| New State Polls (11/2/12) | |||||||||
| State | Poll | Date | Margin of Error | Sample | Obama | Romney | Undecided | Poll Margin | FHQ Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colorado | Survey USA/Denver Post | 10/28-10/31 | +/- 3.8% | 695 likely voters | 47 | 45 | -- | +2 | +1.65 |
| Colorado | Public Policy Polling | 10/31-11/1 | +/- -.-% | 825 likely voters | 50 | 46 | 4 | +4 | -- |
| Connecticut | Public Policy Polling | 11/1-11/2 | +/- 2.8% | 1220 likely voters | 55 | 42 | 3 | +13 | +11.64 |
| Georgia | 20/20 Insight | 10/29-10/31 | +/- 2.7% | 1316 likely voters | 46 | 52 | 1 | +6 | +9.04 |
| Hawaii | Civil Beat/Merriman River Group | 10/24-10/26 | +/- 2.8% | 1218 likely voters | 61 | 34 | 5 | +27 | +29.35 |
| Indiana | Howey-Depauw | 10/28-10/30 | +/- 3.5% | 800 likely voters | 41 | 50 | -- | +9 | +12.01 |
| Indiana | McLaughlin | 10/31-11/1 | +/- 4.0% | 600 likely voters | 41 | 54 | 5 | +13 | -- |
| Iowa | Gravis Marketing | 11/1 | +/- 4.0% | 594 likely voters | 49 | 45 | 6 | +4 | +2.67 |
| Maine | NMB Research | 10/7-10/8 | +/- 4.0% | 500 likely voters | 48 | 44 | -- | +4 | +13.21 |
| Maine | Public Policy Polling | 11/1-11/2 | +/- 2.4% | 1633 likely voters | 55 | 42 | 2 | +13 | -- |
| Massachusetts | Kimball Consulting | 10/31-11/1 | +/- 3.48% | 761 likely voters | 54.0 | 41.4 | 4.6 | +12.6 | +19.56 |
| Massachusetts | Public Policy Polling | 11/1-11/2 | +/- 3.0% | 1089 likely voters | 57 | 42 | 2 | +15 | -- |
| Michigan | Public Policy Polling | 10/31-11/1 | +/- -.-% | 500 likely voters | 52 | 46 | 2 | +6 | +5.72 |
| Michigan | Grove Insight | 10/31-11/1 | +/- 4.4% | 500 registered voters | 48 | 41 | 9 | +7 | -- |
| Michigan | Rasmussen | 11/1 | +/- 4.0% | 750 likely voters | 52 | 47 | 1 | +5 | -- |
| Minnesota | Public Policy Polling | 10/31-11/1 | +/- -.-% | 772 likely voters | 53 | 44 | 3 | +9 | +7.90 |
| Montana | Mellman Group | 10/28-10/31 | +/- 3.5% | 800 likely voters | 41 | 49 | -- | +8 | +9.11 |
| Nebraska | Wiese/Omaha World-Herald | 10/23-10/25 | +/- 3.8% | 679 likely voters | 38 | 52 | -- | +14 | +13.76 |
| Nebraska | We Ask America | 11/1 | +/- 2.95% | 1178 likely voters | 41 | 54 | 3 | +13 | -- |
| Nevada | Mellman Group | 10/29-10/31 | +/- 4.0% | 600 likely voters | 50 | 44 | 4 | +6 | +4.06 |
| New Hampshire | New England College | 10/29-10/31 | +/- 3.7% | 1017 likely voters | 50 | 44 | 4 | +6 | +3.30 |
| Ohio | We Ask America | 10/30-11/1 | +/- 2.6% | 1649 likely voters | 50 | 46 | -- | +4 | +2.86 |
| Ohio | CNN | 10/30-11/1 | +/- 3.5% | 796 likely voters | 50 | 47 | 3 | +3 | -- |
| Ohio | Rasmussen | 11/1 | +/- 4.0% | 750 likely voters | 49 | 49 | 1 | 0 | -- |
| Virginia | We Ask America | 10/30-11/1 | +/- 3.0% | 1069 likely voters | 49 | 48 | -- | +1 | +1.69 |
| Wisconsin | We Ask America | 10/30-11/1 | +/- 3.0% | 1210 likely voters | 52 | 45 | -- | +7 | +4.57 |
This was another seemingly good polling day for the Obama campaign on the state level. Among the toss up states, the president held small leads in Colorado and Virginia (tier one states) and more comfortable advantages in polls in states like New Hampshire, Ohio and Iowa; those Tier two states. Also, there was a bit more distance between the president and Mitt Romney in the Tier three states, Nevada and Wisconsin. Strategically, Romney has to do well in at least the Tier one and Tier two states. And by do well, I mean nearly sweep them. The former Massachusetts governor could -- if the order of states below in the Electoral College Spectrum holds -- cede New Hampshire or Iowa, or Colorado and still get to 270 with North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and Ohio. But Romney would have to have two of those three smaller states to get there. If the rank order is correct, New Hampshire would be that state.
From the Obama perspective, it is still a matter of holding Nevada and Wisconsin (along with the other Lean Obama states where the margins have contracted) and tacking on Ohio or Virginia and New Hampshire for example to just push north of 270. But there are a number of other combinations of paths to 270 for the president as well if polling like that above continues to come in.
The map (changes since 11/1):
| Changes (November 2) | |||
| State | Before | After | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nevada | Toss Up Obama | Lean Obama | |
Nevada barely shifts back into the Lean Obama category (> 4%).
The Electoral College Spectrum (changes since 11/1): No change in the order among the toss up states.
Nevada holds its position but slides into the Lean category.
Maine and Washington trade places.
| The Electoral College Spectrum1 | ||||
| VT-3(6)2 | ME-4(158) | NH-4(257) | GA-16(167) | MS-6(58) |
| HI-4(10) | NJ-14(172) | OH-183(275/281) | SD-3(151) | KY-8(52) |
| NY-29(39) | CT-7(179) | IA-6(281/263) | SC-9(148) | AL-9(44) |
| RI-4(43) | NM-5(184) | VA-13(294/257) | IN-11(139) | KS-6(35) |
| MD-10(53) | MN-10(194) | CO-9(303/244) | TN-11(128) | 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) | WV-5(112) | OK-7(20) |
| CA-55(139) | MI-16(237) | AZ-11(191) | TX-38(107) | ID-4(13) |
| DE-3(142) | WI-10(247) | MO-10(180) | ND-3(69) | WY-3(9) |
| WA-12(154) | NV-6(253) | MT-3(170) | 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. | ||||
The Watch List (changes since 11/1): Nevada, given the shift above, is now within a fraction of a point of moving back into the Toss Up Obama category. Put simply, the Silver state is going to hug that line the rest of the way without a significant change in the polling data there.
| The Watch List1 | |||
| State | Switch | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Florida | from Toss Up Obama | to Toss Up Romney | |
| Georgia | from Strong Romney | to Lean Romney | |
| Montana | from Strong Romney | to Lean Romney | |
| Nevada | from Lean Obama | to Toss Up Obama | |
| New Hampshire | from Toss Up Obama | to Lean Obama | |
| Wisconsin | from Lean Obama | to Toss Up 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:
Frequently Asked Questions about FHQ graduated weighted average methodology.
&
An Update on how to read it in 2012.
Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (11/1/12)
Live by the 3, Die by the 3 (...and other thoughts on what November 6, 2012 is testing)
The Electoral College Map (10/31/12)
Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder