WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com
Update 7/22: Latest projection: Obama leads 303-235, down 2 EVs from our previous forecast. For the first time since we've been tracking the forecast since early June, McCain has improved his position, led by gains in two projections each in Ohio and New Hampshire.
Please also check out our Senate Forecast and House Forecast.
Map showing consensus of sources. This table will show a state Blue or Red if a majority of the sources show it Leaning or Solid for that candidate. NH moves from Obama to Tossup.
| DCW Presidential Forecast | |||||||||||
| State | EVs | Elect. Proj. | Open Left | EV .com | FHQ | RCP | RM | 538 .com | CNN | NBC | .... |
| Date | 7/22 | 7/22 | 7/22 | 7/20 | 7/22 | 7/22 | 7/22 | 6/27 | 7/9 | ||
| Obama-Strong (O) | 200 | 210 | 207 | 175 | 153 | 210 | 210 | 153 | 168 | ||
| Obama-Lean (OL) | 84 | 63 | 35 | 47 | 102 | 63 | 63 | 78 | 42 | ||
| Tossup (T) | 83 | 108 | 115 | 167 | 120 | 38 | 38 | 113 | 139 | ||
| McCain-Lean (ML) | 101 | 70 | 98 | 58 | 64 | 62 | 67 | 69 | 53 | ||
| McCain-Strong (M) | 70 | 87 | 83 | 91 | 99 | 165 | 160 | 125 | 136 | ||
| Obama Total | 284 | 273 | 242 | 222 | 255 | 273 | 273 | 231 | 210 | ||
| McCain Total | 171 | 157 | 181 | 149 | 163 | 227 | 227 | 194 | 189 | ||
| Obama Est. | 329 | 328 | 312 | 308 | 307 | 292 | 288 | 286 | 282 | ||
| Texas | 34 | ML | ML | ML | ML | ML | M | M | M | M | |
| Florida | 27 | T | T | ML | T | T | ML | ML | T | T | |
| Pennsylvania | 21 | OL | OL | T | T | OL | OL | OL | OL | T | |
| Ohio | 20 | OL | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | |
| Michigan | 17 | OL | OL | OL | T | OL | OL | OL | T | T | |
| Georgia | 15 | ML | ML | ML | ML | ML | M | M | ML | ML | |
| New Jersey | 15 | O | O | O | OL | OL | O | O | OL | OL | |
| N. Carolina | 15 | T | T | T | T | T | ML | ML | ML | ML | |
| Virginia | 13 | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | |
| Indiana | 11 | ML | T | T | T | T | M | ML | ML | ML | |
| Missouri | 11 | T | T | T | T | T | ML | ML | T | T | |
| Washington | 11 | O | O | O | O | OL | O | O | OL | O | |
| Arizona | 10 | ML | ML | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | |
| Minnesota | 10 | O | O | O | O | OL | O | O | OL | OL | |
| Wisconsin | 10 | OL | O | O | OL | OL | O | O | OL | OL | |
| Colorado | 9 | T | OL | T | T | T | OL | OL | T | T | |
| Louisiana | 9 | M | M | M | M | M | M | M | ML | M | |
| S. Carolina | 8 | ML | ML | ML | T | M | M | M | M | M | |
| Iowa | 7 | OL | OL | O | OL | OL | OL | OL | T | T | |
| Oregon | 7 | O | O | OL | OL | OL | O | O | OL | OL | |
| Arkansas | 6 | ML | M | M | M | M | M | M | ML | M | |
| Mississippi | 6 | ML | M | ML | ML | ML | M | M | M | M | |
| Nevada | 5 | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | T | |
| New Mexico | 5 | OL | OL | OL | OL | T | OL | OL | ML | T | |
| W. Virginia | 5 | ML | M | ML | M | M | M | M | ML | M | |
| Maine | 4 | O | O | O | O | OL | O | O | OL | O | |
| NH | 4 | OL | OL | T | T | T | OL | OL | T | T | |
| Alaska | 3 | M | ML | ML | ML | ML | M | M | M | ML | |
| Delaware | 3 | O | O | OL | OL | O | O | O | O | O | |
| Montana | 3 | T | T | OL | T | ML | ML | ML | ML | ML | |
| N. Dakota | 3 | ML | T | T | T | ML | ML | M | M | ML | |
| S. Dakota | 3 | ML | M | T | M | M | ML | M | M | ML | |
| Elect. Proj. | Open Left | EV .com | FHQ | RCP | RM | 538 .com | CNN | NBC | .... | ||
Notes:
538 - FiveThirtyEight - Safe and Likely mapped to Strong (O or M), Lean to Lean (OL or ML), Tossup to Tossup (T)
