ELECTION 2008: New Electoral Vote Count Update!

ISO: A poll tracker that currently shows a John McCain win based on state-by-state polling. I would like to start tracking that, as well, but my main sources of conservative commentation -- ColdHeartedTruth, Election Junkie, and Election Projection -- all show a statistical win for Barack Obama.

OK -- so it's been well over a month before I did a comprehensive update on the election, and I'm not going to do a lot of going into anything becuase everyone is still obsessed with celebrity.

The big news, of course, is that John McCain's post-convention bounce has vanished into thin air.... and the unfavorables on that woman are going up. And, what makes things even more fun, is that it appears we have an outing in the McCain camp: Mark Buse, McCain's Chief of Staff. According to Joe.My.God., this is one of four acceptable reasons to out a public figure... when they run the program for a prominent anti-gay politician. And I think, yes, we're going to say that he's anti-gay, that McCain fellow. (This was originally posted on Michelangelo Signorile's blog, btw, who does an excellent job talking about it.)

It has also been reported that Obama seems to have conceded North Dakota, despite earlier indications he was ahead there by pulling out his staff and moving them to Mississippi and Wisconsin. Why does this matter? Because it signifies the first major move away from the 50-state solution in a state that looked like we might be able to grab. But... Mississippi? Obama must be really hoping for huge new additions to the voter rolls... though the socially conservative black vote in California may start problems for Proposition 8.

Oh, and the first debate is this Friday.

Onto the numbers, where I'm going to simply start documenting what states are "new Dem" states from the 2004 (what seems to be pickups from the 2004 election) -- please note that Barack only needs to get all the Kerry states + 3 more... pretty much any three more.

There is a very large chance that we could have a tie situtation. If Barack wins Colorado, New Mexico, and Iowa, but New Hampshire goes red (this is a completely likely scenario), then the EV's split 269-269. The House then decides the election with each state getting one vote. There's a great rundown on what that would look like out there on the interweb somewhere that I read. I will try to find it again because it is worth the read and shows a likely John McCain win (if we assume that the representatives from each state, appropriately, voted for the candidate that their state went for). A tie, then, works well into the hands of the Republicans even assuming a complete Dem take-over of the House (also very likely).

Oh, and PS, I really don't think either Pennsylvania or Michigan are as "swingy" as everyone makes them out to be. Rather, I think there is almost no chance either will go McCain unless it's a McCain landslide.

As a reminder, this is what the 2004 electoral vote map looked like...



New Projections...
ElectionProjection.com: 273 (BO), 265 (JM) -- Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa (the second two look to be less "swing" this time around) There also seems to be an interesting shift in both the Governor's races, with Washington swinging right, and a Senate race or two on this site.

Electoral-Vote.com: 273 (BO), 265 (JM) -- Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa. I watch this site daily ... he updates at 6:00am. Also, he started a new site, evstrength.com, though I prefer his old method. Check out the map from Sept. 18, whic was the highest point McCain had reached, when Pennsylvania started to swing -- it is the only winning scenario that any site has yet published.

Election Junkie: 298 (BO), 240 (JM) -- Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa, Nevada, and Ohio. This is really really old data, publishedon 8/30/08, so pre-convention.

ColdHeartedTruth: 273 (BO), 265 (JM) -- CO, NM, IA. Are you seeing a pattern here, kids?

270toWin.com: 202 (BO), 163 (JM), 173 (ties) -- these are the "strong state numbers." Swing states listed: WI, MI, MO (which is almost out of the discussion these days it seems), CO, NV, PA, OH, IN, VA, NH, NC, FL, and MN. A lot more Dem swings than Rep swings.

USElection Atlas: 273 (BO), 265 (JM) -- again, more of the same. CO, NM, IA.

DemConWatch: 284 (BO), 254 (JM) -- I'm not quite sure I understand where they get this number from -- but I like it!!!

FiveThirtyEight.com: 312 (BO), 226 (JM) -- this is the only site that shows a "landslide" (>300EV's) for Barack, it's also the only one that has VA still listed as blue. However, it's also the only site that weights the polls based on accuracy and when they were done. Something to think about...


