diff --git a/.!1310!.DS_Store b/.!1310!.DS_Store new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e69de29 diff --git a/.!1481!.DS_Store b/.!1481!.DS_Store new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e69de29 diff --git a/.!1596!.DS_Store b/.!1596!.DS_Store new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e69de29 diff --git a/12th.md b/12th.md index 6e33075..ea0f2da 100644 --- a/12th.md +++ b/12th.md @@ -5,17 +5,17 @@ tags = ["tag1", "tag2"] ## Tie scenario -If **President Biden wins only Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin** the outcome will be a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College. This assumes that Biden does not win Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona or Nevada, each of which Trump wins. Otherwise, every remaining state is won by the candidate who won it in 2020. +If **Vice President Harris wins only Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin** the outcome will be a 269-269 tie in the Electoral College. This assumes that Harris does not win Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona or Nevada, each of which Trump wins. Otherwise, every remaining state is won by the candidate who won it in 2020. ## Without the Nebraska Second -The models assume that except for the seven swing states, each candidate will win the states and election districts won in 2020. For Biden, the total includes a Nebraska +The models assume that except for the seven swing states, each candidate will win the states and election districts won in 2020. For Harris, the total includes a Nebraska district that centers on Omaha. Nebraska is one of two states that have this arrangement. The other is Maine. An attempt was made earlier this year to change Nebraska to the winner-take-all system used by other states. It was unsuccessful, and it is not clear if another attempt will be made. It could be added to a special session anticipated for July to deal with property tax relief, but as of mid-June there has been a scarcity of news raising this. There also appears to be some internecine conflict going on between the Congressional delegation and the MAGA-aligned party apparatus. Should winner take all be implemented or if the Nebraska Second this time votes for Trump, possible outcomes differ. -A tie outcome that was produced by Biden winning only Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, now has three different possible scenarios +A tie outcome that was produced by Harris winning only Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, now has three different possible scenarios * Wisconsin, Georgia and Pennsylvania -* Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and North Carolina (through May, NC is not moving in Biden's direction) +* Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and North Carolina (through May, NC is not moving in Harris's direction) * Arizona, Michigan and Pennsylvania Those three scenarios, which were formally wins, are replaced as the smallest possible victories by @@ -36,9 +36,9 @@ A majority of 50 state delegations is 26, which is currently what the Republican ## Following the presidential and congressional elections -If the Republican Party retains control of 26 states, it is in a position to choose the President. +If the Republican Party retains control of 26 states, it is in a position to choose the Vice President. -If the Republican Party loses control of one state, no party has sole power to choose the President. +If the Republican Party loses control of one state, no party has sole power to choose the Vice President. In that case, the provisions of the [Presidential Succession Act](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/19) come into operation. diff --git a/2020model.md b/2020model.md index 0a254ec..82de781 100644 --- a/2020model.md +++ b/2020model.md @@ -6,18 +6,18 @@ title = "Election of 2020" The model used to assess monthly polls begins with the assumption that the 2024 election will resemble the 2020 election in that -* Biden will win the same states as in 2020, except for seven swing states +* Harris will win the same states as Biden won in 2020, except for seven swing states * Trump will win the same states as in 2020, except for North Carolina -Models of the 2020 election for each of the seven swing states considers the number of votes won by Biden as a starting point. The results of each model will feed-forward as partial inputs to monthly poll models. In turn, the results of those will be input for subsequent months. +Models of the 2020 election for each of the seven swing states considers the number of votes won by Harris as a starting point. The results of each model will feed-forward as partial inputs to monthly poll models. In turn, the results of those will be input for subsequent months. ~~~ - - + + @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ Models of the 2020 election for each of the seven swing states considers the num ## Explanation - **Median**: Half of the random samples have probabilities greater than and half less than the median. -- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Biden Proportion in the table above. +- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Harris Proportion in the table above. - **Mode**: The probability that occurs most often. - **q025**: The value below which 2.5% of the probabilities occur. - **q975**: The value below which 97.5% of the probabilities occur. @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ The density plots show the number of observations on the $y$-axis and the probab ## Rationale -Although there will be a different electorate, for the reasons explained [here](/typology), most voters in 2024 are highly likely to have voted in 2020. A high degere of political polarization makes it likely that most of those voters will vote the same way. However, it is unrealistic to expect that they will vote exactly the same way. An approach to adjusting for this is to introduce mathematical uncertainty into the results of the 2020 election, explained in more detail [here](/prior). +Although there will be a different candidate and a different electorate, for the reasons explained [here](/typology), most voters in 2024 are highly likely to have voted in 2020. A high degere of political polarization makes it likely that most of those voters will vote the same way. However, it is unrealistic to expect that they will vote exactly the same way. An approach to adjusting for this is to introduce mathematical uncertainty into the results of the 2020 election, explained in more detail [here](/prior). ## Results diff --git a/_assets/docs/pa_long.md b/_assets/docs/pa_long.md index 5d51582..4c01dd1 100644 --- a/_assets/docs/pa_long.md +++ b/_assets/docs/pa_long.md @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ -The poll does not specify whether the panel (N = 1305) was divided into subgroups for the presidential preference questions. Assuming that it was sub-grouped, half of the panel (N = 653) were asked to choose among “Joe Biden, the Democrat,” “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” or “No opinion.” That is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below (N = 652), the choices were “Joe Biden, the Democrat”, “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., an independent”, “Cornel West, an independent”,” Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” “No opinion.” +The poll does not specify whether the panel (N = 1305) was divided into subgroups for the presidential preference questions. Assuming that it was sub-grouped, half of the panel (N = 653) were asked to choose among “Joe Harris, the Democrat,” “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” or “No opinion.” That is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below (N = 652), the choices were “Joe Harris, the Democrat”, “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., an independent”, “Cornel West, an independent”,” Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” “No opinion.” ~~~ @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ The poll does not specify whether the panel (N = 1305) was divided into subgroup ~~~ -The panel (N = 807) were asked first to choose among “Democrat Joe Biden,” “Republican Donald Trump,” “Would not vote,” or “Don’t know/No opinion” That is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below, they were asked to choose among “Democrat Joe Biden”, “Republican Donald Trump”, “Independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr.”, “Independent Cornel West”, “Green Party candidate Jill Stein”, “Someone else, please specify”,”Would not vote”, or “Don’t know/No opinion” +The panel (N = 807) were asked first to choose among “Democrat Joe Harris,” “Republican Donald Trump,” “Would not vote,” or “Don’t know/No opinion” That is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below, they were asked to choose among “Democrat Joe Harris”, “Republican Donald Trump”, “Independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr.”, “Independent Cornel West”, “Green Party candidate Jill Stein”, “Someone else, please specify”,”Would not vote”, or “Don’t know/No opinion” ~~~ @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ The panel (N = 807) were asked first to choose among “Democrat Joe Biden,” ~~~ -Half of the panel (N = 520) were asked to choose among “Joe Biden, the Democrat,” “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” or “No opinion.” hat is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below, the choices were “Joe Biden, the Democrat”, “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., an independent”, “Cornel West, an independent”,” Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” “No opinion” +Half of the panel (N = 520) were asked to choose among “Joe Harris, the Democrat,” “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” or “No opinion.” hat is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below, the choices were “Joe Harris, the Democrat”, “Donald Trump, the Republican,” “Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., an independent”, “Cornel West, an independent”,” Other,” “Do not plan to vote,” “No opinion” ~~~ @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ Two-way poll with N = 1000. ~~~ -Half of the panel (N = 431) were asked to choose among “Biden”, “Trump”, “Someone else” or “Do not know.” That is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below, there were additional choices of “Robert Kennedy Jr.” and “Jill Stein” for the other half of the panel (N = 430). +Half of the panel (N = 431) were asked to choose among “Harris”, “Trump”, “Someone else” or “Do not know.” That is reflected in the two-way plot above. In the plot below, there were additional choices of “Robert Kennedy Jr.” and “Jill Stein” for the other half of the panel (N = 430). ~~~ @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ This was an N = 1000 two-way poll. ~~~ -The panel (N = 600) were given three presidential preference sets of choices: 1) "Republican Donald Trump," or "Democrat Joe Biden," shown above as 2-way, 2) "Republican Donald Trump,", "Democrat Joe Biden," "Independent Robert F. Kennedy, Jr," "Independent Cornel West," "Libertarian Lars Mapstead," "Green Party Candidate Jill Stein," or "Undecided" and 3) "Republican Donald Trump," or "Democrat Joe Biden," "Libertarian Lars Mapstead," "Green Party Candidate Jill Stein," or "Undecided" shown below as 3-way long and 3-way short. +The panel (N = 600) were given three presidential preference sets of choices: 1) "Republican Donald Trump," or "Democrat Joe Harris," shown above as 2-way, 2) "Republican Donald Trump,", "Democrat Joe Harris," "Independent Robert F. Kennedy, Jr," "Independent Cornel West," "Libertarian Lars Mapstead," "Green Party Candidate Jill Stein," or "Undecided" and 3) "Republican Donald Trump," or "Democrat Joe Harris," "Libertarian Lars Mapstead," "Green Party Candidate Jill Stein," or "Undecided" shown below as 3-way long and 3-way short. ~~~ diff --git a/_assets/objs/outcome.csv b/_assets/objs/outcome.csv index 53e75ce..96b538a 100644 --- a/_assets/objs/outcome.csv +++ b/_assets/objs/outcome.csv @@ -56,73 +56,73 @@ PA and NC,35,260,278,Trump "NV, WI, AZ and NC",43,268,270,Trump "AZ, GA and NC",43,268,270,Trump "WI, MI and PA",44,269,269,Tie -"WI, GA and PA",45,270,268,Biden -"WI, PA and NC",45,270,268,Biden -"AZ, MI and PA",45,270,268,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ and PA",46,271,267,Biden -"AZ, GA and PA",46,271,267,Biden -"AZ, PA and NC",46,271,267,Biden -"NV, WI, GA and MI",47,272,266,Biden -"NV, WI, MI and NC",47,272,266,Biden -"GA, MI and NC",47,272,266,Biden -"NV, WI, GA and NC",48,273,265,Biden -"NV, AZ, GA and MI",48,273,265,Biden -"NV, AZ, MI and NC",48,273,265,Biden -"NV, AZ, GA and NC",49,274,264,Biden -"NV, WI, MI and PA",50,275,263,Biden -"GA, MI and PA",50,275,263,Biden -"MI, PA and NC",50,275,263,Biden -"NV, WI, GA and PA",51,276,262,Biden -"NV, WI, PA and NC",51,276,262,Biden -"NV, AZ, MI and PA",51,276,262,Biden -"GA, PA and NC",51,276,262,Biden -"NV, AZ, GA and PA",52,277,261,Biden -"NV, AZ, PA and NC",52,277,261,Biden -"WI, AZ, GA and MI",52,277,261,Biden -"WI, AZ, MI and NC",52,277,261,Biden -"NV, GA, MI and NC",53,278,260,Biden -"WI, AZ, GA and NC",53,278,260,Biden -"WI, AZ, MI and PA",55,280,258,Biden -"NV, GA, MI and PA",56,281,257,Biden -"NV, MI, PA and NC",56,281,257,Biden -"WI, AZ, GA and PA",56,281,257,Biden -"WI, AZ, PA and NC",56,281,257,Biden -"NV, GA, PA and NC",57,282,256,Biden -"WI, GA, MI and NC",57,282,256,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI",58,283,255,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC",58,283,255,Biden -"AZ, GA, MI and NC",58,283,255,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC",59,284,254,Biden -"WI, GA, MI and PA",60,285,253,Biden -"WI, MI, PA and NC",60,285,253,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA",61,286,252,Biden -"WI, GA, PA and NC",61,286,252,Biden -"AZ, GA, MI and PA",61,286,252,Biden -"AZ, MI, PA and NC",61,286,252,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA",62,287,251,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC",62,287,251,Biden -"AZ, GA, PA and NC",62,287,251,Biden -"NV, WI, GA, MI and NC",63,288,250,Biden -"NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC",64,289,249,Biden -"NV, WI, GA, MI and PA",66,291,247,Biden -"NV, WI, MI, PA and NC",66,291,247,Biden -"GA, MI, PA and NC",66,291,247,Biden -"NV, WI, GA, PA and NC",67,292,246,Biden -"NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA",67,292,246,Biden -"NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC",67,292,246,Biden -"NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC",68,293,245,Biden -"WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC",68,293,245,Biden -"WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA",71,296,242,Biden -"WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC",71,296,242,Biden -"NV, GA, MI, PA and NC",72,297,241,Biden -"WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC",72,297,241,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC",74,299,239,Biden -"WI, GA, MI, PA and NC",76,301,237,Biden -"AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",77,302,236,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA",77,302,236,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC",77,302,236,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC",78,303,235,Biden -"NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC",82,307,231,Biden -"NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",83,308,230,Biden -"WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",87,312,226,Biden -"NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",93,318,220,Biden +"WI, GA and PA",45,270,268,Harris +"WI, PA and NC",45,270,268,Harris +"AZ, MI and PA",45,270,268,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ and PA",46,271,267,Harris +"AZ, GA and PA",46,271,267,Harris +"AZ, PA and NC",46,271,267,Harris +"NV, WI, GA and MI",47,272,266,Harris +"NV, WI, MI and NC",47,272,266,Harris +"GA, MI and NC",47,272,266,Harris +"NV, WI, GA and NC",48,273,265,Harris +"NV, AZ, GA and MI",48,273,265,Harris +"NV, AZ, MI and NC",48,273,265,Harris +"NV, AZ, GA and NC",49,274,264,Harris +"NV, WI, MI and PA",50,275,263,Harris +"GA, MI and PA",50,275,263,Harris +"MI, PA and NC",50,275,263,Harris +"NV, WI, GA and PA",51,276,262,Harris +"NV, WI, PA and NC",51,276,262,Harris +"NV, AZ, MI and PA",51,276,262,Harris +"GA, PA and NC",51,276,262,Harris +"NV, AZ, GA and PA",52,277,261,Harris +"NV, AZ, PA and NC",52,277,261,Harris +"WI, AZ, GA and MI",52,277,261,Harris +"WI, AZ, MI and NC",52,277,261,Harris +"NV, GA, MI and NC",53,278,260,Harris +"WI, AZ, GA and NC",53,278,260,Harris +"WI, AZ, MI and PA",55,280,258,Harris +"NV, GA, MI and PA",56,281,257,Harris +"NV, MI, PA and NC",56,281,257,Harris +"WI, AZ, GA and PA",56,281,257,Harris +"WI, AZ, PA and NC",56,281,257,Harris +"NV, GA, PA and NC",57,282,256,Harris +"WI, GA, MI and NC",57,282,256,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI",58,283,255,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC",58,283,255,Harris +"AZ, GA, MI and NC",58,283,255,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC",59,284,254,Harris +"WI, GA, MI and PA",60,285,253,Harris +"WI, MI, PA and NC",60,285,253,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA",61,286,252,Harris +"WI, GA, PA and NC",61,286,252,Harris +"AZ, GA, MI and PA",61,286,252,Harris +"AZ, MI, PA and NC",61,286,252,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA",62,287,251,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC",62,287,251,Harris +"AZ, GA, PA and NC",62,287,251,Harris +"NV, WI, GA, MI and NC",63,288,250,Harris +"NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC",64,289,249,Harris +"NV, WI, GA, MI and PA",66,291,247,Harris +"NV, WI, MI, PA and NC",66,291,247,Harris +"GA, MI, PA and NC",66,291,247,Harris +"NV, WI, GA, PA and NC",67,292,246,Harris +"NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA",67,292,246,Harris +"NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC",67,292,246,Harris +"NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC",68,293,245,Harris +"WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC",68,293,245,Harris +"WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA",71,296,242,Harris +"WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC",71,296,242,Harris +"NV, GA, MI, PA and NC",72,297,241,Harris +"WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC",72,297,241,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC",74,299,239,Harris +"WI, GA, MI, PA and NC",76,301,237,Harris +"AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",77,302,236,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA",77,302,236,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC",77,302,236,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC",78,303,235,Harris +"NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC",82,307,231,Harris +"NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",83,308,230,Harris +"WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",87,312,226,Harris +"NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC",93,318,220,Harris diff --git a/_assets/scripts/CreateOutcomes.jl b/_assets/scripts/CreateOutcomes.jl index 5d28e43..e5a388d 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/CreateOutcomes.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/CreateOutcomes.jl @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ # purpose: create a dataframe `outcomes` with variables state containing states # that vote in combination in the sample space, the collective electoral votes -# and whether that results in a Biden win, loss or draw +# and whether that results in a Harris win, loss or draw using CSV using DataFrames @@ -69,6 +69,6 @@ outcome.result = Vector{String}(undef, size(outcome, 1)) outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .< TIE] .= "Trump" outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .== TIE] .= "Tie" -outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .> TIE] .= "Biden" +outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .> TIE] .= "Harris" # CSV.write(""/Users/ro/projects/swingwatch/_assets/objs/outcome.csv",outcome) diff --git a/_assets/scripts/alt_swing.jl b/_assets/scripts/alt_swing.jl index f92b706..b53f4eb 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/alt_swing.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/alt_swing.jl @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ outcome.result = Vector{String}(undef, size(outcome, 1)) outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .< TIE] .= "Trump" outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .== TIE] .= "Tie" -outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .> TIE] .= "Biden" +outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .> TIE] .= "Harris" states = collect(keys(votes)) diff --git a/_assets/scripts/bayes.jl b/_assets/scripts/bayes.jl index fb456fd..88292c4 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/bayes.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/bayes.jl @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ end """ normalize_poll(poll::Poll) -Normalizes the poll results for Biden and Trump by dividing their respective support values +Normalizes the poll results for Harris and Trump by dividing their respective support values by the total support, and returns a `NormalizedPoll` object with the normalized values and sample size. # Arguments @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ by the total support, and returns a `NormalizedPoll` object with the normalized # Returns - `NormalizedPoll`: A `NormalizedPoll` object with the following fields: - - `normalized_biden::Float64`: The normalized support for Biden (between 0 and 1). + - `normalized_biden::Float64`: The normalized support for Harris (between 0 and 1). - `normalized_trump::Float64`: The normalized support for Trump (between 0 and 1). - `sample_size::Int64`: The sample size of the poll. diff --git a/_assets/scripts/bayes_main.jl b/_assets/scripts/bayes_main.jl index ae5b122..a43d367 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/bayes_main.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/bayes_main.jl @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ # Define the prior biden_prob ~ Beta(prior_prob, 1 - prior_prob) - # Return the Biden and Trump probabilities + # Return the Harris and Trump probabilities return (biden_prob, trump_prob) end @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ trump_prob_mean = mean(trump_prob_samples) trump_prob_median = median(trump_prob_samples) trump_prob_sd = std(trump_prob_samples) trump_prob_credible_interval = quantile(trump_prob_samples, [0.025, 0.975]) -println("Biden Probability:") +println("Harris Probability:") println(" Mean: ", biden_prob_mean) println(" Mode: ", biden_prob_mode) println(" Median: ", biden_prob_median) @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ println(" 95% Credible Interval: ", biden_prob_credible_interval) summary_df = DataFrame( - Parameter = ["Biden likelihood", "Trump likelihood"], + Parameter = ["Harris likelihood", "Trump likelihood"], Mean = [biden_prob_mean, trump_prob_mean], Mode = [biden_prob_mode, trump_prob_mode], Median = [biden_prob_median, trump_prob_median], diff --git a/_assets/scripts/college_table.jl b/_assets/scripts/college_table.jl index 4566fb1..591c316 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/college_table.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/college_table.jl @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ rename!(votes, name_dict) const FLAGRED = "#B22234" const FLAGBLUE = "#3C3B6E" change.color = ifelse.(change.biden_col .!= 0, FLAGBLUE,FLAGRED) -change.party = ifelse.(change.biden_col .!= 0, "Biden","Trump") +change.party = ifelse.(change.biden_col .!= 0, "Harris","Trump") sort!(tab1,[:party,:st]) tab1 = change[:,[:st,:ev,:old,:chg,:party]] sort!(tab1,[:party,:st]) diff --git a/_assets/scripts/debris/ElectionAnalysis.jl b/_assets/scripts/debris/ElectionAnalysis.jl index d470306..62ddbdc 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/debris/ElectionAnalysis.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/debris/ElectionAnalysis.jl @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ module ElectionAnalysis # purpose create a dataframe `outcomes` with variables state containing states # that vote in combination in the sample space, the collective electoral votes -# and whether that results in a Biden win, loss or draw +# and whether that results in a Harris win, loss or draw using CSV using DataFrames @@ -71,6 +71,6 @@ outcome.result = Vector{String}(undef, size(outcome, 1)) outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .< TIE] .= "Trump" outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .== TIE] .= "Tie" -outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .> TIE] .= "Biden" +outcome.result[outcome[:,:biden] .> TIE] .= "Harris" end # end of module diff --git a/_assets/scripts/debris/func.jl b/_assets/scripts/debris/func.jl index c400db9..d6ffaf2 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/debris/func.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/debris/func.jl @@ -77,6 +77,6 @@ function determine_result(biden_value) elseif biden_value < 269 return "Trump" else - return "Biden" + return "Harris" end end diff --git a/_assets/scripts/debris/main.jl b/_assets/scripts/debris/main.jl index 4cca0c9..99251d2 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/debris/main.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/debris/main.jl @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ function determine_result(biden_value) elseif biden_value < 269 return "Trump" else - return "Biden" + return "Harris" end end diff --git a/_assets/scripts/debris/sql.jl b/_assets/scripts/debris/sql.jl index 2a067cf..41a98dd 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/debris/sql.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/debris/sql.jl @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS polls ( end_date DATE COMMENT 'End date of polling', url VARCHAR(255) COMMENT 'URL of the poll', n INTEGER COMMENT 'Sample size (in respondents)', - biden FLOAT COMMENT 'Biden support', + biden FLOAT COMMENT 'Harris support', trump FLOAT COMMENT 'Trump support', third FLOAT COMMENT 'Third-party support', sserept FLOAT COMMENT 'Reported sample standard error', @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS polls ( ssecalc FLOAT COMMENT 'Calculated [sub]sample standard error', deadj FLOAT COMMENT 'Design effect adj [sub]sample st error', moeadj FLOAT COMMENT 'Total adjusted margin of error', - leadr VARCHAR(255) COMMENT 'Poll leader (Biden,Trump,Third,None)' + leadr VARCHAR(255) COMMENT 'Poll leader (Harris,Trump,Third,None)' ); """ # Database connection details diff --git a/_assets/scripts/debris/statetabs.jl b/_assets/scripts/debris/statetabs.jl index 7312cfa..d15983f 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/debris/statetabs.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/debris/statetabs.jl @@ -12,16 +12,16 @@ include("utils.jl") # objs = "/Users/ro/projects/SwingWatch/_src/objs/" outcome = CSV.read("/Users/ro/projects/SwingWatch/_src/objs/outcome.csv"DataFrame) -header = ["Scenario", "Electoral Votes", "Biden Total", "Trump Total", "Result"] +header = ["Scenario", "Electoral Votes", "Harris Total", "Trump Total", "Result"] # pretty_table(outcome; backend = Val(:html), header = header, standalone = false) pa_loss = outcome[(occursin.("PA", outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Trump"), :] pa_ties = outcome[(occursin.("PA", outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Tie"), :] -pa_wins = outcome[(occursin.("PA", outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Biden"), :] +pa_wins = outcome[(occursin.("PA", outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Harris"), :] -println("### Biden wins") +println("### Harris wins") # see intake.jl for production of 2020vote.csv diff --git a/_assets/scripts/first_posterior_aftpart.jl b/_assets/scripts/first_posterior_aftpart.jl index baaac9b..0b4995c 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/first_posterior_aftpart.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/first_posterior_aftpart.jl @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ function draw_density() fig = Figure(size = (600, 400)) # Add an axis to the figure - ax = Axis(fig[1, 1], xlabel = "Likelihood of Biden win", ylabel = "Number of draws", title = "Model: Biden results in $ST from 2020 election before polling") + ax = Axis(fig[1, 1], xlabel = "Likelihood of Harris win", ylabel = "Number of draws", title = "Model: Harris results in $ST from 2020 election before polling") # Plot the full density curve lines!(ax, kde_result.x, kde_result.density, color = "#a3b35c", linewidth = 3, strokewidth = 4, strokecolor = GREENBAR, label = "Draws") diff --git a/_assets/scripts/func.jl b/_assets/scripts/func.jl index e5eaaef..731b400 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/func.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/func.jl @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ """ without_states(lost::Vector{String}) -> DataFrame -Find and return rows from the `outcomes` DataFrame where the `combo` column does not contain any of the states specified in the `lost` vector and where the result is "Biden". +Find and return rows from the `outcomes` DataFrame where the `combo` column does not contain any of the states specified in the `lost` vector and where the result is "Harris". # Arguments - `lost::Vector{String}`: A vector of strings where each string represents a state to be excluded from the `combo` column. @@ -12,11 +12,11 @@ Find and return rows from the `outcomes` DataFrame where the `combo` column does # Examples ```julia without_states(["PA", "NC"]) -header = ["Scenario", "Electoral Votes", "Biden Total", "Trump Total", "Result"] +header = ["Scenario", "Electoral Votes", "Harris Total", "Trump Total", "Result"] pretty_table(without_states["PA"]; backend = Val(:html), header = header, standalone = false) """ function without_states(lost::Vector{String}) - filter(row -> all(!occursin(state, row.combo) for state in lost) && row.result == "Biden", outcomes) + filter(row -> all(!occursin(state, row.combo) for state in lost) && row.result == "Harris", outcomes) end #------------------------------------------------------------------ """ diff --git a/_assets/scripts/hypo.jl b/_assets/scripts/hypo.jl index 550db42..2b865f0 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/hypo.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/hypo.jl @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@ To illustrate the limitations of presidential preference polling it is possible to simulate accuracy of polling conducted for the Georgia election in 2020. It is assumed that one or more pollsters independently sample after polls close election night but before official results are released. The pollsters each ask three questions: 1. Did you vote? -2. Did you vote for one of Donald Trump or Joe Biden? +2. Did you vote for one of Donald Trump or Joe Harris? 3. Which one? until some preset number of replies to the third question are obtained. The objective is to determine -1. The minimum sample size needed to have a 97.5% probablility of identifying a vote spread less than or equal to 246775, or 0.5% of the total cast for Trump and Biden, which is the threshhold for a mandatory recount. -2. The probability that the mean spread is positive (a Biden win) at the 97.5% confidence interval, which is 39 chances in 40 of being correct. +1. The minimum sample size needed to have a 97.5% probablility of identifying a vote spread less than or equal to 246775, or 0.5% of the total cast for Trump and Harris, which is the threshhold for a mandatory recount. +2. The probability that the mean spread is positive (a Harris win) at the 97.5% confidence interval, which is 39 chances in 40 of being correct. 3. The probability that all polls will show a positive spread at the 97.5% confidence interval 4. The probability that at least one poll will show a negative spread (Trump win) at the 97.5% confidence interval """ diff --git a/_assets/scripts/outcomes.jl b/_assets/scripts/outcomes.jl index dbc839c..f01c965 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/outcomes.