The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)

Not a good half a week of polling for the McCain campaign. Some of that is the result of the direction the polling is trending (away from the Arizona senator), but most of the discrepancy is due to where the polling that came out over the last few days was conducted. The 4th of July period saw a flurry of polling in the states of the Northeast, and unless you're talking about New Hampshire (where no new polls surfaced), you aren't really talking about one of McCain's natural bases of support. Of the ten new polls that emerged, seven were from northeastern states (if you want to include New York as northeastern. I do here simply because it is so close to those other northeastern states polled and so far from Georgia, Montana and Washington.). The outcome? An awful lot of blue, deep blue:

New Polls (July 2-5)
State	Poll	Margin
Connecticut	Quinnipiac	+21
Connecticut	Rasmussen	+17
Connecticut	Research 2000/DailyKos	+22
Georgia	Insider Advantage	+2
Massachusetts	Rasmussen	+20
Montana	Rasmussen	+5
New York	Rasmussen	+31
Rhode Island	Rhode Island College	+24
Rhode Island	Rasmussen	+28
Washington	Strategies 360	+8

Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York and Rhode Island made up the states where those seven polls were conducted and all but one of those polls gave Obama an edge over McCain of more than 20 points. But since each is already rated a "Strong Obama" state, none of this comes as too much of a surprise. The real news comes out of the only two red states that were polled in this late week window. Insider Advantage turned in yet another close result in Georgia and Rasmussen produced the mirror image of the Montana poll the service conducted three months ago showing a 5 point McCain lead.

Changes (July 2-5)
State	Before	After
Georgia	Strong McCain	McCain lean
Montana	McCain lean	Toss Up McCain

It is those two polls that triggered the only changes we witness in our weekend map, and both are red states shifting in Obama's direction. Georgia continues to jump back and forth between being Strong McCain and a McCain lean. The Peach state, however, remains a state that is on Obama's board, but only barely so. It has fairly consistently hovered around that 10 percent point in FHQ's average for a few weeks now. While Georgia may still be an Obama target, it isn't as likely a potential pick off as Bush 2004 states like Colorado, Ohio or Virginia. And that brings us to Montana. The Treasure state has been polled far less than many other states and as such is more susceptible to the volatility one outlier can produce. Having said that though, none of McCain's leads in the previous 3 polls in the state exceeded single digits. So, while the five point edge the current Rasmussen poll in Montana gives Obama is an aberation in the face of past polling in the state, it only pulls the average into Toss Up McCain status on the map below (and past the point of being placed on The Watch List further down).

[Click Map to Enlarge]

Obama's electoral college numbers remain stationary as all the blue states polled already favored him (and heavily at that). The electoral college breakdown shifts on right end of the spectrum, though. McCain's strong and lean states make up nearly 200 electoral votes, but overall the toss up states still favor Obama and three other McCain lean states (Alaska, Florida and North Carolina, 45 electoral votes) could slip into Toss Up status. That increases the Arizona senator's pool of Toss Up states, but at his own expense; dropping his number of safer states. The message? As it was during June, Obama currently holds a distinct advantage in the electoral college breakdown here as McCain holds to a decreasing number of electoral votes (with more trending toward being more competitive).

The Watch List*
State	Switch
Alaska	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Florida	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Massachusetts	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Minnesota	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Mississippi	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Missouri	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Nevada	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
New Mexico	from Toss Up Obama	to Obama lean
North Carolina	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Ohio	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
Texas	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Wisconsin	from Obama lean	to Toss Up Obama
Washington	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Oh, but it isn't all bad for McCain. The new poll in Washington pulls the Evergreen state onto The Watch List (on the line between being a Strong Obama state and an Obama lean). Like Georgia for Obama, though, Washington appears to be a bit beyond McCain's reach at the moment. It is one thing to pull to within single digits, but the real work seems to be putting a dent in that last layer of support that make the difference between a state being truly competitive or merely coming to rest in the gray area between being close and comfortable.

Note: I'll go ahead and post, but I've given Montana two more electoral votes in the map tally than it actually has. I'll correct that and re-post shortly.

Note: Fixed. Montana with 5 electoral votes? Yeah, I don't think so. McCain may wish for a couple more there and and a few more in many other states if these numbers don't change (and they will...we just don't know where) before November.

