The Electoral College Map (9/25/20)

 Update for September 25.

Changes (September 25)
State	Before	After
Nevada	Toss Up Biden	Lean Biden
Ohio	Toss Up Trump	Toss Up Biden

It was September 1 when last there was a change to the overall electoral vote tally at FHQ. Then it was Ohio drifting over the partisan line onto Toss Up Trump turf. And in the time after the conventions, it was not unreasonable to think that close as the Buckeye state may be over the remainder of the race, it would not necessarily jump the partisan line to join the Biden coalition of states. Well, close Ohio has remained in the intervening weeks, and on the weight of yesterday's Fox News poll, the state has, in fact, moved back over to Toss Up Biden territory, raising the former vice president's total projected number of electoral votes to 353. That would put Biden in between the Obama 2008 on the high end and Obama 2012 on the low end.

Yet, there are still 39 days to go until election day as the race enters this final weekend before the first presidential debate next week. There is, then, still time for things to change. And Ohio may very well be first in line to move back over the partisan line once again. Biden's current lead there is a not exactly insurmountable 0.08 points.

Elsewhere on the Friday poll release front...

Polling Quick Hits:
Arizona
(Trump 46, Biden 45)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +3.36]
The last time Data for Progress_ was in the field in Arizona in early August, Biden led by three points. In the time since then, Trump has gained a couple of points, seemingly at Biden's expense creating a four point swing and a Trump lead in the latter survey in the series. Polls of Arizona with the president ahead have been few and far between all year, but this is the second one in the last few days. But unlike that ABC/WaPo survey of the Grand Canyon state, this one was more consistent on the Trump number than on Biden's. Biden, in this one, was toward the lower end of his range in recent polling while the president was in the heart of his. The opposite was true of the ABC/WaPo poll.

California
(Biden 67, Trump 28)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +30.23]
There is not a whole lot to make of the update in California from UC-Berkeley. The university pollster last conducted a survey in the Golden state back at the end of the July and found the same 67-28 advantage for Biden. That is not only no change over those last nearly two months, but this poll matches the largest margin in California polling in calendar 2020.

Florida
(Biden 46, Trump 43)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +3.41]
For all the talk about the narrowing of the race in the Sunshine state, there is still a certain consistency there. Yes, the margin has come down in recent weeks, but looking more closely, Biden +3 has become a predictable outcome to polls in September. Of the 19 surveys conducted in whole or in party during this month so far, Biden has led by three points in nearly half of them (9 of 19). And that group includes the latest Data for Progress survey of Florida. Both candidates may come in a little behind their established FHQ averages in this poll, but both are off by about the same amount.

Maine
(Biden 50, Trump 39)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +12.79]

Maine CD1
(Biden 54, Trump 36)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +23.00]

Maine CD2
(Biden 46, Trump 43)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +2.46]
Further north in Maine, Colby College released poll results to a survey that closely resembled the status quo there. Biden was out in front statewide, way ahead in the first district and narrowly ahead in the second. And it was in the least competitive of the three where the poll diverged the most from the FHQ average shares for both candidates. Biden lagged three point behind his share there while Trump ran a couple of points ahead of his. But consistency is the name of the game with this survey.

Maryland
(Biden 62, Trump 30)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +28.76]
There has not been much survey work in the Old Line state so far in calendar 2020, so the new poll from OpinionWorks had the potential to really uproot Maryland in the order depicted on the Electoral College Spectrum below. And it did. The 32 point margin is basically 25 percent greater than in the other surveys there and expanded Biden's lead to more than 28 points in the graduated weighted average of the margin. That pushed Maryland deeper into Biden's coalition of states.

Minnesota
(Biden 47, Trump 40)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +8.14]
At one time it looked as if the race for Minnesota's ten electoral votes was tightening, but most of the polling there -- including this latest Suffolk survey -- has found the race comfortably in the Lean category range (five to ten points). There are exceptions, of course, but they are rare. However, while the margin in this poll fell in that range, there was still room for growth for both candidates. Although this was a likely voter sample, there remained more than ten percent of respondents who were either undecided or have to this point thrown their support behind a minor party candidate.