CNN - Safe mapped to Strong, Leaning to Lean, Tossup to Tossup
Elect. Proj. - Election Projection - Solid and Strong mapped to Strong, Moderate to Lean, Weak to Tossup
EV.com - Electoral-Vote.com - Strong mapped to Strong, Weak to Lean, Barely and Tossup to Tossup
FHQ - FrontLoading HQ - Solid mapped to Strong, Lean to Lean, Tossup (Dem and Rep) to Tossup
NBC - Base mapped to strong, Lean to Lean, Tossup to Tossup
OpenLeft - Solid mapped to Strong, Lean to Lean, Tossup to Tossup
RM - Rasmussen - Safe and Likely mapped to Strong, Lean to Lean, Tossup to Tossup
RCP - RealClearPolitics - Solid mapped to Strong, Lean to Lean, Tossup to Tossup
Here are the states that span 3 categories.
Alaska: Now only 1 at Tossup, 4 at McCain-Strong. Rasmussen's own poll shows McCain only up by 4, yet they still have AK as Likely-Republican, which we convert to McCain-Strong.- Indiana: 4 at Tossup, Rasmussen at McCain-Strong.
- Iowa: One at Obama-Strong, NBC and CNN still calling it a Tossup.
Michigan: 1 Obama-Strong, 3 Tossups.- Montana : EV.com at Obama-Lean, 5 at McCain-Lean. EV.com will exactly follow the latest poll if no other poll has been published within the week.
New Hampshire: 4 at Tossup, 2 at Obama-Strong.- New Mexico: Six projections have it as Obama-Lean, CNN has it at McCain-Lean. Two recent polls show Obama up by 3 and 8 points.
- North Dakota - Two at McCain Strong, 2 at tossup.
- South Carolina: 1 Tossup, 5 McCain-Strong
- South Dakota: 1 Tossup, 5 McCain-Strong
The overall projection is just a straight average of each projections' estimate of Electoral Votes (EVs) for each candidate. For each projection other than FiveThirtyEight, we give Obama 100% of the EVs in a state that is solid for him, 80% of the EVs for a leaner, 50% of the EVs for a Tossup, 20% of the EVs for state that is McCain-Lean, and 0% of the Solid McCain states. Exact opposite for McCain. For FiveThirtyEight, we use their overall estimate of Obama's EVs, not the state-by-state categories.
Logging you in...
del.icio.us
Leah 85p · 873 weeks ago
SarahLawrence Scott · 873 weeks ago
A few weeks ago, Rasmussen started releasing state polling numbers in two ways: with "leaners," and without. 538, RCP, and FHQ chose to use the numbers with leaners. EV did not. I haven't checked the others.
The Rasmussen press releases make it pretty clear that pre-July state numbers did not include leaners; he even averages the current results without leaners with the old result to create a kind of moving average.
McCain usually does better among leaners than Obama. I've crunched the numbers, and if we assume that the old polls were without leaners, then there has been an average shift in the Rasmussen state polls of 1.2 percentage points towards McCain in the polls that have come out in the last few weeks. If we assume, as many sites do, that the old numbers were with leaners, then the difference is 2.5 percentage points.
In other words, half the shift toward McCain in these polls is a methodological artifact introduced by the sites (not on the part of Rasmussen!); the other half is presumably "real."
This is a particularly severe problem for 538, which attempts to forecast forward by extrapolating trends. In this case, half of their trend from the Rasmussen polls is also an artifact.
I'm trying to get Nate's attention at 538 to either fix this or explain why I'm wrong. I'm not so concerned with RCP and FHQ; since they don't use a trend model, it's a one-shot shift.
Just letting y'all know that this recent dip may be not as sharp as it seems...
