Friday, September 30, 2016

The Electoral College Map (9/30/16)



New State Polls (9/30/16)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Clinton
Trump
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Florida
9/27-9/29
+/- 3.5%
820 likely voters
46
42
4
+4
--
Florida
9/28-9/29
+/- 4.0%
619 likely voters
47
46
1
+1
+2.10
Michigan
9/27-9/28
+/- 4.0%
600 likely voters
42
35
10
+7
+5.99
Nevada
9/27-9/29
+/- 4.4%
500 likely voters
44
38
6
+6
+0.24
New Hampshire
9/27-9/29
+/- 4.4%
502 likely voters
42
35
4
+7
+5.76


Polling Quick Hits:
The end of the week brought another wave of state-level polls that were in the field completely after the first presidential debate earlier in the week. And that has folks out looking high and low for debate effects in the results. FHQ would urge some patience. There simply has not been as much state-level polling in the time since that debate to arrive at any conclusion. Now, there have been a series of national polls -- national polls with a time series with fairly regular intervals -- that have indicated that, but the evidence at the state level is still inconclusive.

Unlike those national polls, the state surveys are less regular in their occurrence. Take this MassINC/WBUR survey of New Hampshire. The last time the firm was in the field in the Granite state was right around the time the calendar was flipping from July to August; right after the conventions. Well, if you take those results and compare them with the just-released numbers, it shows a narrowing in the race; not a post-debate increase in the margin.

And this is not to suggest that there has been no effect. Again, the national polls have so far shown that Clinton got something out of the Monday night showdown at Hofstra. But it is more difficult sometimes to put state polls in their proper context. One not only has to look back at the last poll the firm conducted in the state (if any), but also explore where that firm's polls have generally fallen relative to other polls in the same basic time period.

All this is to say that the national polls are beginning to show a debate bounce for Clinton, but the state polls are not necessarily indicating that trend.

...yet. On to the day's polls...


Florida:
The two Florida polls also illustrate the state poll lag (or if not that, then the inconclusive nature of the post-debate results to this point). Compared to the last polls from each firm -- Mason-Dixon and Opinion Savvy -- the changes are pretty muted. Clinton gained a couple of points since August in the Mason-Dixon survey while Trump held pat, and in the Opinion Savvy poll, both candidates gained two points, keeping the margin at Clinton +1. Now, this point could be nitpicked to death if it came to that. But the key thing to look at now is the overall state of the polls. In Florida, the pre-debate polling was all over the place. Trump led some and Clinton led others. If the post-debate landscape displaces that trend with, say, a string of Clinton leads (with no interruptions), then something is probably happening. These two along with the PPP survey release from a day ago are perhaps beginning to hint at just that.


Michigan:
In the Great Lakes state, Glengariff had not conducted a survey since the very beginning of August. As was the case with the New Hampshire poll used as an example above, that time period was even more favorable to Clinton than the current survey is. There may have been some additional fluctuations had the firm been in the field in the interim period. All we can glean from the series is that Clinton is still ahead by a margin somewhere in the Lean area. And that is where Michigan has been for the most part here at FHQ. As such, this is an affirming poll.


Nevada:
Changes (September 30)
StateBeforeAfter
NevadaToss Up TrumpToss Up Clinton
The biggest change of the day is Nevada crossing back over the partisan line to Clinton's group of states. Still, comparing this one to the bulk of the recent polling in the Silver state, it does at first glance look like an outlier. First, there have not been a lot of Clinton leads in the polling there throughout September. And second, there certainly have not been any surveys with Clinton ahead by a comfortable margin. All one can say is that the last Suffolk survey had Clinton up two points during an August and early September period when the margins in other polls were similar. That trend may or may not hold with this poll.


New Hampshire:
The Granite state was dealt with above for the most part, but it should be noted that this MassINC survey is consistent with the polling that has been conducted in New Hampshire in September. Clinton's lead there has held steady and her FHQ average in the state has been comfortably in the five to six point range all along.


