Sam Spade Swing State Analysis - 9/26 (updated 10/21)

[Sam Spade]

I figure I need to post one of these threads.  This will help explain why the campaigns are spending, or are not spending where there are.  Additionally, some states follow the national trend, others are more stable, and yet others move more erratically.

Basically, the race, as far as I can see it, is Obama +3.  For comparison of what I see into what an even map should look like, consult my 49-49-2 Tied Election thread.

Traditional Red Swing States (i.e. where both candidates are advertising)

Colorado
Continues to swing around with the national mean, as far as I can tell.  Don't believe the crappy outlier polls.  There are still a reasonable number of undecideds here who appear to be flexible.  As such, the campaigns are advertising there heavily and more heavily and will continue to.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +3

Florida
In comparison with Ohio, my gut tells me that there's more swing in Florida right than Ohio.  Since in an even election, I suspect both Florida and Ohio will have a slight Republican bias, this is what has led the Obama campaign to push Florida more heavily than Ohio in its mind and in its advertising.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  McCain +1 (agreeing w/Rasmussen again - ugh)

Iowa
If the election gets closer, Iowa will tighten a lot more.  If it stays like this, Iowa will stay like this (i.e. the large movement vis-a-vis 2004), but swing slightly Republican in the end.  Still, if Obama continues to be up 3 points or so in the next couple of weeks, McCain will move his stuff out of here.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +9

Missouri
Missouri is moving with the national mean as far as I can tell, yet Obama has decreased advertising in the state.  Why?  Because he already started in a bad place to begin with - my national mean (49-49-2) figure would place it at M+6, and even if his place were to get better in the polls, that last 1% or 2% is going to be difficult given the complexion of the state.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  McCain +3

New Mexico
The wackiest state in the union (though Wisconsin likes to vie for that title).  This is one state where I prefer to go on my own and not trust the polling.  With the exceptions of 1980 and 1968 (where third-party candidates screwed up everything), the state has tracked between +5 GOP and +5 DEM of the national mean in every election held in the last half-century.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +5

Nevada
Obama is investing heavily here because there are a good bit of solid undecideds in the state and they weren't swayed to McCain post-RNC.  I still don't see them swaying yet at all.  Nevada is a difficult to call state for a whole host of reasons, but I'll give it to Obama right now.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +1

Ohio
As mentioned above with Florida, Ohio just simply is not moving much in Obama's direction past a certain point even with the national movement.  The undecideds just simply refuse to go for him.  It's quite possible that something is going on here which fits into the MSM articles.  As such, even with it O+3, I would choose to give the state to McCain.  It would also explain why Obama is not raising his advertising money here, in choosing between Ohio and Florida, he sees more open undecideds in Florida.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  McCain +1

Virginia
Virginia polling has been strange the past few weeks, jumping all over the place (mainly due to bad sampling).  Historically, Republicans tend to underpoll slightly in Virginia a bit in federal elections and I see Obama is going there to campaign on Saturday.  Considering my statement earlier that I suspect Virginia and Ohio will run about the same in this election, I'm going to give it to McCain for now.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Even

New Red Swing States (i.e. where Obama or both candidates are advertising)
Indiana
The RNC put up $100,000 in ads in the state today.  Typically, (my own personal rule) is that when another candidate is polling within 5 points consistently, you put money into that state.  Given the advertising being put there by Obama right now uncontested, he may be overpolling a tad.  So...

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  McCain +5

Montana
Obama should be withdrawing here soon, imho.  I may have the state slightly undervalued in my analysis right now, as I doubt it's going to move that much vis-a-vis national mean.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  McCain +10

North Carolina
Ah, NC.  Both campaigns are advertising fairly heavily right now (but not that heavily - Michigan's still getting more per pound).  A couple of points - blacks tend to overpoll in NC and if things get really bad there, you'll see at least one McCain race ploy.  There is also more potential swingability towards McCain in NC than in almost any other contested state for a few reasons.  In other words, if the election gets closer, NC could move more rapidly than other states.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  McCain +4

Traditional Blue Swing States (i.e. where both candidates are advertising)
Michigan
Michigan is moving with the national mean, for the most part.  It's the reason why McCain/Obama were advertising and campaiging heavily here post-RNC and why everything's died down the past week or two.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +5

Minnesota
Minnesota doesn't seem to be moving as much towards Obama given the latest numbers as it should, and I'm at a lost to explain why.  However, in 2004, MN appeared almost even and the DFL turnout machine performed exceptionally well.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +6

New Hampshire
New Hampshire has acted weird this whole election.  First it acted heavily Obama, then it swung back to narrowly Obama and now it's swung to being a tie, although everything else is moving against McCain.  The national environment beckons me to give it to Obama, however.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +2

Pennsylvania
Much like Ohio, there are just some entrenched undecideds that are not interested in moving to Obama yet, or at all.  That explains the added spending by Obama and campaigning by both sides.  Problem is for McCain is that the closer he gets to even nationally, the less PA will move.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +3

Wisconsin
Wisconsin always likes to stay close to the 50-50 race even if it means deviating from the national mean.  It acts weird.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +5
Key Point:  Obama +3 may be just at the point of close electoral victory to large electoral landslide because the close calls in Florida/Ohio/Virginia.

[J. J.]

When was Montana a Swing State.  That's my only disagreement with the current situation.

[Alcon]

When was Montana a Swing State.  That's my only disagreement with the current situation.

There was a point (July) where we had two Rasmussen polls that showed Obama +5 and a tie.  I had it on my swing state list for about a week and a half.

[Torie]

Good job Sam. The partisan biases of the state vis a vis the nation have not changed much at all over time it seems, except that Colorado has moved to the Dems - which is very potentially a fatal move for McCain, putting him at risk he will win the popular vote but lose the EV.

[Rococo4]

If the election stays close, McCain has to find a way to hold Colorado.  Pretty clear.

[WalterMitty]

i pretty much agree with those projections.

new mexico and iowa seem a bit high.

why doesnt obama fight harder for missouri?

[Stranger in a strange land]

i pretty much agree with those projections.

new mexico and iowa seem a bit high.

why doesnt obama fight harder for missouri?

the demographics there aren't great for him, IMHO. The southern part of the state is an extension of the south - and one with few blacks - and the rural and exurban parts of the state have a lot of white evangelicals. I'm guessing he'll only win it in a landslide.

[Sam Spade]

new mexico and iowa seem a bit high.

Might be a point high, I agree.

[Ban my account ffs!]

The only one I am a little skeptical of is Iowa.  I think Obama will do really well there, but I just don't think he can pull off a 9 point win.  Otherwise it's all good analysis.

[J. J.]

I think it's right for today; I'm more interested in 2-3 weeks.

[Sam Spade]

Good job Sam. The partisan biases of the state vis a vis the nation have not changed much at all over time it seems, except that Colorado has moved to the Dems - which is very potentially a fatal move for McCain, putting him at risk he will win the popular vote but lose the EV.

The possibility of a PV-EV tie, considering the way NH has been acting, is a more distinct scenario than I thought it was a few weeks ago.

[Torie]

Good job Sam. The partisan biases of the state vis a vis the nation have not changed much at all over time it seems, except that Colorado has moved to the Dems - which is very potentially a fatal move for McCain, putting him at risk he will win the popular vote but lose the EV.

The possibility of a PV-EV tie, considering the way NH has been acting, is a more distinct scenario than I thought it was a few weeks ago.

Ties go to Obama.

[Sam Spade]

Good job Sam. The partisan biases of the state vis a vis the nation have not changed much at all over time it seems, except that Colorado has moved to the Dems - which is very potentially a fatal move for McCain, putting him at risk he will win the popular vote but lose the EV.

The possibility of a PV-EV tie, considering the way NH has been acting, is a more distinct scenario than I thought it was a few weeks ago.

Ties go to Obama.

That is actually a highly complicated scenario, but you're probably right.  There might be concessions.

[Torie]

Or a faithless elector. I don't believe that SD congresswoman will vote for McCain - no way.