Note: Fixed. I'm sad to admit that Idaho has been mistakenly tagged with 3 electoral votes since we shifted to the new map at the conclusion of primary season. The map above, as well as all the past maps, have been altered to reflect the reality on the ground in Idaho. Thanks to Anonymous (whoever you are) for the correction. I'd be nothing but a fool on the internet without my readers.

Note: Fixed. Well, I found where that Idaho electoral vote went: Kansas. Thanks to Anton P. in the comments for the 7/2 map for pointing out that Kansas was incorrectly tagged with 8 electoral votes instead of 6. That is now correct on all the maps.


Recent Posts:
Blog Note

Happy 4th of July!!!!

The Electoral College Map (7/2/08)

Blog Note

In case you hadn't noticed, things have been a bit slow around here this week. I've been out of town, and though I'll continue to be for the next week or two, the beach won't be pulling me away from my laptop as much in the coming week. So even though July has gotten off to a slow start here at FHQ, I'll hopefully make amends this week. I'll have a new electoral college map ready to roll out in the morning and have a couple of other interesting (I think) posts for later in the week.

Also, with results like the Montana poll the other day (more on that tomorrow), the temptation is to start doing a daily update of the electoral college map. However, I'm going to keep it a bi-weekly analysis until probably Labor Day. At that point, I'll shift to daily update when the real (or traditional) campaign begins.


Recent Posts:
Happy 4th of July!!!!

The Electoral College Map (7/2/08)

Did Obama Bounce Everywhere in June?

Happy 4th of July!!!!

It was just 232 short years ago that the cornerstone for the US system of presidential selection was laid. So thanks Founding Fathers, and yes, especially you, John Hancock (You were aiming for a blurb in an FHQ post lo those many years ago, weren't you?) for declaring American independence. Over 200 years of electoral evolution later, we've had an election even the Framers would have been entertained by. And while you're dining on hamburgers and hot dogs today, you too can ponder what the Founders would have thought of 2008.

What would they have thought of the Clinton-Obama nomination battle?

Would they have found the increased participation in the primaries beneficial to American democracy?

Given the 3/5ths compromise (or the language concerning "all men being created equal), what would the prevailing mindset have been among the Founders concerning an African American (or a woman) being among the most viable presidential candidates? Or given life expectancy at the time, what would they have thought of a 72 year old (in November) running for president?

Happy 4th everyone!


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (7/2/08)

Did Obama Bounce Everywhere in June?

The Electoral College Map (6/29/08)

The Electoral College Map (7/2/08)

Thirteen new polls in 9 states since Sunday clarified the electoral college map a bit further. The closer the campaign gets to November, the clearer the state of the game is going to appear. Georgia, for instance, continues to tread the line between being a strong or lean state for McCain. All that does is put the Peach state right at the cut line for states in which Obama can play offense. There has been some movement in Georgia's weighted average but that number continues to hover around that 10% margin. The longer that back and forth persists (without trending one way or the other), the less likely the Peach state is to actually be competitive in November.

New Polls (June 29-July 1)
State	Poll	Margin
Alabama	Rasmussen	+15
Arizona	Rasmussen	+9
Florida	PPP	+2
Florida	Strategic Vision	+6
Florida	Rasmussen	+7
Georgia	Rasmussen	+10
Georgia	Strategic Vision	+8
Louisiana	SMOR	+16
Massachusetts	Rasmussen	+20
Massachusetts	Survey USA	+13
New York	Survey USA	+20
North Carolina	PPP	+4
Virginia	Survey USA	+2

Other than Georgia, Massachusetts was the only other state to have switched categories since the weekend. The Bay state moved from being an Obama lean to being a more comfortably strong state for the Illinois senator. Obviously, this pulls Massachusetts in line with where it would be expected to be given its past voting history. Some early tighter polls have kept Massachusetts under the 10% mark, but with the inclusion of more information, those polls are now acting as outliers in the formula.