Last Post's (8/13/08) Projections...
ElectionProjection.com: 298 (BO), 240 (JM)
Electoral-Vote.com: 289 (BO), 249 (JM)
Election Junkie: 278 (BO), 260 (JM)
ColdHeartedTruth: 298 (BO), 240 (JM)
270toWin.com: 231 (BO), 154 (BO), 153 (ties)
USElectionAtlas: 293 (BO), 245 (JM)
DemConWatch: 299 (BO), 239 (JM)

I know you are all so excited I did this. Just, please, humor me and read :-).

ELECTION 2008: Finally! An update!!!!

John Edwards, John Edwards, John Edwards. It makes me sad, but it happened. I don't think, however, it will play that well in the general election, but it certainly bars him from the Convention (I believe it has been confirmed that neither him nor his wife will be speaking -- anyone surprised???). However, we've seen this whole "stand by your man" routine before (speaking of E. Edwards); is Elizabeth Edwards thinking about politics in the future??? Well timed, too, btw, John Edwards... on the first day of the Olympics. And right before an invasion. Easily buried story.

There's a sad rhetoric that major female voices in American politics -- or at least the celebrity female voices -- are wives of male politicians. Ahem -- Liddy Dole and Hillary Clinton. I will say this right now: I would die to see a Dole-Clinton fight again, but this time with the wives. I really believe, in this one, Dole will win.

So Obama is slipping a little in all the polls. It's August. The election is boring right now, nothing is going on, though the Georgia-Russia situation is definitely an interesting test for both of them. Like most of the world -- and President Bush -- Obama called on Russia and Georgia to accept ceasefires, and supported Georgia and blasted Russia's militarism. McCain, meanwhile, supports Russia's decision. Interesting. Forecast of things to come??? Oh, and, apparently, McCain has said that it would be wise to expell Russia from the G8.... riiiiiight. Is there some giant plot on the part of the Republicans to make him seem as folksy as our current President???

The Convention is shaking up -- FINALLY!!! :-) And Hillary supporters seem to be planning some sort of march on the Convention??? That's silly. One thing to the PUMA (party unity my ass) voters: COME ON!!!! :-) Hillary, though not encouraging the situation, doesn't seem to be helping it either. Although I can't fault her for simply acknowledging that there are a lot of REALLY REALLY pro-Clinton supporters still out there, and that they want to be heard at the Convention. Simple solution: take it to a real floor vote, leave them both in the kitty, and have it ultimately said: BARACK WON. Period, end of story. She's a prime-time speaker, so the country will still hear her. But Tim sent me an interesting Op-Ed piece in the NYT about HRC:

While Obama was spending three hours watching “The Dark Knight” five time zones away, and going to a fund-raiser featuring “Aloha attire” and Hawaiian pupus, Hillary was busy planning her convention.

You can almost hear her mind whirring: She’s amazed at how easy it was to snatch Denver away from the Obama saps. Like taking candy from a baby, except Beanpole Guy doesn’t eat candy. In just a couple of weeks, Bill and Hill were able to drag No Drama Obama into a swamp of Clinton drama.

As for the VEEPSTAKES... I want to say this right now: I have four major people I'm rooting for. Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas (she's a lot like Clinton, but less dirty), Evan Bayh of Indiana (it would solidify the midwest for Obama and he's really cool), Hillary Clinton (duh, but I don't think this will happen), and Bill Richardson (though I really doubt this will happen). In all likelihood, Obama will probably pick up Kaine from Virginia, though I think the far wiser decision is Bayh. Can we have two people with funny names on the ballot though (Obama-Bayh... Barack-Evan...), especially when McCain-Romney sounds so presidential???

Current Estimates...

ElectionProjection.com: 298 (BO), 240 (JM)
Missouri and Virginia are the big changes here back to McCain, and, like most sites, Montana, ND, and SD have all gone back to red -- not a big surprise.

Electoral-Vote.com: 289 (BO), 249 (JM)
The big switch here comes from Ohio and Virginia "leaning McCain" according to the polls. That's unfortunate. Probably the more disturbing thing that comes along is his new feature -- This Day in 2004 -- which confirms that Kerry was still ahead 307-231 around this time four years ago. The conservative pundits like to point this fact out, except they leave out one major issue: Barack is not John Kerry. Kerry was barely understandable when he spoke, and he had that whole Vietnam War thing going on that, in retrospect, actually hurt him quite a bit. Obama is different.

