Friday, October 3, 2008

The Electoral College Map (10/4/08)

I don't like not have a ton of new polling data on any given day, but it is nice on a day like today when only five polls come out (Well, six, but I lumped the Rasmussen poll in New Hampshire into "yesterday's" post). And those five polls from five different states tell a story similar to what we have witnessed recently: Obama continues to strengthen his position in this race. However, we rarely get a sweep by one of the candidates, but that's what we got today. Now, we would expect to see New York, Rhode Island and Washington colored blue. Nevada and North Carolina, though, are more competitive, and continue the slow creep toward Obama.

New Polls (Oct. 3)
StatePollMargin
Nevada
Rasmussen
+4
New York
Siena
+22
North Carolina
Elon
+2
Rhode Island
Rhode Island College
+14
Washington
Rasmussen
+10

Both the Silver state and the Tar Heel state have been consistently behind McCain at one point or another during this race. North Carolina has been some shade of red for the entire duration of this map series and Nevada has switched back and forth between the McCain and Obama toss up categories since the early summer months. And on the strength of the Rasmussen poll out in the Silver state today, flips again; this time to Obama.

Changes (Oct. 3)
StateBeforeAfter
Nevada
Toss Up McCain
Toss Up Obama

But that brings us to broader discussion we've have had in the comments section here over the last week of so concerning FHQ's methodology. We have been using a weighted average that gives the most weight to the one most recent poll while discounting all the rest back to Super Tuesday. I like having those past polls in there -- that information is valuable, if inflated at the moment -- but they can serve as a drag on certain states that makes the average there sluggish in response to new data. So, while the average, on the whole does a good job of laying out the basic rank ordering of the states in this race, there are some problem areas that need to be addressed.

What are those states and what are the areas? Well, I think it is clear that something is up in both Minnesota and North Carolina that we just aren't capturing with our weighted average in its current configuation. Of the last seven polls in North Carolina, Obama has been either ahead or tied in six. The story is similar in Minnesota. McCain has only been ahead in the Survey USA poll out yesterday, but the Arizona senator has been within three points of Obama in six of the last eight polls there, dating back to September 11. While both states may not be as close as some other sites have them, they are both in my estimation, closer than what the map and the Electoral College Spectrum below indicate. I also think that Florida can be put in this group as well. In nine of the most recent ten polls, Obama has been ahead or tied with the Arizona senator. Now sure, I can be accused of cherrypicking the number of polls I'm looking at in each case, but in each state those polls represent a sizable chunk of the total number of polls in all three. The ten polls in Florida represent just under 20% of the data we have on the Sunshine state. In North Carolina it's a shade under 1 in every six polls. And in Minnesota, we're talking about a group of polls that makes up almost 30% of the total number of polls conducted there this cycle.

In other words, we're seeing a pattern. But the average isn't reacting as quickly as perhaps it should to those changes.
[Click Map to Enlarge]

Well, despite that, we see that Obama adds Nevada's five electoral votes to bring his total from yesterday up to 278 electoral votes. But the fact remains that we just don't see many changes around here. That's fine. I don't mind being the among the conservative voices methodologically speaking in the great electoral college debate/discussion being had across the web. However, I do want the numbers to reflect as accurately as possible the actual state of the race. Fine, what are you going to do already, FHQ? As I said in the comments section today, I'll look into this over the weekend -- now that I have a little bit of time -- and will probably initially reexaine the weighting scheme. All polls are not created equally. May polls, for example, mean less now than September polls and our method needs to reflect that. I have done some trial runs of a couple of progressive weighting structures that discount those earlier polls more than the recent ones and the results are promising. This is on a trial basis in just a handful of states, but I want to try and work out the kinks before I use any of them across the board.

The Electoral College Spectrum*
HI-4
(7)**
ME-4
(157)
NH-4
(264/278)
ND-3
(160)
KS-6
(64)
VT-3
(10)
WA-11
(168)
CO-9***
(273/274)
WV-5
(157)
AR-6
(58)
RI-4
(14)
IA-7
(175)
NV-5
(278/265)
TX-34
(152)
NE-5
(52)
IL-21
(35)
OR-7
(182)
OH-20
(298/260)
GA-15
(118)
TN-11
(47)
MD-10
(45)
NJ-15
(197)
VA-13
(311/240)
AK-3
(115)
KY-8
(36)
DE-3
(48)
MN-10
(207)
FL-27
(338/227)
MS-6
(100)
AL-9
(28)
CT-7
(55)
WI-10
(217)
IN-11
(349/200)
SC-8
(94)
WY-3
(19)
NY-31
(86)
NM-5
(222)
MO-11
(360/189)
SD-3
(86)
ID-4
(16)
CA-55
(141)
MI-17
(239/316)
NC-15
(178)
AZ-10
(83)
OK-7
(12)
MA-12
(153)
PA-21
(260/299)
MT-3
(163)
LA-9
(73)
UT-5
(5)
*Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.
**The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, McCain won all the states up to and including Pennsylvania (all Obama's toss up states, but Michigan), he would have 299 electoral votes. Both candidates numbers are only totaled through their rival's toss up states. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and McCain's is on the right in italics.