Changes (June 29-July 1)
State	Before	After
Georgia	McCain lean	Strong McCain
Massachusetts	Obama lean	Strong Obama

And what about the map? Well, both Georgia and Massachusetts get darker, but the underlying electoral college breakdown remains the same. Obama leads McCain by 298 electoral votes to 240. The Obama part of the map continues to solidify. Very few states are still "leans" for him. Most states that are in shades of blue are either solidly Obama or toss ups favoring the Illinois senator. The movement out of the lean category for Obama has been in the direction of more strongly supporting Obama as opposed to becoming any more weakly associated with him. For McCain, the story is a bit different. His "toss up" numbers have been fairly static for a couple of weeks now while there has been some shift between his "strong" and "lean" statistics. Overall, as we saw yesterday, McCain lost ground to Obama in 31 states during June while gaining in only 6 (though it should be noted that those six states are considered by many to be swing states).

[Click Map to Enlarge]

As the week continues, there are several states to look for new polling from. Those states have not changed much since Sunday, but we can add Florida to the list. The trio of new polls from the Sunshine state pulled the average for Florida toward toss up status. It still leans to McCain, but only barely at this point. I don't want to set a precedent here, but Virginia, by virtue of several small polling victories for Obama is close to being added to the Watch List as well.

The Watch List*
State	Switch
Alaska	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Florida	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Georgia	from Strong McCain	to McCain lean
Massachusetts	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Minnesota	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Mississippi	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Missouri	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Nevada	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
New Mexico	from Toss Up Obama	to Obama lean
North Carolina	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Ohio	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
Texas	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Wisconsin	from Obama lean	to Toss Up Obama
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

Recent Posts:
Did Obama Bounce Everywhere in June?

The Electoral College Map (6/29/08)

The National Popular Vote Plan...and Other Ways of Reforming the Electoral College

Did Obama Bounce Everywhere in June?

There has been a lot of chatter since Barack Obama effectively won the Democratic nomination on June 3 about an Obama (or unity) bounce in the polls. I was--and still am--skeptical about the bounce based on semantics. As I've argued, a bounce--like those after a convention--implies that there is a sudden uptick in polling following a certain event that will eventually regress to the mean (the one established prior to the event occurring). However, has there been a bounce or just an increase in the margin between McCain and Obama that reflects the conditions on the ground (unpopular president and war, poor economy, etc.)? Let's look at that question with the data we now have from June.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

The map above shows how much FHQ's weighted averages have changed as a result of the polls that emerged during June. Those states in green show varying degrees of movement toward Obama while the yellow states reflect a shift toward McCain (White states are states where no polls were conducted in June. There was no case where there were new polls, but no change in the average.). From the outset, it is apparent that this map is largely green. There were 37 states where polling was done in June and of those, 31 shifted in Obama's direction. The states that moved toward Obama the most, as a result of the Illinois senator securing the Democratic nomination, are, for the most part, the states where he trailed by the largest margins prior to that point. We see big jumps in the Appalachian states where Obama lost primaries to Hillary Clinton: West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee. That grouping of states stretches to encompass Arkansas and Oklahoma as well. Beyond that, there are a handful of typically blue states in that have shown significant shifts toward Obama (A significant shift is defined as anything greater than a two percentage point jump in the weighted average during June. 2 points! Yeah, keep in mind that we are talking about changes in the average here. In other words, some states are more prone than others to significant shifts. On the one hand, large outliers--at least by comparison to the pre-existent data--will pull the average in their direction. But states that have had comparatively little polling are much more vulnerable to bigger shifts.): Massachusetts, Washington and Maine.

And what of McCain? Well, it isn't all bad for the Arizona senator. The momentum is against him, but he is making gains. And the places where he has made gains during the month are swing states: Nevada, Colorado, Missouri and--depending on who you talk to--Oregon and Iowa.
With the exception of Missouri, those are all Obama states in the current electoral college breakdown and comprise 28 electoral votes. That would be enough to pull McCain within 2 electoral votes of victory, but would still put him behind Obama. While Oregon and Iowa may be moving in his direction, some of the other states would potentially be easier pick ups for McCain (Think light blue states on the electoral college map.). States that are both light blue on the electoral college map and light green on the map above (So, Obama toss ups and slight Obama gains during June) are probably more likely targets for McCain than Iowa and Oregon. New Mexico and Pennsylvania fit that bill.