--Scott
Cob_NJ 8p · 873 weeks ago
So now that I'm done sucking up, a couple things with regard to DCW's Presidential Forecast methodology/algorithm. As far as I can tell, the basic goal of the Forecast is to provide a relatively simple, up-to-date distillation of the info from many different sources, averaging them all into one nice number, complete with pretty map. Right now, the sources DCW is pulling from can be split into three basic types:
1. Simple poll averages
OpenLeft, EV.com, RCP, and FHQ are all nothing beyond (relatively) simple averages of polls. The time windows, weighting methods, and cut-off points (of what is considered "Strong" vs. "Lean", etc.) differ between the sites, but they're all still working from roughly the same playbook.
2. Polls plus magic
Elect. Proj. and 538 are averages as well, but include additional correcting factors in their methodologies that set them apart from the four sites listed above. Really, 538 deserves to be in a class of it's own, but I digress.
3. Polls, magic, hamsters, and the weather forecast, combined by secret formula (PMHWF-CbSF)
Rasmussen, CNN, and NBC have secret magical formulas that they use to derive their state rankings. The amount of objective vs. subjective information is really anybody's guess.
____
Anyway, my point is that using 4 of the 9 spaces for simple poll averages is a waste of space that could be better used for adding other, different data, making the Forecast a wider--and therefore more interesting/informative--measure. Since each site is weighted in the Forecast algorithm equally, including 4 simple poll averages has the additional problem of weighing this data too heavily with regards to the other sources.
Suggestion: Perhaps dropping two of the four, and adding InTrade market data?
And what is with the outrageous lameness of the never-updating CNN and NBC? As a child of the InterTubes, I demand instant information updated hourly! This old-media "meh, once a month is enough" mindset just won't fly. But it does seem like a good idea to include more than one PMHWF-CbSF in the Forecast, so if there aren't any other good PMHWF-CbSFs out there updating more frequently, I guess we're stuck with the infinite lame-itude of CNN/NBC.
But yeah, I don't mean to step on anyone's toes or anything--just suggestions. Let me know what you guys think.
DocJess 71p · 873 weeks ago
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/4/1172/3...
SarahLawrence Scott · 873 weeks ago
Suppose, for example, that we find out in late October that one of the candidates is actually a space alien robot programmed to destroy the human race. 538 and FHQ will have a hard time catching that, and will still list states as solid for the space alien robot even though they have no chance. On the other hand, if the actual race is very stable EV is much more likely to show something inaccurate. That's why we want a variety of sources; they're all accurate in different situations.
And Leah--you caught me. I've accepted the inclusion of RCP projections, but that doesn't mean I LIKE them. Sort of the same attitude I have to bean sprouts in salads. :) Incidentally, I love RCP for news and poll results; I probably spend more time there than any other political site. It's just their electoral map that annoys me.
Matt 75p · 873 weeks ago
Leah 85p · 873 weeks ago
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/24/c...
Chad_Nielson 57p · 873 weeks ago
Leah 85p · 873 weeks ago
I wonder if they have been reading the comments here!
Karen Anne · 872 weeks ago
Stephanopoulos said the trip has been “a clean success” for Obama. However, noted polls showing McCain has made up considerable ground in places like Minnesota, Colorado, Michigan.
Matt 75p · 872 weeks ago
SarahLawrence Scott · 872 weeks ago
For the first set, maybe North Dakota, Virginia, and Michigan? That covers different regions, dynamics, and consensus opinions.
Leah 85p · 872 weeks ago
Oreo DemConWatch 47p · 872 weeks ago
Leah 85p · 872 weeks ago
http://www.zogby.com/50state/
susan · 872 weeks ago
The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC). The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral vote -- that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Because of state-by-state enacted rules for winner-take-all awarding of their electoral votes, recent candidates with limited funds have concentrated their attention on a handful of closely divided "battleground" states. Two-thirds of the visits and money were focused in just six states; 88% on 9 states, and 99% of the money went to just 16 states. Two-thirds of the states and people have been merely spectators to the presidential election.
Another shortcoming of the current system is that a candidate can win the Presidency without winning the most popular votes nationwide.
The National Popular Vote bill has been approved by 20 legislative chambers (one house in Colorado, Arkansas, Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Washington, and two houses in Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont). It has been enacted into law in Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland. These states have 50 (19%) of the 270 electoral votes needed to bring this legislation into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
Leah 85p · 872 weeks ago