Election Junkie: 278 (BO), 260 (JM)
This site actually lists it as the closest of all the sites, though it's hard to tell why as there's no map involved. It was actually his update (yesterday) that spurred me to update the sites...

ColdHeartedTruth: 298 (BO), 240 (JM)
Are you noticing a trend here when it comes to the numbers???

270toWin.com: 231 (BO), 154 (BO), 153 (ties)
This one is fun to watch because of the ever growing number of ties they list. Currently: NM, NV, FL, NH, MO, MI, OH, MT, SD, ND, IA, VA, and NC. That's a lot to go after this early in the game.

USElectionAtlas: 293 (BO), 245 (JM)
No major changes... even from two weeks.

NEW SITE...
DemConWatch: 299 (BO), 239 (JM)
Finally! Found a biased site for the Democrats. We had ColdHeartedTruth for the Republicans... this one, I think, will balance it all out! :-) The other two sites which state their political affiliation -- ElectionProjection and Electoral-Vote -- are so mathematical in nature that I don't believe that they are biased. In this particular circumstance, DemConWatch is the biggest Obama win, while ColdHeartedTruth is his smallest win. Is anyone surprised????

Last Week's Estimates...

ElectionProjection.com: 325 (BO), 213 (JM)
Electoral Vote: 292 (BO), 219 (JM), 27 (ties)
Election Junkie: 309 (BO), 229 (JM)
Cold Hearted Truth: 293 (BO), 245 (JM)
270toWin.com: 247 (BO), 174 (JM), 117 (ties)
USElectionAtlas: 293 (BO), 245 (JM)

ELECTION 2008: Weekly Poll Estimates... 7-18-08

All things said, I think it's important to point out a great article here over at Election Geek. Here's a perfect quote before we get into the polls and the projections for this week:

Most Americans, those in the center and the suburbs and rural parts of this nation, don’t make their minds up until after the conventions, the debates and the bulk of the coverage is over. They decide in the final weeks and days and they do it with a gut feeling of whom they “like” more or which candidate shares their values or their vision for that time and place.

So in short not one bit of the polling matters. All we know is that the president is unpopular, the World is moving rapidly and everything we think we know will change.

This Week's Estimates...

ElectionProjection.com: 311 (BO), 227 (JM)
BO+5 due to Nevada switching for no clear reason, I can't seem to find the poll he made that call on.

Electoral Vote: 320 (BO), 204 (JM)
JM-14 due to Missouri (!!!!) and North Dakota now being listed as "ties." A recent poll shows BO has pulled ahead enough to throw off this sites laws of averages, and therefore call this one dead even in Missouri.

Election Junkie: 306 (BO), 232 (JM)
JM+14. I'm not quite sure why the numbers are changing here like they are, as I don't follow him as religiously as some of the other sites. However, he has a tendency to throw out outlier polls, unlike some other sites that treat them all equally. SO, his numbers may be a tad more reliable. His new prediction discussion is here, and I'm sure you've heard that John McCain is rising in the national polls which he discusses here.

Cold Hearted Truth: 293 (BO), 245 (JM)
No change.

270toWin.com: 259 (BO), 151 (JM)
Using the new link they emailed to me! I'm not listing any changes because I'm foolish and couldn't seem to get any of the numbers right! LOL! So, these stand alone but also list Missouri, Nevada, and North Dakota as ties. This one also lists South Dakota as a tie -- I mean, it, ND, and Montana are demographically similarly so it makes sense if those two are going, this one would too... And there was a poll that listed JM only ahead by 4 there on 7-9-08 by Ramussen, so we'll see if that was an outlier or a predictor of things to come...

USElectionAtlas: 268 (BO), 172 (JM)
JM-16, due to Missouri and Nevada listed as "ties" now. There's the poll I couldn't find on ElectionProjection (actually, I could, I just thought it was referring to something else). It was a Ramussen poll dated yesterday showing Obama ahead there by 2.

