The Electoral College Map (8/21/20)

Update for August 21.

Democrats wrapped up their convention Thursday night with Joe Biden accepting the party's presidential nomination. While it will be at least a little while before any sort of bounce can be detected coming out of this virtual convention, the former vice president emerges from the quadrennial gathering in much the same position today as he was last weekend before the meeting officially gaveled in. That is to say that Biden still maintains the same 353-185 electoral vote edge that he did before the convention. And the pair of polls added to the mix at FHQ did little to change that.


Polling Quick Hits:
New Hampshire
(Biden 51, Trump 43):
In New Hampshire, St. Anselm was back in the field for the first time since mid-June and finds the race for the White House looking much the same in the Granite state as it did then. Biden has pushed past the 50 percent mark with Trump still stuck in the low 40s. But then again, that has been the sort of snapshot the college survey has shown every other month since April. It is a steady race through their lens and fairly consistent with the 50-42 advantage Biden has in the FHQ averages in the state.


New Jersey
(Biden 52, Trump 33):
The first update in New Jersey since last month also carries with it a tale of status quo maintenance. In fact, the latest DKC Analytics survey of the Garden state look nearly identical to the firm's poll of the state a month ago. And while Biden is ahead, the former vice president is running behind Hillary Clinton's pace in the state four years ago. At this point, Biden is about two points behind where Clinton was in New Jersey in November 2016. [That said, this survey looks an awful lot like the Washington Post poll of the state, the lone August 2016 poll there.] Trump, on the other hand, is more than six points behind his position in New Jersey in the 2016 election results there.



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
MA-112 (14)	NJ-14 (173)	WI-10 (252)	AK-3 (125)	UT-6 (60)
HI-4 (18)	OR-7 (180)	PA-203 NE CD2-1 (273 | 286)	MO-10 (122)	IN-11 (54)
CA-55 (73)	DE-3 (183)	FL-29 (302 | 265)	SC-9 (112)	ID-4 (43)
VT-3 (76)	CO-9 (192)	NV-6 (308 | 236)	KS-6 (103)	KY-8 (39)
NY-29 (105)	NM-5 (197)	AZ-11 (319 | 230)	MT-3 NE CD1-1 (97)	AL-9 (31)
WA-12 (117)	ME-2 (199)	NC-15 (334 | 219)	LA-8 (93)	ND-3 (22)
MD-10 (127)	VA-13 (212)	ME CD2-1 OH-18 (353 | 204)	MS-6 (87)	SD-3 (19)
IL-20 (147)	MN-10 (222)	IA-6 (185)	AR-6 (79)	OK-7 (16)
ME CD1-1 RI-4 (152)	MI-16 (238)	GA-16 (179)	NE-2 (73)	WV-5 (9)
CT-7 (159)	NH-4 (242)	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 286 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 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 Pennsylvania is the state where Biden crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election, the tipping point state.

It goes without saying that two polls like those above that did little to change the outlook in either New Hampshire or New Jersey did not do much to altered the overarching state of the race at FHQ. The did not. Neither budged on the Electoral College Spectrum above nor was either added to the Watch List below.

The same 13 states and districts along with underpolled Nevada remain the state to watch as more polls are released in the coming days. It is those states that have the highest potential to switch categories given new polling data.

--
There were no new polls from Nevada today.

Days since the last Nevada poll was in the field: 113.

--
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
Florida	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
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
Maine	from Strong Biden	to Lean Biden
Maine CD2	from Toss Up Biden	to Toss Up Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Missouri	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Nebraska CD2	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 (8/20/20)

The Electoral College Map (8/19/20)

The Electoral College Map (8/18/20)


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

The Electoral College Map (7/28/20)

Update for July 28.

Changes (July 28)
State	Before	After
Florida	Lean Biden	Toss Up Biden
Ohio	Toss Up Biden	Toss Up Trump
Pennsylvania	Toss Up Biden	Lean Biden

The Tuesday 14 weeks before election day brought with it a slew of new polls. In fact, 35 new surveys were added to the FHQ polling dataset for 2020 from 19 states. That included a couple of 12 state waves from Morning Consult and another 7 state series from Public Policy Polling. There was even a Maine survey that included the first look at the races on the congressional district level.

