New State Polls (8/17/16)
| |||||||||
State
|
Poll
|
Date
|
Margin of Error
|
Sample
|
Clinton
|
Trump
|
Undecided
|
Poll Margin
|
FHQ Margin
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Colorado
|
8/9-8/16
|
+/- 3.4%
|
830 likely voters
|
41
|
33
|
3
|
+8
|
+7.32
| |
Indiana
|
8/13-8/16
|
+/- 4.9%
|
403 likely voters
|
36
|
47
|
5
|
+11
|
+9.24
| |
Iowa
|
8/9-8/16
|
+/- 3.4%
|
846 likely voters
|
41
|
39
|
4
|
+2
|
+2.01
| |
Michigan
|
8/9-8/10
|
+/- 2.7%
|
1303 likely voters
|
43.6
|
33.8
|
8.8
|
+9.8
|
+7.91
| |
Mississippi
|
8/11
|
+/- 2.9%
|
1084 likely voters
|
39
|
52
|
6
|
+13
|
+10.19
| |
Missouri
|
8/8-8/9
|
+/- _._%
|
947 likely voters
|
42
|
45
|
13
|
+3
|
+4.22
| |
Virginia
|
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 | |
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.
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.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment