 |
 |
Yesterday the analysis had Sec. Hillary Clinton leading Donald Trump with, on average, 296 electoral votes to 242. And Clinton’s probablity of winning was 93.9% to Trump’s 6.1% chance.
Today there were 19 new polls released. To me, the one noticable thing about today’s batch is that they weren’t that bad for Clinton and not that bad for Trump. You can see the polls and my comments on my Twitter timeline (@hominidviews).
My impression was verified by today’s analysis. After 100,000 simulated elections, Clinton wins 94,164 times and Trump wins 5,836 times (including the 950 ties). Clinton received (on average) 295 to Trump’s 243 electoral votes. In an election held now, Clinton would have a 94.2% probability of winning and Trump would have a 5.8% probability of winning.
In other words, very little has changed from today’s poll dump. This suggests that Hillary’s slide we’ve seen for the past week has hit bottom. If so, she may even make gains in the final four days, as Obama did in 2012.
The long term trends in this race can be seen from a series of elections simulated every seven days using polls from 04 Nov 2015 to 04 Nov 2016, and including polls from the preceding ten days (FAQ).
An animated sequence of maps and electoral vote distributions can be seen here
Here is the distribution of electoral votes [FAQ] from the simulations:
Ten most probable electoral vote outcomes for Clinton (full distribution here):
- 286 electoral votes with a 2.93% probability
- 287 electoral votes with a 2.92% probability
- 291 electoral votes with a 2.68% probability
- 272 electoral votes with a 2.40% probability
- 271 electoral votes with a 2.36% probability
- 293 electoral votes with a 2.25% probability
- 290 electoral votes with a 2.21% probability
- 300 electoral votes with a 2.20% probability
- 316 electoral votes with a 2.19% probability
- 296 electoral votes with a 2.18% probability
After 100,000 simulations:
- Clinton wins 94.2%, Trump wins 5.8%.
- Average (SE) EC votes for Clinton: 295.2 (17.9)
- Average (SE) EC votes for Trump: 242.8 (17.9)
- Median (95% CI) EC votes for Clinton: 293 (266, 328)
- Median (95% CI) EC votes for Trump: 245 (210, 272)
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 | 129 | |||
| Strong Clinton | 134 | 263 | ||
| Leans Clinton | 8 | 8 | 271 | |
| Weak Clinton | 15 | 15 | 15 | 286 |
| Weak Trump | 34 | 34 | 34 | 252 |
| Leans Trump | 13 | 13 | 218 | |
| Strong Trump | 89 | 205 | ||
| Safe Trump | 116 |
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 | 1* | 2400 | 40.0 | 60.0 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| AK | 3 | 1* | 360 | 52.2 | 47.8 | 72.7 | 27.3 | ||
| AZ | 11 | 5 | 3444 | 47.6 | 52.4 | 2.0 | 98.0 | ||
| AR | 6 | 1* | 556 | 37.9 | 62.1 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| CA | 55 | 2 | 1939 | 63.3 | 36.7 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| CO | 9 | 6 | 9574 | 52.7 | 47.3 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| CT | 7 | 1* | 847 | 58.8 | 41.2 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| DE | 3 | 1* | 618 | 62.9 | 37.1 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| DC | 3 | 1* | 1131 | 76.5 | 23.5 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| FL | 29 | 11 | 9166 | 49.9 | 50.1 | 43.0 | 57.0 | ||
| GA | 16 | 4 | 3084 | 47.9 | 52.1 | 4.3 | 95.7 | ||
| HI | 4 | 1* | 801 | 61.9 | 38.1 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| ID | 4 | 1* | 774 | 30.9 | 69.1 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| IL | 20 | 2 | 977 | 56.5 | 43.5 | 99.8 | 0.2 | ||
| IN | 11 | 2 | 868 | 43.7 | 56.3 | 0.4 | 99.6 | ||
| IA | 6 | 1 | 597 | 48.4 | 51.6 | 30.4 | 69.6 | ||
| KS | 6 | 1 | 538 | 43.5 | 56.5 | 1.9 | 98.1 | ||
| KY | 8 | 2 | 1267 | 38.4 | 61.6 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| LA | 8 | 4* | 2145 | 42.1 | 57.9 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| ME | 2 | 2 | 1300 | 52.5 | 47.5 | 90.2 | 9.8 | ||