[angus]

Iowa
If the election gets closer, Iowa will tighten a lot more.  If it stays like this, Iowa will stay like this (i.e. the large movement vis-a-vis 2004), but swing slightly Republican in the end.  Still, if Obama continues to be up 3 points or so in the next couple of weeks, McCain will move his stuff out of here.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +9

I have been watching my local PBS station, assuming it will go to the debate soon, or hoping it will, so I don't have to watch it on one of the commercial networks, and the 7:30 to 8 slot was an interview with the Iowa Secretary of State, Michael Mauro.  He was asked about the swing.  Apparently in 2004, there were about 7000 more registered Republicans in Iowa than Democrats.  In 2008, there are about 102000 more registered Democrats than Republicans.  Why is that?  Mauro says it's all Obama.  Said he's been watching it--which is probably reasonable since he's the sos--and that it started to spike in the lead-up to the primary, a primary that Obama won handily.  Remember, this state has a closed caucus system, and one has to be a registered Democrat to vote for Obama in the caucus. 

I thought it was an interesting comment.  Just passing it on.

Oh, good, they're going to Jim Lehrer now for the debate.  Good Evening.

[angus]

Iowa
If the election gets closer, Iowa will tighten a lot more.  If it stays like this, Iowa will stay like this (i.e. the large movement vis-a-vis 2004), but swing slightly Republican in the end.  Still, if Obama continues to be up 3 points or so in the next couple of weeks, McCain will move his stuff out of here.

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  Obama +9

I have been watching my local PBS station, assuming it will go to the debate soon, or hoping it will, so I don't have to watch it on one of the commercial networks, and the 7:30 to 8 slot was an interview with the Iowa Secretary of State, Michael Mauro.  He was asked about the swing.  Apparently in 2004, there were about 7000 more registered Republicans in Iowa than Democrats.  In 2008, there are about 102000 more registered Democrats than Republicans.  Why is that?  Mauro says it's all Obama.  Said he's been watching it--which is probably reasonable since he's the sos--and that it started to spike in the lead-up to the primary, a primary that Obama won handily.  Remember, this state has a closed caucus system, and one has to be a registered Democrat to vote for Obama in the caucus. 

I thought it was an interesting comment.  Just passing it on.

Oh, good, they're going to Jim Lehrer now for the debate.  Good Evening.

I don't normally like to interrupt my debate viewing, but I couldn't resist. 

McCain just lost Iowa.  Not that I thought he was going to win anyway, and not that I don't agree with him about the futility and wastefulness of the corn ethanol subsidies, but about ten seconds ago he lost any outside shot at Iowa, for good.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Indiana
The RNC put up $100,000 in ads in the state today.  Typically, (my own personal rule) is that when another candidate is polling within 5 points consistently, you put money into that state.  Given the advertising being put there by Obama right now uncontested, he may be overpolling a tad.  So...

Sam Spade 9/26 Call:  McCain +5

Make that McCain +2.  McCain attacked ethanol subsidies in the debate, hard.  I agree with him 100% on this issue, but that won't stop the continuing farmer revolt that is giving Obama a fighting chance here.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I don't normally like to interrupt my debate viewing, but I couldn't resist. 

McCain just lost Iowa.  Not that I thought he was going to win anyway, and not that I don't agree with him about the futility and wastefulness of the corn ethanol subsidies, but about ten seconds ago he lost any outside shot at Iowa, for good.

I posted my reply without reading yours.  Yeah, McCain is boned in Iowa, and will now have to fight for Bible-Belt Indiana.  Unreal.

[Brittain33]

Historically, there has been no case of a candidate winning the presidential election while losing all three top bellwethers: Missouri, Nevada, and Ohio. Nev. was the last of the three to join the union, and get the vote, in 1864.

Give Gore 600 more votes in Florida, and what happens then?

[Lunar]

Historically, there has been no case of a candidate winning the presidential election while losing all three top bellwethers: Missouri, Nevada, and Ohio. Nev. was the last of the three to join the union, and get the vote, in 1864.

While Republicans and Democrats have squred off since 1856, the late-1800s saw some winners prevail in only one of the three states (GOP William McKinley won Ohio in 1896 and 1900; no Republican president has ever won election without the Buckeye State). Since 1908, the last 25 elections saw Mo. back the loser in 1956, Nev. going for the 1908 and 1976 runners-up, and Ohio did not picking the winners of 1944 and 1960. Agreeing as a trio in 20 of the last 25 elections—for 80 percent—Mo. has been right 96 percent, and Nev. and Ohio both 92 percent.

Mo., Nev., and Ohio are each included in the states that I predict in this year's election—one that I believe will show Sen. Barack Obama (D-Illinois) prevailing in the Electoral College.

Since Sam credits Obama with Nevada, I just wanted to present this for anyone else finding it worth consideration.

These arguments are cute, but they are born out of coincidence, not logic.

You can find millions of those little things.  Remember Bush proving the "No president has won if his approval rating is below..." comments wrong?  Or one of my favorites "No incumbent President has won when Redskins take home loss in game preceeding election." 

If you just take, say, ~27 elections going back to 1900 or so, think about how many frickin' variables there are!  There are literally an infinite amount of variables.  You can find "No president with an E in his last name has won without Delaware" sorts of things all the time.  It's not surprising at all that three states that have stayed relatively close to the center have been a component of every victory,  but it's meaningless in terms of predictive capability.

[JSojourner]

Sam,

This is excellent.  And another reason you are one of my favorite posters here!  Well done!

[Adlai Stevenson]

As I see it now:

LEANS MCCAIN -
Nevada: McCain + 2%
Florida: McCain + 2%
Ohio: McCain + 2%
Missouri: McCain + 3%
North Carolina: McCain + 3%


LEANS OBAMA -
Virginia: Obama + 3%
Colorado: Obama + 3%
New Hampshire: Obama + 4%
Pennsylvania: Obama + 5%
New Mexico: Obama + 5%
Iowa: Obama + 7%

[The Hack Hater]

Historically, there has been no case of a candidate winning the presidential election while losing all three top bellwethers: Missouri, Nevada, and Ohio. Nev. was the last of the three to join the union, and get the vote, in 1864.

While Republicans and Democrats have squred off since 1856, the late-1800s saw some winners prevail in only one of the three states (GOP William McKinley won Ohio in 1896 and 1900; no Republican president has ever won election without the Buckeye State). Since 1908, the last 25 elections saw Mo. back the loser in 1956, Nev. going for the 1908 and 1976 runners-up, and Ohio did not picking the winners of 1944 and 1960. Agreeing as a trio in 20 of the last 25 elections—for 80 percent—Mo. has been right 96 percent, and Nev. and Ohio both 92 percent.

Mo., Nev., and Ohio are each included in the states that I predict in this year's election—one that I believe will show Sen. Barack Obama (D-Illinois) prevailing in the Electoral College.

Since Sam credits Obama with Nevada, I just wanted to present this for anyone else finding it worth consideration.

While Nevada's demographics may be changing once again, they are not, nor will they ever be, in my mind a "bellweather." Their population will remain fairly low for one thing, even with the rapid growth of Las Vegas.

 Ohio's a better choice, but it was on the losing Republican side in '48. Missouri is more of a true bellweather since it's always had an effective mix of demographics that can predict the election. There's this one book I read that said Missouri was almost like two different states when it camt to it's regional makeup. But here, it appears the blue-collar moderate conservative vote has more influence there than in more liberarian Colorado, methinks. Exactly why it's that way when it went for Obama in the primary is beyond me, but that's how it goes. sometimes.

[angus]

I don't normally like to interrupt my debate viewing, but I couldn't resist. 

McCain just lost Iowa.  Not that I thought he was going to win anyway, and not that I don't agree with him about the futility and wastefulness of the corn ethanol subsidies, but about ten seconds ago he lost any outside shot at Iowa, for good.

I posted my reply without reading yours.  Yeah, McCain is boned in Iowa, and will now have to fight for Bible-Belt Indiana.  Unreal.

Somehow I remember you being prime Wisconsin angus beef.  Did you move?

[Sam Spade]

I will update this this evening, adding some states and removing others.