Tuesday, October 9, 2012

The Electoral College Map (10/9/12)

Four weeks out from election day and in the middle of the second week of debate season, there were eleven new polls added to the FHQ dataset from ten states. We also added in a somewhat dated survey from another of those ten states, North Dakota. With few exceptions, this was another in the string of now several days of relatively good polling for Mitt Romney. Not only does the compression of toss up state averages continue, but several states are starting to move in a very noticeable way in the FHQ averages toward the former Massachusetts governor.

New State Polls (10/9/12)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Obama
Romney
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Colorado
10/5-10/8
+/- 4.0%
600 likely voters
46
50
3
+4
+1.98
Connecticut
10/7
+/- 4.5%
500 likely voters
51
45
3
+6
+11.50
Massachusetts
10/5-10/7
+/- 4.4%
501 likely voters
52
36
10
+16
+20.78
Minnesota
10/5-10/8
+/- 3.2%
937 likely voters
53
43
4
+10
+9.35
Nevada
10/8
+/- 4.5%
500 likely voters
47
47
3
0
+4.32
New Hampshire
9/30-10/6
+/- 4.1%
545 likely voters
50
44
4
+6
+5.07
North Carolina
10/6-10/8
+/- 2.9%
1325 likely voters
41.2
49.9
8.8
+8.7
+1.31
North Dakota
9/24-9/27
+/- 4.0%
600 likely voters
39
51
10
+12
+14.91
North Dakota
10/3-10/5
+/- 4.0%
625 likely voters
40
54
5
+14
--
Ohio
10/5-10/8
+/- 4.0%
600 likely voters
47
48
4
+1
+3.60
Ohio
10/5-10/8
+/- 3.5%
722 likely voters
51
47
1
+4
--
Pennsylvania
10/1-10/5
+/- 4.2%
545 likely voters
43
40
12
+3
+6.85

Polling Quick Hits:
Colorado:
The latest ARG poll finds Obama down three points and Romney up three points as compared to the firm's mid-September survey of the Centennial state. That turned a two point Romney deficit into a four point advantage, post-debate. In terms of the candidates' respective shares of support in the poll, Romney's outperformed where the FHQ weighted average has his share charted currently and Obama, to a lesser extent, underperformed his. That has less to do with the current trajectory of the polling in Colorado than it does the conservative nature of the FHQ averages. If there is a change across the partisan line, then it is typically a lasting change unless it hovers around that line.

Connecticut:
It has been over a month since any survey found the margin in the race for the seven electoral votes in the Nutmeg state in the single digits, and this Rasmussen poll is the first to show the president's lead under seven points there. On the cautionary side, FHQ will await additional data indicating/confirming a (not illogically) close race in Connecticut. After all, there has been past data to back up that assertion and we should expect, given movement in other states, some shift toward Romney there. But we don't have enough data to suggest that Connecticut is anything more than what New Jersey was in 2004: a probably reliable blue state tempting the Republican campaign to pay more attention to it.

Massachusetts:
Even with the margin having nearly halved since the last WBUR survey of the Bay state just a week and a half ago, Massachusetts is seemingly safely blue for the Obama campaign. However, as was the case with Connecticut above, if the expectation is that the Romney debate effect will be more or less uniform across states, then things have really shifted in Massachusetts. Still, the move is worth noting even in a strongly blue state.

Minnesota:
Unlike the two strong blue states immediately above, Minnesota has resisted the post-debate swing toward Romney at least in regard to the poll-over-poll comparison between PPP surveys. Since the last (mid-September) poll, Obama gained a couple of points and Romney lost one. It is a minimal change overall, and the results are consistent with pre-debate surveys of the Land of 10,000 Lakes. But this is also the only post-debate survey we have access to in Minnesota. Other firms may offer a different account of the state of the race there.

Nevada:
Things are all tied up in Nevada (...at least according to Rasmussen). That result is consistent with the only other post-debate survey of the Silver state from Gravis. And while those two polls, together, have not been enough to fundamentally shift things in Nevada, it is worth noting that had FHQ not lowered the cutpoints between categories last week, we would be talking about how Nevada had jumped into the Toss Up Obama category. Yet, if the current polling arc toward Romney continues, such a move probably won't be too far off. FHQ did want to take a moment to point out the fact that change may be masking some category movement toward the Republican nominee in some states. Nevada is the only state so far to fall into that group, but we will be sure to indicate when that happens in the future. Given the way things are moving, New Hampshire could potentially be the next such state.

