Not content with merely being noticed during the presidential primaries this year, the Guamanian legislature has passed a measure to frontload its general election vote (technically a straw poll anyway) to coincide with its primary election on September 6. As Guam goes, so goes the nation. Well, maybe not, but if that were true, it would be the shortest general election campaign ever. The official general election season traditionally kicks off following Labor Day and the primary in Guam falls on the Saturday after Labor Day (September 1 this year).
The good folks in Guam must have missed the fact that college football will have begun by that point. They can't compete with that. Then again McCain will be competing with the first NFL game with his Thursday night acceptance speech at the GOP convention. Who said sports and politics don't mix?
Seriously though, this is an interesting move by the legislature in Guam. They aren't going to get any attention in November anyway (since their votes don't officially count toward the eventual winner of the presidential race), but they may at least get a mention in the media with this move. I wouldn't put this on par with the Iowa straw poll that the Republicans hold in the late summer before primary season begins every four years, but the media will be looking for signals of who will win this election in November. And even a straw poll in Guam will be something different from a convention or what will, by then, be a steady stream, if not torrent, of poll numbers. If you're among the powers that be in Guam, why not not make the move?
Thanks to Ballot Access News for the link.
Recent Posts:
Bob Barr Through the Lens of the Zogby Polls
The Electoral College Map (7/9/08) [Update]
Polling Alert
Friday, July 11, 2008
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Bob Barr Through the Lens of the Zogby Polls
Yesterday's look at the electoral college map following the inclusion of the polling data from Zogby generated a good amount of chatter concerning the wisdom of averaging in internet-based polls. As I said, both in the post and in the comments, these data points may prove to be aberrations, but they have not significantly altered the state of the electoral college map. So, while the Zogby numbers should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt, I don't mind including them in FHQ's weighted average.
Having said that, let's use the information gleaned from the Zogby polls to open up a discussion about Bob Barr's presence in the presidential race as the Libertarian candidate. First let's revisit the table from yesterday's post and include the Barr numbers in each of the 34 states polled.
Across all 34 states, Barr averages exactly 6%. [Just for fun, I drew the median and mode from the data as well. The median was also 6% while both 5 and 6 were the most frequently occurring values; each showing up in the data seven times.] What do we see (and where do we see it) above the midpoint of 6? Though we may discount the Zogby numbers, it still may be beneficial to examine the Barr patterns we see in this data just as a crude baseline of comparison. [That baseline may need to be tweaked moving forward as we here at FHQ begin to take notice of his numbers in other polls.] Here are the states where Barr received more than 6% support in the recent round of Zogby Interactive polls:
Arizona
Colorado
Georgia
Iowa
Indiana
Minnesota
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Mexico
Ohio
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Once the first one on the list (Arizona) and the last two (Oklahoma and Tennessee) are removed, what's left is a fairly centralized group of states. Arizona, though it has been trending ever so slightly in Obama's direction lately, just isn't going to happen for the Illinois senator (and if it does, we are looking at a substantial victory for Obama and the Democrats). Similarly, both the Sooner and Volunteer states are too far gone (even at this point) to go any way other than for McCain. The other nine states, though, are among the two regions we have been discussing as toss up states. On the one hand, you have the western group of states, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico. And on the other, there are the midwestern states of Iowa, Indiana, Minnesota and Ohio. Once you throw in ever-independent New Hampshire and Barr's home state of Georgia, you have a pretty interesting group of states. So if you're the McCain campaign, and if these polls provide an indication of where Barr is doing well (even if overstated), you cannot be too terribly encouraged about Barr polling well in swing states. As I said about Colorado and Iowa specifically yesterday (and can be broadened to include these other seven states), Barr's success directly and negatively affects McCain's ability to compete with Obama in many of these states. Barr takes enough Republican support away from McCain in Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Nevada and Ohio to bring Obama to within varying levels of striking distance (Georgia is the only state among these not considered a toss up right now by FHQ.). And in Iowa and Minnesota, two states often mentioned as toss ups, Barr potentially eats into McCain's support enough to provide Obama with a comfortable lead.
Even if Barr's support is exaggerated in these polls, if they are anywhere close to being indications of where the former Georgia congressman is performing well, then McCain may very well find it extremely difficult to cobble together enough states to add up to 270 electoral votes. One thing is for sure, I'll be keeping an eye on how Barr is doing in these and other swing states to get a sense of how (and how much) he may be affecting the race between McCain and Obama.
Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (7/9/08) [Update]
Polling Alert
Jesse Helms and the Current American Political Climate
Having said that, let's use the information gleaned from the Zogby polls to open up a discussion about Bob Barr's presence in the presidential race as the Libertarian candidate. First let's revisit the table from yesterday's post and include the Barr numbers in each of the 34 states polled.
New Polls w/Barr (July 6-9)* | ||||
State | Poll | Margin | Barr | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Alabama | Zogby Interactive | +11 | 4 | |
Arizona | Zogby Interactive | +3 | 7 | |
Arkansas | Zogby Interactive | +2 | 4 | |
California | Zogby Interactive | +20 | 5 | |
Colorado | Zogby Interactive | +2 | 8 | |
Connecticut | Zogby Interactive | +16 | 5 | |
Florida | Zogby Interactive | +4 | 6 | |
Georgia | Zogby Interactive | +6 | 8 | |
Illinois | Zogby Interactive | +20 | 5 | |
Indiana | Zogby Interactive | +1 | 7 | |
Iowa | Zogby Interactive | +4 | 8 | |
Kentucky | Zogby Interactive | +5 | 3 | |
Louisiana | Zogby Interactive | +7 | 4 | |
Maryland | Zogby Interactive | +24 | 6 | |
Massachusetts | Zogby Interactive | +25 | 5 | |
Michigan | Zogby Interactive | +14 | 6 | |
Minnesota | Zogby Interactive | +16 | 8 | |
Missouri | Zogby Interactive | +2 | 6 | |
Nevada | Zogby Interactive | 0 | 9 | |
New Hampshire | Zogby Interactive | +3 | 10 | |
New Jersey | Zogby Interactive | +13 | 3 | |
New Mexico | Zogby Interactive | +16 | 9 | |
New York | Zogby Interactive | +21 | 4 | |
North Carolina | Zogby Interactive | +9 | 4 | |
Ohio | Zogby Interactive | +5 | 7 | |
Oklahoma | Zogby Interactive | +5 | 9 | |
Oregon | Zogby Interactive | +16 | 6 | |
Pennsylvania | Zogby Interactive | +10 | 5 | |
South Carolina | Zogby Interactive | +1 | 6 | |
Tennessee | Zogby Interactive | +5 | 7 | |
Texas | Zogby Interactive | +3 | 6 | |
Virginia | Zogby Interactive | +5 | 5 | |
Washington | Zogby Interactive | +13 | 5 | |
Wisconsin | Zogby Interactive | +10 | 4 | |
*All polls from Zogby International. Follow link and click state for poll data. |
Across all 34 states, Barr averages exactly 6%. [Just for fun, I drew the median and mode from the data as well. The median was also 6% while both 5 and 6 were the most frequently occurring values; each showing up in the data seven times.] What do we see (and where do we see it) above the midpoint of 6? Though we may discount the Zogby numbers, it still may be beneficial to examine the Barr patterns we see in this data just as a crude baseline of comparison. [That baseline may need to be tweaked moving forward as we here at FHQ begin to take notice of his numbers in other polls.] Here are the states where Barr received more than 6% support in the recent round of Zogby Interactive polls:
Arizona
Colorado
Georgia
Iowa
Indiana
Minnesota
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Mexico
Ohio
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Once the first one on the list (Arizona) and the last two (Oklahoma and Tennessee) are removed, what's left is a fairly centralized group of states. Arizona, though it has been trending ever so slightly in Obama's direction lately, just isn't going to happen for the Illinois senator (and if it does, we are looking at a substantial victory for Obama and the Democrats). Similarly, both the Sooner and Volunteer states are too far gone (even at this point) to go any way other than for McCain. The other nine states, though, are among the two regions we have been discussing as toss up states. On the one hand, you have the western group of states, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico. And on the other, there are the midwestern states of Iowa, Indiana, Minnesota and Ohio. Once you throw in ever-independent New Hampshire and Barr's home state of Georgia, you have a pretty interesting group of states. So if you're the McCain campaign, and if these polls provide an indication of where Barr is doing well (even if overstated), you cannot be too terribly encouraged about Barr polling well in swing states. As I said about Colorado and Iowa specifically yesterday (and can be broadened to include these other seven states), Barr's success directly and negatively affects McCain's ability to compete with Obama in many of these states. Barr takes enough Republican support away from McCain in Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Nevada and Ohio to bring Obama to within varying levels of striking distance (Georgia is the only state among these not considered a toss up right now by FHQ.). And in Iowa and Minnesota, two states often mentioned as toss ups, Barr potentially eats into McCain's support enough to provide Obama with a comfortable lead.
