Skip to main content

The purpose of this post is to track and report the combined averages and trends of several leading and credible Electoral Map predictions. National polls are useless in projecting the voting outcome in November. The only thing that determines who will be our next President is the outcomes state by state, which directs outcome in the Electoral College (which is, in my opinion, incredibly outdated, un-democratic, and needs to be replaced with a simple national popular vote).

Data for the combined map will come from Huffington Post, Real Clear Politics, Washington Post, CNN, and the New York Times.

I’ll try to make this a weekly post.

Data below the fold:

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
As
      of July 21, 2012
Solid Leans Leans Solid
270
      Need to Win
Obama Obama Toss Up Romney Romney
Huffington Post 221 35 91 10 181
Real Clear Politics 142 79 136 105 76
Washington Post 196 41 95 36 170
CNN 196 51 85 47 159
New York Times 185 32 115 48 158
Average 188 48 104 49 149
Percent
of Toss Up
Has Needs Needed
Obama 236 34 32.95%
Romney 198 72 68.97%
Of course, averages of Electoral Vote counts are in and of themselves meaningless - as they come in blocks by state. But over time I think there will be trends in the averages that will be informative.

Thanks,

Originally posted to mondaymedia on Sat Jul 21, 2012 at 08:45 PM PDT.

Also republished by Election Projections And Analysis.

Poll

Is this helpful?

55%16 votes
31%9 votes
13%4 votes

| 29 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (6+ / 0-)

    Faith is not believing something which our intelligence denies. Faith is the resolve to place the highest meaning on the facts which we observe.

    by mondaymedia on Sat Jul 21, 2012 at 08:45:45 PM PDT

  •  would a simple national vote really be (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Porterhouse, camlbacker

    better, or address the problems arising out of an EC system without creating new ones that are equally bad?

    if a Presidential candidate can run up the popular vote score in California and New York (or Texas and several deep southern states) and, by and large, ignore large swaths of the country, is that really that much better than the system that, by and large, discounts the states with an extreme partisan lean one way or the other and forces candidates to compete in competitive ground, rather than playing solely to their bases?

    No system is perfect, but I think that the Electoral College, much like the Senate, is a bit of an equalizer when it comes to realizing that states, as part of the union, do have unique characters and interests, at times, and should be represented in our politics.

    Your state gets electoral votes based on population, but if your Congressional delegation is going to tend to swing largely in one direction or the other, Presidential candidates aren't going to be catering to your interests in the election.  It is a somewhat interesting check and balance that isn't often talked about.

    On the other hand, of course, you would suddenly see candidates trying to win votes on the margins in places they might not have otherwise campaigned.  The President would have to keep Romney's margins down in the deep south, and Romney would have to spend some time in Orange County and upstate New York to avoid getting blown out.

    Nonetheless, I think that eliminating the Electoral College could have the unintended consequence of driving our Presidential candidates FURTHER from seeking a national consensus, ironically making the results of our elections less representative.

    Having seen many statewide elections close up, I don't know that I want to see a situation like that writ nationwide- Dem strongholds get GOTV attention and Dem ad dollars, GOP strongholds get mailers and GOP ad dollars, and the rest of the state is left to fall as it may with far less attention given to their votes or their interests.

    In the end, I think our democracy is better served to have Mitt Romney and Barack Obama competing for votes in Virginia and Ohio than it is for them to be running up the margins in California and Texas.  I think that a direct national popular vote ignores one of the strengths of our federalist system, and relegates the states' differing characters and interests to a backburner in national politics.

    •  Popular Vote (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      camlbacker

      After talking and thinking some more about a National Popular Vote, I think it would be best, if the winner had to get at least 50%.

      So have two rounds of voting (if needed). The main election and a runoff between the top two.

      At least that way, a true majority of those who vote will have elected the president.

      That system might also encourage better voter participation.

      Faith is not believing something which our intelligence denies. Faith is the resolve to place the highest meaning on the facts which we observe.

      by mondaymedia on Sat Jul 21, 2012 at 09:20:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What would it do to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      camlbacker

      voter fraud? Many States are locks for each party and it matters not if the candidate gets 71% or 74% of the vote. So cheating only matters in states expected to be close.

