State of the Race: Texas -- A repeat of 2020?

State of the Race offers quick hit reactions to state or national poll releases in the 2024 race for the White House. For a broader overview of the battle for electoral college votes, check out FHQ Plus in the coming days. It will be where the 2024 FHQ electoral college projection resides.

--

Texas was one of those states that looked closer in the averages than it ended up being on election day in 2020. Sure, the Lone Star state still tilted in Donald Trump's direction, but as in a number of other states, Biden ultimately settled into a position in the averages that was close to where he landed in the voting while Trump's share was underestimated to some degree.

In Texas, that discrepancy was a little more than four points. And when that was added into the mix in November 2020, it meant a state that looked like it may be a toss up (less than five points) in the projections as election day approached wound up more firmly planted in leaning (five to ten points) territory when the final tally came in. 

So, it was in that context in which FHQ first observed the latest data on the 2024 presidential race in the Lone Star state from the University of Houston/YouGov: Trump -- 49.5, Harris -- 44.6 (multi-candidate question). First, it is worth noting that the outlet previously had a survey in the field in Texas during a late June/early July window that straddled the Biden-Trump debate. While Trump basically held steady between the two, Harris improved upon Biden's position, roughly cutting the Republican's advantage in half. 

That lens is helpful, but at this point in a race that is still settling in following Biden's exit, the context from 2020 is just as important. No, past is not necessarily prelude, but note that 1) the margin in the UH survey is similar to where the 2020 Biden-Trump race ended up in Texas and that 2) both 2024 candidates are in the range of but behind where Biden and Trump found themselves in the state on election day four years ago. 

However, the most important thing, and something FHQ will increasingly discuss as November 5 approaches, is that Donald Trump is more consistently at or above 50 percent in Texas polls now. [Yes, it is still early days in this race and one should use some caution in generalizing from the scant Texas data available at this time.] But that was not a given in 2020. 

Things can change. After all, presidential races have the capacity to be dynamic. Yet, there is a reason the focus is on seven battleground states (not including Texas) and that map expansion from the Democratic perspective is solely focused on North Carolina and not, say, Florida and/or Texas as well. 

--

Recent Posts:

State of the Race: Virginia -- Is the presidential contest close in the commonwealth?

--

Follow FHQ on Bluesky, Threads and Twitter/X. Or subscribe to receive posts in your Inbox. 

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 

A different kind of non-endorsement in the Republican presidential race

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...

• One of the early tests of campaign organizational mettle will be in how able the candidates are in getting on the ballot across 57 states and territories in late 2023 and early 2024. Those hurdles often separate the wheat from the chaff in a competitive presidential nomination field. All the details at FHQ Plus.

If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.

In Invisible Primary: Visible today...

...

Normally, FHQ would not necessarily pay much attention to the musings of a random Republican congressperson from Nebraska. But Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE, 2nd) recently offered some interesting comments on the 2024 Republican presidential nomination race. Yes, the congressman has been outspoken and skeptical of Donald Trump, and earlier this month followed the lead of a few others in the US House and Senate who have unendorsed the former president.

But Bacon's comments on Wednesday highlighted anew the freezing effect that Trump's presence in the race and hold over a loyal segment of the Republican primary electorate continues to have:

“It is so important to have someone who unites more people than divides.”

...
“Someone like Tim Scott is an example. I haven’t endorsed him, but he has a message I really like right now. It’s about America’s best days are ahead, and about bringing people into the party — and the Reagan rule that if you’re with me 80% of the time, we’re on the same team; I don’t hate you.”

Perhaps, like South Dakota Senator Mike Rounds, Bacon is kind of sort of pre-endorsing the junior senator from South Carolina. Maybe he is still considering the non-Trump options (which is understandable). There remains a great deal of uncertainty in the race. But by not sending a direct signal of support for Scott, Bacon is also sending a signal. It is a non-endorsement that may elevate Tim Scott in some sense, but not nearly to the extent the Palmetto state senator wants or needs at this point in the race. And that would only seem to further buttress Trump, whether the former president is actually freezing would-be endorsers or not. 

...

The border issue animates the Republican Party base and Eagle Pass in Texas has become a popular stop for presidential candidates, upping the Lone Star state's value in the travel primary as primary season in 2024 approaches. It does not hurt that Texas has a Super Tuesday primary.

...

Jonathan Bernstein has a solid piece on Robert F. Kennedy Jr. up at Bloomberg. As he notes, presidential primaries define parties, but in elevating Kennedy, media on the right may only be redefining the Republican Party rather than hurting President Biden's chances on the Democratic side.

And Philip Bump has a nice companion item over at The Washington Post that shows that while Kennedy's support has not really increased since he entered the Democratic nomination race, his favorability has. 

...among Republicans (as they have sunk with Democrats). 