Even if Barr's support is exaggerated in these polls, if they are anywhere close to being indications of where the former Georgia congressman is performing well, then McCain may very well find it extremely difficult to cobble together enough states to add up to 270 electoral votes. One thing is for sure, I'll be keeping an eye on how Barr is doing in these and other swing states to get a sense of how (and how much) he may be affecting the race between McCain and Obama.
Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (7/9/08) [Update]
Polling Alert
Jesse Helms and the Current American Political Climate
Labels:
2008 presidential election,
Bob Barr,
swing states
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
The Electoral College Map (7/9/08) [Update]
This morning I was like a kid on Christmas morning (Well, maybe not that excited, but...). I was all prepared for a rather boring glance back at the electoral college map we put out on Sunday and a brief discussion of the everyone's favorite game: who's that VP. And then I saw that Zogby International had state-level, head-to-head polls out in 34 states with some fairly interesting results:
The real surprises were the deep red states that have Obama in the lead: Arizona, Arkansas and South Carolina (Yeah, I know South Carolina isn't deep red--really isn't now--but I just can't shake recent and even not so recent history in the Palmetto state.). Arizona is the shocker. I can't imagine that the Grand Canyon state will go against its senior senator in November, but the fact that it is following neighbors, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico into potentially competitive status, can't come as welcome news to the campaign of the presumptive Republican nominee.
On the blue side of the ledger, things remain pretty much the same. Obama is still running strong in the northeast (New Hampshire being the only possible exception. The Granite state's numbers jumped after Obama's clinch but have come back down to earth a bit since. Is that a bounce?) and through that swath of states from Wisconsin over through Michigan and Ohio over to Pennsylvania.
Despite all the new polling, there really isn't that much in the way of change. Ohio, back on June 18 was the last state to shift from one side to the other (red to blue), but since then the map and the average behind have simply been fine-tuning the positions of both candidates in each of the states. We have a good amount of information in most of the states now so that even the polls that appear to be outliers are quickly absorbed without altering the fundamental shape of the race. South Carolina is one of those exceptions. There are only three polls out now from the Palmetto state, but each has been in the single digits. One double digit poll (likely in favor of McCain) would shift things substantially with that limited amount of polling. In this case however, the third poll is one that shows Obama ahead in South Carolina by one point. That techinically isn't an outlier since the one and only poll that we had prior to last month came out in late February and pegged McCain's lead at just three points. What the new poll does do is pull South Carolina back into the toss up category it had been in until last month's Rasmussen poll.
Beyond South Carolina, though, there were only two other states that switched categories. Both New Mexico and North Carolina moved toward Obama. In each, unlike South Carolina, there has already been a fair amount of polling, the most recent of which have trended toward the Illinois senator. Even with that said, both Zogby margins were a bit beyond what what has been witnessed in the Old North state and the Land of Enchantment. Each serves as an point of punctuation, if not peak, in the recent polling in both states for the Obama campaign.