***
Colorado is the state where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. It is currently favoring Obama, thus the blue text in that cell.

Alright, back to our regularly scheduled electoral map update. The only change on the Electoral College Spectrum today is the same change we saw above; Nevada turning blue...again. If the Obama gains there plateau or continue to rise, these fluctuations will work themselves out. And that goes for Virginia and Ohio as well. The basic idea remains the same though. McCain is on the defensive now that Michigan is off the board. However, if Minnesota is getting closer, unlike Michigan and New Hampshire and Pennsylvania (and to a lesser extent Colorado), then that might be a decent trade. Not ideal, but decent. If McCain holds the states in shades of red, adding Minnesota gets him to 270 exactly. That is a razor-thin victory, but a win is a win. Right Al Gore? Adding Colorado in place of Minnesota would trigger the tiebreaker in the House. But really those are the options now. Well, those two states and that second district in Maine. I can see now where that one could come into play.

Red states + Colorado + Maine's 2nd = 270

That may be easier said than done when Obama is making serious runs at Virginia/North Carolina and Ohio/Indiana.

The Watch List*
StateSwitch
Iowafrom Obama lean
to Strong Obama
Michiganfrom Toss Up Obama
to Obama lean
Missourifrom Toss Up McCainto McCain lean
Nevadafrom Toss Up Obama
to Toss Up McCain
North Carolinafrom McCain lean
to Toss Up McCain
Ohiofrom Toss Up McCain
to Toss Up Obama
Oregonfrom Obama lean
to Strong Obama
Pennsylvaniafrom Toss Up Obama
to Obama lean
Texasfrom Strong McCainto McCain lean
Virginiafrom Toss Up McCain
to Toss Up Obama
Washingtonfrom Strong Obama
to Obama lean
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

The Watch List's only change today is the potential change Nevada could make given new polling. If there is a shift there toward McCain, the average could push back into the red.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (10/3/08)

Live Blog and Open Thread: The Vice Presidential Debate

Where is McCain Playing Offense Now that Michigan is Off the Table?

The Electoral College Map (10/3/08)

After the debate there was plenty to talk about last night, but the state polls released during the day yesterday and into the night/early morning were certainly noteworthy as well. In total there were 16 new polls in 14 states. And in most cases, the post-Lehman conventional wisdom prevailed. In most cases...

New Polls (Oct. 2)
StatePollMargin
Colorado
Ciruli
+1
Florida
Insider Advantage
+3
Georgia
Insider Advantage
+6
Kentucky
Rasmussen
+10
Michigan
Public Policy Polling
+10
Minnesota
Survey USA
+1
Montana
Rasmussen
+8
Nebraska
Rasmussen
+19
Nevada
Insider Advantage
+1
New Hampshire
Rasmussen
+10
New Hampshire
St. Anselm
+12
New Mexico
Rasmussen
+5
New Mexico
Survey USA
+8
North Carolina
Rasmussen
+3
Ohio
Democracy Corps
+6
Virginia
Mason-Dixon
+3

Florida, Michigan and Ohio polls continue to indicate an increased level of support for Obama that is in each individual poll at or above the margin of error. And New Hampshire has followed suit, with a couple of polls that have the margin in the double digits for Obama, countering a handful of polls -- no not a string of them -- that had tightened to the 1-2 point range recently. In fact, New Hampshire is starting to look something like Michigan with these two new polls. Yet, it was among the states listed as targets in the McCain campaign's conference call yesterday concerning the decision to pull resources out of the Wolverine state. The Granite state was on the outside looking in in Politico's accounting of those targets. They only listed Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

We also see this in a few red states where the margins are closing. Georgia, Kentucky and Montana all show Obama gaining, but McCain is at or above the 50% mark in each of those states (in the polls above) and at this late point all three are likely too far away to make a real effort to swing. In North Carolina though, well, that's a different story. Surveys of the Tar Heel state continue to find Obama ahead there. Since the market downturn, Obama has been ahead in all the North Carolina polls save the ARG survey that was released earlier this week.

