--
6 days until election day.
Showing posts with label electoral college. Show all posts
Showing posts with label electoral college. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 30, 2024
Tuesday, October 29, 2024
Monday, October 28, 2024
Sunday, October 27, 2024
Saturday, October 26, 2024
Tuesday, January 24, 2023
Legislation to Alter Electoral Vote Allocation Introduced in Nebraska
Nebraska shifted away from a winner-take-all allocation of electoral college votes for the 1992 cycle and efforts have been continually mounted ever since to return to that method. None of them have been successful, including legislation from the 2021 legislative session that died in committee.
But that has not stopped another bill from coming forward in 2023. Senator Loren Lippincott (34th, Central City) has become the latest to attempt to tackle the issue following a cycle in which the Cornhusker state again split its electoral college allocation between Democratic and Republican slates. LB 764 strikes all language from current law that references any distinction between at-large and congressional district electors. It further compels electors -- all five of them -- to cast their electoral votes for the presidential and vice presidential candidates with the highest number of votes statewide.
In eight presidential election cycles since the institution of the congressional district allocation, Nebraska electors have split just twice with the second congressional district around Omaha going for the Democratic candidate in 2008 and again in 2020. That frequency has been enough of an issue for similar legislation to have come up now at least six times, but not enough of a problem for the state to move back to a winner-take-all allocation.
Perhaps 2023 will be different. LB 764 awaits action in the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee.
--
Recent posts:
Thursday, February 18, 2021
Early Signs: Nebraska Electoral Vote Allocation Likely to Stay the Same
Last week FHQ detailed new legislation in Nebraska that would shift the allocation of electoral college votes from a congressional district method back to the standard winner-take-all method used in 48 other states and Washington, DC.
And this latest effort to switch back to a winner-take-all format for the first time since 1988 looks to go down the same road the previous 16 over the years: nowhere. Martha Stoddard at the Omaha World-Herald reported that LB 76's hearing before the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee found more opposition than support in the comments brought before the panel.
Only the bill's sponsor, Senator Julie Slama (R-1st, Peru) and Ryan Hamilton, the executive director of the Republican Party in the Cornhusker state, spoke in favor of the move back to a winner-take-all allocation. Slama called the current system "unfair" and that it places undue partisan pressure on lawmakers in the redistricting process.
Both arguments received pushback from opponents of the bill, including the system's architect, former Senator DiAnna Schimek. Opposition argued that the current system at least potentially makes part of the state -- Omaha -- competitive during a presidential general elections and thus draws some attention to the state.
The bill is not dead, but the signal coming out of the initial hearing was not positive for those seeking a reversion to the winner-take-all system.
Recent posts:
Tuesday, February 9, 2021
Nebraska Once Again Considers Returning to a Winner-Take-All Electoral Vote Allocation
A committee hearing scheduled for next week will once again have the Nebraska legislature considering a return to a winner-take-all allocation of electoral votes in future Electoral College meetings.
LB 76 would revert Nebraska to the same winner-take-all system that it utilized in the Electoral College prior to the 1992 cycle and which all states other than Maine also use.
But these attempts are nothing new in the Cornhusker state. Ever since that 1991 legislative session ushered in the era of electoral vote allocation by congressional district in Nebraska, some legislator or legislators have introduced legislation to rejoin the majority of states in how they handle the process. Each time, however, those efforts have failed. In 1993. In 1995. And in 1997. Chatter ramped up again in the aftermath of the state's first split of electoral votes in 2008, but nothing came of it. The same was true in 2015-16 before the 2016 presidential election and then again after it during the 2017 session.
Now though, on the heels of yet another split of the five electoral votes at stake in Nebraska -- with John Biden replicating Barack Obama's 2008 win in the state's second congressional district on the way to the White House -- talk has again escalated around the idea of abandoning the more proportional system. And that talk with continue at the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs committee hearing next Wednesday.
