 |
 |
There still too many states that have yet to be polled for this match-up for this analysis to have teeth. I count 27 missing states (plus D.C.) and that number includes the possible swing states of Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Maine, New Mexico and more. We have no polls for Washington state yet, but I don’t think Washington is likely to swing in Trump’s direction.
So why do this analysis? Quite simply, because Clinton and Trump are in the undisputed position of leading in their respective primaries.
Even lacking many state polls, this analysis is instructive for the states we have, and for how Trump’s performance compares to the other candidates. A couple of days ago, a similar analysis of Clinton v. Bush showed Bush leading with a 65% chance of winning an election held now. Trump does significantly worse against Clinton than does Bush.
After 100,000 simulated elections, Clinton wins 96,573 times and Trump wins 3,427 times (including the 952 ties). Clinton received (on average) 315 to Trump’s 223 electoral votes. In an election held now, Clinton would have a 96.6% probability of winning and Trump would have a 3.4% probability of winning. In other words, Clinton would almost certainly win an election held right now.
There are a few surprises at the state level. Both Wisconsin and Virginia heavily lean toward Clinton in the two polls in each state conducted within the past month. Now compare those two states to their geographical and political neighbors Minnesota and North Carolina. There we see things nearly tied. In the “classic” swing states, Trump leads in Florida in four of five polls, but Clinton leads in both Ohio polls and in two of three polls in Pennsylvania. Clinton leads in Kentucky, too, but the poll is from way back in mid-June.
Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
Ten most probable electoral vote outcomes for Clinton (full distribution here):
- 320 electoral votes with a 6.30% probability
- 305 electoral votes with a 5.08% probability
- 304 electoral votes with a 4.40% probability
- 289 electoral votes with a 3.46% probability
- 358 electoral votes with a 2.81% probability
- 343 electoral votes with a 2.51% probability
- 342 electoral votes with a 2.24% probability
- 312 electoral votes with a 2.13% probability
- 300 electoral votes with a 2.07% probability
- 310 electoral votes with a 1.89% probability
After 100,000 simulations:
- Clinton wins 96.6%, Trump wins 3.4%.
- Average (SE) EC votes for Clinton: 314.8 (26.2)
- Average (SE) EC votes for Trump: 223.2 (26.2)
- Median (95% CI) EC votes for Clinton: 312 (269, 369)
- Median (95% CI) EC votes for Trump: 226 (169, 269)
Each column of this table shows the electoral vote total aggregated by different criteria for the probability of winning a state (Safe=100%, Strong=90%+, Leans=60%+, Weak=50%+):
| Threshold | Safe | + Strong | + Leans | + Weak |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safe Clinton | 203 | |||
| Strong Clinton | 24 | 227 | ||
| Leans Clinton | 62 | 62 | 289 | |
| Weak Clinton | 31 | 31 | 31 | 320 |
| Weak Trump | 0 | 0 | 0 | 218 |
| Leans Trump | 73 | 73 | 218 | |
| Strong Trump | 38 | 145 | ||
| Safe Trump | 107 |
This table summarizes results by state. Click on the poll count to see the individual polls included for the state.
| 1 | 0 | EC | # | Total | % | % | Clinton | Trump | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 8 | Votes | polls | Votes | Clinton | Trump | % wins | % wins | |
| AL | 9 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| AK | 3 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| AZ | 11 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| AR | 6 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| CA | 55 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| CO | 9 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| CT | 7 | 1 | 1509 | 54.0 | 46.0 | 98.4 | 1.6 | ||
| DE | 3 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| DC | 3 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| FL | 29 | 5 | 3911 | 48.8 | 51.2 | 14.9 | 85.1 | ||
| GA | 16 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| HI | 4 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| ID | 4 | 1 | 475 | 37.1 | 62.9 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| IL | 20 | 1 | 782 | 60.7 | 39.3 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| IN | 11 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| IA | 6 | 4 | 4293 | 48.9 | 51.1 | 15.2 | 84.8 | ||
| KS | 6 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| KY | 8 | 1* | 964 | 51.8 | 48.2 | 78.2 | 21.8 | ||
| LA | 8 | 1 | 688 | 45.3 | 54.7 | 4.2 | 95.8 | ||
| ME | 2 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| ME1 | 1 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| ME2 | 1 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| MD | 10 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| MA | 11 | 1 | 387 | 70.3 | 29.7 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| MI | 16 | 4 | 3295 | 50.3 | 49.7 | 58.5 | 41.5 | ||
| MN | 10 | 1 | 843 | 53.0 | 47.0 | 89.3 | 10.7 | ||
| MS | 6 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| MO | 10 | 1 | 747 | 44.8 | 55.2 | 2.2 | 97.8 | ||
| MT | 3 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| NE | 2 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| NE1 | 1 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| NE2 | 1 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| NE3 | 1 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| NV | 6 | 1* | 609 | 53.4 | 46.6 | 88.5 | 11.5 | ||
| NH | 4 | 5 | 3878 | 52.3 | 47.7 | 98.2 | 1.8 | ||
| NJ | 14 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| NM | 5 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| NY | 29 | 1 | 743 | 60.4 | 39.6 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| NC | 15 | 4 | 3440 | 50.1 | 49.9 | 54.8 | 45.2 | ||
| ND | 3 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| OH | 18 | 2 | 1890 | 51.7 | 48.3 | 86.4 | 13.6 | ||
| OK | 7 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| OR | 7 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| PA | 20 | 3 | 2715 | 51.0 | 49.0 | 77.7 | 22.3 | ||
| RI | 4 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| SC | 9 | 1 | 993 | 43.8 | 56.2 | 0.4 | 99.6 | ||
| SD | 3 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| TN | 11 | 0 | (0) | (100) | |||||
| TX | 38 | 1 | 481 | 48.6 | 51.4 | 33.7 | 66.3 | ||
| UT | 6 | 1 | 335 | 43.3 | 56.7 | 4.1 | 95.9 | ||
| VT | 3 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| VA | 13 | 2 | 1397 | 55.5 | 44.5 | 99.8 | 0.2 | ||
| WA | 12 | 0 | (100) | (0) | |||||
| WV | 5 | 1 | 337 | 36.2 | 63.8 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| WI | 10 | 2 | 1382 | 58.5 | 41.5 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| WY | 3 | 0 | (0) | (100) |
* An older poll was used (i.e. no recent polls exist).
Details of the methods are given in the FAQ.
The most recent analysis in this match-up can be found from this page.
This poll reaffirms my faith in humanity. (But what the hell is wrong with Kansas and all those other red states?) And in case no one else noticed, Canada held an election today, and the conservatives lost. Canada has a new majority party and prime minister. It wasn’t close.
Roger,
In fairness to Kansas, they haven’t been polled. Same is true of many other “red” states. In fact, the only “dark red” state that has been polled is Idaho.
I am detecting a bit of Republican “Rat Fucking” (a real GOP staffer term) on social media that is trying to get the Sandernistas to hate Hill and vote Green in the general. I rock a Bernie sticker on my Subaru, but can gladly vote for Hillary if that is the choice.
I think there is danger in underestimating Trump. The RepubliKKKlan’s elites have been doing it and it’s biting them in the ass.
I think the Trump phenomenon boils down to one simple thing: the GOP has got a turnout problem. To be sure, the Dems may have one as well. But from a totally non-scientific perspective, the kind of moderate conservative NASCAR/Soccer Dad/Mom, suburban, low information, unaffiliated etc. voter that Republicans have relied upon in past general campaigns is not participating in this primary at all. Are there enough angry, gun-sucker, white supremacist, Teapublicans to make up for that? Dunno. But I kinda doubt it.