| If the election were held today and... | Obama | McCain |
| ...all McCain <5% went to Obama | 396 | 142 |
| ...all Obama <5% went to McCain | 317 | 221 |
| Shift since yesterday: | +0 | -0 |
| Shift this week: | +13 | -31 |
Today's Numbers: | Yesterday's Numbers: |
The chart at the left shows the distribution of electoral votes based on statewide polls. The colors represent the gap in the poll. The darker the color, the larger the gap. 50% +1 or 270 Electoral votes are needed to win, out of a possible 538.
This site is really designed to be used along with Electoral-Vote.com. I provide one useful way to interpret the data, but without the information that is provided at that site, you won't get as much use from this chart.
For a complete explanation of the methodology used, see the Electoral-Vote.com polling FAQ. The raw data used to generate the chart is also available there. Please note that other than using the data that they make available, this site is not affiliated with Electoral-vote.com
3 comments:
When you wish upon a star…
You can't always get what you want, but… you get what you need.
A New West poll in AZ has McCain with a lead of 4%. 538 weights New West with a .9, an above-average pollster. Looking back, you can see McCain had about a 20-point lead in a couple of polls in his home state a month ago. He has been losing about a percent every two days. That leaves just enough time for him to lose AZ on election day and enable the trans-national blue-state drive-path*. Yay!
(*Contingent upon the electoral cooperation of GA and one of NE, KS, OK, or TX+AR.)
But instead of heading out west, McCain is in Iowa, the state he ignored for years? That was October 2007 you were supposed to go to Iowa, idiot. Wrong calendar year.
Given a chance on Meet The Press to be George Clooney in A Perfect Storm (2000) or Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams (1992), McCain took his crayon out of the lines and chose Knute Rockne, All-American (1940). How dumb was that?!?!? That doesn't make him look old and out of touch or anything does it? Noooo. Gipper 2.0? Son of the Gipper? But I wish he had chosen a role from The WIzard of Oz if he was going to go back that far. Sure, it was a stupid question. But how about Mission: Impossible? Let's use our head here, Gramps!
In other news, Sam Wang's Senate prediction today is 59-41, one seat more Democratic than Nate reckons.
Wow... AZ, GA, -AND- one of NE, KS, OK, or TX+AR? And I thought -I- was the optimistic one! Would be nice, but I suspect that we'll have to wait until 2012 to realize your dream. Either that or we could take the easier route and win MT & ND, then build a bridge over the tip of Idaho. Or that part of BC is pretty sparse. Maybe we could talk Canada into letting us annex a 100 yard swatch along the border that could be made part of WA. I'd offer to trade them ID in exchange, but I doubt that they'd want it any more then we do.
In the last few days, McCain has not only campaigned in Iowa, but also in NM and CO. I can almost see how they can rationalize CO, but NM is just a waste of time. I really think at this point that they have all but given up, subconsciously at least. I can't believe that they'd be wasting time in IA and NM if they still thought that they could win.
President Obama won't admit it, but the surge (his) is working. ;-)
There will be a few surprise states such as Iowa voting for Bush 2004 and WI very nearly so. (I think those were closer than expected.)
AZ for Obama would be great. They may be a little ashamed of the image McCain gives their state as a poor campaigner and want to say, "We ddn't vote for him either!" AZ's an 80% chance for McCain at Intrade. SD 85%, WV 77, GA 73.
You get a few crazy results just by chance, such as Texas voting for Obama, on 270towin simulations. With 50 states, some of them barely polled, there will be a few surprises. 270towin doesn't tie them together with demographic data the way 538 does; they just calculate each state independently, so you get things like Obama losing Missouri and winning Texas --not likely. The smaller the population the easier it can swing.
2012 electoral layout: The population in those mountain states is so low, you just send a million Californians into each one, and the demographics will be completely different. It's possible the Obama administration will (have to) have public works programs to do something like that, possibly to build the national maglev train network (Come on America, Japan built its Shinkansen "Bullet Train" network from 1964!) or superconducting grid to transmit the energy around the country from new solar, wind, geothermal and other domestic renewable energy sources. Throwing some of that 700,000,000,000 dollars into work programs in the red states would make a lot more sense than giving it to crooked bankers (or to Iraq, or to the Saudis, or to Pakistan, or to Russia, or to China…) and would help Obama politically as well. It's hard to imagine America gettings it's $#*† together and doing something right on a big scale, though, it's been so long.
Post a Comment