Changes (Oct. 2)
StateBeforeAfter
Nevada
Toss Up Obama
Toss Up McCain
Virginia
Toss Up Obama
Toss Up McCain

However, there were some exceptions to the conventional wisdom rule discussed above. But it wasn't all bad for McCain. Traditional red state, Nebraska didn't budge and the Ciruli poll out of Colorado had the Arizona senator within one point. In fairness, though, Nebraska is right where we'd expect it to be given the current climate and the median date in which Colorado poll was in the field was September 21 was the night the Lehman collapse became public knowledge.

And then there were the polls out of Minnesota and Virginia. After CNN's poll of the North Star state inflated the state's average, that poll was exposed -- and more time will ultimately tell the tale here -- as an outlier in the post-convention period for Minnesota. Still, this is the first poll McCain has led in Minnesota since the same one point margin was the result of a mid-March poll of state (also by Survey USA). We were in Jeremiah Wright land during that time though. That was during that stretch after McCain had wrapped up the GOP nomination and the Democratic nomination race was in the midst of that stretch of no contests before Pennsylvania's primary in late April. Similarly, CNN's poll of Virginia had the same effect as the one it did in Minnesota. And having that 10 point Obama lead lose the weighting that goes with being the most recent poll in our average, meant that Virginia moved back into McCain territory. This was the case in Nevada as well.
[Click Map to Enlarge]

With Nevada and Virginia retaking their spots in the McCain toss up category, the map reverts to the way it looked two days ago: Obama 273-McCain 265. Again though, this underscores just how close it is in the three states of Nevada, Ohio and Virginia. Virginia actually jumped Ohio in the process of turning pink and that indicates the extent to which Ohio has drawn closer this last week.

The Electoral College Spectrum*
HI-4
(7)**
ME-4
(157)
NH-4
(264/278)
ND-3
(160)
KS-6
(64)
VT-3
(10)
WA-11
(168)
CO-9***
(273/274)
WV-5
(157)
AR-6
(58)
RI-4
(14)
IA-7
(175)
NV-5
(278/265)
TX-34
(152)
NE-5
(52)
IL-21
(35)
OR-7
(182)
OH-20
(298/260)
GA-15
(118)
TN-11
(47)
MD-10
(45)
NJ-15
(197)
VA-13
(311/240)
AK-3
(115)
KY-8
(36)
DE-3
(48)
MN-10
(207)
FL-27
(338/227)
MS-6
(100)
AL-9
(28)
CT-7
(55)
WI-10
(217)
IN-11
(349/200)
SC-8
(94)
WY-3
(19)
NY-31
(86)
NM-5
(222)
MO-11
(360/189)
SD-3
(86)
ID-4
(16)
CA-55
(141)
MI-17
(239/316)
NC-15
(178)
AZ-10
(83)
OK-7
(12)
MA-12
(153)
PA-21
(260/299)
MT-3
(163)
LA-9
(73)
UT-5
(5)
*Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.
**The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, McCain won all the states up to and including Pennsylvania (all Obama's toss up states, but Michigan), he would have 299 electoral votes. Both candidates numbers are only totaled through their rival's toss up states. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and McCain's is on the right in italics.

***
Colorado is the state where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. It is currently favoring Obama, thus the blue text in that cell.

You can see that Virginia jump well on the Electoral College Spectrum as well as Minnesota's move past New Jersey and closer to toss up status. The other change of note is New Hampshire swapping positions with Colorado on the stregth of the two new polls out there yesterday. Colorado is now the sole state occupying the role of Victory Line. If the candidates win all the states they are ahead in on the map and win Colorado (which is favoring Obama now by more than two points currently), that candidate will win the presidency. The Centennial state is the state each candidate needs to surpass 270 electoral votes.

The Watch List*
StateSwitch
Iowafrom Obama lean
to Strong Obama
Michiganfrom Toss Up Obama
to Obama lean
Missourifrom Toss Up McCainto McCain lean
Nevadafrom Toss Up McCain
to Toss Up Obama
North Carolinafrom McCain lean
to Toss Up McCain
Ohiofrom Toss Up McCain
to Toss Up Obama
Oregonfrom Obama lean
to Strong Obama
Pennsylvaniafrom Toss Up Obama
to Obama lean
Texasfrom Strong McCainto McCain lean
Virginiafrom Toss Up McCain
to Toss Up Obama
Washingtonfrom Strong Obama
to Obama lean
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Yet Colorado is not on the Watch List. In fact, none of the Obama toss up states are within a fraction of a point of switching categories. Correction, Michigan and Pennsylvania are, but that potential move is not toward McCain. The three McCain toss ups we discussed earlier are in that range, though, and any new poll out of Nevada, Ohio and/or Virginia should be watched closely now that we are almost under a month until election day. There were no additions to the list today, but Minnesota was its lone loss. The North Star state is now comfortably within the Obama lean category. Well, comfortably unless more polls show McCain ahead there. As always, we'll have to see.