All that really happened then, was that the electoral vote numbers on both sides were tweaked without shifting any over to the opposition. Obama slid a handful into the lean category while McCain lost some leaners to toss up status on his side. The Arizona senator's strong and lean electoral votes add up to 176; one more than the number Obama currently holds solidly. And with Obama moving to the center--with a good amount of press coverage but no real damage to his campaign--that cannot be good news for the McCain folks. While that doesn't necessarily bode well for McCain, the fact remains that he only trails in this accounting of the electoral college by 58 electoral votes with 13 states and 140 electoral votes up for grabs.
Of those 13 states, only four are currently on the Watch List (states that could potentially move given future polling). And all have been trending toward Obama since May with the possible expecption of Nevada. The Silver state just looks close. With North Carolina and Virginia already "giving" McCain 28 of his 240 total electoral votes, that leaves just 25 electoral votes in Nevada and Ohio as the one most immediately up for grabs. That would only cut the margin in the map above by less than half; obviously not enough to put McCain in the White House.
The list did lose Massachusetts, Missouri, New Mexico and Texas while adding Arizona, Oregon and Virginia. Of those Missouri, Virginia and possibly New Mexico are the only competitive ones. The eleven above though are the ones to watch as we head into the weekend.
...and hopefully some increased polling (now that July 4th is over).
[Update]: I should also have mentioned that Bob Barr did really well in these Zogby polls, getting anywhere from 2 to 10% in each. I'll have to look at those averages across all 34 states, but if the former Georgia congressman were to continue pulling 8% in places like Colorado or Iowa, it would make McCain's job of reaching 270 that much more difficult.
Recent Posts:
Polling Alert
Jesse Helms and the Current American Political Climate
The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)
New Polls (July 6-9)* | |||
State | Poll | Margin | |
---|---|---|---|
Alabama | Zogby Interactive | +11 | |
Arizona | Zogby Interactive | +3 | |
Arkansas | Zogby Interactive | +2 | |
California | Zogby Interactive | +20 | |
Colorado | Zogby Interactive | +2 | |
Connecticut | Zogby Interactive | +16 | |
Florida | Zogby Interactive | +4 | |
Georgia | Zogby Interactive | +6 | |
Illinois | Zogby Interactive | +20 | |
Indiana | Zogby Interactive | +1 | |
Iowa | Zogby Interactive | +4 | |
Kentucky | Zogby Interactive | +5 | |
Louisiana | Zogby Interactive | +7 | |
Maryland | Zogby Interactive | +24 | |
Massachusetts | Zogby Interactive | +25 | |
Michigan | Zogby Interactive | +14 | |
Minnesota | Zogby Interactive | +16 | |
Missouri | Zogby Interactive | +2 | |
Nevada | Zogby Interactive | 0 | |
New Hampshire | Zogby Interactive | +3 | |
New Jersey | Zogby Interactive | +13 | |
New Mexico | Zogby Interactive | +16 | |
New York | Zogby Interactive | +21 | |
North Carolina | Zogby Interactive | +9 | |
Ohio | Zogby Interactive | +5 | |
Oklahoma | Zogby Interactive | +5 | |
Oregon | Zogby Interactive | +16 | |
Pennsylvania | Zogby Interactive | +10 | |
South Carolina | Zogby Interactive | +1 | |
Tennessee | Zogby Interactive | +5 | |
Texas | Zogby Interactive | +3 | |
Virginia | Zogby Interactive | +5 | |
Washington | Zogby Interactive | +13 | |
Wisconsin | Zogby Interactive | +10 | |
*All polls from Zogby International. Follow link and click state for poll data. |
The real surprises were the deep red states that have Obama in the lead: Arizona, Arkansas and South Carolina (Yeah, I know South Carolina isn't deep red--really isn't now--but I just can't shake recent and even not so recent history in the Palmetto state.). Arizona is the shocker. I can't imagine that the Grand Canyon state will go against its senior senator in November, but the fact that it is following neighbors, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico into potentially competitive status, can't come as welcome news to the campaign of the presumptive Republican nominee.