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/outcomes.jl @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ # purpose: create a dataframe `outcomes` with variables state containing states # that vote in combination in the sample space, the collective electoral votes -# and whether that results in a Biden win, loss or draw +# and whether that results in a Harris win, loss or draw using CSV using DataFrames diff --git a/_assets/scripts/prep.jl b/_assets/scripts/prep.jl index dfea42d..dc8a5ce 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/prep.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/prep.jl @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ if outcome.biden < tie elseif outcome.bidden == tie outcome.result = "Trump" else - outcome.result = "Biden" + outcome.result = "Harris" end end @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ function determine_result(biden_value) elseif biden_value < 269 return "Trump" else - return "Biden" + return "Harris" end end diff --git a/_assets/scripts/ribbon.jl b/_assets/scripts/ribbon.jl index 15108b6..1ab1a8f 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/ribbon.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/ribbon.jl @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ p = plot(legend=:topright, xlims=(TRUMP_LOW, BIDEN_HIGH), ylims=(0, 0.1), # Plotting the segments plot!([TRUMP_LOW, TRUMP_HIGH], [0, 0], linewidth=NEW_LINEWIDTH, linecolor=:red, label="Trump") -plot!([BIDEN_LOW, BIDEN_HIGH], [0, 0], linewidth=NEW_LINEWIDTH, linecolor=:blue, label="Biden") +plot!([BIDEN_LOW, BIDEN_HIGH], [0, 0], linewidth=NEW_LINEWIDTH, linecolor=:blue, label="Harris") plot!([TRUMP_HIGH, BIDEN_LOW], [0, 0], linewidth=NEW_LINEWIDTH, linecolor=:purple, label="Overlap") # Add chart title and labels @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ Create a ribbon chart visualization to display the ranges and overlap of poll re # Examples ```julia -# Assuming `result` is a tuple containing two ranges (vectors) for Biden and Trump +# Assuming `result` is a tuple containing two ranges (vectors) for Harris and Trump biden_range = [46.0, 50.0] trump_range = [45.0, 49.0] result = (biden_range, trump_range) @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ function create_ribbon_chart(result, STATE, TYPE_POLL, POLLSTER; filename=nothin # Create the ribbon chart p = plot(size=(800, 300), legend=false, grid=false, yaxis=false, bottom_margin=10Plots.mm, top_margin=15Plots.mm) - # Plot Biden's and Trump's ranges + # Plot Harris's and Trump's ranges plot!([biden_range[1], biden_range[end]], [1.2, 1.2], linewidth=10, color=FLAGBLUE) plot!([trump_range[1], trump_range[end]], [0.2, 0.2], linewidth=10, color=FLAGRED) diff --git a/_assets/scripts/scene_tables.jl b/_assets/scripts/scene_tables.jl index e93b51b..3df787e 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/scene_tables.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/scene_tables.jl @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ -h1 = "Biden wins" +h1 = "Harris wins" h2 = "Tie" h3 = "Trump wins" @@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ const FULL = ["Nevada","Michigan","Wisconsin","North Carolina","Arizona","Penn state_dict = Dict(zip(STATES, FULL)) new_names = [ - "States won by Biden ", + "States won by Harris ", "Electoral Votes", - "Biden Votes", + "Harris Votes", "Trump Votes", "Result"] @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ new_names = [ h1 -pretty_table(outcome[(occursin.(ST, outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Biden"), :], backend = Val(:html), header = new_names, standalone = false) +pretty_table(outcome[(occursin.(ST, outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Harris"), :], backend = Val(:html), header = new_names, standalone = false) h2 @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ h3 pretty_table(outcome[(occursin.(ST, outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Trump"), :], backend = Val(:html), header = new_names, standalone = false) -h4 = "Biden wins without $state_dict[ST]" +h4 = "Harris wins without $state_dict[ST]" -pretty_table(outcome[.!(occursin.(ST, outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Biden"), :], backend = Val(:html), header = new_names, standalone = false) +pretty_table(outcome[.!(occursin.(ST, outcome.combo)) .& (outcome.result .== "Harris"), :], backend = Val(:html), header = new_names, standalone = false) diff --git a/_assets/scripts/spread/spread.jl b/_assets/scripts/spread/spread.jl index ae56fc0..f2d5163 100644 --- a/_assets/scripts/spread/spread.jl +++ b/_assets/scripts/spread/spread.jl @@ -10,10 +10,10 @@ include("moe.jl") gr() -function spread(Biden::Int64,Trump::Int64,N::Int64) - biden_lo = Biden/100 - (moe(N) + PLUG) - biden_hi = Biden/100 + (moe(N) + PLUG) - biden_pk = [biden_lo,Biden/100,biden_hi] .* 100 +function spread(Harris::Int64,Trump::Int64,N::Int64) + biden_lo = Harris/100 - (moe(N) + PLUG) + biden_hi = Harris/100 + (moe(N) + PLUG) + biden_pk = [biden_lo,Harris/100,biden_hi] .* 100 biden_bk = Int.(round.(biden_pk,digits = 0)) trump_lo = Trump/100 - (moe(N) + PLUG) trump_hi = Trump/100 + (moe(N) + PLUG) @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ function create_ribbon_chart(result, STATE, TYPE_POLL, POLLSTER; filename=nothin # Create the ribbon chart p = plot(size=(800, 300), legend=false, grid=false, yaxis=false, bottom_margin=10Plots.mm, top_margin=15Plots.mm) - # Plot Biden's and Trump's ranges + # Plot Harris's and Trump's ranges plot!([biden_range[1], biden_range[end]], [1.2, 1.2], linewidth=10, color=FLAGBLUE) plot!([trump_range[1], trump_range[end]], [0.2, 0.2], linewidth=10, color=FLAGRED) diff --git a/about.md b/about.md index 990a6aa..e415b77 100644 --- a/about.md +++ b/about.md @@ -34,4 +34,4 @@ The author reviews, and may revise, such content and accepts responsibility for ### Political bias -The author is a registered Democrat who intends to vote for President Biden. No assurance can be given that the assessments of polls made here will be free of effects of that bias, whether tending to show a favorable outcome on the one hand, or tending to show an unfavorable outcome, on the other, by making methodological decisions that may overcompensate for the bias. Opinions expressed are intended to be clear from context or will be labelled as **Comment** or similarly. \ No newline at end of file +The author is a registered Democrat who intends to vote for Vice President Harris. No assurance can be given that the assessments of polls made here will be free of effects of that bias, whether tending to show a favorable outcome on the one hand, or tending to show an unfavorable outcome, on the other, by making methodological decisions that may overcompensate for the bias. Opinions expressed are intended to be clear from context or will be labelled as **Comment** or similarly. diff --git a/az.md b/az.md index 6c66fd9..582ee06 100644 --- a/az.md +++ b/az.md @@ -19,13 +19,13 @@ In the 2020 election President Biden won 50.16% (0.5016) of the votes cast for B Assessments are based on three criteria. -* **Stringent**—Biden wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. +* **Stringent**—Harris wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. * **Historical**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 2020 margin. * **Relaxed**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 50.01% of the two candidate vote. ## June assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
StateBiden ProportionBiden VotesHarris ProportionHarris Votes Both Candidate Votes
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ## May assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## April assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## March assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ @@ -183,16 +183,16 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## Scenarios -The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizona is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Biden.* +The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizona is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Harris.* -### Biden wins +### Harris wins ~~~
- + - + @@ -203,294 +203,294 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizo - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, GA and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC 64 289 249BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 74 299 239BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 83 308 230BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 87 312 226BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 93 318 220BidenHarris
@@ -500,9 +500,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizo - + - + @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizo
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
~~~ -### Biden wins without Arizona +### Harris wins without Arizona ~~~ @@ -677,9 +677,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizo - + - + @@ -690,196 +690,196 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizo - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
WI, PA and NC 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and MI 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
GA, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
GA, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and PA 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and NC 63 288 250BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and PA 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
GA, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 76 301 237BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 82 307 231BidenHarris