...

On this date...

...in 2012, Fred Karger's long shot bid for the Republican presidential nomination came to a close. 

--

Recent posts:

A mid-week Invisible Primary Roundup

DeSantis and Trump battle to influence state-level delegate rules for 2024

DeSantis Deemphasizing New Hampshire?

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon and Post or subscribe by Email.

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 

Invisible Primary: Visible -- For 2024, a Frankenstein's monster of 2015 parts

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

It was not that long ago that some were over-reading Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' travel as potentially indicative of his approach to the early states on the 2024 presidential primary calendar. And while FHQ is often quick to preach actions, not words in the invisible primary, that long haul plan of DeSantis and his aligned super PAC, Never Back Down, is perhaps more nuanced than simply where the governor is going. [He is abroad this week, for example.]

Despite some anxiety among his supporters, DeSantis and those aligned with his nascent presidential run seem to be playing a slow and methodical long game. In a week last week when the news was bad and the polling continued to take a turn for the worse, DeSantis and Never Back Down plodded along. The governor was in first-in-the-South South Carolina and Super Tuesday Utah addressing the state convention of Beehive state Republicans while Never Back Down was making hires several layers deep for operations in all four early states. The latter, in an evolution over the super PAC apparatus the (Jeb!) Bush effort built in 2015, appears to be assembling a full shadow campaign with all the cash it has at its disposal. 

And that is an interesting amalgam at this point in the race. It seems a bit of an attempt at a better Frankenstein's monster in 2023, taking elements of the Bush super PAC build out in 2015 and melding it with the deep organizing -- staff, grassroots and delegate efforts -- of the Cruz campaign. Neither were particularly successful against Trump separately in 2015-16, but fused in some respects in 2023, it may prove different. Regardless, the evolution continues to hint at the learning that has happened for the 2024 cycle among those who opposed Trump during the competitive 2016 Republican nomination race. 

...

Eyes were on Iowa this past weekend as Republican candidates, announced and prospective, addressed the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition. Political scientist, Steffen Schmidt, gives a reminder about why Iowa commands attention. 

...

Patrick Svitek has a thorough rundown of the state of the Republican presidential nomination race in Texas over at the Texas Tribune. The Lone Star state may be getting more competitive by some measures, but there are a lot of Republicans to go around to support national races. In the endorsement primary, some elected and former elected officials in the state lined up behind former President Trump ahead of his rally in Waco. 

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who chaired both of Trump’s previous campaigns in Texas, has been preoccupied with the legislative session but continues to have the former president’s ear. Speaking at Trump’s March rally in Waco, Patrick blasted those who tied the event to the deadly Branch Davidian standoff in 1993, saying Trump was following his recommendation to hold the rally there.

In the week before the rally, as speculation grew that Trump was facing indictment, his campaign made a push to corral more endorsements from Texas Republicans in the U.S. House. U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson of Amarillo, who was Trump’s doctor in the White House, took the lead inside the delegation, according to a person close to him.

The effort paid dividends as his campaign prefaced the Waco rally by announcing its “Texas Leadership Team” featuring eight new congressional endorsers. Fresh supporters also included Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham and former U.S. Rep. Mayra Flores of Los Indios.

However, many are still sitting on the sidelines. And big donors in Texas have not shied away from Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

As the political world waits for his official presidential campaign launch, DeSantis has cultivated some intriguing — and generous — donors from Texas. Two of last month’s top contributors to his Florida political committee were both from Texas: an entity called Rural Route 3 Holdings LP, which gave $1 million, and a Houston doctor named Clive Fields, who gave $500,000.

Rural Route 3 Holdings also contributed $250,000 to DeSantis last year.

There are not just a lot of potential endorsements and donors in Texas. The Super Tuesday primary there offers a significant chunk of delegates that will keep it at the forefront of the campaign as the invisible primary continues. 

...

Over at FHQ Plus...

• Kansas has a new (one-off) presidential primary for 2024 and the Rhode Island primary may be on the move. The week ahead starts with maneuvering on the potential Hawaii presidential primary and the zombie movement to move the Ohio primary from March to May, well, will not die.

If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work.

...

On this date...

...in 1976, Rep. Mo Udall (D-AZ) won the Democratic caucuses in his home state of Arizona.

...in 1980, Illinois Rep. John Anderson (R) withdrew from the Republican presidential nomination race (...but he would return for the fall campaign as an independent candidate).

...in 1984, Sen. Gary Hart (D-CO) completed the sweep of 1984 Vermont contests, winning the beauty contest primary in March and taking the caucuses in the Green Mountain state on this date that April.

...in 2004, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) won the caucuses in the territory of Guam.

...in 2012, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (R) swept the five ACELA primary states (Connecticut, Delaware, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island) to pad his delegate total against only nominal competition at that point in the race. 

--

Recent posts:

Sunday Series: Ranked Choice Voting in 2024 Presidential Primaries, Updated (April 2023)

From FHQ Plus: Calendar Foreshadowing in New York

Invisible Primary: Visible -- How the Republican Candidates Line Up in South Carolina

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon and Post or subscribe by Email.

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Texas as Trump's Firewall?

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

Texas may provide Donald Trump with some added insurance once voting begins in next year's primary. Just last week, FHQ pointed in the direction of endorsements the former president already has in the Lone Star state. But John L. Dorman at Business Insider took it a step further over the weekend, suggesting that Texas could offer a delegate advantage for Trump in 2024. Maybe! If Trump remains the frontrunner in the Republican process when Super Tuesday rolls around next year, then a win in Texas would certainly pad the stats a bit and give the former president a fairly decent net delegate advantage coming out of the state's primary. 

But is Texas any more of a firewall on Super Tuesday than, say, (even more delegate-rich) California? The electorates in the two states are different, but so are the delegate allocation rules. And Texas Republicans did not use the same rules in 2020 that they used in 2016. And that quirky 2020 system may not have the immediate benefit that the 2016 rules did for Ted Cruz, the example cited by Dorman. California Republicans, on the other hand pooled their delegates in 2020, meaning that the statewide results -- and not also the congressional district results -- are the only ones that matter. If Trump hits it right, then he could win all of California's delegates (if he wins a majority). The process is a long way from getting to that point -- obviously -- but that is a big potential payday in the 2024 delegate count. Rules matter. Pay attention to how they develop in the coming months. 

...

Asa Hutchinson is in. The former Arkansas governor (pre-)announced his intentions to seek the Republican presidential nomination over the weekend, becoming the third candidate with experience in elective office (and more conventional attributes) to join the race. Say what you will about the odds facing Hutchinson, but he is approaching a run differently than most anyone else is. Seth Masket has more. [Always read Seth!]

...

Texas Governor Greg Abbott now has a presidential filing with the Federal Election Commission. But when an organization is called "Greg Abbott President Campaign," it does not exactly scream professional. The date of the filing may also tell us something about the purpose. 

...

When FHQ sees "Dates of 2024 Presidential Primaries Uncertain in Twelve States" we jump at the chance to click. And look, I have read and thoroughly enjoyed what Richard Winger has done at Ballot Access News for years. But I disagree with the way things were characterized in his piece over the weekend.

"In Connecticut, Idaho, Kansas, Maryland, Missouri, New York, Ohio, Oregon, and Pennsylvania, the date can’t be known yet because the legislature is considering bills to change the date and the results are unpredictable at this time." [emphasis FHQ's]

Actually, we can know the dates of the presidential primaries in those states. They are clearly laid out in state law in each instance. Until those laws are changed, those are the dates of the primaries. The fate of those bills may be unpredictable, but the dates -- both the current ones and their alternatives -- are known. 

And do not get me started on this idea that the South Carolina Republican presidential primary is scheduled for February 24. It is not. It is not on January 27 either, but behavior on the state level in past cycles suggests January is closer to where the primary will end up in 2024. It beats simply carrying over a date from a previous cycle and "presuming" that will be the date (especially when there is no state law setting it for that point on the calendar).

...

Over at FHQ Plus... 

• Kansas and Missouri advanced presidential primary bills. 
• There was a new twist in the Idaho move to May late last week (as these stories go, this was one of the more interesting ones FHQ has seen over the years). 
• Also, Democrats are releasing draft delegate selection plans that are hinting at future calendar moves. 

If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below.

...

On this date...

...in 1976, Democrats in Kansas and Virginia held caucuses. While Jimmy Carter "won" both, uncommitted delegates won more slots.

...in 1984, Walter Mondale won the New York primary as Gary Hart was winning a meaningless primary in Wisconsin. [Democrats in the Badger state held caucuses to allocate delegates a few days later to avoid participating in an open presidential primary.]

...in 2012, Romney swept Republican primaries in Maryland, Washington, DC and Wisconsin as President Obama clinched the Democratic nomination. 

...in 2016, the Cruz campaign outworked Donald Trump to claim more delegates from the North Dakota Republican state convention. 

--

Recent posts:

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Donald Trump has been indicted

Introducing FHQ Plus

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Lessons Learned in 2016 and the 2024 Republican Nomination

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon and Post or subscribe by Email.

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Donald Trump has been indicted

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

There may be a bit of a slow-speed white Bronco chase feel to all the coverage, but it cannot go without mention that former President Donald Trump has been indicted by a Manhattan grand jury. Still, FHQ would like to take an opportunity to echo something that the Cook Political Report's Amy Walter said in reaction to the news:

It’s ok to not know what this indictment of Trump means for 2024. How about we watch how people and the process react over the next few weeks? Naive I know. But, I can hope.