Recent Posts:
Live Blog and Open Thread: The Vice Presidential Debate

Where is McCain Playing Offense Now that Michigan is Off the Table?

Is the Obama Campaign Planning for This Contingency?

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Live Blog and Open Thread: The Vice Presidential Debate

10:40pm: Oh, Gwen Ifill is on crutches heading out of the hall (on C-SPAN). Not that it matters, but that is something I've never seen. I always thought presidential debate moderators were invincible. Another childhood dream shattered.

10:34pm: That's all folks. An interesting debate. Palin played it folksy and certainly surpassed the extremely low bar that had been set for her. Biden avoided all the potential pitfalls. [I think. I did briefly catch something about a wink at some point in The Fix's twittering of the proceedings. I'll have to investigate that. Update: The wink was from Palin early on apparently. Now I'm going to have to go to the tape.] But I don't really think this one changed anything. There was no train wreck (Palin bumbling through answers or Biden saying something he shouldn't have.) and no one really provided a wow performance. Thoughts?

10:31pm: I'm starting to see Tina Fey doing those poses while Hillary Clinton/Amy Poehler spoke in that SNL sketch. She's looking off in to the audience and smiling. Meanwhile Biden is wrapping up trying to hit all the points here from the middle class to the troops abroad.

10:29pm: The media is out to get Palin. She's unfiltered here though, she adds.

10:27pm: Change the tone of Washington? Hey, a Jesse Helms reference from Biden. He learned not to question other senator's motives. Palin attempts to tie herself to Biden and McCain by talking about doing similar things in an attempt to isolate Obama.

10:24pm: Last question: Changing positions based on circumstances. Biden: judicial nominations and ideology. Palin: "Quasi-caving?" Ooh, I wouldn't have used that language. But I probably wouldn't be up there. But this is a broad answer that doesn't really say anything.

10:22pm: Honestly, I'm shocked we have not heard the L word this whole time. I really thought we'd hear "maverick" and "most liberal" mentioned an awful lot tonight. Well, one out of two ain't bad.

10:20pm: Discipline? Biden's weakest trait. He counters it may be his passion. That one falls flat and even elicits uneasy laughter from the audience. He rebounds well by going into his biography.

10:18pm: Palin on gubernatorial experience and her experience generally: Alaska is a huge state? Well, in terms of area perhaps. It ain't California, though.

10:16pm: Palin from tripping over Supreme Court questions with Couric to answering constitutional questions on her potential position as VP. Biden calls Cheney dangerous and gets into specifics of Article I. Different definitions on display here. Legislative role for VP? Biden says only to break ties.

10:11pm: "Say it ain't so, Joe" Palin on Biden looking back at Bush policy and attacking them.

10:03pm: Palin's very authentic in talking about her outsider status in response to Biden's discussion of Bosnia and Darfur. And she moves effortlessly into her talking points. But what we have on display is not age versus experience but outsider versus insider and there is some overlap between the two.

10:02pm: Bosniacs? I'm not familiar with that ethnic group, Joe. Oh, can I call you Joe?

10:00pm: Palin is forcefully talking to Biden on the tactics/strategy in Afghanistan. Biden stumbles getting out of the blocks in response.

9:56pm: We are about an hour in. This is a good debate. More entertaining than the one the other night, but I still don't see it as a game changer. Palin is doing well, but not enough to sway a significant portion of those 34% of voters who think that this debate is consequential to their vote decision.

9:54pm: Oh, good line of attack from Palin. [And I'm paraphrasing to borrow a phrase from Biden tonight.] "For a ticket focused on change, you sure are focused on looking to the past and attacking the Bush administration."

9:51pm: On to Israel. Palin supports a two state solution. Biden thinks the Bush administration has been way off on Israel. Wrong on everything from Hezbollah and Lebanon to Hamas in the West Bank.

9:48pm: I love that we now refer to the leadership in Cuba as the Castro brothers. It sounds like a band. A communist, America-hating band, but a band nonetheless.

9:47pm: Iran and Pakistan? Biden pivots to Afghanistan and the Democrats' definition of the central front on terrorism.

9:44pm: And now on to funding of the troops. Barack Obama hasn't according to Palin and Biden still doesn't think McCain understands what's going on.

9:42pm: "
We will end this war!" Biden.

Palin, after an awkward pause: "Your plan is a white flag of surrender."

9:40pm:
And on to foreign policy. How about the surge? Palin takes the McCain line. Biden: "With all due respect, I didn't hear a plan." Shifting response to the Iraqis.

9:38pm: Palin: the traditional definition of marriage. Biden: the traditional definition of marriage. Hey, agreement can happen.

9:36pm: Ah, (non-economic) domestic issues. Why not bring up a wedge issue first? How about gay marriage couched in terms of what is happening in Alaska with benefits for gay couples.