And all that new data ushered in a few changes in this space. One will forgive FHQ for glossing over the Florida and Pennsylvania shifts. Both continue to hover around the border between Lean and Toss Up on the Biden side of the partisan line. But the noticeable change is Ohio jumping the partisan line into Toss Up Trump territory. Other than a brief period at the end of June and the beginning of July when Georgia drifted over to Biden's side of the ledger, the race has fairly steadily been stuck on a Biden 352, Trump 186 tally. That changes today. The Buckeye state has been on the Watch List for the majority of these updates over the last month plus, but has stubbornly stayed ever so slightly tipped in Biden's direction. Now, the opposite is true. How stubborn that bent is, however, remains to be seen. Ohio has been underpolled for the most party -- at least compared to past cycles -- and the two Morning Consult surveys of the Buckeye state were more Trump-favorable than a lot of recent polling there.

Elsewhere...


Polling Quick Hits:
Massachusetts (Biden 55, Trump 23):
The funny thing about the MassINC Polling Group survey of the Bay state is that Biden received his lowest share of support in the limited number of polls conducted there so far in 2020. And the former vice president still led by 32 points. That is because Trump had his lowest share of support in Massachusetts this year as well. The data are nice, but only confirm what was already known about Massachusetts. Yes, it will be a blue state in the fall, but it will be among the bluest states. It had held down the most Democratic cell on the Electoral College Spectrum below, but this poll actually reduced the margin there and yielded that spot to Hawaii.


Maine CD1 (Biden 55, Trump 35):
Both polls from Maine today -- the Public Policy Polling survey (linked below) and this one from Colby College -- are right in the area where the Pine Tree state has settled in this race: just on the Strong side of the Strong/Lean Biden line. And while nothing in either poll changed that, what the Colby poll offered was the initial glimpse at the race on the congressional district level. There were no surprises in CD1. It continues to be a safe jurisdiction for the Democrats. And, in fact, the Biden +20 margin was close to the uniform swing projection FHQ had made based on the shift since 2016 in states that had finished close to the district.


Maine CD2 (Biden 45, Trump 42):
But the real news may have been from the more rural, northern district of the two in Maine; the one Trump won by nearly 10 points in 2016. There, the picture is different through the lens of this survey. Biden may lead by three, but combining that shift with the changes in states that finished near ME CD2 in 2016 still gives the edge to Trump. But that advantage has shrunk and is trending toward the Watch List. Bear in mind that the average shift from 2016 across all states is now a little less than eight points. If one were to shave that average shift off Trump's 2016 margin in ME CD2, then it ends up a with a margin only a little more than the Trump +1.98 at which FHQ now has it calculated.


New Jersey (Biden 51, Trump 33):
Like Massachusetts above, New Jersey, too, is in no danger of being anything other than a safe state for Joe Biden in November. But the update in the Garden state from DKC Analytics is welcome. The 18 point advantage there for the former vice presidential matches the existing gap between the major party candidates in FHQ's graduated weighted averages.


South Carolina (Trump 50, Biden 45):
This one actually was released a day ago but did not quite make it before the update yesterday. But ALG Research, like the brilliant corners survey yesterday, found Trump right at the 50 percent mark in a state the president carried by 14 with 55 percent in 2016. The Palmetto state is unlikely to turn blue any time soon unless the bottom truly drops out on Trump, but the two surveys from the state released in the last 24 hours show about an eight point swing since 2016. And again, that is right there where FHQ has the average swing nationwide.


Morning Consult (May | July waves):
Rather than go through these polls one by one, FHQ will handle them collectively as has become the custom around here when large waves of polls are released. The focus in those cases should always be on the order of the states and how they match up with the established rank ordering as depicted on the Spectrum below.

The big thing between the May and July waves is that while Biden and Trump split the 12 states in May, Biden had taken the lead in 10 of the 12 in this latest round. On average Biden gained a little more than 3.5 points across the dozen states from May to July.

May
Ohio: Trump +8
Texas: Trump +7
North Carolina: Trump +3
Georgia: Trump +2
Arizona: Trump +2
Florida: Trump +1
                               
Pennsylvania: Biden +4
Wisconsin: Biden +5
Minnesota: Biden +7
Michigan: Biden +8
Colorado: Biden +8
Virginia: Biden +10

July
Ohio: Trump +3
North Carolina: Tied
Georgia: Biden +1
Texas: Biden +2
Florida: Biden +3
Minnesota: Biden +3
Arizona: Biden +7
Wisconsin: Biden +7
Pennsylvania: Biden +8
Michigan: Biden +10
Virginia: Biden +11
Colorado: Biden +13

And the order largely holds up in both. Ohio stands out as a state that looked a little more Trump-favorable in these polls than elsewhere, but the Buckeye state is in a fairly tight cluster with Georgia and Texas with North Carolina a bit more distant at the moment. Other than Ohio, Minnesota was the only state among the 12 to actually move in the president's direction since May. But it remains a Lean Biden state and the one most tilted in his direction among that group. Arizona looked like an outlier in the May wave, but swung hard toward Biden in this latest survey conducted by Morning Consult. Split the difference between those two polls and one pretty much has where Arizona is now at FHQ: Biden +3.45.