@@ -2307,7 +2307,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Arizona. Arizo ## Terms - **Median**: Half of the random samples have probabilities greater than and half less than the median. -- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Biden Proportion in the table above. +- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Harris Proportion in the table above. - **Mode**: The probability that occurs most often. - **q025**: The value below which 2.5% of the probabilities occur. - **q975**: The value below which 97.5% of the probabilities occur. diff --git a/az_model.md b/az_model.md index 51360bb..8ef3360 100644 --- a/az_model.md +++ b/az_model.md @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ title = "Arizona Models" +++ - **Median**: Half of the random samples have probabilities greater than and half less than the median. -- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Biden Proportion in the table above. +- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Harris Proportion in the table above. - **Mode**: The probability that occurs most often. - **q025**: The value below which 2.5% of the probabilities occur. - **q975**: The value below which 97.5% of the probabilities occur. diff --git a/calls.md b/calls.md index e9081c3..9a8b384 100644 --- a/calls.md +++ b/calls.md @@ -4,24 +4,24 @@ title = "Election calls in 2024" Based on the AI generated summary below, **if** the 2024 election is called on the same days relative to 2020, -## Early Biden wins, followed by losses in Pennsylvania and North Carolina +## Early Harris wins, followed by losses in Pennsylvania and North Carolina * Election night calls for Michigan, Arizona and Wisconsin leave the outcome in doubts -* A call three days later for Biden in Nevada does not determine the outcome -* A call three days later for Biden in Pennsylvania is the earliest date that the election could be decided in favor of Biden -* If Biden does not take Pennsylvania, the next call, for North Carolina, if called for Biden would be decisive +* A call three days later for Harris in Nevada does not determine the outcome +* A call three days later for Harris in Pennsylvania is the earliest date that the election could be decided in favor of Harris +* If Harris does not take Pennsylvania, the next call, for North Carolina, if called for Harris would be decisive * If North Carolina goes to Trump, the final call, and the race will come with Georgia six days later. -## Early Biden losses +## Early Harris losses -* If the first four calls go against Biden, the election is over with the first loss of Pennsylvania, North Carolina or Georgia +* If the first four calls go against Harris, the election is over with the first loss of Pennsylvania, North Carolina or Georgia The Associated Press (AP) called the 2020 presidential election in the states of Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Nevada at the following times: 1. **Pennsylvania**: AP called Pennsylvania for Joe Biden on November 7, 2020, at 11:26 a.m. ET[^20]. 2. **North Carolina**: AP called North Carolina for Donald Trump on November 13, 2020[^16]. 3. **Michigan**: AP called Michigan for Joe Biden on November 4, 2020, at 5:56 p.m. EST[^5]. -4. **Georgia**: AP called Georgia for Joe Biden on November 19, 2020, after a hand tally of ballots confirmed Biden's lead[^1]. +4. **Georgia**: AP called Georgia for Joe Biden on November 19, 2020, after a hand tally of ballots confirmed Harris's lead[^1]. 5. **Wisconsin**: AP called Wisconsin for Joe Biden on November 4, 2020[^18]. 6. **Arizona**: AP called Arizona for Joe Biden on November 4, 2020[^9]. 7. **Nevada**: AP called Nevada for Joe Biden on November 7, 2020[^20]. @@ -50,4 +50,4 @@ These calls were made based on the AP's analysis of the vote counts and remainin [^19]: [Battlegrounds]: (https://apnews.com/article/presidency-battleground-states-races-84ba06c8d2dd3c16434f0b9a852a5d17) [^20]: [How AP makes calls](https://apnews.com/article/ap-explains-race-calls-0b1988605f9101f4b799fc63b01e0090) -Compiled by [perplexity.ai](https://www.perplexity.ai/search/at-what-hours-qTYHuxTwRDmycaDBuQAw1A) \ No newline at end of file +C:nompiled by [perplexity.ai](https://www.perplexity.ai/search/at-what-hours-qTYHuxTwRDmycaDBuQAw1A) diff --git a/changes.md b/changes.md index 98e057d..ddbcf4d 100644 --- a/changes.md +++ b/changes.md @@ -21,56 +21,56 @@ As the result of the 2020 Census, 17 states lost or gain an electoral vote, exce 54 55 -1 - Biden + Harris CO 10 9 1 - Biden + Harris IL 19 20 -1 - Biden + Harris ME 1 2 -1 - Biden + Harris MI 15 16 -1 - Biden + Harris NY 28 29 -1 - Biden + Harris OR 8 7 1 - Biden + Harris PA 19 20 -1 - Biden + Harris FL diff --git a/college.md b/college.md index f097afc..52faad1 100644 --- a/college.md +++ b/college.md @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ title = "Faithless Electors" +++ -In an election that may be decided by a few electoral votes, for Biden to win it is not sufficient that he win the popular votes in the decisive swing states. He must also retain the vote of the *electors* in all states in which he wins. In states that lack enforceable safeguards, an elector motivated to make a political demonstration about, the war in Gaza, for example, could cast what he or she considers a protest vote, depriving Biden of a vote needed to reach 270 and an Electoral College victory. Even if it were thought that such a protest vote would not be decisive more than a single elector might be relying on the same notion. Being an elector is usually considered an honorary, ministerial role, but the scope of decision making autonomy of electors depends on state law. +In an election that may be decided by a few electoral votes, for Harris to win it is not sufficient that he win the popular votes in the decisive swing states. He must also retain the vote of the *electors* in all states in which he wins. In states that lack enforceable safeguards, an elector motivated to make a political demonstration about, the war in Gaza, for example, could cast what he or she considers a protest vote, depriving Harris of a vote needed to reach 270 and an Electoral College victory. Even if it were thought that such a protest vote would not be decisive more than a single elector might be relying on the same notion. Being an elector is usually considered an honorary, ministerial role, but the scope of decision making autonomy of electors depends on state law. diff --git a/combo.md b/combo.md index fda02ce..405236b 100644 --- a/combo.md +++ b/combo.md @@ -4,19 +4,19 @@ title = "What if?" ## Without Pennsylvania and North Carolina combined -In 2020, Biden won Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes by 80,555 and Trump won North Carolina's 15 electoral votes by 74,483. These were the too largest margins in 2020 in count. As between the two candidates[^1], disregarding third party candidates, the margin in Pennsylvania was 1.18% in favor of Biden and the margin in North Carolina was 1.37% in favor of Trump. +In 2020, Biden won Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes by 80,555 and Trump won North Carolina's 15 electoral votes by 74,483. These were the too largest margins in 2020 in count. As between the two candidates[^1], disregarding third party candidates, the margin in Pennsylvania was 1.18% in favor of Harris and the margin in North Carolina was 1.37% in favor of Trump. In 2024, due to the use of the 2020 Census for apportionment, Pennsylvania will have 19 electoral votes and North Carolina will have 16. -Without Biden wins in both states, the winning scenarios for Biden narrow from 70 to just **five** combinations of the remaining swing states. +Without Harris wins in both states, the winning scenarios for Harris narrow from 70 to just **five** combinations of the remaining swing states. ~~~ - + - + @@ -27,34 +27,34 @@ Without Biden wins in both states, the winning scenarios for Biden narrow from - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
~~~ -All Biden victory scenarios without both Pennsylvania and North Carolina require **winning both Georgia (16 votes) and Michigan (15 votes) plus Nevada (6 votes) and one of Arizona (11 votes) and Wisconsin (10 votes) *or,* without Nevada *both* Arizona and Wisconsin."** +All Harris victory scenarios without both Pennsylvania and North Carolina require **winning both Georgia (16 votes) and Michigan (15 votes) plus Nevada (6 votes) and one of Arizona (11 votes) and Wisconsin (10 votes) *or,* without Nevada *both* Arizona and Wisconsin."** ~~~ @@ -65,19 +65,19 @@ All Biden victory scenarios without both Pennsylvania and North Carolina require -## Biden at the margin +## Harris at the margin -These states had Biden's widest and narrowest margins[^1] of victory—Georgia 0.24% and Michigan 2.83%. Failing to win Georgia again if 11,780 votes were to go to Trump[^2] +These states had Harris's widest and narrowest margins[^1] of victory—Georgia 0.24% and Michigan 2.83%. Failing to win Georgia again if 11,780 votes were to go to Trump[^2] -### Biden wins without Georgia +### Harris wins without Georgia ~~~ - + - + @@ -88,184 +88,184 @@ These states had Biden's widest and narrowest margins[^1] of victory—Georgia 0 - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, MI and PA 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
~~~ -As noted above, however, Biden cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvania and North Carolina. +As noted above, however, Harris cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvania and North Carolina. -### Biden wins without Michigan +### Harris wins without Michigan ~~~ - + - + @@ -276,180 +276,180 @@ As noted above, however, Biden cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvan - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
WI, PA, NC 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA, NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA, NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA, NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA, NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA, NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA, NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA, NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA, NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA, NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA, NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA, NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA, NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA, NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
~~~ -Without **both** Michigan and Georgia, Biden's **only** winning path requires winning *both* Pennsylvania and North Carolina unless he wins Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada. There is **no** winning combination if he loses in each of **Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia and Michigan.** +Without **both** Michigan and Georgia, Harris's **only** winning path requires winning *both* Pennsylvania and North Carolina unless he wins Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada. There is **no** winning combination if he loses in each of **Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia and Michigan.** diff --git a/draft.md b/draft.md index 3d46f42..53ca816 100644 --- a/draft.md +++ b/draft.md @@ -2,11 +2,11 @@ title = "Drafts" +++ -## Biden at the margin +## Harris at the margin -These states had Biden's widest and narrowest margins[^1] of victory—Georgia 0.24% and Michigan 2.83%. Failing to win Georgia again if 11,780 votes were to go to Trump[^2] narrows the possible paths to election for Biden. +These states had Harris's widest and narrowest margins[^1] of victory—Georgia 0.24% and Michigan 2.83%. Failing to win Georgia again if 11,780 votes were to go to Trump[^2] narrows the possible paths to election for Harris. -### Biden wins without Georgia +### Harris wins without Georgia ~~~ @@ -18,9 +18,9 @@ These states had Biden's widest and narrowest margins[^1] of victory—Georgia 0 - + - + @@ -31,176 +31,176 @@ These states had Biden's widest and narrowest margins[^1] of victory—Georgia 0 - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, MI and PA 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