— Amy Walter (@amyewalter) March 31, 2023

We do not know. That will not mean that folks will not rush to fill the void and speculate. They will. But we should all be mindful of the unprecedented nature of all of this. Presidents who lose reelection have not tended to try for a third time in the modern era. Trump is. Former presidents do not often get indicted. Trump is the first. We are all testing this hypothesis as this thing develops. Folks on both sides of the aisle are reacting in what can be called expected ways. That helps to advance this some. What elites say in response to this event matters. Those are signals to rank and file partisans that may impact public opinion on the matter down the line. But this has also moved from hypothetical to real. Survey respondents will now be asked to react to a real indictment and not a hypothetical one. That may influence the sort of read we may get from those polls when they inevitably make it into the political bloodstream in the coming days.

But what we know now is that Trump is signaling that he is going to keep on keepin' on with respect to 2024, and Republicans for the most part are rallying behind him. 

...

There are a lot of elected Republicans in the state of Texas. That is a lot of potential endorsements to go around in the 2024 Republican invisible primary. Trump has gotten the jump on the rest of the field in the Lone Star state in the endorsement primary. It is not a 2019 head start, but it ain't 2015 either. That is yet another datapoint in the Trump 2023 is ahead of Trump 2015 but behind Trump 2019 story. All of those markers are going to end up somewhere between one of the two -- 2015 or 2019 -- poles, but where they all land matters. The closer Trump is to his 2019 version, the better the former president's odds of ultimately claiming the 2024 Republican presidential nomination will be.

...

New Hampshire is back in the news. Remember New Hampshire? That first-in-the-nation presidential primary state? Well, the General Court in the Granite state considered a couple of measures on Thursday. FHQ has discussed both earlier this year. A constitutional amendment to further cement New Hampshire's position on the presidential primary calendar and a bill to force the national parties to seat delegates chosen as a reflection of that primary. Both passed the state Senate on Thursday, March 30, the former with bipartisan support and the latter on a party-line vote with Republicans for and Democrats against. 

And that all makes sense. New Hampshire Democrats are willing to signal their support for the the state's continued first-in-the-nation status in the proposed amendment. That is just good politics at home and that has much has been true since December when the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee initially adopted President Biden's proposed early calendar rules. But they were less willing to go along with a bill that would dig their hole deeper with the Democratic National Committee. New Hampshire may be able to outlast the national parties on calendar positioning, but it is another matter altogether to dictate to a party how to allocate, much less seat, delegates to their national convention. That is something that is unlikely to hold up in the courts. That is a party decision and the national convention is the ultimate decision maker in the process. ...no matter what any state law says. 

A tip of the cap to Dante Scala for the heads up on this one.

...

On a personal note, FHQ Plus, FHQ's subscription service, launched today. Subscribe and come check it out! [See below]

...

On this date...

...in 1984, the Kentucky Democratic caucuses were held.

...in 1992, Jerry Brown won the Vermont caucuses.

...in 2012, President Barack Obama won the Arizona caucuses.

--

Recent posts:

Introducing FHQ Plus

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Lessons Learned in 2016 and the 2024 Republican Nomination

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Think, for just a sec, about those early presidential primary polls

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon and Post or subscribe by Email.

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 

The Electoral College Map (11/1/20)

Update for November 1.

Well, if Saturday was a break from what have often been quiet weekends on the polling front in the 2020 presidential race, then Sunday was a decibel-filled cacophony. There were new data from 57 polls in 16 states -- plus surveys that covered both congressional districts in Maine and the second in Nebraska -- and it was all concentrated in the 13 states from New Mexico on the left to Texas on the right in the heart of the Electoral College Spectrum order. 

What was unique about this batch of new surveys was that a raft of them came from right-leaning pollsters. And across the states that count -- those six core battlegrounds of Arizona, Florida, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin -- the margins all decreased, benefiting President Trump. However, there are two sizable caveats to that. First, despite the decreases, the map and projection remained unchanged after the introduction of those polls. That means that none of those battlegrounds changed categories. But second, in drilling down just a smidgen, there was either no movement or movement toward Biden since the last polls in the majority of surveys in those series. 

They may have -- and may yet on Monday -- flood the zone with new polls, but those data from right-leaning pollsters are unlikely to change anything around here before tomorrow. Even Georgia, which has lately been precariously perched on either side of the partisan line has shifted enough into the Biden column at this point, that it, too, is likely locked in there. Again, this has been a steady race, and while these polls may have brought down the average margins some in states where Biden has been ahead throughout, in the end it is but a small sliver of a change.

On to the polls...