On the blue side of the ledger, things remain pretty much the same. Obama is still running strong in the northeast (New Hampshire being the only possible exception. The Granite state's numbers jumped after Obama's clinch but have come back down to earth a bit since. Is that a bounce?) and through that swath of states from Wisconsin over through Michigan and Ohio over to Pennsylvania.
Despite all the new polling, there really isn't that much in the way of change. Ohio, back on June 18 was the last state to shift from one side to the other (red to blue), but since then the map and the average behind have simply been fine-tuning the positions of both candidates in each of the states. We have a good amount of information in most of the states now so that even the polls that appear to be outliers are quickly absorbed without altering the fundamental shape of the race. South Carolina is one of those exceptions. There are only three polls out now from the Palmetto state, but each has been in the single digits. One double digit poll (likely in favor of McCain) would shift things substantially with that limited amount of polling. In this case however, the third poll is one that shows Obama ahead in South Carolina by one point. That techinically isn't an outlier since the one and only poll that we had prior to last month came out in late February and pegged McCain's lead at just three points. What the new poll does do is pull South Carolina back into the toss up category it had been in until last month's Rasmussen poll.
Changes (July 6-9) | |||
State | Before | After | |
---|---|---|---|
New Mexico | Toss Up Obama | Obama lean | |
North Carolina | McCain lean | Toss Up McCain | |
South Carolina | McCain lean | Toss Up McCain |
Beyond South Carolina, though, there were only two other states that switched categories. Both New Mexico and North Carolina moved toward Obama. In each, unlike South Carolina, there has already been a fair amount of polling, the most recent of which have trended toward the Illinois senator. Even with that said, both Zogby margins were a bit beyond what what has been witnessed in the Old North state and the Land of Enchantment. Each serves as an point of punctuation, if not peak, in the recent polling in both states for the Obama campaign.
All that really happened then, was that the electoral vote numbers on both sides were tweaked without shifting any over to the opposition. Obama slid a handful into the lean category while McCain lost some leaners to toss up status on his side. The Arizona senator's strong and lean electoral votes add up to 176; one more than the number Obama currently holds solidly. And with Obama moving to the center--with a good amount of press coverage but no real damage to his campaign--that cannot be good news for the McCain folks. While that doesn't necessarily bode well for McCain, the fact remains that he only trails in this accounting of the electoral college by 58 electoral votes with 13 states and 140 electoral votes up for grabs.
The Watch List* | |||
State | Switch | ||
---|---|---|---|
Alaska | from McCain lean | to Toss Up McCain | |
Arizona | from Strong McCain | to McCain lean | |
Florida | from McCain lean | to Toss Up McCain | |
Minnesota | from Strong Obama | to Obama lean | |
Mississippi | from McCain lean | to Strong McCain | |
Nevada | from Toss Up Obama | to Toss Up McCain | |
North Carolina | from Toss Up McCain | to McCain lean | |
Ohio | from Toss Up Obama | to Toss Up McCain | |
Oregon | from Obama lean | to Strong Obama | |
Virginia | from Toss Up McCain | to Toss Up Obama | |
Washington | from Strong Obama | to Obama lean | |
*Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. |
Of those 13 states, only four are currently on the Watch List (states that could potentially move given future polling). And all have been trending toward Obama since May with the possible expecption of Nevada. The Silver state just looks close. With North Carolina and Virginia already "giving" McCain 28 of his 240 total electoral votes, that leaves just 25 electoral votes in Nevada and Ohio as the one most immediately up for grabs. That would only cut the margin in the map above by less than half; obviously not enough to put McCain in the White House.
The list did lose Massachusetts, Missouri, New Mexico and Texas while adding Arizona, Oregon and Virginia. Of those Missouri, Virginia and possibly New Mexico are the only competitive ones. The eleven above though are the ones to watch as we head into the weekend.
...and hopefully some increased polling (now that July 4th is over).