Nevada
(Biden 52, Trump 41 via Fox News | Biden 47, Trump 43 via ALG Research)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +5.82]
Ohio grabbed all the attention at the outset for jumping the partisan line into Biden territory, but Nevada also changed categories mainly on the weight of the latest Fox News poll there. That eleven point Biden lead is a bit rosy for the former vice president compared to other Silver state surveys. In fact, other than the other Fox News poll (of registered voters) back in January, no poll has found the race outside of a Biden +3-5 range. But those two polls -- even the discounted Biden +8 Fox poll from the first week of the year -- have nudged Nevada over the Lean/Toss Up line into Lean status. But Biden's advantage there is just inside the lower end of the Lean category, so Nevada remains on the Watch List. The likely switch now, however, is from Lean to Toss Up instead of the reverse.

Ohio
(Biden 50, Trump 45)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +0.08]
The impact of the new Fox News poll of Ohio is clear enough. By the slimmest of margins, the Biden +5 has moved the Buckeye state over the partisan line into Biden's coalition of states. Putting this one into context, however, reveals that 1) Fox has been Biden-favorable in its 2020 polls of Ohio and 2) that that manifests itself through a Biden share of support that comes in well above his established average based on the full world of 2020 Ohio polling. While Trump's share is generally within his range, the Biden share in the Fox poll has him about four points ahead of his. Back in June it was Biden who was right on his share in that Fox poll, and Trump under his. This one looks like an outlier if only because this is just the second time the former vice president has reached 50 percent in any poll in the Buckeye state.

Pennsylvania
(Biden 51, Trump 44 via Fox News | Biden 48, Trump 46 via Trafalgar Group)
[Current FHQ margin: Biden +5.06]
That has not been the case in the Keystone state. Fox News has consistently over three polls had Biden at or over 50 percent. But only now in the first likely voter survey the firm has conducted in Pennsylvania has Trump caught up with his FHQ average in the state. Meanwhile Trafalgar has Trump running ahead of his average and Biden slightly behind his. Neither of these polls is too far off the mark compared to other recent polling in Pennsylvania. Both have the candidates with their established ranges. Pennsylvania -- still the tipping point state -- continues to flirt with that Lean/Toss Up line on the Biden side and has consistently stayed just above it for a while now.

Texas
(Trump 46, Biden 45)
[Current FHQ margin: Trump +1.18]
Finally, in Texas, Data for Progress showed a close race for the Lone Star state's 38 electoral votes. And this survey is basically right on the 47-46 advantage Trump holds in the state (after rounding). Things did not change much from yesterday when Texas came off the Watch List but remained in range. In fact, the margin ticked down just a hair but continues to be tipped in the president's direction.

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

The Electoral College Spectrum1
DC-3 MA-11 (14)2	CT-7 (162)	WI-10 (253)	AK-3 (125)	AL-9 (60)
HI-4 (18)	NJ-14 (176)	NV-6 (259)	SC-9 (122)	IN-11 (51)
CA-55 (73)	OR-7 (183)	PA-203 (279 | 279)	MO-10 (113)	UT-6 (40)
VT-3 (76)	NM-5 (188)	FL-29 (308 | 259)	KS-6 (103)	KY-8 (34)
MD-10 (86)	ME-2 (190)	AZ-11 ME CD2-1 (320 | 230)	MT-3 NE CD1-1 (97)	ID-4 (26)
NY-29 (115)	CO-9 (199)	NC-15 (335 | 218)	LA-8 (93)	ND-3 (22)
WA-12 (127)	VA-13 (212)	OH-18 (353 | 203)	MS-6 (85)	SD-3 (19)
IL-20 ME CD1-1 (148)	MN-10 (222)	IA-6 (185)	AR-6 (79)	OK-7 (16)
RI-4 (152)	MI-16 (238)	GA-16 (179)	NE-2 (73)	WV-5 (9)
DE-3 (155)	NE CD2-1 NH-4 (243)	TX-38 (163)	TN-11 (71)	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 279 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.

Obviously, the Nevada and Ohio moves will grab the headlines today, but there was some other movement beyond those two. Still close in their margins, Arizona and Florida once again switched spots in the order on the Electoral College Spectrum with the Grand Canyon state pushing closer to the partisan line. But as always in the situations, it is best not to get caught up in the maneuvering so much as how close the two are. Any new polls of the two has the potential to flip them again. Further out on the blue end of the Spectrum, ME CD1 shifted down a cell while Maryland moved up a couple of cells toward the left end of the Spectrum.

The Watch List continued to comprise the same ten states as it did a day ago, but the potential changes in both Nevada and Ohio have flipped since then with their category changes. But again, both are still close enough to those lines and could move back given any new polling data. Time will tell, but for now, the electoral vote tally is now projected at 353-185 again.



Where things stood at FHQ on September 25 (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
Arkansas	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Georgia	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Iowa	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Louisiana	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Nevada	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
Ohio	from Toss Up Biden	to Toss Up Trump
Pennsylvania	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
South Carolina	from Lean Trump	to Toss Up Trump
Virginia	from Strong Biden	to Lean 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.


--
Related posts:
The Electoral College Map (9/24/20)

The Electoral College Map (9/23/20)

The Electoral College Map (9/22/20)

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

2020 Democratic Delegate Allocation: MARYLAND

MARYLAND

Election type: primary
Date: June 2
    [April 28 originally]
Number of delegates: 119 [21 at-large, 10 PLEOs, 65 congressional district, 23 automatic/superdelegates]
Allocation method: proportional statewide and at the congressional district level
Threshold to qualify for delegates: 15%
2016: proportional primary
Delegate selection plan (pre-coronavirus)
    [Addendum to plan]


--
Changes since 2016
If one followed the 2016 series on the Republican process here at FHQ, then you may end up somewhat disappointed. The two national parties manage the presidential nomination process differently. The Republican National Committee is much less hands-on in regulating state and state party activity in the delegate selection process than the Democratic National Committee is. That leads to a lot of variation from state to state and from cycle to cycle on the Republican side. Meanwhile, the DNC is much more top down in its approach. Thresholds stay the same. It is a 15 percent barrier that candidates must cross in order to qualify for delegates. That is standard across all states. The allocation of delegates is roughly proportional. Again, that is applied to every state.

That does not mean there are no changes. The calendar has changed as have other facets of the process such as whether a state has a primary or a caucus.

Unlike the past couple of cycles, Maryland lawmakers made no effort to uproot the presidential primary in the Old Line state from its position on the primary calendar. The late April spot alongside neighboring states Delaware and Pennsylvania survived into the 2020 cycle. As the nomination process formally began and the coronavirus pandemic became a more serious threat to the normal administration of the election, changes were made. In mid-March, Governor Larry Hogan (R) initially shifted the April 28 primary back five weeks to June 2. But then later in March, the Maryland State Board of Elections signaled an all-mail primary before retreating from that stance a bit in April. The Board voted then to hold a predominantly mail-in primary while still allowing for a reduced number of election day voting sites for those unable to vote by mail. Each county will have at least one election day voting location but no more than four.

All eligible Maryland voters will receive a ballot -- not an application for an absentee ballot as in most other states that have made similar changes -- with prepaid postage. Those ballots can then be mailed back to county elections offices or dropped off in person there.

All ballots are due to county elections offices' drop off locations or postmarked on or before Tuesday, June 2. 

Overall, the Democratic delegation in Maryland changed by just one delegate from 2016 to 2020. The number of district delegates increased by one and the other two categories of pledged delegates stayed exactly the same as did the number of superdelegates in the Old Line state.


[Please see below for more on the post-coronavirus changes specifically to the delegate selection process.]


Thresholds
The standard 15 percent qualifying threshold applies both statewide and on the congressional district level.


Delegate allocation (at-large and PLEO delegates)
To win any at-large or PLEO (pledged Party Leader and Elected Officials) delegates a candidate must win 15 percent of the statewide vote. Only the votes of those candidates above the threshold will count for the purposes of the separate allocation of these two pools of delegates.

See New Hampshire synopsis for an example of how the delegate allocation math works for all categories of delegates.


Delegate allocation (congressional district delegates)
Maryland's 65 congressional district delegates are split across eight congressional districts and have a variation of just two delegates across districts from the measure of Democratic strength Maryland Democrats are using based on the results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections in the state. That method apportions delegates as follows...
CD1 - 7 delegates*
CD2 - 8 delegates
CD3 - 8 delegates
CD4 - 9 delegates*
CD5 - 9 delegates*
CD6 - 7 delegates*
CD7 - 9 delegates*
CD8 - 8 delegates

*Bear in mind that districts with odd numbers of national convention delegates are potentially important to winners (and those above the qualifying threshold) within those districts. Rounding up for an extra delegate initially requires less in those districts than in districts with even numbers of delegates.


Delegate allocation (automatic delegates/superdelegates)
Superdelegates are free to align with a candidate of their choice at a time of their choosing. While their support may be a signal to voters in their state (if an endorsement is made before voting in that state), superdelegates will only vote on the first ballot at the national convention if half of the total number of delegates -- pledged plus superdelegates -- have been pledged to one candidate. Otherwise, superdelegates are locked out of the voting unless 1) the convention adopts rules that allow them to vote or 2) the voting process extends to a second ballot. But then all delegates, not just superdelegates will be free to vote for any candidate.

[NOTE: All Democratic delegates are pledged and not bound to their candidates. They are to vote in good conscience for the candidate to whom they have been pledged, but technically do not have to. But they tend to because the candidates and their campaigns are involved in vetting and selecting their delegates through the various selection processes on the state level. Well, the good campaigns are anyway.]


Selection
The selection of the 65 district delegates in Maryland will occur on the June 2 presidential primary ballot. That process has not changed although the date of the contest has. PLEO and then at-large delegates will be selected on June 20 by the state central committee. It is unclear as of this writing whether that meeting will be in-person or virtual.

[Initially, before the coronavirus pandemic hit, Maryland Democrats had planned to hold a post-primary state central committee meeting on May 30 to select PLEO and then at-large delegates. District delegates will continue to be elected on the primary ballot, but on June 2 instead of April 28.]


Importantly, if a candidate drops out of the race before the selection of statewide delegates, then any statewide delegates allocated to that candidate will be reallocated to the remaining candidates. If Candidate X is in the race in late-June when the Maryland statewide delegate selection takes place but Candidate Y is not, then any statewide delegates allocated to Candidate Y in the early June primary would be reallocated to Candidate X. [This same feature is not something that applies to district delegates.] This reallocation only applies if a candidate has fully dropped out.  This is less likely to be a factor with just Biden left as the only viable candidate in the race, but Sanders could still gain statewide delegates by finishing with more than 15 percent statewide. Under a new deal struck between the Biden and Sanders camps, Biden will be allocated (or reallocated) all of the statewide delegates in a given state. However, during the selection process, the state party will select Sanders-aligned delegate candidates in proportion to the share of the qualified statewide vote.

Maryland Board of Elections Lands on Predominantly Vote-By-Mail Plan for June 2 Primary

With a Friday, April 3 deadline to report back to Governor Hogan's executive order request to plan for a June 2 presidential primary, the Maryland Board of Elections arrived at a series of conclusions after a week of back and forth.

After first signaling that it would recommend an all-mail ballot primary, the Board walked that back after it was pressured by voting rights and disabilities advocates. Voting access for those who need assistance casting a ballot or who do not receive ballots in the mail became the main hang up for those lobbying the Board and ultimately the Board itself.

Maryland will now follow the rough model outlined by the secretary of state in Rhode Island: providing for a "predominantly" vote-by-mail plan for the June 2 primary. The plan in the Old Line state now has a bit more meat on the bones. While the recommendation continues to call for all Maryland voters to receive a primary ballot, the state will now open at least one voting location (and no more than four) in each county. Those sites will only be opened for voting on primary day itself. Voters will additionally have the option of mailing their ballots back to the county or dropping them off in drop boxes at each of the county voting locations set up for in-person voting on June 2.

The recommendation now heads to Governor Hogan for his consideration under the guidelines in the executive order. He will have to sign off on the changes before they take effect.


--
Related Posts:
Maryland Joins States Pushing Back Presidential Primaries on the Calendar

Maryland Board of Elections Will Recommend an All Vote-By-Mail Presidential Primary for June 2

Maryland Board of Elections Will Recommend an All Vote-By-Mail Presidential Primary for June 2

As part of Governor Larry Hogan's (R-MD) order to shift the Maryland presidential primary back five weeks to June 2, the state Board of Elections was to meet and confer on how best to implement that change given the fallout from the coronavirus threat.

In a remote meeting on Wednesday, March 25, the Maryland state Board of Elections decided in principle to have the now June 2 primary be conducted completely by mail based on the public health concerns around the virus. The board could not guarantee that it could protect poll workers who are increasingly less inclined to work the polls for early and election day in-person voting in even a delayed election.

Some members of the Board wanted to retain the in-person voting options just in case they could be carried out, but reserve the right to cancel those options later if the threat window remained open in the lead up to June 2.

“We could sit here and say the June 2 election will be vote by mail, it will have early voting options, it will have voting centers on Election Day — and the governor, the chief executive, could close everything down on May 30,” said Patrick Hogan, vice chairman of the board. 

“We could always drop the plan to have voting centers if the situation was getting worse," said board member Kelley Howells. "That would at least give us the option.” 

State elections staff members urged the board to make a final decision. If ballots are to be mailed to all voters, they should go out by the last week of April, said Nikki Charlson, deputy administrator for the Board of Elections. Instructions would have to be included with those ballots on how to return them, she said, and those should be in their final form when the ballots go out. 

“I appreciate that things are changing, but at some point we have to make a decision,” Charlson said.

It was Board staff that won out. Said staff will draft the proposal on a vote-by-mail election for the Board before April 2. The Board will then make a final decision charting out the course ahead -- likely adopting the plan -- and send it to the governor for his consideration by the April 3, the deadline laid out in his original executive order calling for the primary date change.

Maryland would join Rhode Island on June 2 as a state with an all-mail presidential primary. Ballots will be mailed to voters rather than applications for absentee ballots as in May states like Georgia, Nebraska and West Virginia. Those efforts can be contrasted with those in Indiana (June 2 primary), where no mailings are going out, but the excuse requirement in requesting absentee ballots has been waived.


Hat tip to Steve Kamp for passing news of this along to FHQ.


--
Related Posts:
Maryland Joins States Pushing Back Presidential Primaries on the Calendar

Maryland Joins States Pushing Back Presidential Primaries on the Calendar

Governor Larry Hogan (R-MD) on Tuesday, March 17 issued a proclamation that among other things postponed the presidential primary in the Old Line state, shifting the date from April 28 back five weeks to June 2. It will be the latest a presidential primary has been conducted in Maryland in the post-reform era and the latest a Maryland presidential primary has been held since before the state joined Super Tuesday for the 1988 cycle.

Hogan's decision throws Maryland into a growing number of states acting in response to the budding coronavirus threat. Five states now including Maryland -- Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana and Ohio -- have moved in recent days to delay their presidential primaries, shifting back anywhere from 35 to 77 days to avoid the window in which voters may be hunkered down at home in an effort to not spread the virus.

Unlike Kentucky and Louisiana, however, the decision in Maryland avoided running afoul of the national party rules on the timing of primaries and caucuses. While those two contests are technically too late according to those rules, the Maryland primary will fall on the last big day on which contests will be held, June 2, a week before the window closes under Democratic Party rules.

The change in the Old Line state will have some impact on the delegate selection process, but it will be pretty minimal. District delegate candidates are listed and directly elected on the primary ballot. That process, then, will move with the primary. Fortunately, Maryland is not one of the states where a quorum of district delegates is responsible for selecting at-large and PLEO delegates. Instead, it is the state central committee of the Maryland Democratic Party that makes those decisions.

However, that selection is set to take place on May 30, the weekend before the new date of the presidential primary. That leaves the state party with some options. The state party will forge ahead and select slates of at-large and PLEO delegate candidates for each remaining candidate on May 30 and fill any allocated slots after the primary. Alternatively, the party could shift back a week -- or some time after the new primary date -- and select those statewide delegates with the result of the primary in mind. Either way, this is a question that Maryland Democrats will have to answer in the coming days in the lead up to the June primary. But with no caucus/convention process to select delegates, Maryland Democrats emerge from this change with a limited number of process questions.


--
Maryland proclamation postponing the presidential primary there is archived here.



--
Related Posts:
Maryland Board of Elections Will Recommend an All Vote-By-Mail Presidential Primary for June 2

The Electoral College Map (10/6/16)

New State Polls (10/6/16)
State	Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Clinton	Trump	Undecided	Poll Margin	FHQ Margin
Arizona	OH Predictive Insights	9/28-9/30	+/- 3.66%	718 likely voters	42	42	9	+/-0	--
Arizona	Emerson	10/2-10/4	+/- 3.9%	600 likely voters	44	42	6	+2	+1.80
Florida	University of North Florida	9/27-10/4	+/- 3.8%	686 likely voters	41	38	10	+3	--
Florida	Emerson	10/2-10/4	+/- 3.9%	600 likely voters	44	45	4	+1	+2.04
Indiana	Public Opinion Strategies/Howey	10/3-10/5	+/- 4.0%	600 likely voters	38	43	8	+5	+11.11
Maryland	Washington Post/University of Maryland	9/27-9/30	+/- 4.0%	706 likely voters	63	27	2	+36	+28.28
Michigan	EPIC/MRA	10/1-10/3	+/- 4.0%	600 likely voters	43	32	12	+11	+6.22
Nevada	Emerson	10/2-10/4	+/- 3.6%	700 likely voters	43	43	2	+/-0	+0.25
New Hampshire	Suffolk	10/3-10/5	+/- 4.4%	500 likely voters	44	42	8	+2	+5.10
Ohio	Anzalone	9/27-10/2	+/- 3.46%	800 likely voters	44	42	4	+2	+0.56
Rhode Island	Emerson	10/2-10/4	+/- 3.9%	600 likely voters	52	32	6	+20	+12.29
Tennessee	Vanderbilt	9/19-10/2	+/- 3.7%	1000 registered voters	33	44	14	+11	+14.52
Texas	Dixie Strategies	9/29-10/1	+/- 3.51%	780 likely voters	37.95	44.87	10.26	+6.92	+8.63
West Virginia	Garin Hart Yang	9/13-9/17	+/- 5.0%	500 likely voters	28	60	12	+32	+24.70

Polling Quick Hits:
Yesterday's trickle is today's relative flood of new state-level polling data to dig into.

Arizona:
The most recent wave of UPI/CVOTER polls had Trump ahead by ten points in the Grand Canyon state. And it stands alone in a series of around two point leads in surveys throughout 2016 in the state.  Even without cell phone users included in the sample, Emerson falls in that range in its new Arizona poll. Of course, this is the first poll Clinton has led there since the end of August. The balance of narrow leads had shifted primarily toward Trump through September; building a small but seemingly durable lead for the New York businessman. The tie in the OH Predictive Insights polls is in a similar position, although this is the closest Trump has been in a series of surveys that have favored Clinton all year.


Florida:
The two new polls from the Sunshine state can tell a couple of different stories taken on their face(s). On the one hand, they represent more evidence that Florida is close. But Florida is always close. On the other, one could take a slightly out of context position that, together, they offer a mixed message about who is ahead. Of the 14 polls in the field after September 11 that FHQ has included in the averages, Clinton has led in 11 of them. Out of the two new polls, take that Emerson one with a grain of salt.


Indiana:
Before jumping to conclusions on the latest Howey survey out of Republican vice presidential nominee Mike Pence's home state, some context. The last poll there was pretty close to the same. Trump is pulling the same 43 percent he did at the beginning of September as he is now. The difference is on Clinton's side, and it is a minimal two percentage point shift in her share of support. Things have gotten marginally closer, then, but only slightly lowers the FHQ graduated weighted average in a Strong Trump state.


Maryland:
Two things on this latest Washington Post poll of Maryland:
1. It looks a lot like the 2012 vote (share) distribution in the Old Line state (only Trump is lagging behind Romney).
2. It also closely resembles the poll the paper conducted in the state in March. Clinton's share is the same and Trump's has increased by one percent.

Mark Maryland as safely blue.


Michigan:
One could argue that Clinton got a bounce in Michigan out of the first debate. Across the last two EPIC/MRA surveys -- one last month before the debate and one this week -- her margin in the Great Lakes state has ballooned from three to eleven. Yet, that may miss part of the story in Michigan. What is interesting is that the two candidates shares of support in the firm's surveys of Michigan have snapped back to exactly where they were just after the two conventions had wrapped up.

Michigan remains one of those 40 percent states for Trump, a state where Trump has struggled to reach and/or stay around 40 percent. Two things do work in Trump's favor there. Clinton has not really broken out of the low 40s and there continues to be a sizable chunk of undecideds there. Granted, Trump would have to win a significant portion of them to even pull even with Clinton.


Nevada:
Nevada is the closest state in FHQ's averages. Just a quarter of a point separates Clinton and Trump there. It is fitting, then, that the new Emerson poll of the Silver state finds the race knotted up. But in the post-debate landscape, this is a good poll for Trump. Everything since that point has turned in Clinton's direction in Nevada, but the leads have been slight.


New Hampshire:
Including the recent UPI/CVOTER survey the last two polls of the Granite state have shown a much tighter race than has been the case for much of the year. Unlike most states in the immediate aftermath of Clinton's mid-September illness, the polls did not really budge in New Hampshire. After the margins briefly climbed into the low double digits in some surveys just after the conventions, most settled into a Clinton +5 to +9. That trend persisted even when the polls narrowed elsewhere in September. These two could be a blip on the radar or be a sign of some new trend. However, it should be said that this is Suffolk's first trip into New Hampshire this cycle.