--
Obviously the Nevada change is the big ticket item for today. It turns blue in crossing over the partisan line. That is reflected on the map, Spectrum and Watch List. The other states represented in today's polls changed little if at all. New Hampshire swapped spots with Virginia on the Spectrum, but that was the extent of it.




The Electoral College Spectrum1
HI-42
(7)
NJ-14
(175)
ME-4
(264)
MS-6
(126)
TN-11
(56)
MD-10
(17)
DE-3
(178)
CO-93
(273 | 274)
MO-10
(120)
AR-6
(45)
VT-3
(20)
NM-5
(183)
FL-29
(302 | 265)
SC-9
(110)
SD-3
(39)
CA-55
(75)
MN-10
(193)
NC-15
(317 | 236)
AK-3
(101)
ND-3
(36)
MA-11
(86)
WI-10
(203)
OH-18
(335 | 221)
KS-6
(98)
ID-4
(33)
NY-29
(115)
MI-16
(219)
NV-6
(341 | 203)
UT-6
(92)
NE-5
(29)
IL-20
(135)
NH-4
(223)
IA-6
(197)
IN-11
(86)
OK-7
(24)
WA-12
(147)
VA-13
(236)
AZ-11
(191)
MT-3
(75)
WV-5
(17)
CT-17
(154)
RI-4
(240)
GA-16
(180)
KY-8
(72)
AL-9
(12)
OR-7
(161)
PA-20
(260)
TX-38
(164)
LA-8
(64)
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 Colorado (all Clinton's toss up states plus Colorado), he would have 274 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 Colorado
 is the state where Clinton crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. Currently, Colorado is in the Toss Up Clinton category.



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
Delaware
from Strong Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Indiana
from Strong Trump
to Lean Trump
Iowa
from Toss Up Trump
to Toss Up Clinton
Maine
from Toss Up Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Michigan
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
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
Ohio
from Toss Up Clinton
to Toss Up Trump
Oregon
from Strong Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Pennsylvania
from Toss Up Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Rhode Island
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
Utah
from Lean Trump
to Strong Trump
Virginia
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (9/29/16)

The Electoral College Map (9/28/16)

The Electoral College Map (9/27/16)

Follow FHQ on TwitterGoogle+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Thursday, September 29, 2016

The Electoral College Map (9/29/16)



New State Polls (9/29/16)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Clinton
Trump
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
California
9/27-9/28
+/- 3.6%
732 likely voters
59
33
3
+26
+21.47
Colorado
9/27-9/28
+/- 3.7%
694 likely voters
46
40
6
+6
+3.42
Florida
9/27-9/28
+/- 3.4%
826 likely voters
45
43
8
+2
+2.08
Missouri
9/26-9/27
+/- 3.0%
1279 likely voters
39
49
--
+10
+7.45
North Carolina
9/27-9/28
+/- 3.3%
861 likely voters
44
42
7
+2
+1.15
Pennsylvania
9/27-9/28
+/- 3.3%
886 likely voters
45
39
8
+6
+4.79
South Carolina
9/18-9/26
+/- 4.5%
475 likely voters
38
42
11
+4
+7.91
Virginia
9/27-9/28
+/- 3.4%
811 likely voters
46
40
5
+6
+5.62


Polling Quick Hits:
Thursday brought eight new state-level polls, seven of which were in the field after Monday's first presidential debate. Either the jury is still out on the true impact or the difference thus far is negligible. FHQ would tend to land on the jury still being out, but that is a position rooted in the desire for a bit more data to accrue first.

California:
There is nothing much to see here. Not only does the new Survey USA poll of the Golden state echo the survey the firm released in early September, but it looks a lot like the final results in the state in 2012.


Colorado:
Somehow this is the first PPP survey of Colorado this year, and as a result, it lacks a natural point of comparison. That is relevant because this survey was in the field completely after the first debate. What looks like Clinton jumping out to a lead, then, may be nothing more than a poll inconsistent with the other recent polls in the state. The frequency of polls being released in the Centennial state has picked up, so more data will be along soon enough to help settle the matter.