[Update]: I should also have mentioned that Bob Barr did really well in these Zogby polls, getting anywhere from 2 to 10% in each. I'll have to look at those averages across all 34 states, but if the former Georgia congressman were to continue pulling 8% in places like Colorado or Iowa, it would make McCain's job of reaching 270 that much more difficult.
Recent Posts:
Polling Alert
Jesse Helms and the Current American Political Climate
The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)
Polling Alert
Polling? What polling? Most of the major polling firms seem to have suspended state polling operations over the 4th of July weekend. That made for a half a week of waiting impatiently and wondering whether there would an update for the Wednesday edition of the electoral college map. I was prepared to put Sunday's map up again with today's date and talk a bit about VP speculation. However, that will have to wait as Zogby International has new state-level polling out for 34 states. I want to include that information, so that'll mean the map will be unveiled a bit later than I usually like to post it. Just scanning through the results, there are some interesting findings. We'll have to see how they affect the map.
Recent Posts:
Jesse Helms and the Current American Political Climate
The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)
Blog Note
Recent Posts:
Jesse Helms and the Current American Political Climate
The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)
Blog Note
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Jesse Helms and the Current American Political Climate
I'm late on this, but I needed a few days to sift through my thoughts on the former North Carolina senator following his passing on Friday. Helms represented a rare dichotomous political figure. Obviously this dichotomy wasn't of the flip-flopping variety that many associate with Washington politics, but more representative of the two sides of the man himself. There were no gray areas with Jesse Helms. People either loved him or hated him. And in the electoral arena, that can come back to bite you. But it never quite did for Helms. He lasted 30 years in the Senate, but never got more than 55% of the vote in any of his election (or re-election) bids.
But what I find interesting is the coalition(s) that he cobbled together every six years. Now the way the media has played it and the way his death and the details of his life have been knocked around the blogosphere have certainly focused upon the more racial aspects of his public career. And that is certainly part of that dichotomy I referred to above. The other part is the service aspect. And both combined to provide Helms with enough of an edge throughout all four of his re-election bids to retain his senate seat.
Well, what do you know? You're just some 30-something from Georgia speculating about the guy from afar.
True, but I grew up in the Old North State and count the events of the 1984 Helms-Jim Hunt senate race as among my first memories of politics (And you're studying presidential elections?) and one of the major roots of my interest in political science. I also had a front seat to both Helms-Gantt I and II and received my bachelor's degree from the University of Negroes and Communists (I still haven't figured out whether I fit in one, the other, or both groups in the familiar moniker Helms hung on the University of North Carolina.). And during my life in North Carolina, I heard quite a few stories about Jesse Helms. Many brought up his nightly editorials on WRAL in Raleigh in the 1960s or his actions on the floor of the Senate as proof of his bigotry and racism and still others spoke of his service to the residents of North Carolina; his constituents.
Those relating the former always voted for his opponent, whoever it was, while those who told stories of his constituent service were often willing to overlook the racial half of the man to vote for him. And it was this group, I'd argue, that formed the swing electorate in those elections. Republicans voted for him (He helped bring many Jessecrats to the party following the southern conservative Democrat exodus from the Democratic Party after civil rights.) and liberal Democrats voted against him. And while there were many overt racists who undoubtedly supported Helms, I don't believe that the majorities supporting him were racist themselves. Many just simply wanted to put the past behind them and look at the good Helms had done. And it was the small, going-out-of-his-way sorts of things that helped those voters overlook what seemed to many of the more progressive Democrats to be people voting against their own interests.
But in my experience and in the outpouring of thoughts on the man following his death last week, there has been account after account of those sorts of actions. The types of actions that David Mayhew would have called advertising in his book on the electoral connection. In Helms' case, this advertising went a long way and accumulated over 30 years helped sway a vote or two in his direction.
