away from Trump. Often talked about as a Republican target in presidential election years, Michigan is following its pattern, resisting those attempts and sticking stubbornly just out of reach for Republican nominees.


Mississippi:

Changes (August 17)
State	Before	After
Mississippi	Toss Up Trump	Strong Trump

Like Indiana, Mississippi has been underpolled during 2016. The only offering from the Magnolia state is a single, solitary Mason-Dixon poll from March when the Clinton-Trump dynamic -- in the midst of unsettled nomination contests -- were different. Still, that Trump +3 has held up pretty well. As the race has moved toward Clinton following the conventions, other states such as South Carolina and Texas -- states that tend to be in the vicinity of Mississippi in the order of states -- have moved closer to it. The Magellan poll disrupts that trend, though. It serves as something of a course correction for Mississippi, but pushes the average there just beyond the strong/lean line into Strong Trump territory.

That is enough to bring Mississippi onto the Watch List and push it to the other side of Texas on the Spectrum, but on the more Republican side where Mississippi has not been (relative to Texas in recent cycles).


Missouri:
The summer polling in the Show-Me state started off in early July with a couple of releases showing Trump up around ten points. Once the calendar got into and through convention season, the tide turned. And on the other side of the conventions now, the bellwether of old is looking similar to how it did in 2008: competitive but favoring the Republican candidate. The new head-to-head survey from Public Policy Polling echoes last week's Remington poll (a multi-candidate poll) with Trump narrowly ahead. If 2016 is like 2012 but pushed slightly more toward the Democrats, then that would tend to bring states like Arizona, Georgia and Missouri into play. And that is exactly where things stand.


Virginia:
Virginia joins Colorado and Michigan (not to mention states like New Hampshire and Pennsylvania) as a state that continues to look like a more comfortable blue state than a competitive battleground. Other than the RABA poll that had Trump ahead in the Old Dominion in the midst of the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia, the other polls from the state in the time since have found Clinton up anywhere from seven to twelve points. And that has only increased the FHQ average margin in the state; enough now that Virginia is off the Watch List and no longer threatening to jump back into the toss up area with more data. Suffice it to say, if these states are off the table, then Trump has many no realistic paths to 270 unless the established order in the Electoral College Spectrum is shaken up somehow. Given the data to this point in 2016, however, that seems increasingly unlikely.

But there are still 83 days to go until Election Day.

NOTE: A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2016 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
HI-42 (7)	NJ-14 (175)	VA-133 (269 | 282)	MO-10 (155)	TN-11 (58)
MD-10 (17)	DE-3 (178)	NH-43 (273 | 269)	AK-3 (145)	LA-8 (47)
RI-4 (21)	WI-10 (188)	FL-29 (302 | 265)	UT-6 (142)	SD-3 (39)
MA-11 (32)	ME-4 (192)	NC-15 (317 | 236)	KS-6 (136)	ND-3 (36)
VT-3 (35)	NM-5 (197)	OH-18 (335 | 221)	TX-38 (130)	ID-4 (33)
CA-55 (90)	MI-16 (213)	IA-6 (341 | 203)	IN-11 (92)	NE-5 (29)
NY-29 (119)	OR-7 (220)	NV-6 (197)	MS-6 (81)	AL-9 (24)
IL-20 (139)	CT-7 (227)	AZ-11 (191)	AR-6 (75)	OK-7 (15)
WA-12 (151)	CO-9 (236)	GA-16 (180)	MT-3 (69)	WV-5 (8)
MN-10 (161)	PA-20 (256)	SC-9 (164)	KY-8 (66)	WY-3 (3)
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 or she won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Trump won all the states up to and including Virginia (all Clinton's toss up states plus Virginia), he would have 282 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Clinton's number is on the left and Trumps's is on the right in bold italics. To keep the figure to 50 cells, Washington, DC and its three electoral votes are included in the beginning total on the Democratic side of the spectrum. The District has historically been the most Democratic state in the Electoral College. 3 New Hampshire and Virginia are collectively the states where Clinton crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. If those two states are separated with Clinton winning Virginia and Trump, New Hampshire, then there would be a tie in the Electoral College.

NOTE: Distinctions are made between states based on how much they favor one candidate or another. States with a margin greater than 10 percent between Clinton and Trump are "Strong" states. Those with a margin of 5 to 10 percent "Lean" toward one of the two (presumptive) nominees. Finally, states with a spread in the graduated weighted averages of both the candidates' shares of polling support less than 5 percent are "Toss Up" states. The darker a state is shaded in any of the figures here, the more strongly it is aligned with one of the candidates. Not all states along or near the boundaries between categories are close to pushing over into a neighboring group. Those most likely to switch -- those within a percentage point of the various lines of demarcation -- are included on the Watch List below.

The Watch List1
State	Switch
Alaska	from Lean Trump	to Toss Up Trump
Arizona	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Arkansas	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Delaware	from Strong Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Georgia	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Indiana	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Missouri	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Nevada	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
New Hampshire	from Lean Clinton	to Toss Up Clinton
New Jersey	from Strong Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Wisconsin	from Lean Clinton	to Strong Clinton
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (8/16/16)

The Electoral College Map (8/15/16)

The Electoral College Map (8/14/16)

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.