Of the states in white, there are only a couple that seem like they could be competitive in the fall, yet did not have any polls conducted in June. Connecticut and Montana are both leans toward Obama and McCain, respectively, but have shown signs of being in play. They are both less intensely red or blue than they have been during recent cycles. And both are cases where more polling will help to clear the picture. Also, because each has had only a few polls during all of campaign '08 (primary season, too), both are more likely than others to move significantly in one direction or the other.

Was June a bounce month for Obama, though? There's definitely an uptick in the poll numbers since he wrapped up the Democratic nomination, but as of now, there hasn't been any detectable reversion to the pre-June mean.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (6/29/08)

The National Popular Vote Plan...and Other Ways of Reforming the Electoral College

The Electoral College Map (6/25/08)

The Electoral College Map (6/29/08)

With Quinnipiac's decision to stretch beyond their typical Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania coverage, there came a bevy of new polls in swing states during the latter half of the week. Beyond that though, there were several changes that shifted things on the Watch List and altered the electoral college projection as well. Since Wednesday there were eleven new polls in ten states:

New Polls (June 25-28)
State	Poll	Margin
Colorado	Quinnipiac	+2
Kentucky	Rasmussen	+16
Michigan	Quinnipiac	+6
Minnesota	Quinnipiac	+17
Mississippi	Rasmussen	+6
New Jersey	FDU	+16
Ohio	Survey USA	+2
Tennessee	Rasmussen	+15
Texas	Texas Lyceum	+5
Texas	Rasmussen	+9
Wisconsin	Quinnipiac	+13

What's worth noting is that, with few exceptions, these polls put the momentum in Obama's direction. Even in the McCain states, where the Illnois senator is (or has been) trailing badly, he has improved upon his standing. States like Kentucky and Tennessee, where McCain had been ahead by more than twenty points for months, have suddenly tightened. And as Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight.com has eloquently pointed out within the last few days, history will tell us that the position of the two major candidates in the polls will converage (or settle into position) to some degree, the closer it gets to November and the general election. Even in states like Colorado have seen Obama's lead decrease but hold steady just outside of the margin of error--but still within the range of what we here at FHQ consider to be a toss up.

Changes (June 25-28)
State	Before	After
Minnesota	Obama lean	Strong Obama
Mississippi	Strong McCain	McCain lean
Ohio	Tied	Toss Up Obama
Texas	Strong McCain	McCain lean
Wisconsin	Toss Up Obama	Obama lean

And this is the case in the states where changes haven taken place since Wednesday. Obama "took the lead" in Ohio, breaking what had been a tie in our average. Still, Ohio along with Nevada, continues to be the tightest of states at the moment. Both are in Obama's column at the moment but could switch quite easily. Both Texas and Mississippi eased into the McCain lean category after being more solidly in the Arizona senator's favor of late. From the looks of things, neither will be Obama states in November, but the closer they get, the more McCain may be force to play defense in the Lone Star and Magnolia states. Meanwhile, due to the Quinnipiac polls, midwestern neighbors Minnesota and Wisconsin became more solidly blue; switching to Strong Obama and Obama lean states, respectively.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

Factoring in the changes, Obama's "strong" and "toss up" categories are bolstered by the addition of Ohio and Minnesota, while the "Strong McCain" states have been reduced with the loss of Texas and Mississippi. The Arizona senator continues to lose out on a majority of the electoral votes in the toss up states (Obama now holds nearly 70% of the electoral votes in those states.).

The Watch List*
State	Switch
Alaska	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Georgia	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Massachusetts	from Obama lean	to Strong Obama
Minnesota	from Strong Obama	to Obama lean
Mississippi	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Missouri	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Nevada	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
New Mexico	from Toss Up Obama	to Obama lean
North Carolina	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Ohio	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
Texas	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Wisconsin	from Obama lean	to Toss Up Obama
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

As far as the Watch List is concerned, Alaska joins the list (a glaring omission from the last poll that came out there), and Minnesota, Mississippi, Texas and Wisconsin all made the switches that had them on the list prior to this week. However, they continue to be on the list because a change in the opposite direction is now possible (from Obama lean to Toss Up Obama in Wisconsin, for instance, after the switch from toss up to lean this week.). These twelve states then, are the ones to watch. New polls in any of them could cause a shift in categories.

I'll be back tomorrow with a look at how the polls shift over the course of the month. In other words, we'll examine just how much our electoral college projection has captured the "Obama bounce" since he secured the nomination at the beginning of June.