--
The allocation method Nebraska utilizes is unique compared to most other states, but given its partisan bent, any split that occurs breaks with the overwhelming partisan sentiment in the state. And those are the ends of the spectrum: maintaining a unique system or preserving electoral votes for the Republican nominee. The former has won out to this point since 1992.
Nebraska may have had difficulty in breaking with that tradition, but other states have had their own issues in trying to move to a more proportional, Nebraska-style allocation method. Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin all considered that in the time after the 2012 election. All states were Republican-controlled, but all had gone for Obama in 2012. Efforts failed in all three and 2016 quickly proved the folly such a move would have presented. Trump narrowly won all three states and would have had to have split the electoral votes had those post-2012 plans been instituted. Unintended consequences are everywhere.
--
As a footnote, in recent years (during the 2010s) there have been more, although not more successful, bids to transition Nebraska into the national popular vote pact. There have been at least five (unsuccessful) bills on that front in that time.
Recent posts:
Friday, January 22, 2021
The 2020 Electoral College Spectrum
Final version (certified results)
The 2020 Electoral College Spectrum1
| ||||
DC-3
VT-3
(6)2
| IL-20
(162)
| NV-6
(249)
| AK-3
(125)
|
TN-11
(60)
|
MA-11
(17)
| OR-7
(169)
|
PA-203
(269 | 289)
| SC-9
(122)
| AL-9
(49)
|
MD-10
(27)
| NJ-14
(183)
| WI-103 (273 | 269) | KS-6
(113)
| KY-8
(40)
|
HI-4
(31)
| CO-9
(192)
| AZ-11
(308 | 259)
| NE CD1-1 MO-10
(107)
| SD-3
(32)
|
CA-55
(86)
| NM-5
(197)
| GA-16
(319 | 248)
| IN-11
(96)
| AR-6
(29)
|
NY-29
(115)
|
VA-13
(210)
| NC-15
(232)
| MT-3
(85)
| ID-4
(23)
|
ME CD1-1 RI-4
(120)
| ME-2
(212)
| FL-29
(217)
| MS-6
(82)
|
OK-7
(19)
|
CT-7
(127)
| NH-4
(216)
| TX-38
(188)
| LA-8
(76)
|
ND-3
(12)
|
WA-12
(139)
|
MN-10 NE CD2-1
(227)
| ME CD2-1 OH-18
(150)
| NE-2
(68)
|
WV-5
(9)
|
DE-3
(142)
| MI-16
(243)
| IA-6
(131)
| UT-6
(66)
|
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 through Pennsylvania), he would have 289 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 and Wisconsin are the states where Biden crossed the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election, the tipping point states in the order. The tipping point cells are shaded in yellow to denote that and the font color is adjusted to attempt to reflect the category in which the state is. | ||||
More analysis to come.
Friday, November 13, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/13/20) -- 306-232
Update for the afternoon of November 13.
The final calls were made on Friday afternoon with Georgia's 16 electoral votes going to Biden and North Carolina's 15 to Trump. That brings the final 2020 electoral vote tally to Biden 306, Trump 232, the exact same final total in 2016 but on opposite sides of the partisan line.
The scorecard for FHQ was similar to the 2008 projection when we missed on Indiana, North Carolina and Nebraska's second congressional district. Then, the polls-based projection understated Obama's strength. But in 2020 the projection understated President Trump's position in several states through the lens of the state-level polls. So whereas in 2008 the polls lagged behind the eventual winner's performance, in 2020, the issue was the opposite: running in front of the eventual winner. Although the FHQ projection had President-elect Biden winning Florida, Maine's second congressional district and North Carolina, he fell short in all three.
But FHQ will have a more robust rundown of how the projection in the days to come. For now, the wait is on for state-level certification, the Electoral College vote in December, the congressional count in early January and inauguration on January 20, 2021. All that will occur in the next 68 days.
--
Recent posts:
Recent posts:
Thursday, November 12, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/12/20) -- Biden Adds Arizona
Update for the evening of November 12.