Florida:
More of the same in the Sunshine state: Clinton and Trump have traded leads in recent polls there and the margins have been within a +/-3 point range in both directions. This new PPP survey fits in that window and also is little different from the early September poll the firm conducted in the state.


Missouri:
After narrowing some following the conventions, Missouri has subsequently moved in the opposite direction in the time since. The polling margins have climbed to around the Strong/Lean line and pull the FHQ graduated weighted average in the Show-Me state up toward that threshold as well. The former bellwether is lodged well within the Lean Trump category for the time being.


North Carolina:
Most of the Florida description above applies in the Tar Heel state as well. The range is similar as is the narrow Clinton advantage. The only difference is that there was a swing in the PPP series of polls in the state. Whereas the survey last week found Trump up a couple of points, this post-debate poll has Clinton up two.


Pennsylvania:
For starters, the fourth of the PPP surveys today closely resembles the firm's last poll in Pennsylvania. Yes, that six point margin breaks with the slew of more narrow polls out of the Keystone state over the last week or so. However, the simple truth of the matter is that each candidates' share of support is within their established ranges there. It is just that Clinton is at the top end of her range and Trump on the lower end of his.


South Carolina:
Down in the Palmetto state, September has ushered in a series polls finding a double digit lead for Trump. That was a departure from some of the narrower survey margins that emerged in the post-convention period. But this Winthrop poll is a return to those tighter results in a state that has moved and seemingly taken root in the Lean Trump area.


Virginia:
Finally in Virginia, the race seems to have settled into a solid Lean-level lead for Clinton. Clinton, more often than not in recent polls, can be found somewhere in the mid-40s while Trump tends to trail somewhere around the 40 percent mark. That is as true in this latest PPP survey of the Old Dominion as it was when the firm was last in the field there earlier in September.


--
These polls did little to change things here at FHQ. Virginia came back on the Watch List and shuffled again with Michigan on the Spectrum. California also moved a cell deeper into the Strong Clinton category on the Spectrum, switching with Massachusetts. Other than that, everything else held steady.




The Electoral College Spectrum1
HI-42
(7)
NJ-14
(175)
ME-4
(264)
MS-6
(126)
TN-11
(56)
MD-10
(17)
DE-3
(178)
CO-93
(273 | 274)
MO-10
(120)
AR-6
(45)
VT-3
(20)
NM-5
(183)
FL-29
(302 | 265)
SC-9
(110)
SD-3
(39)
CA-55
(75)
MN-10
(193)
NC-15
(317 | 236)
AK-3
(101)
ND-3
(36)
MA-11
(86)
WI-10
(203)
OH-18
(335 | 221)
KS-6
(98)
ID-4
(33)
NY-29
(115)
MI-16
(219)
NV-6
(203)
UT-6
(92)
NE-5
(29)
IL-20
(135)
VA-13
(232)
IA-6
(197)
IN-11
(86)
OK-7
(24)
WA-12
(147)
NH-4
(236)
AZ-11
(191)
MT-3
(75)
WV-5
(17)
CT-17
(154)
RI-4
(240)
GA-16
(180)
KY-8
(72)
AL-9
(12)
OR-7
(161)
PA-20
(260)
TX-38
(164)
LA-8
(64)
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 Colorado (all Clinton's toss up states plus Colorado), he would have 274 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 Colorado
 is the state where Clinton crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. Currently, Colorado is in the Toss Up Clinton category.