Last Week's Estimates...

ElectionProjection.com: 306 (BO), 232 (JM)
Electoral Vote: 320 (BO) 218 (JM)
Election Junkie: 306 (BO), 218 (JM)
Coldhearted Truth: 293 (BO), 245 (JM)
270toWin.com: 185 (BO), 174 (JM)
USElectionAtlas: 268 (BO), 188 (JM)

ELECTION 2008: Weekly Update 7-10-08

Last Weeks Estimates...

Here are the (now) weekly estimates for the Electoral Vote per my favorite websites:

ElectionProjection.com: 338 (BO), 200 (JM)
Electoral Vote: 317 (BO) 221 (JM)
Election-Junkie: 306 (BO), 232 (JM)

And the ones that just report polls and don't make "predictions," just show numbers:

270toWin.com: 185 (BO), 174 (JM)
US Election Atlas: 261 (BO), 180 (JM)

This Week's Estimates...

ElectionProjection.com: 306 (BO), 232 (JM)
BO-32 due to polls showing him trailing in Nevada (EV=5) and Florida (EV=27). As a side note, and I've always sad this about the Blogging Caesar over there, he knows his shit and is probably (to my mind) the most accurate pundit.

Electoral Vote: 320 (BO) 218 (JM)
BO+3 due to a poll showing him ahead in Montana. He has a really interesting chart that comes from online polls in 32 states produced by Zogby here -- also, this guy is great as he does daily updates.

Election Junkie: 306 (BO), 218 (JM)
Per the author:

Due to another day of either worthless or no polls at all, I am going to wait until the end of the week to post my next projection.

He's right... it did seem like a really unusual week for polls, not the least of which is due to July 4 being in there and no polls done pretty much the whole weekend.

New Poll Estimates...

Coldhearted Truth: 293 (BO), 245 (JM)

There is an argument here that most of my "guessers" are conservatives. I have yet to find a good liberal EV counter. I actually prefer things like Electoral Vote, ElectionProjection, and USElectionAtlas because they are very mathematically based. So when you get to things like Election Junkie or Coldhearted Truth, you have people using polls and then interpreting.

The point? These are conservatives saying that Barack is going to win.

270toWin.com: 185 (BO), 174 (JM)
No change, but Montana, North Dakota (recent polls showing JM only 1 point ahead there), and Indiana all still listed in the McCain category.

USElectionAtlas: 268 (BO), 188 (JM)
Listing a number of changes, including Nevada going to JM; Colorado going to BO; and New Mexico, Montana, Indiana and North Dakota becoming "in play." (PLEASE NOTE: Dave Leip has the colors reversed -- John McCain is blue, and Barack is red; he has a great note on his page how the red-blue thing did not becoem standard until the 2000 election.)

--------

This little flicker from Jesse Jackson:



I have one thing to say: who the fuck cares? Jesse Jackson is a pompous ass. It's really funny that, despite people like Fox who were lambasting him for everything he does (remember him going to Southeastern Europe and walking across the border with POW's?), people now care what he thinks.

He's a smart man, but, come on guys, what value does he have anymore???

--------

No real movement on the Senate or Houses. A few more have been listed as "in play," but the general consensus is that the Republicans are just fighting back a "blue wave," spending money to defend existing seats where as the Dem's are holding pretty strong and able to challenge new seats.

--------

We're going to start watching Ohio-specific races once things settle down around here; and I will start making endorsements come August or so.

ELECTION 2008: 50TH BLOG SPECTACULAR

Predictions for Super Tuesday:

PLEASE NOTE: When editing this post again and again and again, the HTML has gotten messed up somehow. I think I've fixed most of it... but, for example, I lost three predictions at one point. So, just stick with me and tell me what I've missed.

Alabama
D: Obama by 3-6%
R: McCain by 3-6% (Huckabee may pull a little closer)
delegates awarded proportionally on both sides

Alaska
D: I'm holding off saying either way, as there's an interesting catch here: Mike Gravel who is still on the ballot. There is a possibility that he may take his home state. I'm going to "say" that Gravel will take it in a landslide, but, if not, my next guess is that Clinton will win by 3-6%.
R: McCain by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally on both sides
there have been no polls done in Alaska

Arizona
D: Clinton by 3-6%
R: McCain by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

Arkansas
D: Clinton by >10%
R: Huckabee by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally on both sides
there have been no polls done on either side since 12/14/07

California
D: Clinton but barely (<3%)>delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes all" by Congressional District for the Republicans

Colorado
D: Obama but barely (<3%)>10%
delegates awarded proportionally on both sides

Connecticut
D: Obama but barely (<3%)>10%
delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

Delaware
D: Clinton by 3-6%
R: McCain by 7-10%
delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

Georgia
D: Obama by >10%
R: Huckabee but barely (<3%>delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

Idaho
D: Obama by >10% <--I'm calling this on absolutely nothing, as the last poll in 7/07 had Al Gore in it (and winning), which is a group that you would assume, naturally, would gravitate towards the Clintons, but I think he has become something of a superhero for the "younger set" and I think those who would choose him would gravitate towards the more liberal Obama... plus, the environment is a big issue out there, and Obama has the better environmental record (it's hard to tarnish your record in six years, isn't it?) delegates awarded proportionally for both sides

Illinois
D: Obama by >10%
R: McCain by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally for both sides

Kansas
D: Obama but barely (<3%)>delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats

Massachusetts
D: Clinton by >10%
R: Romney by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally for both sides

Missouri
D: Clinton by 3-6%
R: McCain but barely (<3%>delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

Minnesota
D: Clinton 7-10%
R: McCain >10%
delegates awarded proportionally for both sides

Montana
R: Romney, but barely (close second: McCain) <--I'm calling this on nothing, as there have been no polls in Montana, and I'm assuming, like in Kansas with Obama, Romney will carry most of this area of the country delegates awarded proportionally for both sides

New Jersey
D: Clinton by 3-6%
R: McCain by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

New Mexico
D: Clinton but barely (<3%)>delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats

New York
D: Clinton by >10%
R: McCain by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

North Dakota
D: Clinton by >10%
R: Romney by >10%
there have been no polls or news about anyone and North Dakota, so I'm just guessing here; McCain and Obama may take it
delegates awarded proportionally for both sides

Oklahoma
D: Clinton >10%
R: McCain by 3-6%
delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

Tennessee
D: Clinton by >10%
R: McCain but barely (<3%)>delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans, if there is a majority (proportional if there is a plurality)

Utah
D: Obama by >10% -- there is only one poll out there by "Dan Jones" in 1/08 that has Obama way ahead, by over 20 points, so we're basing this on that and that alone; it might be a mistake as Clinton was way ahead when there was still a full Democratic field ahead of us
R: Romney by >10%
delegates awarded proportionally for the Democrats
"Winner-takes-all" for the Republicans

BTW--> I have no idea if West Virginia has anything tomrow. I have so many sources saying so many things. If they have their Republican state convention tomrow, which is what CNN reports, then I'm giving it to McCain by a hefty margin. But, none of the poll sites are reporting anything will be decided tomrow. Oh, and, Obama went to go talk to the Democratic convention... today? I'm no coal miners daughter, so my attention is elsewhere.

So, I'll call this: by Wednesday, I think McCain will pretty much have the nomination locked up. Not perfectly, but he'll be so close it will almost be impossible to beat him. To the Blogging Caesar of http://www.electionprojection.com/ (another site I follow -- if you read this Caesar, I followed you REALLY close in 2004, but your move from "unbiased" to "conservative commentator" has made me stopped coming by as often) --> I take your challenge. Let's see whose edicts are right. And, btw, I so wanted to scoop you on the McCain-as-nominee edict. *Sigh* I failed. Because of the split delegates in most states with the Dems, the Obama-Clinton ticket will continue to be a big question. (And for those thinking of the "dream ticket" of Clinton-Obama in 2008 ... Roland Martin has an interesting analysis of that here: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/04/roland.martin/index.html . . . do I agree? somewhat; I'm sure Mrs. Clinton will not want to be VP)

And, btw, I was wrong about the surprise endorsement (I really was expecting Bill Richardson to say something today), so god only knows how much of this is right.