Ohio:
The Anzalone survey in Ohio looks a lot like another recent poll of the state. While there is some consistency across those two surveys, the reality is that the polling is mixed in Ohio. The Buckeye state is close; not Nevada close, but not far off from that either.


Rhode Island:

Changes (October 6)
State	Before	After
Rhode Island	Lean Clinton	Strong Clinton

In 2012, the Rhode Island vote distribution ended up looking a lot like that of Maryland's. Four years later, however, the similarity has disappeared. Maryland seems the same, but Rhode Island, while still comfortably blue, has seen the gap between candidates contract. The story there is not that Trump has made any gains. He is, in fact, currently only slightly -- a point -- ahead of Romney's pace. Rather, the issue is that Hillary Clinton has consistently run well behind where Obama was in the Ocean state four years ago. Even in this new Emerson poll -- one where the former Secretary of State is well ahead of Trump -- she is about ten points behind Obama 2012.

Rhode Island could do with some more polling.


Tennessee:
Sure, both candidates are lagging behind their 2012 counterparts in this Vanderbilt poll of the Volunteer state. And Trump is even further behind Romney than Clinton is Obama. However, that does not change the fact that Trump continues to be around 15 points ahead of Clinton in Tennessee. It is still falls well into the Strong Trump group of states.


Texas:
FHQ does a mini-double take every time we see a Texas poll with Trump only ahead by a margin in the upper single digits. But those sorts of surveys have been the rule rather than the exception during 2016. While the Lone Star state has been polled infrequently, they collectively paint a picture of a consistent -- albeit it smaller than normal -- Republican advantage.


West Virginia:
For every Maryland on the Democratic side of the partisan line there is a West Virginia on the Republican side. The Mountain state is nearly the surest thing for Donald Trump, but it still amazing how far West Virginia has traveled across the Electoral College Spectrum in the time since another Clinton was the last Democrat to carry the state.


--
There was a lot to look at, but not much to show for it. The bulk of the figures had mostly Rhode Island flavored changes. The Ocean state inched back into a more typical Strong Democratic position on the map, taking its four electoral votes with it. Additionally, it represented the largest moving state on the Electoral College Spectrum; shifting three spots toward the Democratic end. The other shifts on the Spectrum were only small flips of one spot. Finally, the Watch List lost both Rhode Island and Michigan.

NOTE: A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2016 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
MD-102 (13)	WA-12 (162)	PA-20 (263)	SC-9 (154)	MT-3 (53)
HI-4 (17)	NJ-14 (176)	CO-94 (272 | 275)	TX-38 (145)	AR-6 (50)
VT-3 (20)	OR-7 (183)	FL-29 (301 | 266)	AK-3 (107)	ND-3 (44)
CA-55 (75)	NM-5 (188)	NC-15 (316 | 237)	MS-6 (104)	KY-8 (41)
MA-11 (86)	ME-23 (190)	OH-18 (334 | 222)	IN-11 (98)	NE-53 (33)
NY-29+13 (116)	MN-10 (200)	NV-6 (340 | 204)	KS-6 (87)	AL-9 (28)
IL-20 (136)	MI-16 (216)	IA-6 (198)	UT-6 (81)	OK-7 (19)
DE-3 (139)	WI-10 (226)	AZ-11 (192)	LA-8 (75)	ID-4 (12)
CT-7 (146)	VA-13 (239)	GA-16 (181)	TN-11 (67)	WV-5 (8)
RI-4 (150)	NH-4 (243)	MO-10+13 (165)	SD-3 (56)	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 275 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 Maine and Nebraska allocate electoral college votes to candidates in a more proportional manner. The statewide winner receives the two electoral votes apportioned to the state based on the two US Senate seats each state has. Additionally, the winner within a congressional district is awarded one electoral vote. Given current polling, all five Nebraska electoral votes would be allocated to Trump. In Maine, a split seems more likely. Trump leads in Maine's second congressional district while Clinton is ahead statewide and in the first district. She would receive three of the four Maine electoral votes and Trump the remaining electoral vote. Those congressional district votes are added approximately where they would fall in the Spectrum above. 4 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
Alaska	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Colorado	from Toss Up Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Iowa	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Clinton
Maine CD2	from Lean Trump	to Toss Up Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
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 Lean Clinton	to Toss Up Clinton
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 (10/5/16)

The Electoral College Map (10/4/16)

The Electoral College Map (10/3/16)

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