9:34pm: And Palin corrects Biden on the "Drill, baby, drill" chant. She's awfully good in a debate format. Interviews maybe not. But she's warmed up tonight.

9:33pm:
Ooh, Biden brought up clean coal. Palin is writing notes on that one. Here she goes.

9:32pm:
"If you don't understand the problem, you can't come up with a solution." Biden on the differences in the two tickets' approaches to the climate change issue.

9:27pm: "Toxic waste on Main St. is affecting Wall St. ." She flip-flopped that line. Not that she has lines.

9:25pm: If you aren't watching the full time split screens on C-SPAN, you are missing half the debate. The reactions are classic. And no, I don't work for C-SPAN, nor are they paying me.

9:21pm: Biden: "I call that the ultimate bridge to nowhere."

9:18pm: This is right where this debate is, both internally and externally: This tax discussion is about Reagan era, small government ideals versus a governmental role assisting citizens. Is the pendulum swinging back on this one? Public opinion on this government bailout sure is low.

9:14pm: Palin's good. Her debating style will play well in Peoria. The nerves are gone and she's warmed up.

...enough to get cut off by Gwen Ifill.

9:10pm: Palin apparently got the memo on the eye contact thing. She's trained on the cameras but she's already looked at Biden in rebuttal to his discussion of McCain's "fundamentals".

9:08pm: And there's the rebuttal to McCain voting 90% of the time with the Bush administrator line. "Obama has voted along party lines 96% of the time."

9:07pm: Biden is in attack mode.

9:06pm: Palin seems slightly nervous. Playing up John McCain and hasn't moved into the attack dog role. Ah, it's the first question.

9:04pm: Huh? The economy? I'm shocked this was the first lead question. Biden's off first and he's pointing out deregulation already.

9:03pm: "Can I call you Joe?" Nice, folksy icebreaker from Palin.

8:58pm: C-SPAN is showing podiums and unless Biden and Palin are sitting on them, I'd say this one will follow the presidential debate on Friday as a stand-behind-the-podium deal.

8:43pm: Here's a note on the format tonight (Yes, I think I've got it right this time.). From the Commission on Presidential Debates:
Vice presidential debate: all topics, moderated by Gwen Ifill
Thursday, October 2, Washington University in St. Louis, Mo.

-Ninety-second answers, followed by two-minute discussion for each question. Two-minute closing statements.
I couldn't glean from the press release whether this is a stand up or sit down debate. We'll know shortly.

8:24pm: Incidentally, I'll be watching the debate tonight on C-SPAN. Hopefully they don't pull the ol' switcheroo on me like the did last week when the presidential debate was on C-SPAN2 -- a channel FHQ does not have access to -- and left me scrambling at the last minute to find any channel in time. Anyway, C-SPAN does have a nice resource in their Debate Hub, which will not only be streaming things live tonight, but has some nice features as well.

7:10pm: We are t-minus one hour and fifty minutes until go time at the vice presidential debate in St. Louis. I'm going on record now -- and I may hate myself in the morning because of it -- to say that this debate will be watched by a greater audience than the first presidential debate last Friday night. It is a classic Howard Stern scenario. People are tuning in for two completely polar opposite reasons. Either potential viewers like Sarah Palin and want to see her do well or they can't stand her and are awaiting the train wreck. Regardless, Joe Biden seems almost ancillary to tonight's debate (...unless he puts his foot in his mouth in a major way.).

And that brings us to the goals for each candidate tonight.

Biden simply needs to avoid the George Bush (circa 1984) trap and continue his convention attack on McCain.

For Palin, the bar has been lowered significantly by a few rocky interviews and the fact that the moderator, Gwen Ifill, has a forthcoming book about politics and race post-Obama.

For me, I'm trying to make it through one of these things without being booed again. But I digress...

Tonight should be fun and while you're waiting for the festivities to begin, why not interview Sarah Palin yourself? Thanks to the folks at the Princeton Election Consortium for the link.


Recent Posts:
Where is McCain Playing Offense Now that Michigan is Off the Table?

Is the Obama Campaign Planning for This Contingency?

Cracking the Muhlenberg Code

Where is McCain Playing Offense Now that Michigan is Off the Table?

The discussion on this is already underway in the Muhlenberg post below, but the McCain campaign's decision to pull out of Michigan is big news deserving of its own post. In last night's Electoral College Spectrum, the Wolverine state the last of the Obama toss up states before they turn darker blue and the lean category begins. And it has been in that position for a while now, save a few iterations where New Mexico jumped into the toss up category. The decision, then, isn't totally from out of left field, but as I said, symbolically this is a huge [negative] admission for the McCain folks. If Michigan is off the table, that means that McCain has one less blue state to reach for to get to 270 electoral votes.

Where is he playing offense, though? The campaign says Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (Thanks for the link, Scott.), but none of those three looks terribly attainable at this point. Minnesota, perhaps. The North Star state has been within the margin of error in a host of polls recently with the exception of the 12 point lead CNN showed Obama enjoying yesterday. But let's assume McCain wins Minnesota. He would still have play defense in Florida, not to mention run the table in the Nevada, Ohio and Virginia close state parlay. Minnesota would get McCain to 275 if he wins those three states and holds on to the remaining pink states. Obama could gain Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado -- Bush states four years ago -- and come up short.

The tendency has been to discount McCain's chances in light of events of the last couple of weeks, but the Arizona senator is still right there if -- and this is a big if -- the momentum can be shifted back. The problem is that that is going to be a tough sell -- kind of like the push for the 2nd district in Maine. That just seems like a move to get Obama to spend some time and/or money in the Pine Tree state. In reality the McCain campaign knew that they didn't necessarily need Michigan to win. It would have helped, but they didn't necessarily need it. But they know they need Virginia and Florida. And that may be why the Old Dominion has seen an increased McCain staff presence in the last couple of days.


Thanks to loyal FHQ reader and contributor, Jack, for the scoop.


Recent Posts:
Is the Obama Campaign Planning for This Contingency?

Cracking the Muhlenberg Code

The Electoral College Map (10/2/08)

Is the Obama Campaign Planning for This Contingency?

Belligerent, Republican-programmed Voting Machines



Tip of the cap to Robi Ragan for bringing this one to my attention.

Recent Posts:
Cracking the Muhlenberg Code

The Electoral College Map (10/2/08)

Here's the Deal...

Cracking the Muhlenberg Code

Why do the polling firms conducting daily tracking polls not release the results of the individual days along with the rolling averages they are producing? Ah, wouldn't it be nice. In reality, they don't and that leaves people like me wondering about how to go about determining what those numbers are. As the good folks at FiveThirtyEight showed, however, it is an inexact science that just has too many unknowns to definitively determine that data. What they looked at was the national trackers. But what I'm more interested in are the state level daily trackers. We only have one so far and it is the poll conducted by the Institute of Public Opinion at Muhlenberg College along with Morning Call. So, what do we know and what don't we know?

[Click Figure to Enlarge]

Above you'll see, from the Institute itself, the results from each of the first six days of the tracking poll in question. Now, to keep things simple, we'll focus just on margins and not each candidate's percentage. The latter just replaces one unknown with two more and that muddies the picture that much more. What we see, though, is that the margin increases by one for each of the first five days of the five day rolling average. That tells us that for each of those days the new data coming into the average (an additional days worth of data) has a margin that is about five points greater than the day that is being subtracted from the rolling average.

Huh? How do you know that? Well, each new release has five different days worth of polling. For instance the first release last Friday found that between the dates of September 21 and September 25 Obama averaged a four point lead over McCain. We know that the sum total of those five polls is somewhere around 20 (5 polls X 4 point margin). [I continue to say "around" because we are dealing with rounded numbers here. Again, that is another way in which this examination is oversimplified, but it is the information we have available to us.] If the average increases to five, then we know that that total increases to 25 (5 polls X 5 point margin). And as that one point increase pattern continues, you simply add five more points to the average until things either level off or drop.

If we assume that each of those days in the first poll released last Friday had the exact same result, then we would see something like this:

Muhlenberg Tracking Polls - PA (Oct. 1):
Scenario #1

Date
Polls
2122
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
#1
4
4
4
4
4





#2

4
4
4
4
9




#3


4
4
4
9
9



#4



4
4
9
9
9


#5




4
9
9
9
9

#6





9
9
9
9
-1

So if every day in the original poll found Obama to be up four, he would have to be up nine on the sixth day when the first day's four point margin is phased out. We can continue that replacement and it looks just fine until you get to yesterday's poll, when the margin dropped by one. Not only does the above hypothetical assume things into simpliticity, it is also probably unrealistic. I think it is unlikely that there was a McCain blip in there, as the -1 would imply.

It is not unrealistic, then, to forcibly constrain things to the Obama side of the ledger. But what that tell us is that, if the original average was four points and if there was a drop in the margin yesterday, then there must have been an inflated number on the last day (September 25) of the initial poll. That would be the day that was phased out in the data that the Institute released yesterday. To frame this slightly differently, there was likely something of an established pattern to the data from September 21-24, but the data from the 25th was a significant departure from that pattern, one that altered things thereafter. Below, I think, is a good guess as to how things may have looked over the course of the first ten days of the tracking poll.