Recent Posts:
The National Popular Vote Plan...and Other Ways of Reforming the Electoral College

The Electoral College Map (6/25/08)

Vice Presidents Quiz

The National Popular Vote Plan...and Other Ways of Reforming the Electoral College

We here at FHQ have certainly spent some time discussing the various ways (and likelihood) of reforming the presidential nomination process. Now that the 2008 campaign has shifted into general election mode however, it may be time to look into America's other electoral problem child, the electoral college. [When it comes to reform, often, no two things are higher on the list than the frontloading of presidential primaries and the disparity between the electoral college and the overall popular vote.]

The issue? Well, unless you've been under a rock since early November 2000, you're probably aware that a candidate for president can win the most votes nationwide, but still lose the electoral college vote and in the process fail to become president. To some folks that's a problem (...and you can bet whoever it is they have a D next to their name for the time being.). But hey, out of 55 presidential elections in US history, only 3 have had a discrepancy between popular vote winner and the electoral college outcome (That's about 5% of the time.). In other words, about once every 75 years. Is it too much to ask for a little, once-in-a-lifetime, electoral excitement? Okay, I understand that some people have the "one person, one vote" hang up, but still.

The rules do matter, though. The popular vote isn't how the president is selected just as it wasn't the method in which the Democratic nomination was decided in 2008. That doesn't mean that those rules cannot be revisited and altered though. As sure as the rules governing the ways in which nominees are chosen will be examined in detail prior to 2012, the electoral college is going and will continue to be examined as long as the institution acts as the final hurdle of the presidential election system. There are differing views on how to deal with the issue ranging from completely do away with the electoral college to simply leaving well enough alone.

Let's look at these individually:
1) Abolish the electoral college. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL), leaning on the one person, one vote argument (a powerful one, mind you), is the latest to propose amending the constitution to do away the electoral college completely. Amending the constitution solves the problem, but that isn't really the issue with this option. The means of getting to that end are what stands in the way of a change. The constitution is held sacred and altering it is not something taken lightly or easily pulled off. So while it is easy enough to say that the constitution should be amended, it is an entirely different matter to actually make the change. As good as Nelson's intentions may be (He appears to be making a play for the mantle of voting rights senator and that will certainly won't hurt his future electoral pursuits in a place like Florida.), this one probably isn't going anywhere.

2) National Popular Vote Plan: Now here's a clever way around the amendment issue. Anchor the distribution of a state's electoral votes to the national popular vote. The issue I have with this plan is similar to a point brought up by FHQ reader, Scott, in the comments the other day: the action would be shifted from battleground states to the more populous states. Instead of a red-blue-purple divide, the door could be opened to a rural-urban-suburban/exurban divide. So while the plan potentially helps to spread the attention from the typical swing states to some not so typical players, the NPV ultimately just shifts candidate attention from competitive states to populous states; the very thing the Founders were attempting to insulate the system from. But hey, candidates could raise their money and campaign in a state at the same time. This one has unintended consequences written all over it.

3) The Maine-Nebraska District Plan Nationwide (or in more than those two states): Now this idea has been bandied about in several state legislatures lately (California and North Carolina, notably). Essentially, states would allocate their electoral votes based on how each individual district voted with the two Senate seat electors being determined by the statewide outcome. This is similar to how delegates were distributed in proportional primaries in 2008. In this instance the balance of power would shift from swing states to swing districts. That could bring at least part of a state some national attention from the major party candidates. Nothing gives the Democrats more nightmares than the idea of having those 55 California electoral votes split up though. And the reverse could be true in typically Republican states. No state legislature is going to opt for this plan if the party in control of said legislature would potentially negatively affect the prospects of their national party being able to win the White House. Partisanship is the likely roadblock to this plan then.

4) The Leave it alone plan: Can you tell where I'm going with this? In the end, the most pragmatic approach is to leave well enough alone and grin and bear it when the once-in-a-lifetime, electoral college at odds with the popular vote scenario pops up. The whole thing seems like such a problem now, but when Johnson and Reagan were winning in landslides you only heard the vanquished parties calling (and quietly at that) for there to be some electoral college reform.

...and even then it wouldn't have made that much of a difference.