Polling Quick Hits:

Arizona

(Trump 50, Biden 48 via AtlasIntel | Biden 48, Trump 46 via Emerson | Biden 49, Trump 43 via Siena/NYT Upshot | Biden 50, Trump 46 via CNN | Biden 50, Trump 47 via Y2 Analytics)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +2.89] 

No previous AtlasIntel poll

Emerson: Biden 53, Trump 47 in August poll

Siena: Biden 49, Trump 41 in early October poll

CNN: Biden 49, Trump 45 in July poll

No previous Y2 Analytics poll

FHQ will start each of these polling vignettes today with the current FHQ average in each state. In Arizona, Biden's (rounded) advantage is 48-45. Of the day's polls in the Grand Canyon state, Emerson, CNN and Y2 Analytics most fall in line with that long established state of affairs in Arizona. It is and has been close, but it has also, more often than not been tipped in the former vice president's direction in individual polls. There is some narrowing across a few of these from their last iterations, but it is not to the level of tightening that the president is going to need to pull out wins in some of these states below. 

Colorado

(Biden 53, Trump 41 via Keating Research)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +12.82] 

Keating: Biden 54, Trump 39 in mid-October poll

Currently, the averages in this former perennial battleground has Biden out to a 53-40 (rounded) lead. Colorado simply has not been close in 2020 and is not still in an update that falls right on the candidates' averages here.

Florida

(Trump 47, Biden 46 via Susquehanna | Biden 48, Trump 47 via Pulse Opinion Research | Biden 47, Trump 44 via Siena/NYT Upshot | Biden 49, Trump 48 via St. Pete Polls | Biden 52, Trump 46 via Emerson | Biden 51, Trump 47 via RMG Research | Trump 50, Biden 48 via ABC/WaPo | Biden 49, Trump 47 via YouGov/CCES)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +2.88] 

Susquehanna: Trump 49, Biden 44 in poll last week

Pulse Opinion Research: Trump 50, Biden 46 in mid-October poll

Siena: Biden 47, Trump 42 in early October poll

St. Pete Polls: Biden 49, Trump 47 in mid-October poll

Emerson: Biden 51, Trump 48 in mid-October poll

RMG Research: Biden 50, Trump 48 in mid-October poll

ABC/WaPo: Trump 51, Biden 47 in September poll

No previous YouGov/CCES poll

In the Sunshine state, Trump lags Biden by a 49-46 (rounded) margin, and most of the eight new polls out of Florida today fit right in that general range. There are some exceptions like Susquehanna, but it remains a steady picture in this case. Like Arizona, it has been close in Florida almost all along. There was a brief five day period in late July when the Sunshine state drifted over into Lean Biden territory, but that moment was fleeting. Yet, the fact remains that as close as Florida has been, it has been consistently tipped toward the former vice president throughout much of 2020. The addition of these polls does not alter that. Even the polls that had Trump ahead -- Susquehanna, RMG and WaPo -- all either saw no shift since the last polls in the series or tightening that benefited Biden. And surveys that moved toward Trump tended to bring them in line with the prevailing average in the state at FHQ.

Georgia

(Trump 48, Biden 46 via Insider Advantage | Biden 49, Trump 49 via Emerson | Biden 48, Trump 47 via YouGov/CCES)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +0.36] 

No previous Insider Advantage poll

Emerson: Trump 48, Biden 47 in mid-October poll

No previous YouGov/CCES poll

In the Peach state, once the average shares of both candidates are rounded, the count comes to a 47-47 tie. And again, the new surveys are largely in line with that. Only the Emerson poll offered a comparison to an earlier poll, and even there, the change was minimal. Georgia is close, the closest state on the board at the moment. 

Iowa

(Trump 49, Biden 48 via Civiqs | Trump 49, Biden 47 via Emerson | Trump 48, Biden 46 via Insider Advantage | Trump 48, Biden 41 via Selzer)

[Current FHQ margin: Trump +0.89] 

Civiqs: Biden 48, Trump 47 in early October poll

Emerson: Trump 48, Biden 48 in mid-October poll

Insider Advantage: Trump 45, Biden 45 in mid-October poll

Selzer: Trump 49, Biden 47 in September poll

Speaking of the closest states on the board, Iowa also fits that bill with Trump maintaining a narrow 47-46 (rounded) edge in the FHQ averages. Again, as in Georgia above, most of the new polls today are consistent with that established average. However, the one that stands out is the one that is often called he gold standard of polling in the Hawkeye state. And in that Selzer poll, the president stayed in the upper 40s like the last survey in September but Biden trailed off, dropping in to the low 40s. What is different from that last poll to the latest update is that five percent of the respondents refused to say who they were supporting in the new one. That was a segment of the electorate that was not accounted for in the previous poll. The crosstabs on that subsample of around 40 respondents in that poll would have been interesting to look at; not necessarily representative, but interesting. 