New Hampshire:
In a poll that picked up on the day that the immediately previous WMUR poll came out of the field, the overall margin between the candidates dropped by nine points. That seems like a significant shift except for a couple of related reasons. First, the previous WMUR survey was -- at Obama +15 -- an outlier. The margin was overinflated and set up nicely for a big post-debate surge in the opposite direction. However (and secondly), more than half of the data for this poll was gathered prior to the first presidential debate last week. Given the reality of those two conflicting factors, the nine point shift is slightly more impressive.

North Carolina:
Well, the Tarheel state has provided us with a double digit margin in Romney's favor before and Gravis' first foray into the state approaches that level as well. Is this poll an outlier? Probably, but not nearly to the same extent as the early September Civitas poll reference above. Things are moving in Romney's direction in North Carolina as elsewhere, but that has meant a gradual subsidence of Obama leads and the emergence of more recent polls showing a Romney advantage in the 1-4 point range. In defense of Gravis, it very well could be that it is on the upper end of a new range, but we'll need more data to make that determination.

North Dakota:
Add one new and one dated poll to the small set of polls out of the Peace Garden state. The most recent  and only post-debate survey from Mason-Dixon does not show any decided shift toward Romney; only  a modest one point jump. Rest assured, though, despite little or not shift, North Dakota is not in any danger of being anything other than a solid Romney state on November 6.

Ohio:
The New Hampshire poll looks good on the surface for the president, but given the caveat described above, the CNN survey of the Buckeye state may be the lone bright spot for the incumbent. The poll may be a bit rosy but is not completely inconsistent with the scant though comparatively robust set of post-debate polling data. Obama's share of support in the CNN poll is in line with where Rasmussen charted it on the day after the debate last week. Romney's share is slightly under the Rasmussen mark, but both are running above where the FHQ weighted average level of support has the governor at the moment. We just need more data. The ARG poll largely mirrors the We Ask America poll from last week as well; a small Romney lead. This is likely the range in which the true levels of support for the candidates reside right now.

Pennsylvania:
FHQ was skeptical in the face of the Susquehanna poll released yesterday. The firm has tended to have though not always had results that were more favorable to Romney when compared to a long list of surveys indicating a margin in the Keystone state in the Obama +6-7 area. Without further data backing up a much closer race the skepticism was not unwarranted. But today's Siena release provides Susquehanna with some relief, pointing toward a race within a few points. Granted, Siena has a very high number of undecided voters for this late in the race and as a result understates both candidates' shares of support in the FHQ weighted averages. It will take a lot of data to move Pennsylvania into range of being on the Watch List, much less moving into the toss up category. [And yes, that may be a flaw in the formula here. But recall that FHQ likes being conservative. There's a trade-off between blowing in the wind of polling fluctuations or moving when a real consistent move has occurred.]


With no polling releases out of Florida today, the best chance to see some -- the first -- change to the overall electoral vote tally was dashed. Yet, the compression of the Ohio-Colorado group of toss up states continued. That compression, as we noted yesterday, is coupled with an overall movement toward Romney. The order of those states has to this point remained the same on the Electoral College Spectrum below. Meanwhile North Dakota jumped five spots over in the order toward the partisan line separating each candidate's list of states. And yeah, Massachusetts and Maryland switched places again.  That is less significant as a move than it is as an indication that the two are quite closely huddled together way out in safe Obama land in the far left column below.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
VT-3
(6)2
WA-12
(158)
NV-6
(257)
AZ-11
(167)
MS-6
(58)
HI-4
(10)
NJ-14
(172)
OH-183
(275/281)
MT-3
(156)
KY-8
(52)
RI-4
(14)
CT-7
(179)
IA-6
(281/263)
IN-11
(153)
AL-9
(44)
NY-29
(43)
NM-5
(184)
VA-13
(294/257)
GA-16
(142)
KS-6
(35)
MD-10
(53)
MN-10
(194)
CO-9
(303/244)
SC-9
(126)
AR-6
(29)
MA-11
(64)
OR-7
(201)
FL-29
(332/235)
NE-5
(117)
AK-3
(23)
IL-20
(84)
PA-20
(221)
NC-15
(206)
ND-3
(112)
OK-7
(20)
CA-55
(139)
MI-16
(237)
SD-3
(191)
TX-38
(109)
ID-4
(13)
DE-3
(142)
WI-10
(247)
MO-10
(188)
WV-5
(71)
WY-3
(9)
ME-4
(146)
NH-4
(251)
TN-11
(178)
LA-8
(66)
UT-6
(6)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.

2 The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Romney won all the states up to and including Ohio (all Obama's toss up states plus Ohio), he would have 281 electoral votes. Romney's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and Romney's is on the right in italics.

3 Ohio
 is the state where Obama crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line.

There were new polls in both Nevada and Ohio, but neither did enough to change either state's position on the Watch List or remove either altogether. Additionally, there were no new states with new polling data out today that threatened to jump onto the list. It was a status quo day. ...but only on the Watch List.

The Watch List1
State
Switch
Indiana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Minnesota
from Strong Obama
to Lean Obama
Montana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Nevada
from Lean Obama
to Toss Up Obama
Ohio
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
1 The Watch list shows those states in the FHQ Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. The List is not a trend analysis. It indicates which states are straddling the line between categories and which states are most likely to shift given the introduction of new polling data. Montana, for example, is close to being a Lean Romney state, but the trajectory of the polling there has been moving the state away from that lean distinction.

Please see:



Are you following FHQ on TwitterGoogle+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Monday, October 8, 2012

The Electoral College Map (10/8/12)

Debate season, week two in the presidential campaign opened with eight new polls from seven states. Together, most of the survey data seemingly indicated a continued narrowing between the two major party candidates, particularly in the toss up states. What is interesting is that while the post-convention period polling drew some lines of demarcation between some toss up states/groups of toss up states, said lines are being redefined now. For instance, among the toss up states, there was some marked separation in the FHQ weighted average margins between Florida/North Carolina and Colorado and then between Colorado and Iowa/Virginia. That Iowa/Virginia pair had gradually drawn closer to the tipping point state of Ohio, the margin in which had widened as well. But in the time since the first debate, there has been not only a reversal of that widening across the most important states in the electoral puzzle, but a compression in terms of the resulting polling averages. In other words the states are becoming competitive and those former lines of demarcation between states is disappearing.

New State Polls (10/8/12)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Obama
Romney
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Colorado
10/7
+/- 4.5%
500 likely voters
49
48
2
+1
+2.23
Iowa
10/7
+/- 4.5%
500 likely voters
49
47
2
+2
+2.96
Louisiana
10/2-10/4
+/- 1.9%
2682 likely voters
36.2
58.8
4.9
+22.6
+16.15
Massachusetts
9/28-10/4
+/- 4.7%
440 likely voters
63
33
3
+30
+21.08
Michigan
10/5
+/- 2.93%
1122 likely voters
49
46
3
+3
+5.79
Michigan
10/4-10/6
+/- 4.0%
600 likely voters
48
45
7
+3
--
Pennsylvania
10/4-10/6
+/- 3.64%
725 likely voters
47
45
4
+2
+7.01
Virginia
10/4-10/7
+/- 3.7%
725 likely voters
50
47
3
+3
+2.85

Polling Quick Hits:
Colorado:
Though Obama topped or met the 50% mark in about half of the post-convention polling in the Centennial state, the president has more or less performed at or around his FHQ average share of support. The changes/narrowing there have/has been is more about the Romney side of the equation. Just before and in the time after the debate, the governor has more consistently pulled in a share of polling support above his pre-existing weighted average. And that is in line with this notion that there is continued compression in the toss up states.

Iowa:
The same is not necessarily the case in Iowa. Methodologically/statistically speaking Iowa has been slightly more volatile from poll to poll and its average has oscillated a bit more due to a lack of polls relative to the other toss ups. The pattern is less clear, then, in the Hawkeye state and we need more post-debate data to get a firm grasp on where the state of play is there. Close, yes, but how close is the question.

Louisiana:
Hey! Some Louisiana polling data! Oh, some Louisiana polling data. Yeah, it's good to have something out of the Pelican state, but the information we did get from Magellan did not really break from the conventional wisdom that Louisiana is safely red for Romney and the Republicans.

Massachusetts:
Sure, FHQ could draw a connection between Massachusetts and Louisiana because the outlook in each  is the same -- solidly in one camp or the other -- but there has been much more data out of the Bay state. That hasn't made things any less clear there. We know Massachusetts will be an Obama state on November 6.

Michigan:
There is, perhaps, a similar outlook in Michigan, but it is certainly less strong than in Louisiana or Massachusetts. And that is a reasonable conclusion given that Michigan has been consistently blue throughout, but has spent some time as a toss up state in our averages. These two polls point toward some tightening, but do little to change the fact (given the information we have now) that Michigan may be trending more competitive, but is still likely to end up in the president's column on election day.