Public Policy Polling (July wave):
Alaska: Trump +6
Montana: Trump +5
Iowa: Trump +1
                                
Georgia: Biden +1
North Carolina: Biden +3
Maine: Biden +11
Colorado: Biden +13

This group of polls may be more interesting for any Senate or gubernatorial polling simultaneously done with the presidential trial heats. But the bottom line is that the rank ordering in this series aligns with where FHQ has them among each. None of the seven did anything to uproot any of the states from their current positions, either the categories each is in or their spots on the Spectrum below.

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
HI-42 (7)	NJ-14 (173)	PA-203 (269 | 289)	AK-3 (125)	TN-11 (56)
MA-11 (18)	OR-7 (180)	FL-293 (298 | 269)	MO-10 (122)	NE-2 (45)
CA-55 (73)	DE-3 (183)	NH-4 (302 | 240)	SC-9 (112)	AL-9 (43)
VT-3 (76)	CO-9 (192)	NV-6 (308 | 236)	MT-3 (103)	ID-4 (34)
NY-29 (105)	NM-5 (197)	AZ-11 (319 | 230)	UT-6 (100)	ND-3 (30)
MD-10 (115)	ME-2 (199)	NC-15 (334 | 219)	LA-8 NE CD1-1 (94)	KY-8 (27)
IL-20 (135)	VA-13 (212)	GA-16 (204)	MS-6 (85)	SD-3 (19)
WA-12 (147)	MN-10 (222)	OH-18 (188)	IN-11 (79)	OK-7 (16)
RI-4 ME CD1-1 (152)	MI-16 (238)	TX-38 (170)	AR-6 (68)	WV-5 (9)
CT-7 (159)	WI-10 NE CD2-1 (249)	IA-6 ME CD2-1 (132)	KS-6 (62)	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 up to the Keystone state), he would have 289 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Biden's number is on the left and 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 Florida is the state where Biden crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election, the tipping point state for the former vice president. But because the line between Florida and Pennsylvania creates an Electoral College tie (269-269), Pennsylvania is the tipping point state for Trump. It is where the president surpasses 270 electoral votes. Collectively, Florida and Pennsylvania are the tipping point states.

The take home today is that the shuffling among those states around the Lean/Toss Up Biden line has once again affected the tipping point in the order. Once again, there is no one tipping point state. If Trump were to mount a comeback and win all of the states up to Florida in the order then the president would have 269 electoral votes. The tipping point, then, is just between Florida and Pennsylvania. A candidate would have to win both states to get to 270.

The order on the Spectrum remained much the same. Obviously, Ohio pushing over into Trump territory is noteworthy, but so too is the fact that it did that and passed Georgia in the process. The Peach state is now the closest state. Both are on the Watch List below, within a point of shifting to Toss Up Biden.

Speaking of the List, Maine, Minnesota and Montana all came off today with the addition of new polls.


--
There were also no new polls from Nevada nor New Hampshire today.

Days since the last Nevada poll was in the field: 89.
Days since the last New Hampshire poll was in the field: 42.

--
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
Florida	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
Georgia	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Indiana	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Louisiana	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Missouri	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Nebraska CD1	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Nebraska CD2	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
New Hampshire	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
Ohio	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Pennsylvania	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
Utah	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Virginia	from Strong Biden	to Lean Biden
Wisconsin	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

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


--
Related posts:
The Electoral College Map (7/27/20)

The Electoral College Map (7/26/20)

The Electoral College Map (7/25/20)


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

2020 Democratic Delegate Allocation: NEW JERSEY

NEW JERSEY

Election type: primary
Date: July 7
    [June 2 originally]
Number of delegates: 146 [28 at-large, 14 PLEOs, 84 congressional district, 20 automatic/superdelegates]
Allocation method: proportional statewide and at the (paired) legislative district level
Threshold to qualify for delegates: 15%
2016: proportional primary
Delegate selection plan (pre-coronavirus)
    [Timeline of changes, post-coronavirus]


--
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.

Rarely in the post-reform era has the consolidated New Jersey primary been uprooted from its traditional early June position on the presidential primary calendar and moved to another spot. That was no different from 2016-2019. But as has been the case in a number of other states, the coronavirus served as an impetus for electoral change in 2020 in the Garden state as well.