| ME1 | 1 | 2 | 681 | 55.4 | 44.6 | 97.7 | 2.3 | ||
| ME2 | 1 | 2 | 626 | 49.5 | 50.5 | 43.9 | 56.1 | ||
| MD | 10 | 2* | 1062 | 70.0 | 30.0 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| MA | 11 | 2 | 750 | 69.2 | 30.8 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| MI | 16 | 7 | 5249 | 52.8 | 47.2 | 99.9 | 0.1 | ||
| MN | 10 | 2* | 1111 | 55.3 | 44.7 | 99.4 | 0.6 | ||
| MS | 6 | 1* | 987 | 42.9 | 57.1 | 0.1 | 99.9 | ||
| MO | 10 | 6 | 5044 | 43.3 | 56.7 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| MT | 3 | 2* | 1345 | 46.1 | 53.9 | 2.1 | 97.9 | ||
| NE | 2 | 1* | 594 | 34.5 | 65.5 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| NE1 | 1 | 1* | 191 | 35.6 | 64.4 | 0.1 | 99.9 | ||
| NE2 | 1 | 1* | 207 | 44.9 | 55.1 | 14.9 | 85.1 | ||
| NE3 | 1 | 1* | 199 | 23.6 | 76.4 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| NV | 6 | 4 | 2661 | 48.5 | 51.5 | 13.6 | 86.4 | ||
| NH | 4 | 8 | 4351 | 50.0 | 50.0 | 48.9 | 51.1 | ||
| NJ | 14 | 1 | 617 | 56.1 | 43.9 | 98.3 | 1.7 | ||
| NM | 5 | 1 | 981 | 51.7 | 48.3 | 76.9 | 23.1 | ||
| NY | 29 | 1* | 513 | 64.3 | 35.7 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| NC | 15 | 8 | 6800 | 50.1 | 49.9 | 53.7 | 46.3 | ||
| ND | 3 | 1* | 300 | 42.7 | 57.3 | 3.5 | 96.5 | ||
| OH | 18 | 4 | 3378 | 47.9 | 52.1 | 4.5 | 95.5 | ||
| OK | 7 | 1* | 477 | 33.3 | 66.7 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| OR | 7 | 1 | 378 | 54.8 | 45.2 | 90.6 | 9.4 | ||
| PA | 20 | 10 | 10624 | 51.8 | 48.2 | 99.5 | 0.5 | ||
| RI | 4 | 1* | 504 | 61.9 | 38.1 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| SC | 9 | 2* | 1509 | 42.9 | 57.1 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| SD | 3 | 1 | 504 | 41.7 | 58.3 | 0.4 | 99.6 | ||
| TN | 11 | 2* | 1185 | 43.0 | 57.0 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| TX | 38 | 3 | 2489 | 43.7 | 56.3 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| UT | 6 | 3 | 974 | 39.2 | 60.8 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| VT | 3 | 1* | 437 | 69.1 | 30.9 | 100.0 | 0.0 | ||
| VA | 13 | 6 | 4497 | 52.3 | 47.7 | 98.6 | 1.4 | ||
| WA | 12 | 1* | 397 | 60.7 | 39.3 | 99.6 | 0.4 | ||
| WV | 5 | 1* | 440 | 31.8 | 68.2 | 0.0 | 100.0 | ||
| WI | 10 | 4 | 3533 | 53.0 | 47.0 | 99.3 | 0.7 | ||
| WY | 3 | 1* | 293 | 25.9 | 74.1 | 0.0 | 100.0 |
* 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.
Follow me on Twitter (@hominidviews) for poll updates and other political stuff.
Darryl, can you comment on Alaska – pollster reliability and poll strength – and if Alaska goes red, how might that change the numbers? Was this pollster involved in the Murkowski write-in/Joe Miller general election race and what was the accuracy then?
Also, is this your last or will there be one on M or Tu?
Thank you in advance for your reply.
@1 Still clinging to hope?
Sloppy @ 1,
I corresponded a bit with pollster about methods, and the methods are legit for inclusion in my analysis (i.e. not an online poll and not commissioned by a party or candidate). I have no idea if the pollster polled the Murkowski/Miller race. You could check the RCP archive for that. I don’t use pollster reliability as a criterion (for good reason), but this is the first poll I can recall seeing from this pollster, so it is difficult to tell.
Affect numbers: If a new AK poll had come out today that was large and broke strongly for Trump, it would shift the mean by a maximum of 2.2 EVs toward Trump (found as 0.727*3 EVs)
There will definitely be more analyses. If enough polls come out, I’ll do one every day including Tuesday morning.
I’ll also do a couple of Senate analyses. Just ran out of time today.
Here’s hoping for some new AK polls. My aim is for the best possible analysis, which means more data.
Yeah, it’s at Hotair, but check out Ralston’s piece on NV Dem turnout in Clark County.
Wow.