Muhlenberg Tracking Polls - PA (Oct. 1):
Scenario #2

Date
Polls
2122
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
#1
2
3
2
3
10





#2

3
2
2
10
7




#3


2
3
10
7
8



#4



3
10
7
8
7


#5




10
7
8
7
8

#6





7
8
7
8
5

We know that since there was a one point drop in the margin yesterday, that there was around a five point drop in the total of all five days' polls. When we additionally factor in the fact that there was a drop, but one that still showed a pretty good lead for Obama, you get a pattern similar to what is depicted above. Things were close and then, suddenly, they weren't.

Is this right? I don't know. As I said this is just a guess. More importantly, how is FHQ going to deal with the data from Muhlenberg? We are, like what is being done at Electoral-Vote.com, going to take one poll every six days. That way no one day in this series of surveys is being counted more than once. The first poll Muhlenberg released covered September 21-25. We would take that poll and then the one where the 25th is phased out of the average (the poll covering September 26-30). That decision was reflected in last night's update of the map.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (10/2/08)

Here's the Deal...

The Electoral College Map (10/1/08)

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

The Electoral College Map (10/2/08)

Who says change can't happen, even at the site with the most conservative electoral college methodology? I find it somewhat ironic that I, just yesterday, made light of the feasibility of a 10 point Obama margin in Virginia and today that exact number appeared in the CNN survey results. There's no sense in hiding that. Virginia switched sides, moving above the partisan line (The point at which light blue Obama states become pink McCain states.) into Obama territory. But that wasn't all. CNN caused quite a shake up across the analysis with new polls in a series of states. Virginia was one, but Nevada was the other. [Minnesota was in there too, but it didn't switch categories in the way Nevada did as a result of the survey there being added to FHQ's weighted averages.] On the strength of a five point margin in that poll, the Silver state, too, inches above that partisan line and into the blue, passing Virginia in the process. That leaves the Old Dominion as the closest state still, but we'll get to the Electoral College Spectrum momentarily.

New Polls (Oct. 1)
StatePollMargin
Arizona
ASU/Cronkite
+7
Connecticut
Pulsar
+14
Florida
Quinnipiac (pre-debate)
+6
Florida
Quinnipiac (post-debate)
+8
Florida
Suffolk
+4
Florida
CNN
+8
Indiana
Research 2000
+1
Iowa
Research 2000
+16
Minnesota
CNN
+12
Mississippi
Rasmussen
+8
Missouri
CNN
+1
Nevada
CNN
+5
New Jersey
Strategic Vision
+9
Ohio
Quinnipiac (pre-debate)
+7
Ohio
Quinnipiac (post-debate)
+8
Oklahoma
Survey USA
+30
Pennsylvania
Franklin & Marshall
+5
PennsylvaniaQuinnipiac (pre-debate)
+6
PennsylvaniaQuinnipiac (post-debate)
+15
PennsylvaniaMuhlenberg
+7
Tennessee
Rasmussen
+19
Texas
Rasmussen
+9
Virginia
CNN
+10
Wisconsin
Strategic Vision
+9

The rest of the polling out today wasn't much better for John McCain. Four new polls in both Florida and Pennsylvania all favored Obama and by pretty sizable margins. Half of those polls were the pre- and post-debate surveys from Quinnipiac. All had already shifted toward Obama prior to Friday night and those gaps grew larger afterward. This held true in the other state covered by Quinnipiac as well, Ohio. The Buckeye state, though, held firm just slightly on the McCain side of the partisan line.

Changes (Oct. 1)
StateBeforeAfter
Nevada
Toss Up McCain
Toss Up Obama
Virginia
Toss Up McCain
Toss Up Obama

But Indiana and Missouri drew closer too and Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin all moved farther away from the Arizona senator. Even Mississippi and Texas turned in tighter results, though, not to the point that either will become competitive. At the end of the day, all McCain has to hand his hat on today are the polls in Oklahoma and Tennessee. Neither of those state has had the type of single digit margins that Mississippi and Texas have had over the course of this campaign. They were never in doubt.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

The map, then, changes for the first time since Nevada moved over into McCain's column following the Republican's convention in St. Paul. With the addition of Nevada and Virginia, Obama now pads that paltry 8 point advantage he held with 18 more electoral votes. The edge the Illinois senator has is now up to 44, much further below some of the other electoral college estimates out there. But, to be honest, all of the pink states are now within the margin of error and are technically in play. Even if FHQ has lowered the toss up/lean line down to 3 points last week, all of those McCain toss ups would be under that line with the exception of Missouri. So while none of those states are likely to change, they have slipped away from McCain and within Obama's grasp, both in reality and in the perception game.