So is that pragmatism or the partisan gridlock that so many Americans are sick of? The comments section awaits. Feel free to weigh in.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (6/25/08)

Vice Presidents Quiz

Presidents and Vice Presidents from the Same State: The Misconception of the 12th Amendment

The Electoral College Map (6/25/08)

And the Kiss of Death Award for the week goes to the Sunday electoral college post for claiming that the frequency of state head-to-head polling had increased. The rest of the week may be jam packed with polling but the week so far has yielded very little in the way of polling. So few in fact, that I waited until today's polling surfaced before running to the virtual presses. Yeah sure, that's why you're so tardy.

New Polls (June 22-25)
State	Poll	Margin
Arizona	Cronkite	+10
California	Rasmussen	+28
Indiana	Survey USA	+1
Michigan	PPP	+9
Missouri	Survey USA	+7
Nebraska	Rasmussen	+16
New Mexico	Rasmussen	+8
New Mexico	Survey USA	+3
Oregon	Survey USA	+3
Pennsylvania	Rasmussen	+4
Utah	Deseret News	+28
Utah	Rasmussen	+19

From Sunday through today, there were twelve new polls from ten states. Both New Mexico and Utah were polled twice, but the new numbers did little to change the landscape in either state. Utah was never a place where Obama (or any Democrat, for that matter) was going to do well, so it isn't terribly surprising to see the presumptive Democratic nominee trailing by more than twenty points in the Beehive state. New Mexico is and will continue to be a battleground heading into the fall because of its even distribution of Democratic and Republican partisans. And even though the Land of Enchantment is as susceptible to the same indicators that are dragging Republicans nationwide down, the state does neighbor John McCain's home of Arizona. That being said, the 8 point margin in Obama's favor in the Rasmussen poll does push New Mexico on to the Watch List (below). Another similar result out of the state could bump the New Mexico into Obama lean territory.

Of the other polls, California remains firmly in the Democratic column while states like Arizona and Nebraska continue to be solidly Republican. If California and Nebraska are running to the extremes, both Indiana and Oregon are trending away from their traditional red and blue electoral roots, respectively, to the middle. Oregon had always been considered a toss up in some quarters, but in the midst of an active primary campaign had given Obama watchers what may eventually prove to be an inflated sense of security. The Beaver state was closing in on being solidly blue, but has reversed course in recent polling and looks to potentially be competitive. And while Obama got something of a bounce (that has since receded) in Oregon after its primary, the competitive primary in Indiana appears to be a bit more influential. The polling in the Hoosier continues to show a close race in a typically red state.

Finally, the new polling out of Michigan and Missouri provided each campaign with a bit of a cushion this week. Both states will undoubtedly be competitive in the fall, but both the Wolverine state and the Show-Me state inched in the direction of where they have been in recent electoral cycles. Missouri moved to the right while Michigan headed toward the left.

[Click Map to Enlarge]

And what does all this mean for the electoral college map? Nothing really. On the whole, this collection of polls did little to rewrite the current narrative of the general election campaign. Obama's 38 electoral vote victory persists through this iteration of the analysis with Ohio (no new polls) and its 20 electoral votes still tied. Where there are some shifts though, is on the Watch List.

The Watch List*
State	Switch
Georgia	from McCain lean	to Strong McCain
Massachusetts	from Obama lean	to Strong Obama
Mississippi	from Strong McCain	to McCain lean
Missouri	from Toss Up McCain	to McCain lean
Nevada	from Toss Up Obama	to Toss Up McCain
New Mexico	from Toss Up Obama	to Obama lean
North Carolina	from McCain lean	to Toss Up McCain
Ohio	from Tied	to Toss Up Dem. or GOP
Texas	from Strong McCain	to McCain lean
Wisconsin	from Toss Up Obama	to Obama lean
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

The Michigan poll didn't have enough oomph to push the Wolverine state into the Obama lean category, but it did move the state out of the "it could switch to McCain very easily" area. The same thing could almost be said in Missouri as well. That seven point edge for McCain pushed Missouri to the brink of moving to the more comfortable McCain lean distinction. New Mexico is also a new addition to the list. The two new polls there (averaging a 5.5 point margin) brought the weighted average for the Land of Enchantment to the line between toss up favoring Obama to an Obama lean state.