Helms' death and the discussions of his life's work come at an interesting time in United States political history. Yes, Obama is the first African American presidential candidate from one of the two major parties, but that isn't really the direction I'm heading in with this. The 2004 presidential election represented on one level, a contest between a stick-to-your-guns candidate and a Washington flip-flopper. George W. Bush, as president, has very much been in a similar vein to what Jesse Helms was in the Senate for 30 years, a never wavering from your positions politician. 2008, by contrast, is a change election where flip-flopping is being tolerated a bit more. That's partly because both Obama and McCain have been accused of changing positions, but also has much to do with an electorate ready to embrace a leadership style that is willing to change given the problems that face the nation. I don't mean a politician that blows with the prevailing political wind necessarily, but one willing to make a move to build a consensus in the middle. In that sense, both of the candidates in this race differ from both the current president and Jesse Helms.
Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)
Blog Note
Happy 4th of July!!!!
But what I find interesting is the coalition(s) that he cobbled together every six years. Now the way the media has played it and the way his death and the details of his life have been knocked around the blogosphere have certainly focused upon the more racial aspects of his public career. And that is certainly part of that dichotomy I referred to above. The other part is the service aspect. And both combined to provide Helms with enough of an edge throughout all four of his re-election bids to retain his senate seat.
Well, what do you know? You're just some 30-something from Georgia speculating about the guy from afar.
True, but I grew up in the Old North State and count the events of the 1984 Helms-Jim Hunt senate race as among my first memories of politics (And you're studying presidential elections?) and one of the major roots of my interest in political science. I also had a front seat to both Helms-Gantt I and II and received my bachelor's degree from the University of Negroes and Communists (I still haven't figured out whether I fit in one, the other, or both groups in the familiar moniker Helms hung on the University of North Carolina.). And during my life in North Carolina, I heard quite a few stories about Jesse Helms. Many brought up his nightly editorials on WRAL in Raleigh in the 1960s or his actions on the floor of the Senate as proof of his bigotry and racism and still others spoke of his service to the residents of North Carolina; his constituents.
Those relating the former always voted for his opponent, whoever it was, while those who told stories of his constituent service were often willing to overlook the racial half of the man to vote for him. And it was this group, I'd argue, that formed the swing electorate in those elections. Republicans voted for him (He helped bring many Jessecrats to the party following the southern conservative Democrat exodus from the Democratic Party after civil rights.) and liberal Democrats voted against him. And while there were many overt racists who undoubtedly supported Helms, I don't believe that the majorities supporting him were racist themselves. Many just simply wanted to put the past behind them and look at the good Helms had done. And it was the small, going-out-of-his-way sorts of things that helped those voters overlook what seemed to many of the more progressive Democrats to be people voting against their own interests.
But in my experience and in the outpouring of thoughts on the man following his death last week, there has been account after account of those sorts of actions. The types of actions that David Mayhew would have called advertising in his book on the electoral connection. In Helms' case, this advertising went a long way and accumulated over 30 years helped sway a vote or two in his direction.
Helms' death and the discussions of his life's work come at an interesting time in United States political history. Yes, Obama is the first African American presidential candidate from one of the two major parties, but that isn't really the direction I'm heading in with this. The 2004 presidential election represented on one level, a contest between a stick-to-your-guns candidate and a Washington flip-flopper. George W. Bush, as president, has very much been in a similar vein to what Jesse Helms was in the Senate for 30 years, a never wavering from your positions politician. 2008, by contrast, is a change election where flip-flopping is being tolerated a bit more. That's partly because both Obama and McCain have been accused of changing positions, but also has much to do with an electorate ready to embrace a leadership style that is willing to change given the problems that face the nation. I don't mean a politician that blows with the prevailing political wind necessarily, but one willing to make a move to build a consensus in the middle. In that sense, both of the candidates in this race differ from both the current president and Jesse Helms.
Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (7/6/08)
Blog Note
Happy 4th of July!!!!
Sunday, July 6, 2008
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:
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.
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).
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).
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)
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).
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)
Saturday, July 5, 2008
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?
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?
Friday, July 4, 2008
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)
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)
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
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.
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.
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).
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.
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
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).
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
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
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.
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 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)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)