Governor Phil Murphy (D) issued an executive order in early April to shift the primary 35 days deeper into the calendar and beyond the DNC rules-defined deadline to hold delegate selection events. Along with the move from June 2 to July 7, the governor also bought the state more time to push the state toward a predominantly vote-by-mail election. While there will be a reduced number of polling places on primary day, all registered voters in New Jersey will receive an absentee vote-by-mail ballot with return postage included. That is a route taken most clearly by Maryland, but all counties in Montana also opted to send ballots -- not applications for absentee ballots -- to eligible voters. New Jersey joins that group.

All absentee ballots are due to county elections offices postmarked on or before Tuesday, July 7. If a ballot meets that criterion, then it will be accepted until July 14. 

Overall, the Democratic delegation in New Jersey changed by five delegates from 2016 to 2020. All three pledged categories of delegates retained their same numbers from four years ago while all the gains in the delegation came from the additional of five superdelegates to the delegation.


[Please see below for more on the post-coronavirus changes specific 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)
New Jersey's 84 congressional district delegates are split across 20 paired state legislative districts and have a variation of three delegates across districts from the measure of Democratic strength Garden state Democrats are using based on the results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections in the state. That method apportions delegates as follows...
CD1 - 3 delegates*
CD2 - 3 delegates*
CD3 - 4 delegates
CD4 - 4 delegates
CD5 - 3 delegates*
CD6 - 3 delegates*
CD7 - 4 delegates
CD8 - 5 delegates*
CD9 - 4 delegates
CD10 - 3 delegates*
CD11 - 3 delegates*
CD12 - 4 delegates
CD13 - 4 delegates
CD14 - 3 delegates*
CD15 - 6 delegates
CD16 - 6 delegates
CD17 - 5 delegates*
CD18 - 6 delegates
CD19 - 6 delegates
CD20 - 5 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 coronavirus pushed the presidential primary in the Garden state back by five weeks and the timeline of the delegate selection process New Jersey Democrats are using basically mimics that change. The 84 district delegates in the New Jersey are directly elected on the primary ballot on July 7, listed alongside the presidential candidate to whom they are pledged. That selection moved when the primary moved. And so did the selection of statewide delegates. The New Jersey Democratic State Committee will choose PLEO and then at-large delegates in a post-primary meeting that will fall on July 18.

[Under the originally approved and compliant delegate selection plan, New Jersey Democrats would still have directly elected their district delegates on the primary ballot, but on June 2. Likewise, the PLEO and at-large delegates would have been chosen by a post-primary state committee meeting that was planned for June 13.]


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 early July when the New Jersey statewide delegate selection takes place but Candidate Y is not, then any statewide delegates allocated to Candidate Y in the mid-July 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.

Murphy's Order Moves New Jersey Presidential Primary Back to July 7

Citing the choice Wisconsin primary voters had to make between voting and their own health a day earlier, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy (D) on Wednesday, April 8 issued an executive order moving the primary in the Garden state from June 2 back five weeks to July 7. 

While the move may help avoid any overlap between in-person voting and the peak of the coronavirus, the new date does run afoul of national party rules on the timing of primaries and caucuses by a full four weeks. The New Jersey Democratic Party will have to bring that change before the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee in particular for the national party's approval on any likely waiver request. 

But this is a big one. It is one thing for a state to push into late June, but another to move all the way into July. New Jersey Democrats' cause will undoubtedly be helped out to some degree by the DNC decision to shift the national convention from July to August.

--

The New Jersey change is now reflected on the 2020 FHQ presidential primary calendar.

UPDATE (4/13/20): The New Jersey state legislature unanimously passed legislation backing Governor Murphy's executive order to push the primary back 35 days to July 7.

UPDATE (5/15/20): Governor Murphy issued another executive order to provide vote-by-mail ballots to every registered voter in New Jersey in an effort to further protect public health amid the threat of the coronavirus. There will still be an in-person option, but there will be a reduced number of polling locations on primary day, July 7. As long as the ballots are postmarked on or before July 7, then they will be accepted and counted as late as July 14. 