The Electoral College Spectrum*
HI-4
(7)**
ME-4
(157)
CO-9***
(269/278)
ND-3
(160)
KS-6
(64)
VT-3
(10)
WA-11
(168)
NH-4***
(273/269)
WV-5
(157)
AR-6
(58)
RI-4
(14)
IA-7
(175)
NV-5
(278/265)
TX-34
(152)
NE-5
(52)
IL-21
(35)
OR-7
(182)
VA-13
(291/260)
AK-3
(118)
TN-11
(47)
MD-10
(45)
MN-10
(192)
OH-20
(311/247)
GA-15
(115)
KY-8
(36)
DE-3
(48)
NJ-15
(207)
FL-27
(338/227)
MS-6
(100)
AL-9
(28)
CT-7
(55)
NM-5
(212)
IN-11
(349/200)
SC-8
(94)
WY-3
(19)
NY-31
(86)
WI-10
(222)
MO-11
(360/189)
SD-3
(86)
ID-4
(16)
CA-55
(141)
MI-17
(239/316)
NC-15
(178)
AZ-10
(83)
OK-7
(12)
MA-12
(153)
PA-21
(260/299)
MT-3
(163)
LA-9
(73)
UT-5
(5)
*Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.
**The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, McCain won all the states up to and including Pennsylvania (all Obama's toss up states, but Michigan), he would have 299 electoral votes. Both candidates numbers are only totaled through their rival's toss up states. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and McCain's is on the right in italics.

***
The line between Colorado and New Hampshire is the where Obama crosses (or McCain would cross) the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line. Both states are currently favoring Obama, thus the blue text in those two cells.

For the first time in a while then the partisan line and the victory line (the point at which either candidate would surpass 270 electoral votes) aren't right up against each other. That cushion that we referenced so many times in discussing the likelihood of Obama has returned. And, as was so often mentioned in that context, the number of paths Obama has to 270 is greater as a result. The Illinois senator once again has states to give. In other words, he could lose both of the two states in which he just pulled ahead and still get to 270.

The Watch List*
StateSwitch
Iowafrom Obama lean
to Strong Obama
Michiganfrom Toss Up Obama
to Obama lean
Minnesotafrom Obama lean
to Strong Obama
Missourifrom Toss Up McCainto McCain lean
Nevadafrom Toss Up Obamato Toss Up McCain
North Carolinafrom McCain lean
to Toss Up McCain
Ohiofrom Toss Up McCain
to Toss Up Obama
Oregonfrom Obama lean
to Strong Obama
Pennsylvaniafrom Toss Up Obama
to Obama lean
Texasfrom Strong McCainto McCain lean
Virginiafrom Toss Up Obama
to Toss Up McCain
Washingtonfrom Strong Obama
to Obama lean
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

The big question now: Which state is next? Well, it isn't assured that Nevada and Virginia will hold their current positions, so they could shift back toward McCain. But that seems less likely in the current environment where Obama is surging in the polls both nationally and on the state level. What we do know is that Florida and Indiana are now off the Watch List and have been replaced by Iowa, Minnesota and Texas. For the moment, let's excluded Texas; the Lone Star state isn't going anywhere. The other four have moved significantly toward Obama based on today's and other recent polling. Iowa and Minnesota are safer for Obama and Florida and Indiana are much less safe for McCain than they were.

Bad continues to get worse for McCain.


Recent Posts:
Here's the Deal...

The Electoral College Map (10/1/08)

The Electoral College Map (9/30/08)

Here's the Deal...

Alright folks. This is a change election, or so I've been told, and to have an electoral college analysis that does not respond well to changes in polling, is not necessarily a plus. I can see the writing on the wall and have now for a few days.

So here's the plan, both short and long term.

Tonight, I'll update the map as if there was no change to the formula and then have a few words to say in a separate post about the Muhlenberg polling discussion that sprang out of last night's update. It will likely not be tonight, but tomorrow I will revise the formula behind the map and see if we can kick start things around here.

Now the big question now is, well, why didn't you make this change after McCain's convention in St. Paul? Things were moving in his direction then. Why favor Obama with a change to the formula now? These are all valid and good questions. [I should have thought of them myself.] The reason is that conventions are part of what Jim Campbell would call the predictable campaign. We expected McCain to get at least something of a bounce out of the convention. The average's job in that scenario wasn't to mute the shift toward McCain, but to account for the likely temporary nature of the fluctuation. What we are witnessing now in the polls is something different and the mountain of past polls in our data set are too much of an anchor on the new -- and different -- data we now have. In other words, some revision is necessary to capture the true nature of the change. Whereas the convention bounce was temporary, the movement now likely isn't.

I'll be back shortly. I need to add in the afternoon polls to the averages.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (10/1/08)

The Electoral College Map (9/30/08)

The Electoral College Map (9/29/08)