      But with one national number deciding everything, will there be an incentive to goose the numbers everywhere, and especially in those states where one party holds all the levers of power?

    •  the current system relegates most states (0+ / 0-)

      to the backburner every year, if they're not large swing states. the whole country comes down to wooing small slices of the electorate in a handful of states, while ignoring the millions living in safe states. why do ohioans and floridians matter more than the rest of us?

      •  but would a national popular vote change (0+ / 0-)

        that dynamic?  or merely shift who is being ignored and who gets the attention?

        Wyoming and Montana are never going to get a lot of attention.  But in a national popular vote, New York, California, Texas, and several states in the deep south get a lot more attention than they do now, and other states would get drastically less.  States where the vote is expected to be close would get far less attention- who cares if you end up winning or losing in a 51-49 scenario if you can run up huge margins elsewhere?

      •  Electoral College Skews... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Andrew F Cockburn

        to give more power to smaller (and mostly red) states. Because the number of electoral votes each state gets is based on the total number of House members plus the number of Senate members, the total number of votes, and how much weight they have per citizen of each state, is skewed unfairly to smaller states.

        For instance, California has a population over 37 million and has 55 Electoral Votes.

        North Dakota has a population of 684,000 and has 3 Electoral Votes.

        We here in California only get one Electoral Vote per 684,000 people, while North Dakota gets one Electoral Vote per 227,000 people. That's not democratic, and tends to make small, isolated, and mostly conservative states more powerful than they should be.

        The rights of smaller states are protected by the Senate allocation, but I want my personal vote to count as much as every other citizen in the country.

        Faith is not believing something which our intelligence denies. Faith is the resolve to place the highest meaning on the facts which we observe.

        by mondaymedia on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 09:48:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I'm running an... (5+ / 0-)

    ...election projection series daily myself right now.

    I don't think we're necessarily covering the same ground, though.

    We've chosen different projectors, and have different focuses. I'm very focused on having my projectors call every state. Personally, I don't see the point in skipping all the easy calls, and leaving everything else as "too close to call."

    So I've chosen a stable of projectors that call every state almost all the time. I want stuff to be either red or blue. And I don't mess around with "leaning," either. On election day, it will be one of two outcomes, so my projection is binary.

    Plus, the presentation of your data is tabular, while mine is graphic.

    At the very least, I think we probably ought to be using the same tags.

    We could also start an "electoral projections" group.

    Cartography is 27% art. - Steve Demers

    by Jeffrey L Albertson on Sat Jul 21, 2012 at 09:33:42 PM PDT

  •  the point of all this, btw... (0+ / 0-)

    ...is that now people are able to "follow" the group, and be alerted to the posts queued to it.

    Cartography is 27% art. - Steve Demers

    by Jeffrey L Albertson on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 01:24:04 PM PDT

  •  one more thing! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mondaymedia, Supavash

    If you're interested, you can use the <pre> tag to format your table. Everything between the <pre> tags is rendered with the whitespace preserved.

    I think you could cut-and-paste the following and come out with the table you included in your diary, but with a lot less HTML markup:


    <pre>
    July 21, 2012  
                          Solid  Leans  Tossup  Leans   Solid
                          Obama  Obama          Romney  Romney
    Huffington Post        221     35     91      10     181
    Real Clear Politics    142     79    136     105      76
    Washington Post        196     41     95      36     170
    CNN                    196     51     85      47     159
    New York Times         185     32    115      48     158
    Average                188     48    104      49     149
                         Percent
                        of Tossup
            Has  Needs   Needed  
    Obama   236   34     32.95%  
    Romney  198   72     68.97%
    </pre>

    Doing it as an html table definitely gives you more flexibility, though.

    Cartography is 27% art. - Steve Demers

    by Jeffrey L Albertson on Sun Jul 22, 2012 at 06:43:27 PM PDT

    •  Thanks... (0+ / 0-)

      I struggled with how to keep the table format. This is definitely more practical than HTML.

      Faith is not believing something which our intelligence denies. Faith is the resolve to place the highest meaning on the facts which we observe.

      by mondaymedia on Mon Jul 23, 2012 at 12:56:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site