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
Delaware
from Strong Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Indiana
from Strong Trump
to Lean Trump
Iowa
from Toss Up Trump
to Toss Up Clinton
Maine
from Toss Up Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Michigan
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
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
Ohio
from Toss Up Clinton
to Toss Up Trump
Oregon
from Strong Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Pennsylvania
from Toss Up Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Rhode Island
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
Utah
from Lean Trump
to Strong Trump
Virginia
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (9/28/16)

The Electoral College Map (9/27/16)

The Electoral College Map (9/26/16)

Follow FHQ on TwitterGoogle+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

The Electoral College Map (9/28/16)



New State Polls (9/28/16)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Clinton
Trump
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Michigan
9/27
+/- 2.2%
1956 likely voters
46
41
4
+5
+5.92
Nebraska
9/25-9/27
+/- 3.6%
700 likely voters
29.3
55.7
6.6
+26.4
+20.59
Washington
9/25-9/26
+/- 3.6%
700 likely voters
44.2
38.4
5.6
+5.8
+11.19


Polling Quick Hits:
Midweek brought the first post-debate state-level poll and a couple of others from Emerson that overlapped with the first debate on Monday night.

Michigan:
That first completely post-debate poll was from Mitchell Research out of the Great Lakes state. Throughout September, the Michigan average margin has narrowed as the polls have ranged from about a one to six point Clinton advantage. This latest Mitchell poll is on the upper side of that spread, but shaves a point off the early September survey from the firm. In the grand scheme of things in this race, it represents no real change. However, it is noteworthy that this is Trump's third consecutive poll in the 40s (rather than below that threshold).


Nebraska:
In Nebraska, Emerson's debate-straddling survey finds Trump inching up to within range of where Romney was in the state four years ago. Clinton, on the other hand, is lagging well behind not only Trump in one of the reddest states, but trailing Obama's final share of support by around ten points as well.


Washington:
If the trajectory of the race is toward a more normal position in the Cornhusker state, the opposite is true in Washington. There, though the polling has been light, the margin has been off the track as compared to the vote distribution in the Evergreen state during the Obama era. One thing can be said about the polling in Washington: it has been quite volatile. Clinton has led across the full set of surveys there in 2016, but both candidates' shares of support has varied widely; Clinton within a 14 point window and Trump in a 19 point range. Those are wild fluctuations given such a sporadically surveyed state.


--
Michigan trades spots with Virginia on the Spectrum and moves onto the Watch List. Other than that, all remains unchanged from a day ago.




The Electoral College Spectrum1
HI-42
(7)
NJ-14
(175)
ME-4
(264)
MS-6
(126)
TN-11
(56)
MD-10
(17)
DE-3
(178)
CO-93
(273 | 274)
MO-10
(120)
AR-6
(45)
VT-3
(20)
NM-5
(183)
FL-29
(302 | 265)
SC-9
(110)
SD-3
(39)
MA-11
(31)
MN-10
(193)
NC-15
(317 | 236)
AK-3
(101)
ND-3
(36)
CA-55
(86)
WI-10
(203)
OH-18
(335 | 221)
KS-6
(98)
ID-4
(33)
NY-29
(115)
VA-13
(216)
NV-6
(203)
UT-6
(92)
NE-5
(29)
IL-20
(135)
MI-16
(232)
IA-6
(197)
IN-11
(86)
OK-7
(24)
WA-12
(147)
NH-4
(236)
AZ-11
(191)
MT-3
(75)
WV-5
(17)
CT-17
(154)
RI-4
(240)
GA-16
(180)
KY-8
(72)
AL-9
(12)
OR-7
(161)
PA-20
(260)
TX-38
(164)
LA-8
(64)
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 Colorado (all Clinton's toss up states plus Colorado), he would have 274 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 Colorado
 is the state where Clinton crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. Currently, Colorado is in the Toss Up Clinton category.



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
Delaware
from Strong Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Indiana
from Strong Trump
to Lean Trump
Iowa
from Toss Up Trump
to Toss Up Clinton
Maine
from Toss Up Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Michigan
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
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
Ohio
from Toss Up Clinton
to Toss Up Trump
Oregon
from Strong Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Pennsylvania
from Toss Up Clinton
to Lean Clinton
Rhode Island
from Lean Clinton
to Toss Up Clinton
Utah
from Lean Trump
to Strong Trump
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (9/27/16)

The Electoral College Map (9/26/16)

The Electoral College Map (9/25/16)

Follow FHQ on TwitterGoogle+ and Facebook or subscribe by Email.