Moving forward, these are ten states to keep your eye on. But other states could jump into the mix as more polls emerge.


Oh, and for those who took the NYT Vice President's quiz (whether you shared your answers or not), look no further than the first comment from Jack for the correct answers. Congrats to Jack. A lowly graduate student has little to offer (This ain't The Fix, with their fancy t-shirts.), but he's won the coveted first annual FHQ memorial, "...classic, deluxe, custom, designer, luxury, prestige, high-quality, premium, select, gourmet pocket pencil sharpener. It's our way of saying thank you...*" for participating. A doff of the hat to George Carlin on that one. I'll miss the guy.


*from Carlin's book, Napalm and Silly Putty.


Recent Posts:
Vice Presidents Quiz

Presidents and Vice Presidents from the Same State: The Misconception of the 12th Amendment

New Zealand Schoolgirls, Simpleminded Voters and Presidential Elections

Vice Presidents Quiz

Alright FHQ readers. The Week in Review in the Sunday Times had a quiz testing your ability to match vice presidents with the presidents they served.

Via The New York Times (The online edition is gated, so I'll reproduce it here so our readers can test their knowledge.):

The office of vice president has been a springboard for some of the most important leaders in American history, including John Adams, Theodore Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson and Harry S. Truman.

But many of those who have filled the position have found themselves on the fast, or slow, track to obscurity — or worse. Franklin D. Roosevelt went through three vice presidents. Richard M. Nixon’s vice president was forced to resign (10 months before M. Nixon himself did). Thomas Jefferson’s was indicted for murder. Millard Fillmore and Andrew Johnson, who both made the leap from the vice presidency to the top slot, left their former jobs vacant. Below are 10 vice presidents and 10 presidents. Who goes with whom?

1. Garret A. Hobart
2. Adlai E. Stevenson
3. Henry A. Wallace
4. Hannibal Hamlin
5. Calvin Coolidge
6. Charles G. Dawes
7. William R. King
8. James S. Sherman
9. Alben W. Barkley
10. Elbridge Gerry

A. William H. Taft
B. Calvin Coolidge
C. Grover Cleveland
D. Abraham Lincoln
E. Harry S. Truman
F. Franklin D. Roosevelt
G. William McKinley
H. James Madison
I. Warren G. Harding
J. Franklin Pierce

Take the test and share your results...if you dare. I'll post the answers tomorrow afternoon.



Recent Posts:
Presidents and Vice Presidents from the Same State: The Misconception of the 12th Amendment

New Zealand Schoolgirls, Simpleminded Voters and Presidential Elections

The Electoral College Map (6/22/08)

Presidents and Vice Presidents from the Same State: The Misconception of the 12th Amendment

Ballot Access News has a great post up today examining in detail the 12th amendment and especially the one section of it that is often misinterpreted.

The question: Can presidential and vice presidential nominees be from the same state?

Myth: No, they can't (...with the reasoning being that representatives of one state shouldn't hold that much power.).

Fact: Well, as the good folks at BAN point out, that's not the case. Both nominees can be from the same state, but the electoral college electors from that state would be unable to cast a vote for that ticket. George W. Bush, a Texan, in 2000 chose another Texan (via Wyoming), Dick Cheney. Such a ticket would not have been a problem under the 12th amendment until it came time for the electors from the Lone Star state to vote in the electoral college. But those delegates wouldn't have mattered anyway, right Al Gore supporters? Hey wait. You mean to tell me, Al Gore could have raised this issue, had those 32 electors from Texas excluded and become president? Well, several Texas voters sued to challenge Cheney's residency during the election aftermath in 2000 thinking the same thing. So, Al Gore should have been president and we could have been spared all those claims that he was elected, just not in the electoral college? Yeah, well no. The person, be they presidential or vice presidential candidate, only technically has to be a resident of another state at the time that the electors of the electoral college meet in December to vote. So as evil as Dick Cheney seems to Democrats, at least he didn't switch his residency back to Texas the day after the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore and really rub it in. So you have that going for you Gore fans.

[Insert sound of nearly 51 million Gore voters' hands smacking their foreheads in unison.]


Recent Posts:
New Zealand Schoolgirls, Simpleminded Voters and Presidential Elections

The Electoral College Map (6/22/08)

2008 Primary and Caucus Final Grade Sheet