Pennsylvania:
See Michigan, but with the caveat that Pennsylvania has been slightly less competitive in 2012 polling of the Keystone state and that it was never a toss up as FHQ has measured it. That said, there is going to have to be additional, similar and consistent data in the Obama +2 range to bring Pennsylvania into a strategically competitive area for Romney. ...and that is not to say that that cannot happen, just that it hasn't yet.

Virginia:
We still don't have enough to go on post-debate in the Old Dominion, but this latest PPP survey did not change the FHQ average margin there at all. Both candidates outperformed their average shares of support but were still separated by a margin approximating the FHQ weighted average margin.


The separation that had developed between the groups of state mentioned at the top of this post might be disappearing but the ordering of states has remained largely unaltered. However, while that's true, if the compression continues, it is all the more likely that these states all become interchangeable to some degree. The order becomes less relevant as the toss up states cluster and more likely tip to one candidate or the other en masse (or split in less predictable ways/combinations). To this point, it should be noted that the majority of FHQ toss up states have tipped toward the president in the time since we began putting up daily electoral college updates in July.

This is a longwinded way of saying that there has been a change in direction of the trajectory of polling in the toss up states since the debate (and arguably a little bit before it), but that has yet to manifest itself in any noticeable way in the various FHQ graphical depictions of the race. The map above, for example, still shows the very same 332-206 electoral college count that it has shown all along. And sure, Massachusetts may have flip-flopped positions with Maryland again and Louisiana may have leapfrogged three states deeper into the Romney column, but among the states that will decide the final breakdown on the electoral vote tally -- the middle column in the Electoral College Spectrum below -- there has been no movement.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
VT-3
(6)2
WA-12
(158)
NV-6
(257)
AZ-11
(167)
KY-8
(55)
HI-4
(10)
NJ-14
(172)
OH-183
(275/281)
MT-3
(156)
ND-3
(47)
RI-4
(14)
CT-7
(179)
IA-6
(281/263)
IN-11
(153)
AL-9
(44)
NY-29
(43)
NM-5
(184)
VA-13
(294/257)
GA-16
(142)
KS-6
(35)
MA-11
(54)
MN-10
(194)
CO-9
(303/244)
SC-9
(126)
AR-6
(29)
MD-10
(64)
OR-7
(201)
FL-29
(332/235)
NE-5
(117)
AK-3
(23)
IL-20
(84)
PA-20
(221)
NC-15
(206)
TX-38
(112)
OK-7
(20)
CA-55
(139)
MI-16
(237)
SD-3
(191)
WV-5
(74)
ID-4
(13)
DE-3
(142)
WI-10
(247)
MO-10
(188)
LA-8
(69)
WY-3
(9)
ME-4
(146)
NH-4
(251)
TN-11
(178)
MS-6
(61)
UT-6
(6)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.

2 The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Romney won all the states up to and including Ohio (all Obama's toss up states plus Ohio), he would have 281 electoral votes. Romney's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and Romney's is on the right in italics.

3 Ohio
 is the state where Obama crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line.

Where we can begin to or appreciate the movement that is occurring is perhaps on the ever-changing Watch List. Most consequentially, we have witnessed first Virginia and now Iowa slip off the list into a firmer position within the Toss Up Obama category. Neither is seemingly threatening to shift into the less competitive Lean Obama category now that the trajectory of polling has changed. As such, less competitive states like Indiana, Minnesota and Montana are not particularly worthy of watching -- despite being on the list -- but Ohio moving off the list and Nevada switching from a lean state on the verge of being a toss up to a toss up within a fraction of a point of being a lean state are certainly states to keep tabs on.

The Watch List1
State
Switch
Indiana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Minnesota
from Strong Obama
to Lean Obama
Montana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Nevada
from Lean Obama
to Toss Up Obama
Ohio
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
1 The Watch list shows those states in the FHQ Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. The List is not a trend analysis. It indicates which states are straddling the line between categories and which states are most likely to shift given the introduction of new polling data. Montana, for example, is close to being a Lean Romney state, but the trajectory of the polling there has been moving the state away from that lean distinction.

Please see:



Are you following FHQ on TwitterGoogle+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Saturday, October 6, 2012

The Electoral College Map (10/6/12)

As we roll into the weekend following the first presidential debate, things have quieted down some as most pollsters are in the field gauging public opinion after the events of Wednesday night took the snow globe, turned it upside down and shook it rather vigorously. Now that the globe is back on the table, we wait. We wait for the flakes to settle in and give us the proper picture of what the new normal -- to the extent there is something new to it -- is in this race for the White House.