Maine

(Biden 54, Trump 43 via Emerson

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +13.40] 

Maine CD1

(Biden 58, Trump 39 via Emerson

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +22.92] 

Maine CD2

(Biden 50, Trump 47 via Emerson

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +1.88] 

No previous Emerson poll

FHQ will keep the focus in Maine on the second congressional district where the competition is. There has been no previous Emerson poll of the Pine Tree state, so there is no natural comparison, but Biden's lead in the averages there has stabilized around 47-45 (rounded). That is behind this poll of the district, yet not exactly inconsistent with it. Although there have been just 14 surveys in the field in ME CD2, 11 of them have favored the former vice president. Like the rest of those other toss ups close to the partisan line on the Biden side, the second is and has been close throughout, but consistently tilted toward the Democratic nominee. 

Michigan

(Biden 53, Trump 45 via Ipsos | Biden 49, Trump 47 via Insider Advantage | Biden 52, Trump 46 via Emerson | Biden 53, Trump 41 via CNN | Biden 52, Trump 45 via Mitchell Research | Biden 48, Trump 41 via EPIC-MRA)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +7.31] 

Ipsos: Biden 53, Trump 43 in poll last week

No previous Insider Advantage poll

Emerson: Biden 54, Trump 43 in early October poll

CNN: Biden 52, Trump 40 in July poll

Mitchell: Biden 52, Trump 42 in poll last week

EPIC-MRA: Biden 48, Trump 39 in mid-October poll

 

Here is the deal in the Great Lakes state: Biden is already averaging over a 50 percent share of support there. Despite the fact that each of these polls today -- those with a predecessor in the series anyway -- show some narrowing, it is almost all on the Trump side of the equation. The former vice president is still stable and at or over the majority mark in each of these updates. The president may or may not close the gap some on election day, but if Biden is over 50 percent, it will not matter. 

Minnesota

(Biden 54, Trump 39 via St. Cloud State

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +8.52] 
No previous St. Cloud State poll

This St. Cloud State survey of the North Star state may be on the high side of the range for Biden and low side for Trump, but it remains in line with the 51-42 (rounded) average the race is currently at under the FHQ methodology. And as was said in Saturday's update, other than the Survey USA series, the majority of pollsters have generally found a race with Biden over 50 percent and Trump stuck in the low 40s, the latter of which is in the range of the president's overall job approval numbers nationally. 

Nebraska CD2

(Biden 50, Trump 48 via Emerson)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +6.69] 

No previous Emerson poll

The difference between this latest poll and the FHQ averages for NE CD2 are fairly stark. As of now, Biden holds a 51-44 (rounded) lead that looks a lot like the early polls out of the district over the summer. But that discrepancy likely has more to do with the general lack of polling activity in the Omaha area this year. The big polling issue on the state level in 2016 was that there were not a lot of polls in the field in the days before the election. Now, the swing is much less likely to be as large this time around -- there are fewer undecideds after all -- but the same sort of thing could be happening Nebraska's second as election day nears and partisans/partisan leaners come home. Regardless, Biden has been at or over 50 percent in all but one of the (yes, just) six public polls conducted in the district in 2020.

Nevada

(Biden 49, Trump 47 via Emerson)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +4.34] 
No previous Emerson poll

 

Nevada is another jurisdiction where polling has been lacking all year, but where Biden has trailed only once. This Emerson poll hits the vice president's average FHQ share but has Trump running about three points ahead of his average share of support. That tighter margin may be partisans coming home to the president, Biden struggling with Latinos in the state and/or signs of the vaunted Harry Reid turnout machine faltering in the midst of a global pandemic. But the Silver state is another state where it is striking how close the Democratic nominee is to 50 percent. He is not there in this case, but Biden is approaching it in a way that neither Clinton nor Trump did four years ago. 

New Mexico

(Biden 54, Trump 42 via Research & Polling Inc.)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +10.64] 
Research & Polling: Biden 54, Trump 39 in September poll

In the Land of Enchantment, the FHQ averages have the race for the state's five electoral votes at 53-42 (rounded) in favor of the former vice president. This poll is evidence of the race coming in line with that more than it is about Trump gaining ground. This may have been a flip opportunity -- or a state that was eyed as one by the president's campaign operation -- but that has not panned out in any of the New Mexico polling in 2020.  

North Carolina

(Trump 50, Biden 48 via AtlasIntel | Trump 48, Biden 44 via Insider Advantage | Biden 47, Trump 47 via Emerson | Biden 51, Trump 45 via CNN | Trump 49, Biden 47 via Trafalgar Group | Biden 49, Trump 45 via YouGov/CCES)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +1.77] 

No previous AtlasIntel poll

No previous Insider Advantage poll

Emerson: Biden 49, Trump 49 in mid-October poll

CNN: Biden 49, Trump 46 in September poll

Trafalgar: Trump 49, Biden 46 in poll last week

No previous YouGov/CCES poll

Only half of the polls out today in North Carolina had a previous survey to which to compare, and two of those had Trump uncharacteristically ahead in a state where Biden has carried a narrow but consistent lead in the FHQ averages for much of the year. Currently, Biden is up 48-46 (rounded) and most of the surveys today are consistent with that. Some, like the CNN poll have Biden running toward the top end of this range while others like AtlasIntel have the president outperforming his average. The margin may have inched down a tick, but it remains tipped in Biden's direction in the Tar Heel state. 

Ohio

(Trump 49, Biden 48 via Civiqs | Biden 50, Trump 49 via Emerson)

[Current FHQ margin: Trump +0.95] 

Civiqs: Trump 50, Biden 47 in mid-October poll

Emerson: Trump 51, Biden 49 in May poll

One could make a mountain out of a molehill and suggest that the gap narrowed in both Buckeye state polls released today, but the truth is that both maintain an established status quo Trump lead in Ohio. With election day in sight, the president's 47-46 (rounded) advantage in the FHQ averages of Ohio are reflected in both surveys. But the key is less about who leads than how much Ohio has swung toward the Democrats since 2016. The shift there is in line with the seven point average swing across the whole country in 2020 polls. That Ohio is close at all is the story here. Whether Biden can flip it or Trump narrowly defend it is mostly immaterial to the quest for 270 electoral votes (especially in the winning Biden scenarios). 

Pennsylvania

(Biden 52, Trump 46 via Ipsos | Trump 49, Biden 47 via Insider Advantage | Biden 49, Trump 43 via Siena/NYT Upshot | Biden 52, Trump 47 via Emerson | Trump 50, Biden 49 via AtlasIntel | Biden 51, Trump 44 via ABC/WaPo | Biden 52, Trump 44 via YouGov/CCES)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +5.28] 

Ipsos: Biden 51, Trump 44 in poll last week

Insider Advantage: Trump 48, Biden 46 in poll last week

Siena: Biden 49, Trump 42 in early October poll

Emerson: Biden 51, Trump 47 in early October poll

No previous AtlasIntel poll

ABC/WaPo: Biden 54, Trump 45 in September poll

No previous YouGov/CCES poll

There is a prevailing take home that has emerged in the most frequently surveyed state in the 2020 presidential race. The first point on the checklist is always to ask whether Biden is around 50 percent and if Trump is in the mid-40s. This batch of polls checks that box for the most part. Those that do not, like the Emerson survey show no real movement poll-to-poll from the last update, have Biden over the majority mark (ABC/WaPo) or have the president ahead in a state where polls have shown that less than a tenth of the time. But that 50-44 (rounded) edge the former vice president has had has been among the most consistent realities of this race for months. That consistency has kept the Keystone state firmly lodged in the tipping point position well inside Biden's coalition of states.

Texas

(Trump 50, Biden 49 via Emerson | Trump 50, Biden 45 via Gravis Marketing | Trump 49, Biden 47 via YouGov/CCES)

[Current FHQ margin: Trump +1.45] 

Emerson: Trump 52, Biden 48 in May poll

Gravis: Trump 46, Biden 44 in July poll

No previous YouGov/CCES poll

Like Iowa and Ohio, Texas has been a state that has swung toward the Democrats since 2016, but shifted in a manner that is in line with the average change across the country. That has made the Lone Star state look much more competitive in 2020, but it continues to be basically the North Carolina of the Trump side of the partisan line. The president has led throughout, but has maintained a narrow -- and at this point 48-46 (rounded) -- edge in the FHQ averages. The newly added surveys do little to disrupt that general outlook in Texas. 

Utah

(Trump 51, Biden 44 via Y2 Analytics)

[Current FHQ margin: Trump +13.44] 

Y2 Analytics: Trump 50, Biden 40 in early October poll

Look, this is among the rosiest polls a Democrat will likely ever get in the Beehive state. But then, the Y2 Analytics series of polls this year in Utah, has been that way for Joe Biden. But the fact remains that no Democrat has cleared 40 percent in Utah since Johnson carried the state in 1964. Obama came closest in 2008 with 35 percent there, but this series polls stands out in a state where the FHQ average has settled in at 52-39 (rounded) with Trump out in front.