Another batch of counted votes out of Arizona was enough to push President-elect Biden over the the top in the Grand Canyon state on Thursday night. Biden claims the state's 11 electoral votes -- the first time for a Democratic nominee since Bill Clinton won the state in 1996 -- after President Trump ran out of uncounted ballots to realistically (mathematically) eliminate the narrow deficit separating him and his successor.
Georgia and North Carolina now stand as the only uncalled states. The Peach state enters a hand-counted recount on Friday. Results in North Carolina are now imminent. Counties across the Tar Heel state will finalize their unofficial counts throughout the day on Friday following the deadline on Thursday (November 12) for mail-in ballots postmarked by election day to arrive.
--
Recent posts:
Recent posts:
Wednesday, November 11, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/11/20) -- Alaska Raises Trump's Total
Update for the morning of November 11.
New tranche of counted ballots in the Last Frontier puts Alaska in President Trump's column.
Biden leads in Arizona (no consensus call) and Georgia (uncalled with upcoming hand recount) while Tump has the edge in North Carolina (uncalled but results likely after November 12 deadline for mail-in ballots to arrive).
To this point, the 2020 map looks like the 2016 map with the exception of Biden flips in Michigan, Nebraska's second congressional district, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
--
Recent posts:
Recent posts:
Saturday, November 7, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/7/20) -- Biden Tops 270
Update for November 7 (afternoon).
--
Recent posts:
Recent posts:
Friday, November 6, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/6/20) -- Morning Update
Update for the morning of November 6.
Trump continued to gain ground in the vote count in Arizona.
Biden overtook Trump in the vote count in Georgia.
Biden continued to gain ground in the vote count in Pennsylvania.
--
Recent posts:
Recent posts:
Wednesday, November 4, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/4/20) -- Afternoon Update
Update for the afternoon of November 4.
Maine CD2 for Trump
Wisconsin for Biden
Michigan for Biden
Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania remain unsettled.
--
Recent posts:
Recent posts:
Tuesday, November 3, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/3/20) -- Election Day
Update for November 3.
[Updating throughout the day. Scroll down for final margins in states as they go final]
| Final FHQ Margins -- 11/3/20 (*flip from 2016) | ||
State
| Margin | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| Alabama |
+20.07
|
Strong Trump
|
| Alaska |
+6.40
|
Lean Trump
|
| Arizona* |
+2.86
|
Toss Up Biden
|
| Arkansas |
+25.63
|
Strong Trump
|
| California |
+29.26
|
Strong Biden
|
| Colorado |
+12.83
|
Strong Biden
|
| Connecticut |
+24.59
|
Strong Biden
|
| Delaware |
+26.48
|
Strong Biden
|
| Florida* |
+2.94
|
Toss Up Biden
|
| Georgia* |
+0.47
|
Toss Up Biden
|
| Hawaii |
+30.77
|
Strong Biden
|
| Idaho |
+22.58
|
Strong Trump
|
| Illinois |
+16.98
|
Strong Biden
|
| Indiana |
+11.31
|
Strong Trump
|
| Iowa |
+0.79
|
Toss Up Trump
|
| Kansas |
+9.75
|
Lean Trump
|
| Kentucky |
+13.52
|
Strong Trump
|
| Louisiana |
+18.61
|
Strong Trump
|
| Maine |
+13.36
|
Strong Biden
|
| Maine CD1 |
+22.75
|
Strong Biden
|
| Maine CD2* |
+1.73
|
Toss Up Biden
|
| Maryland |
+31.54
|
Strong Biden
|
| Massachusetts |
+36.76
|
Strong Biden
|
| Michigan* |
+7.25
|
Lean Biden
|
| Minnesota |
+8.72
|
Lean Biden
|
| Mississippi |
+16.26
|
Strong Trump
|
| Missouri |
+7.14
|
Lean Trump
|
| Montana |
+7.53
|
Lean Trump
|
| Nebraska |
+11.65
|
Strong Trump
|
| Nebraska CD2* |
+6.06
|
Lean Biden