There were some poll releases on Saturday, but nothing like what we are likely to get once we get into next week. The information that did emerge is consistent with the comments FHQ made on Friday. There is some evidence to suggest that the peak margin of Obama's lead was reached last week sometime and that the trajectory -- perhaps even more so now post-debate -- is headed downward. That isn't to say that Obama's weighted average is necessarily headed south, but rather that the margin in toss up states may be narrowing. Saturday's polls tell that same tale.

New State Polls (10/6/12)
State
Poll
Date
Margin of Error
Sample
Obama
Romney
Undecided
Poll Margin
FHQ Margin
Colorado
10/3-10/4
+/- 2.8%
1285 likely voters
45.9
49.4
4.8
+3.5
+2.28
Colorado
10/4-10/5
+/- 4.0%
604 likely voters
47
43
5
+4
--
Wisconsin
10/4-10/6
+/- 3.1%
979 likely voters
49
47
3
+2
+5.29

Polling Quick Hits:
Colorado:
The two polls out of Colorado were a bit of a mixed bag. Romney up four in one poll and Obama leading in the other. The Gravis poll slightly understates Obama's support relative to the pre-existing FHQ weighted average and indicates a pretty good jump for Romney (...again, compared to the FHQ average of the governor's support). On the other hand the Selzer survey was in line with the Obama average once these polls were added into the dataset and understated Romney's. But again, the divergent results -- polling volatility -- are more a function of the snow globe being shaken up. Subsequent polls will help us to determine where the true measure of the race is.

Wisconsin:
Compared to the last -- pre-debate -- PPP survey of the Badger state, the margin in this one is down 5 points overall (from a seven point gap before to just two points now). Poll-to-poll, Obama is down three and Romney up two. The effect is that the trajectory of the race -- if not the FHQ weighted average -- in Wisconsin is turning around some. If subsequent polling backs this up then the margin will have peaked earlier this past week before shifting in the other direction; narrowing.


None of the three polls had much of an impact on the various graphical representations of the race FHQ provides. In the parlance that we have come to adopt of late, these polls were (re)calibrating surveys. The new data altered the averages without affecting the overarching ordering of states involved. In other words, the debate effect has been felt -- so far -- in a uniform fashion; that Colorado remains a little to the right of Wisconsin. ...still. As a result both states remained stationary on both the map and on the Electoral College Spectrum below.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
VT-3
(6)2
WA-12
(158)
NV-6
(257)
AZ-11
(167)
ND-3
(55)
HI-4
(10)
NJ-14
(172)
OH-183
(275/281)
MT-3
(156)
KY-8
(52)
RI-4
(14)
CT-7
(179)
IA-6
(281/263)
IN-11
(153)
AL-9
(44)
NY-29
(43)
NM-5
(184)
VA-13
(294/257)
GA-16
(142)
KS-6
(35)
MD-10
(53)
MN-10
(194)
CO-9
(303/244)
SC-9
(126)
AR-6
(29)
MA-11
(64)
OR-7
(201)
FL-29
(332/235)
LA-8
(117)
AK-3
(23)
IL-20
(84)
PA-20
(221)
NC-15
(206)
NE-5
(109)
OK-7
(20)
CA-55
(139)
MI-16
(237)
SD-3
(191)
TX-38
(104)
ID-4
(13)
DE-3
(142)
WI-10
(247)
MO-10
(188)
WV-5
(66)
WY-3
(9)
ME-4
(146)
NH-4
(251)
TN-11
(178)
MS-6
(61)
UT-6
(6)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum.

2 The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Romney won all the states up to and including Ohio (all Obama's toss up states plus Ohio), he would have 281 electoral votes. Romney's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Obama's number is on the left and Romney's is on the right in italics.

3 Ohio
 is the state where Obama crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election. That line is referred to as the victory line.

Very briefly, the Watch List -- the handful of states within a fraction of a point of changing categories in the FHQ weighted averages -- held steady as compared to the list a day ago. At just six states, the list is limited, but that could change depending upon where the polling takes us as we move into a new week.

The Watch List1
State
Switch
Indiana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Iowa
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
Minnesota
from Strong Obama
to Lean Obama
Montana
from Strong Romney
to Lean Romney
Nevada
from Lean Obama
to Toss Up Obama
Ohio
from Toss Up Obama
to Lean Obama
1 The Watch list shows those states in the FHQ Weighted Average within a fraction of a point of changing categories. The List is not a trend analysis. It indicates which states are straddling the line between categories and which states are most likely to shift given the introduction of new polling data. Montana, for example, is close to being a Lean Romney state, but the trajectory of the polling there has been moving the state away from that lean distinction.

Please see:



Are you following FHQ on TwitterGoogle+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.