The Electoral College Map (10/18/16)

New State Polls (10/18/16)
State	Poll	Date	Margin of Error	Sample	Clinton	Trump	Undecided	Poll Margin	FHQ Margin
Arizona	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1028 likely voters	41	44	2	+3	+1.51
California	Survey USA	10/13-10/15	+/- 3.7%	725 likely voters	56	30	7	+26	+22.18
Colorado	Magellan	10/12-10/13	+/- 4.38%	500 likely voters	40	35	6	+5	--
Colorado	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	956 likely voters	44	37	3	+7	+4.29
Florida	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1702 likely voters	43	45	3	+2	+2.21
Georgia	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	886 likely voters	45	41	3	+4	+3.05
Indiana	Lucid/Times-Picayune	10/7-10/10	--	1123 likely voters	37	43	7	+6	+9.601
Iowa	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1135 likely voters	40	45	4	+5	+1.30
Massachusetts	MassINC/WBUR	10/13-10/15	+/- 4.4%	502 likely voters	54	28	6	+26	+22.09
Michigan	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1331 likely voters	45	37	3	+8	+6.62
Nevada	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	884 likely voters	40	44	2	+4	--
Nevada	Monmouth	10/14-10/17	+/-4.8%	413 likely voters	47	40	3	+7	+1.07
New Hampshire	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	569 likely voters	47	36	2	+11	+5.69
New Jersey	Fairleigh Dickinson	10/12-10/16	+/-4.3%	579 likely voters	49	35	5	+14	+11.88
New Mexico	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	889 likely voters	41	33	2	+8	+7.82
North Carolina	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1191 likely voters	46	40	3	+6	+1.56
Ohio	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1307 likely voters	41	44	2	+3	+0.71
Oregon	DHM Research/OPB	10/6-10/13	+/- 4.0%	600 likely voters	43	36	7	+7	+9.62
Pennsylvania	Lucid/Times-Picayune	10/7-10/10	--	1457 likely voters	47	38	7	+9	--
Pennsylvania	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1449 likely voters	46	40	3	+6	+5.55
Texas	University of Houston	10/7-10/15	+/- 3.0%	1000 likely voters	38	41	13	+3	--
Texas	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1332 likely voters	42	44	3	+2	+7.11
Virginia	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1644 likely voters	49	38	2	+11	+6.51
Wisconsin	Survey Monkey/Washington Post	10/8-10/16	--	1076 likely voters	43	38	3	+5	--
Wisconsin	St. Norbert	10/13-10/16	+/-3.8%	664 likely voters	47	39	7	+8	+6.35
1The Picayune poll in Indiana pushes the Hoosier state from the Strong Trump to Lean Trump category.

--
Changes (10/18/16)

Changes (October 18)
State	Before	After
Indiana	Strong Trump	Lean Trump

Despite all the new polling data, little changed here at FHQ. Indiana went from barely a Strong Trump state to barely a Lean Trump state. It remains on the line between the two categories based on the new data from the Picayune survey. The Hoosier state maintained its same position on the Electoral College Spectrum, but changed shades both there and on the map. That obviously changes Indiana's distinction on the Watch List. Other than that, the only other changes were Texas hopping South Carolina and Alaska in the Lean Trump area of the Spectrum toward the Toss Up category and Virginia and Wisconsin swapping spots on the Spectrum in Lean Clinton territory.

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)	TX-38 (154)	SD-3 (53)
HI-4 (17)	NJ-14 (176)	CO-94 (272 | 275)	AK-3 (116)	AR-6 (50)
VT-3 (20)	OR-7 (183)	FL-29 (301 | 266)	SC-9 (113)	ND-3 (44)
CA-55 (75)	NM-5 (188)	NC-15 (316 | 237)	IN-11 (104)	KY-8 (41)
MA-11 (86)	ME-23 (190)	NV-6 (322 | 222)	MS-6 (93)	NE-53 (33)
NY-29+13 (116)	MN-10 (200)	OH-18 (340 | 216)	UT-6 (87)	AL-9 (28)
IL-20 (136)	MI-16 (216)	IA-6 (198)	KS-6 (81)	OK-7 (19)
DE-3 (139)	VA-13 (229)	AZ-11 (192)	LA-8 (75)	ID-4 (12)
CT-7 (146)	WI-10 (239)	GA-16+13 (181)	MT-3 (67)	WV-5 (8)
RI-4 (150)	NH-4 (243)	MO-10 (164)	TN-11 (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 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
Colorado	from Toss Up Clinton	to Lean Clinton
Indiana	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Maine CD2	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
New Hampshire	from Lean Clinton	to Toss Up Clinton
Ohio	from Toss Up Clinton	to Toss Up Trump
Oregon	from Lean Clinton	to Strong Clinton
Pennsylvania	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 (10/17/16)

The Electoral College Map (10/16/16)

The Electoral College Map (10/15/16)

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