|
| Nevada |
+4.26
|
Toss Up Biden
|
| New Hampshire |
+10.61
|
Strong Biden
|
| New Jersey |
+19.86
|
Strong Biden
|
| New Mexico |
+11.04
|
Strong Biden
|
| New York |
+29.24
|
Strong Biden
|
| North Carolina* |
+1.85
|
Toss Up Biden
|
| North Dakota |
+25.20
|
Strong Trump
|
| Ohio |
+1.26
|
Toss Up Trump
|
| Oklahoma |
+25.05
|
Strong Trump
|
| Oregon |
+20.05
|
Strong Biden
|
| Pennsylvania* |
+5.14
|
Lean Biden
|
| Rhode Island |
+21.79
|
Strong Biden
|
| South Carolina |
+6.83
|
Lean Trump
|
| South Dakota |
+19.75
|
Strong Trump
|
| Tennessee |
+16.62
|
Strong Trump
|
| Texas |
+1.49
|
Toss Up Trump
|
| Utah |
+13.10
|
Strong Trump
|
| Vermont |
+38.27
|
Strong Biden
|
| Virginia |
+12.08
|
Strong Biden
|
| Washington |
+24.18
|
Strong Biden
|
| Washington, DC |
+78.25
|
Strong Biden
|
| West Virginia |
+27.32
|
Strong Trump
|
| Wisconsin* |
+6.69
|
Lean Biden
|
| Wyoming |
+38.22
|
Strong Trump
|
Monday, November 2, 2020
The Electoral College Map (11/2/20)
Update for November 2.
As FHQ noted over the weekend, it was/is going to take a lot to move the needle down the stretch in any state, much less the core battlegrounds that have witnessed by far the most polling activity all year. And that is borne out in what follows. Yes, Arizona and Florida traded spots in the order yesterday, but both remained on the Biden side of the partisan line. No, neither is there comfortably. They both continue to fall under Biden +3. [But the two states did revert to form today with Florida nudging past Arizona away from the partisan line.] Everything else, however remains the same with respect to the order of these states. There was some subtle shifting in this last mega-batch of surveys, but the order (from most to least Biden favorable) is intact: Michigan > Wisconsin > Pennsylvania > Florida > Arizona > North Carolina. The same Rust Belt/Sun Belt divide that has been evident nearly throughout these updates continues right up to the last day in the run up to the end of the voting phase of this campaign.
Below FHQ will go through a pretty simple checklist with each of the six battlegrounds:
1. Who did the movement within polls -- from the preceding poll to the most recent -- benefit?
2. How many times did Biden hit 50 percent in this last wave of polls? [Interestingly or not, this metric actually pretty closely mirrors the order in the FHQ average margins.]
On to the polls...
Polling Quick Hits:
NOTE:
Where things stood at FHQ a day 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.
--
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:
Polling Quick Hits:
Arizona
(Biden 50, Trump 48 via Ipsos | Biden 48, Trump 48 via Marist | Biden 50, Trump 47 via Change Research | Biden 50, Trump 47 via Data for Progress | Biden 48, Trump 46 via Morning Consult | Biden 46, Trump 45 via Data Orbital | Biden 50, Trump 46 via Redfield and Wilton Strategies)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +2.82]
Ipsos: Biden 47, Trump 47 in poll last week
Marist: Biden 50, Trump 45 in July poll
Change Research: Biden 51, Trump 45 in mid-October poll
Data for Progress: Biden 49, Trump 45 in September poll
Morning Consult: Trump 48, Biden 47 in mid-October poll
Data Orbital: Biden 47, Trump 42 in mid-October poll
Redfield and Wilton: Biden 49, Trump 43 in early October poll
In Arizona, most of the last minute movement was toward President Trump. They were not big shifts, but in five of the seven polls that had a previous survey in the series, Trump gained ground. Yet, Biden was over 50 percent in the final poll in four of the seven pollsters with new surveys in the Grand Canyon state. But the former vice president's average lead ticked down a few one-hundredths of a point on the final day before election day.