~~~ -As noted above, however, Biden cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvania and North Carolina. +As noted above, however, Harris cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvania and North Carolina. -### Biden wins without Michigan +### Harris wins without Michigan ~~~ @@ -210,9 +210,9 @@ As noted above, however, Biden cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvan - + - + @@ -223,175 +223,175 @@ As noted above, however, Biden cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvan - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
WI, PA, NC 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA, NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA, NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA, NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA, NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA, NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA, NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA, NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA, NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA, NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA, NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA, NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA, NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA, NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
@@ -402,4 +402,4 @@ As noted above, however, Biden cannot win without Georgia if he loses Pennsylvan ~~~ -Without **both** Michigan and Georgia, Biden's **only** winning path requires winning *both* Pennsylvania and North Carolina unless he wins Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada. There is **no** winning combination if he loses in each of **Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia and Michigan.** \ No newline at end of file +Without **both** Michigan and Georgia, Harris's **only** winning path requires winning *both* Pennsylvania and North Carolina unless he wins Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin and Nevada. There is **no** winning combination if he loses in each of **Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia and Michigan.** \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/focus.md b/focus.md index c8d8b56..e931d1b 100644 --- a/focus.md +++ b/focus.md @@ -4,10 +4,10 @@ title = "Focus" ## Without the Nebraska Second -The models assume that except for the seven swing states, each candidate will win the states and election districts won in 2020. For Biden, the total includes a Nebraska +The models assume that except for the seven swing states, each candidate will win the states and election districts won in 2020. For Harris, the total includes a Nebraska district that centers on Omaha. Nebraska is one of two states that have this arrangement. The other is Maine. An attempt was made earlier this year to change Nebraska to the winner-take-all system used by other states. It was unsuccessful, and it is not clear if another attempt will be made. Should it be or if the Nebraska Second this time votes for Trump, possible outcomes differ. -A tie outcome that was produced by Biden winning only Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, now has three different possible scenarios +A tie outcome that was produced by Harris winning only Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, now has three different possible scenarios * Wisconsin, Georgia and Pennsylvania * Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and North Carolina @@ -21,19 +21,19 @@ Those three scenarios, which were formally wins, are replaced as the smallest po ## Without Pennsylvania and North Carolina combined -In 2020, Biden won Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes by 80,555 and Trump won North Carolina's 15 electoral votes by 74,483. These were the too largest margins in 2020 in count. As between the two candidates[^1], disregarding third party candidates, the margin in Pennsylvania was 1.18% in favor of Biden and the margin in North Carolina was 1.37% in favor of Trump. +In 2020, Harris won Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes by 80,555 and Trump won North Carolina's 15 electoral votes by 74,483. These were the too largest margins in 2020 in count. As between the two candidates[^1], disregarding third party candidates, the margin in Pennsylvania was 1.18% in favor of Harris and the margin in North Carolina was 1.37% in favor of Trump. In 2024, due to the use of the 2020 Census for apportionment, Pennsylvania will have 19 electoral votes and North Carolina will have 16. -Without Biden wins in both states, the winning scenarios for Biden narrow from 70 to just **five** combinations of the remaining swing states. +Without Harris wins in both states, the winning scenarios for Harris narrow from 70 to just **five** combinations of the remaining swing states. ~~~ - + - + @@ -44,34 +44,34 @@ Without Biden wins in both states, the winning scenarios for Biden narrow from - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
~~~ -All Biden victory scenarios without both Pennsylvania and North Carolina require **winning both Georgia (16 votes) and Michigan (15 votes) plus Nevada (6 votes) and one of Arizona (11 votes) and Wisconsin (10 votes) *or,* without Nevada *both* Arizona and Wisconsin."** +All Harris victory scenarios without both Pennsylvania and North Carolina require **winning both Georgia (16 votes) and Michigan (15 votes) plus Nevada (6 votes) and one of Arizona (11 votes) and Wisconsin (10 votes) *or,* without Nevada *both* Arizona and Wisconsin."** ~~~ diff --git a/ga.md b/ga.md index f92fbde..a1170f2 100644 --- a/ga.md +++ b/ga.md @@ -14,17 +14,17 @@ title = "Georgia" * [Other news](#other-news) * [Terms](#terms) -In the 2020 election President Biden won 50.12% (0.5012) of the votes cast for Biden or Trump in Georgia. This leaves out votes for third-party candidates. Taking the actual result as a starting point, the model introduces some uncertainty into the result to create a range of outcomes for that election from 50.08% to 50.16%. Next, the results of each month's polling are factored in on a rolling basis. +In the 2020 election President Harris won 50.12% (0.5012) of the votes cast for Harris or Trump in Georgia. This leaves out votes for third-party candidates. Taking the actual result as a starting point, the model introduces some uncertainty into the result to create a range of outcomes for that election from 50.08% to 50.16%. Next, the results of each month's polling are factored in on a rolling basis. Assessments are based on three criteria. -* **Stringent**—Biden wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. +* **Stringent**—Harris wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. * **Historical**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 2020 margin. * **Relaxed**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 50.01% of the two candidate vote. ## June assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## May assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ## April assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## March assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ @@ -187,18 +187,18 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## Scenarios -The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Georgia is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Biden.* +The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Georgia is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Harris.* -### Biden wins +### Harris wins ~~~
- + - + @@ -209,322 +209,322 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Geor - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, GA and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and MI 47 272 266BidenHarris
GA, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
GA, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and PA 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and NC 63 288 250BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC 64 289 249BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and PA 66 291 247BidenHarris
GA, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 74 299 239BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 76 301 237BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 82 307 231BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 83 308 230BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 87 312 226BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 93 318 220BidenHarris
@@ -535,9 +535,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Geor - + - + @@ -673,7 +673,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Geor
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
~~~ -### Biden wins without Georgia +### Harris wins without Georgia ~~~ @@ -683,9 +683,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Geor - + - + @@ -696,168 +696,168 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Geor - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, MI and PA 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
@@ -866,7 +866,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Geor ## Georgia facts * Electoral votes: 16 -* 2020: Biden +* 2020: Harris * 2016: Trump * 2020 turnout: 4,935,487 * 2020 margin: 11,779 @@ -2285,7 +2285,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Georgia. Geor ## Terms - **Median**: Half of the random samples have probabilities greater than and half less than the median. -- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Biden Proportion in the table above. +- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Harris Proportion in the table above. - **Mode**: The probability that occurs most often. - **q025**: The value below which 2.5% of the probabilities occur. - **q975**: The value below which 97.5% of the probabilities occur. @@ -2300,11 +2300,11 @@ The density plots show the number of observations on the $y$-axis and the probab ## Runoff rules -In the 2020 United States presidential election, Georgia initially reported its results on November 4th, 2020, the day after Election Day. However, due to the very close margin between Joe Biden and Donald Trump, Georgia conducted a statewide hand recount of all ballots. +In the 2020 United States presidential election, Georgia initially reported its results on November 4th, 2020, the day after Election Day. However, due to the very close margin between Joe Harris and Donald Trump, Georgia conducted a statewide hand recount of all ballots. -The hand recount began on November 13th and concluded on November 19th, 2020. The recount affirmed Biden's win in the state. +The hand recount began on November 13th and concluded on November 19th, 2020. The recount affirmed Harris's win in the state. -However, the Trump campaign requested another machine recount, which was conducted from November 24th to December 2nd, 2020. This second recount also confirmed Biden's victory. +However, the Trump campaign requested another machine recount, which