Wisconsin

(Biden 51, Trump 47 via Civiqs | Biden 53, Trump 45 via Ipsos | Biden 51, Trump 49 via AtlasIntel | Biden 53, Trump 45 via Emerson | Biden 49, Trump 46 via Susquehanna | Biden 52, Trump 41 via Siena/NYT Upshot | Trump 52, Biden 44 via CNN)

[Current FHQ margin: Biden +6.39] 

Civiqs: Biden 53, Trump 45 in mid-October poll

Ipsos: Biden 53, Trump 44 in poll last week

No previous AtlasIntel poll

Emerson: Biden 52, Trump 45 in September poll

Susquehanna: Biden 46, Trump 45 in mid-October poll

Siena: Trump 51, Biden 41 in mid-October poll

CNN: Biden 52, Trump 42 in September poll

There just is not that much different from one poll to the latest in this group of new surveys out of the Badger state. And two of the three polls that find a greater than one point change increase the former vice president's advantage there. But the bigger thing in Wisconsin is that Biden's average FHQ share has now, as in Michigan, surpassed the 50 percent threshold, a point he passes in six of the seven new polls today. Trump does not need Wisconsin, but with Biden north of 50 percent at FHQ in both Michigan and Wisconsin now, the president's margin for error is quite low. Without those two, Trump absolutely has to run the table through the Biden toss ups and claim the one remaining blue wall state he flipped (and where Biden is barely below 50 percent at FHQ), Pennsylvania. 

NOTE: 

A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2020 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
DC-3 VT-3 (6)2	NJ-14 (156)	NE CD2-1 WI-10 (253)	AK-3 (125)	TN-11 (60)
MA-11 (17)	OR-7 (163)	PA-203 (273 | 285)	MO-10 (122)	KY-8 (49)
MD-10 (27)	IL-20 (183)	NV-6 (279 | 265)	SC -9 (112)	SD-3 (41)
HI-4 (31)	ME-2 (185)	AZ-11 (290 | 259)	MT-3 NE CD1-1 (103)	AL-9 (38)
NY-29 (60)	CO-9 (194)	FL-29 (319 | 248)	KS-6 (99)	ID-4 (29)
CA-55 (115)	VA-13 (207)	ME CD2-1 NC-15 (335 | 219)	IN-11 (93)	AR-6 (25)
DE-3 (118)	NH-4 (211)	GA-16 (351 | 203)	NE-2 (82)	OK-7 (19)
WA-12 (130)	NM-5 (216)	IA-6 (187)	UT-6 (80)	ND-3 (12)
CT-7 ME CD1-1 (138)	MN-10 (226)	OH-18 (181)	MS-6 (74)	WV-5 (9)
RI-4 (142)	MI-16 (242)	TX-38 (163)	LA-8 (68)	WY-3 NE CD3-1 (4)
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 Pennsylvania (Biden's toss up states plus the Pennsylvania), he would have 285 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Biden's number is on the left and Trump's is on the right in bold italics. 3 Pennsylvania is the state where Biden crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election, the tipping point state. The tipping point cell is shaded in yellow to denote that and the font color is adjusted to attempt to reflect the category in which the state is.

57 new polls from 16 states and another poll out of the second district in Nebraska led to the following changes:

• Nebraska CD2 moves into the middle column at the very top, a once cell shift toward the partisan line.
• Arizona and Florida traded spots on the Electoral College Spectrum with the Sunshine state moving closer the partisan line. 
• Speaking of the partisan line, Maine CD2 moved away from it and to the other side of North Carolina in the order. 
• Wisconsin saw Joe Biden's share of support push across the 50 percent barrier there. 

2 days to go.

Where things stood at FHQ two days before election day (or close to it) in...
2016
2012
2008


--
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 Biden 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	Potential Switch
Georgia	from Toss Up Biden	to Toss Up Trump
Iowa	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Kansas	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Nevada	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
New Hampshire	from Strong Biden	to Lean Biden
New Mexico	from Strong Biden	to Lean Biden
Ohio	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Pennsylvania	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

--
Methodological Note: In past years, FHQ has tried some different ways of dealing with states with no polls or just one poll in the early rounds of these projections. It does help that the least polled states are often the least competitive. The only shortcoming is that those states may be a little off in the order in the Spectrum. In earlier cycles, a simple average of the state's three previous cycles has been used. But in 2016, FHQ strayed from that and constructed an average swing from 2012 to 2016 that was applied to states. That method, however, did little to prevent anomalies like the Kansas poll that had Clinton ahead from biasing the averages. In 2016, the early average swing in the aggregate was  too small to make much difference anyway. For 2020, FHQ has utilized an average swing among states that were around a little polled state in the rank ordering on election day in 2016. If there is just one poll in Delaware in 2020, for example, then maybe it is reasonable to account for what the comparatively greater amount of polling tells us about the changes in Connecticut, New Jersey and New Mexico. Or perhaps the polling in Iowa, Mississippi and South Carolina so far tells us a bit about what may be happening in Alaska where no public polling has been released. That will hopefully work a bit better than the overall average that may end up a bit more muted.


--
Recent posts:

Happy Halloween, 2020

The Electoral College Map (10/31/20)

The Electoral College Map (10/30/20)

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