Florida
(Trump 48, Biden 47 via Insider Advantage | Biden 45, Trump 43 via AYTM | Biden 51, Trump 48 via Change Research | Biden 47, Trump 42 via Quinnipiac | Biden 51, Trump 47 via Ipsos | Biden 51, Trump 48 via Data for Progress | Trump 51, Biden 49 via Frederick Polls | Biden 52, Trump 45 via Morning Consult | Trump 51, Biden 47 via Targoz Market Research | Biden 50, Trump 46 via Redfield and Wilton Strategies)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +2.92]
Insider Advantage: Trump 46, Biden 43 in early October poll
No previous AYTM poll
Change Research: Biden 51, Trump 44 in mid-October poll
Quinnipiac: Biden 45, Trump 42 in late October poll
Ipsos: Biden 48, Trump 47 in poll last week
Data for Progress: Biden 46, Trump 43 in September poll
No previous Frederick poll
Morning Consult: Biden 52, Trump 45 in mid-October poll
No previous Targoz poll
Redfield and Wilton: Biden 49, Trump 44 in early October poll
In the Sunshine state, the picture was a bit more muddled. Trump closed the gap in some polls (three) as they transitioned to their last surveys, but Biden widened his in a nearly equivalent number of polls (two). And the status quo carried over in another couple pollsters final snapshots. But importantly, the former vice president hit or exceeded 50 percent in seven of the ten surveys and saw his FHQ average margin push up (and past Arizona in the order) on the final day before the election.
Michigan
(Biden 50, Trump 43 via Research Company | Biden 51, Trump 44 via Change Research | Trump 48, Biden 46 via Trafalgar Group | Biden 48, Trump 46 via AtlasIntel | Biden 52, Trump 45 via Morning Consult | Biden 53, Trump 39 via Targoz Marketing Research | Biden 54, Trump 41 via Redfield and Wilton Strategies)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +7.28]
No previous Research Company poll
Change Research: Biden 51, Trump 44 in mid-October poll
Trafalgar: Trump 49, Biden 47 in late October poll
No previous AtlasIntel poll
Morning Consult: Biden 52, Trump 44 in mid-October poll
No previous Targoz poll
Redfield and Wilton: Biden 50, Trump 42 in early October poll
The story was quite similar in Michigan as compared to Florida. More polls remained exactly the same from next to last to last poll in the sequence than moved toward Biden or Trump in that transition. And Biden was at or over 50 percent in five of the seven surveys. Yet, the Democratic nominee's average advantage in the Great Lakes state slightly shrunk while his average share of support remained north of 50 percent here at FHQ.
North Carolina
(Biden 49, Trump 47 via Change Research | Biden 50, Trump 48 via Ipsos | Biden 50, Trump 48 via Data for Progress | Biden 51, Trump 49 via Frederick Polls | Biden 49, Trump 48 via Morning Consult | Trump 49, Biden 47 via Redfield and Wilton Strategies)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +1.81]
Change Research: Biden 50, Trump 47 in mid-October poll
Ipsos: Biden 49, Trump 48 in poll last week
Data for Progress: Biden 48, Trump 44 in mid-October poll
No previous Frederick poll
Morning Consult: Biden 50, Trump 47 in mid-October poll
Redfield and Wilton: Biden 49, Trump 44 in early October poll
As in Arizona, most of the final movement in the surveys of the Tar Heel state was toward Trump. More polls (four) had the president making up ground in their final iterations than was the case for Biden (one). And befitting North Carolina's status among these six states as the closest, Biden only reached or surpassed 50 percent in half of the six surveys that were released on the Monday prior to election day. As has been the case all along, North Carolina is close, but is and has been consistently tipped toward the Democratic nominee throughout the summer and into the fall. And his FHQ average lead over the president nudged up on the final day.