was conducted from November 24th to December 2nd, 2020. This second recount also confirmed Harris's victory. Georgia officially certified its election results on November 20th, 2020, after the hand recount. The results were then re-certified on December 7th, 2020, following the machine recount. @@ -2314,7 +2314,7 @@ So in total, it took about a month from Election Day for Georgia to finalize its > Whenever the difference between the number of votes received by a candidate who has been declared … elected to an office in an election … and the number of votes received by any other candidate … not declared so … elected or … shall be not more than one-half of 1 percent of the total votes which were cast for such office therein, any such candidate … receiving a sufficient number of votes so that the difference between his or her vote and that of a candidate declared … elected … is not more than one-half of 1 percent of the total votes cast, within a period of two business days following the certification of the election results, shall have the right to a recount of the votes cast, if such request is made in writing by the losing candidate. If the office sought is a federal or state office voted upon by the electors of more than one county, the request shall be made to the Secretary of State who shall direct that the recount be performed in all counties in which electors voted for such office and notify the superintendents of the several counties involved of the request. -The 0.5% (0.005) threshhold applies to the total number of votes cast for the position, rather than only the votes received by the two top candidates. In the 2020 election, the total number of votes cast for president was 4,999,960, while the votes for Biden and Trump numbered 4,935,487 and the 0.5% recount threshold was, accordingly 24,951 votes vs 24,678, a difference of only 273 votes. In the 2020 election, the difference between Biden and Trump was 11,779 votes, well within either measure. +The 0.5% (0.005) threshhold applies to the total number of votes cast for the position, rather than only the votes received by the two top candidates. In the 2020 election, the total number of votes cast for president was 4,999,960, while the votes for Harris and Trump numbered 4,935,487 and the 0.5% recount threshold was, accordingly 24,951 votes vs 24,678, a difference of only 273 votes. In the 2020 election, the difference between Harris and Trump was 11,779 votes, well within either measure. ## Other News @@ -2323,7 +2323,7 @@ The 0.5% (0.005) threshhold applies to the total number of votes cast for the po ## Terms - **Median**: Half of the random samples have probabilities greater than and half less than the median. -- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Biden Proportion in the table above. +- **Mean**: The average of the 10,000 random samples constructed. It coincides with the Harris Proportion in the table above. - **Mode**: The probability that occurs most often. - **q025**: The value below which 2.5% of the probabilities occur. - **q975**: The value below which 97.5% of the probabilities occur. diff --git a/index.md b/index.md index 686c0e8..8448abf 100644 --- a/index.md +++ b/index.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ title = "Latest" ## Superseding event -As of July 22, 2024, Vice President Harris will replace President Biden as the nominee of the Democratic Party and a new model will need to be developed to reflect that change. The plan is to aggregate the polls conducted in July prior to July 21, 2024 (when Biden withdrew) as the prior distribution, after introducing some variability to partially account for the added uncertainty. +As of July 22, 2024, Vice President Harris will replace President Harris as the nominee of the Democratic Party and a new model will need to be developed to reflect that change. The plan is to aggregate the polls conducted in July prior to July 21, 2024 (when Harris withdrew) as the prior distribution, after introducing some variability to partially account for the added uncertainty. For polls conducted through the end of the month, the model will be updated and every fortnight thereafter. Consideration will also be given to reassessing swing states, depending on initial results. It is expected that most Blue and Red states will remain as such, but some swing states will move. @@ -12,21 +12,21 @@ For polls conducted through the end of the month, the model will be updated and ### Stringent view -Based on the criterion that the model must show Biden taking at least 50.25% of the two-candidate split, Bidin would win none of the swing states, resulting in **225-313 Electoral College loss.** +Based on the criterion that the model must show Harris taking at least 50.25% of the two-candidate split, Bidin would win none of the swing states, resulting in **225-313 Electoral College loss.** ### Historical view -Based on the criterion that the model shows Biden doing at least as well as he did in 2020 in the two-candidate split, Biden would win none of the swing states resulting in a **225-313 Electoral College loss.** +Based on the criterion that the model shows Harris doing at least as well as he did in 2020 in the two-candidate split, Harris would win none of the swing states resulting in a **225-313 Electoral College loss.** ### Relaxed view -Based on the criterion that the model shows Biden winning by at least 50% plus one vote of the two-candidate split, Biden would six of the seven swing states (having lost in North Carolina), Biden would take 77 electoral votes resulting in a **302-236 Electoral College victory.** +Based on the criterion that the model shows Harris winning by at least 50% plus one vote of the two-candidate split, Harris would six of the seven swing states (having lost in North Carolina), Harris would take 77 electoral votes resulting in a **302-236 Electoral College victory.** -The poll results conducted in the seven swing states in March, April, May and June show presidential preference divided, but favoring Trump in more states than Biden. Each of the poll results has a greater or smaller degree of uncertainty that depends primarily on how many answers were collected. Taking into account, however, the results of 2020, although there are signs of erosion in Biden's support, the performance is better than the standalone polls would suggest. +The poll results conducted in the seven swing states in March, April, May and June show presidential preference divided, but favoring Trump in more states than Harris. Each of the poll results has a greater or smaller degree of uncertainty that depends primarily on how many answers were collected. Taking into account, however, the results of 2020, although there are signs of erosion in Harris's support, the performance is better than the standalone polls would suggest. Only one June poll has been reported for swing state was taken on the day of the debate nd the day after. That one has partisan affiliation, so it was not included. -The model is based on the *Bayesian analysis* described in [Methodology](/method]) It begins with the relative share of the two-candidate popular vote won by Biden in each of the swing states in 2020 adjusted by the effect of polling conducted in April. Beginning next month, the beginning point will be adjusted to reflect a cumulative model in which cumulative results will be reporting. +The model is based on the *Bayesian analysis* described in [Methodology](/method]) It begins with the relative share of the two-candidate popular vote won by Harris in each of the swing states in 2020 adjusted by the effect of polling conducted in April. Beginning next month, the beginning point will be adjusted to reflect a cumulative model in which cumulative results will be reporting. A total of 45 electoral votes from the swing states is a win, given his safe state edge of 225-220 over Trump. diff --git a/mi.md b/mi.md index c20ea4d..4c4ce80 100644 --- a/mi.md +++ b/mi.md @@ -18,13 +18,13 @@ In the 2020 election President Biden won 51.41% (0.5141) of the votes cast for B Assessments are based on three criteria. -* **Stringent**—Biden wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. +* **Stringent**—Harris wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. * **Historical**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 2020 margin. * **Relaxed**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 50.01% of the two candidate vote. ## June assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ## May assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ## April assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ## March assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -183,16 +183,16 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## Scenarios -The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not included is the trivial case where one candidate takes all of the swing states. Michigan is represented in 64 of the 127 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Biden.* +The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not included is the trivial case where one candidate takes all of the swing states. Michigan is represented in 64 of the 127 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Harris.* -### Biden wins +### Harris wins ~~~
- + @@ -203,203 +203,203 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
Scenario Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
58 270 268BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and GA 58 270 268BidenHarris
MI, NC, AZ and GA 58 270 268BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, AZ and GA 59 271 267BidenHarris
MI, WI, NC and PA 61 273 265BidenHarris
MI, WI, PA and GA 62 274 264BidenHarris
MI, NC, AZ and PA 62 274 264BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, NC and GA 63 275 263BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, AZ and PA 63 275 263BidenHarris
MI, AZ, PA and GA 63 275 263BidenHarris
NV, MI, NC, AZ and GA 64 276 262BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, NC and PA 67 279 259BidenHarris
MI, NC, PA and GA 67 279 259BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, PA and GA 68 280 258BidenHarris
NV, MI, NC, AZ and PA 68 280 258BidenHarris
MI, WI, NC, AZ and GA 68 280 258BidenHarris
NV, MI, AZ, PA and GA 69 281 257BidenHarris
MI, WI, NC, AZ and PA 72 284 254BidenHarris
NV, MI, NC, PA and GA 73 285 253BidenHarris
MI, WI, AZ, PA and GA 73 285 253BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, NC, AZ and GA 74 286 252BidenHarris
MI, WI, NC, PA and GA 77 289 249BidenHarris
MI, NC, AZ, PA and GA 78 290 248BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, NC, AZ and PA 78 290 248BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, AZ, PA and GA 79 291 247BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, NC, PA and GA 83 295 243BidenHarris
NV, MI, NC, AZ, PA and GA 84 296 242BidenHarris