Pennsylvania
(Trump 49, Biden 48 via Susquehanna | Biden 50, Trump 47 via Pulse Opinion Research | Biden 50, Trump 44 via Research Company | Biden 51, Trump 49 via AYTM | Trump 51, Biden 46 via Marist | Biden 50, Trump 46 via Change Research | Biden 50, Trump 45 via Monmouth | Biden 52, Trump 45 via Data for Progress | Trump 52, Biden 48 via Frederick Polls | Trump 48, Biden 46 via Trafalgar Group | Biden 52, Trump 43 via Morning Consult | Biden 56, Trump 42 via Targoz Market Research | Biden 50, Trump 45 via Redfield and Wilton Strategies)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +5.22]
Susquehanna: Biden 44, Trump 42 in September poll
Pulse Opinion Research: Biden 50, Trump 47 in mid-October poll
No previous Research Company poll
No previous AYTM poll
Marist: Biden 53, Trump 44 in September poll
Change Research: Biden 49, Trump 47 in mid-October poll
Monmouth: Biden 53, Trump 45 in early October poll
No previous Data for Progress poll
No previous Frederick poll
Trafalgar: Trump 48, Biden 48 in poll last week
Morning Consult: Biden 52, Trump 43 in mid-October poll
No previous Targoz poll
Redfield and Wilton: Biden 49, Trump 42 in early October poll
There is a distinction to be made, FHQ thinks, in looking at these battlegrounds between Trump turning things around and merely making up ground. The latter is most often about partisans -- partisan leaners and/or undecideds -- coming home as election day nears. Much of what appears to be happening in this wave of surveys is the latter. Biden is relatively stationary in most of these states and in polls where Trump made gains, it is about closing the gap rather than taking the lead. Pennsylvania is probably the best microcosm of this. And that is fitting since the Keystone state is still the pivotal state in the order on the Electoral College Spectrum below. Most of the movement in the polling of the commonwealth represented here (at least where there was a prior survey) shifted things toward Trump. However, in this wave of 13 new polls, Biden was at or over 50 percent in 11 of them. That is some striking consensus across a number of polls/series of polls. Voters are going to vote and actually decide this election, but one would rather be the Biden campaign than the Trump campaign ending it in Pennsylvania above 50 percent. Of course, the former vice president falls just short of the majority mark in his average share of support in the Keystone state (49.8 percent), failing to match Michigan and Wisconsin on that count.
Wisconsin
(Biden 50, Trump 42 via Research Company | Biden 53, Trump 45 via Change Research | Biden 54, Trump 41 via Morning Consult | Biden 53, Trump 41 via Redfield and Wilton Strategies)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +6.61]
No previous Research Company poll
Change Research: Biden 52, Trump 44 in mid-October poll
Morning Consult: Biden 54, Trump 42 in mid-October poll
Redfield and Wilton: Biden 51, Trump 41 in early October poll
Survey activity has slowed down considerably in Wisconsin as election day has approached. The Badger state is still among these core battleground states, but there is a reason polling has decreased: all of the movement is in Biden's direction. More importantly, perhaps, the Democratic nominee was at or north of 50 percent in all four new polls released in Wisconsin today. And, again, Biden's average share there is over the majority mark as well.
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)
| FL-29
(308 | 259)
| MT-3 NE CD1-1
(103)
| AL-9
(38)
|
NY-29
(60)
|
CO-9
(194)
| AZ-11
(319 | 230)
| 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. | ||||
These 47 new surveys from the six core battlegrounds tell a similar tale to the one that has been told throughout the summer and into the fall of this race for the White House. Biden is ahead and ahead in this group of states in an order that has been established and maintained here at FHQ. The math of this in view of the 270 electoral votes necessary to claim the White House is simple enough. If this is how things shake out tomorrow in these states, then Biden will win. Trump has to have the three Sun Belt states that are now Biden toss ups and pick off at least one of those Rust Belt states in order to successfully defend his 2016 win. And Pennsylvania as the tipping point is the most likely of those three states. In fact, that is where the campaigns have turned their attention as the days in this race have dwindled.
1 day to go.
Where things stood at FHQ a day 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:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)