MI, WI, NC, AZ, PA and GA 88 300 238BidenHarris
NV, MI, WI, NC, AZ, PA and GA 94 306 232BidenHarris
@@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not Scenario Electoral Votes - Biden Votes + Harris Votes Trump Votes Result @@ -448,7 +448,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not Scenario Electoral Votes - Biden Votes + Harris Votes Trump Votes Result @@ -682,7 +682,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not ~~~ -### Biden wins without Michigan +### Harris wins without Michigan ~~~ @@ -695,7 +695,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not Scenario Electoral Votes - Biden Votes + Harris Votes Trump Votes Result @@ -706,63 +706,63 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not 58 270 268 - Biden + Harris WI, NC, PA and GA 61 273 265 - Biden + Harris NV, WI, NC, AZ and PA 62 274 264 - Biden + Harris NC, AZ, PA and GA 62 274 264 - Biden + Harris NV, WI, AZ, PA and GA 63 275 263 - Biden + Harris NV, WI, NC, PA and GA 67 279 259 - Biden + Harris NV, NC, AZ, PA and GA 68 280 258 - Biden + Harris WI, NC, AZ, PA and GA 72 284 254 - Biden + Harris NV, WI, NC, AZ, PA and GA 78 290 248 - Biden + Harris @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Michigan. Not ## Michigan facts * Electoral votes: 15 -* 2020: Biden +* 2020: Harris * 2016: Trump * 2020 turnout: 5,453,892 * 2020 margin: 154,188 diff --git a/moe.md b/moe.md index 908a7d8..029565c 100644 --- a/moe.md +++ b/moe.md @@ -2,9 +2,9 @@ title = "Margin of error" +++ -> The latest poll shows President Biden leading former President Trump in Arizona in the two-candidate race by 50.1% to 49.9% with a margin of error of 2.5% +> The latest poll before his withdrawal showed President Biden leading former President Trump in Arizona in the two-candidate race by 50.1% to 49.9% with a margin of error of 2.5% -is the form of a news lede often seen and it means that if the election were held at the time of the poll, those proportions of respondents indicate their preferences for the respective candidates. The margin of error provides the additional information that the respondents were selected at random and indicates how much the response varies from what could be found if everyone, and not just the sample, were asked. So, while the proportion of voters *in the sample* favoring Biden is *exactly* 50.1%, the proportion of *all voters* could be larger or smaller—47.6% to 52.6%. Because the margin for Trump overlaps—47.4% to 52.4%. This is often referred to as a "statistical dead heat." +is the form of a news lede often seen and it means that if the election were held at the time of the poll, those proportions of respondents indicate their preferences for the respective candidates. The margin of error provides the additional information that the respondents were selected at random and indicates how much the response varies from what could be found if everyone, and not just the sample, were asked. So, while the proportion of voters *in the sample* favoring Harris is *exactly* 50.1%, the proportion of *all voters* could be larger or smaller—47.6% to 52.6%. Because the margin for Trump overlaps—47.4% to 52.4%. This is often referred to as a "statistical dead heat." That is an over-simplification because there are two principal sources of error that can be estimated at the time of survey. @@ -88,4 +88,4 @@ $n$ is the sample size The term $\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{n}}$ represents the standard error of the mean, which is the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of the mean. -The z-score measures the number of standard deviations an individual value or sample mean is away from the population mean. \ No newline at end of file +The z-score measures the number of standard deviations an individual value or sample mean is away from the population mean. diff --git a/nc.md b/nc.md index c5b64fd..f0cfed5 100644 --- a/nc.md +++ b/nc.md @@ -7,8 +7,6 @@ title = "North Carolina" * [April assessment](#april-assessment) * [March assessment](#march-assessment) * [2020 election](#2020-election) -* [Scenarios](#scenarios) -* [State facts](#state-facts) * [2022 demographics](#2022-demographics) * [Terms](#terms) @@ -17,13 +15,13 @@ In the 2020 election President Biden won 49.32% (0.4942) of the votes cast for B Assessments are based on three criteria. -* **Stringent**—Biden wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. +* **Stringent**—Harris wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. * **Historical**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 2020 margin. * **Relaxed**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 50.01% of the two candidate vote. ## June assessment -A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. +A Harris victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. ~~~ @@ -54,7 +52,7 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. ~~~ ## May assessment -A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. +A Harris victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. ~~~
@@ -85,7 +83,7 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. ~~~ ## April assessment -A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. +A Harris victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. ~~~
@@ -118,7 +116,7 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. ## March assessment -A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. +A Harris victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. ~~~
@@ -177,15 +175,15 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios.
~~~ -## Biden wins +## Harris wins ~~~ - + - + @@ -196,322 +194,322 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
GA, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and NC 63 288 250BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC 64 289 249BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
GA, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 74 299 239BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 76 301 237BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 82 307 231BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 83 308 230BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 87 312 226BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 93 318 220BidenHarris
@@ -522,9 +520,9 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. - + - + @@ -659,7 +657,7 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios.
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
~~~ -## Biden wins without North Carolina +## Harris wins without North Carolina ~~~ @@ -669,9 +667,9 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. - + - + @@ -682,168 +680,168 @@ A Biden victory is not within the credible interval under any of the scenarios. - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, MI and PA 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, GA and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and MI 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
GA, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and PA 60 285 253BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and PA 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA 67 292 246BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 77 302 236BidenHarris
diff --git a/newvoters.md b/newvoters.md index bac96bc..ab31df1 100644 --- a/newvoters.md +++ b/newvoters.md @@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ Children who were 14 to 17-years old at the time of the 2020 election will be of Some of these new voters also became naturalized citizens between the 2020 and 2024 elections, as shown below. Proportions of citizens to total population of each age cohort was estimated based on the proportion shown for each state in 2022 from the source used for the table below. -**Even at turnouts as low as 50% (comparable to 2020) this demographic dwarfs the 2020 margins of victory in the seven swing states**. How they break between Biden and Trump has the potential to determine the outcome of the election. +**Even at turnouts as low as 50% (comparable to 2020) this demographic dwarfs the 2020 margins of victory in the seven swing states**. How they break between Harris and Trump has the potential to determine the outcome of the election. ### Comparison of First-Time vs. Repeat Voter Turnout @@ -150,11 +150,11 @@ Citizens who have became naturalized after the 2020 election will be eligible to Those new citizen represent numbers equal to * 84% of Trumps winning margin in North Carolina -* 41% of Biden's winning margin in Michigan -* 127% of Biden's winning margin in Nevada -* 132% of Biden's winning margin in Pennsylvania -* 760% of Biden's winning margin in Arizona -* 856% of Biden's winning margin in Georgia +* 41% of Harris's winning margin in Michigan +* 127% of Harris's winning margin in Nevada +* 132% of Harris's winning margin in Pennsylvania +* 760% of Harris's winning margin in Arizona +* 856% of Harris's winning margin in Georgia ~~~ diff --git a/nv.md b/nv.md index 556e875..2ed72ce 100644 --- a/nv.md +++ b/nv.md @@ -18,13 +18,13 @@ In the 2020 election President Biden won 51.22% (0.5122) of the votes cast for B Assessments are based on three criteria. -* **Stringent**—Biden wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. +* **Stringent**—Harris wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. * **Historical**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 2020 margin. * **Relaxed**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 50.01% of the two candidate vote. ## June assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed criterion* +Harris wins under the *Relaxed criterion* ~~~
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ Biden wins under the *Relaxed criterion* ## May assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed criterion* +Harris wins under the *Relaxed criterion* ~~~
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ Biden wins under the *Relaxed criterion* ## April assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed criterion* +Harris wins under the *Relaxed criterion* ~~~
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ Biden wins under the *Relaxed criterion* ~~~ ## March assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed criterion* +Harris wins under the *Relaxed criterion* ~~~ @@ -192,16 +192,16 @@ A ballot initiative to amend the state constitution has been [cleared](https://n ## Scenarios -The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Nevada. Not included is the trivial case where one candidate takes all of the swing states. Nevada is represented in 64 of the 127 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Biden.* +The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Nevada. Not included is the trivial case where one candidate takes all of the swing states. Nevada is represented in 64 of the 127 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Harris.* -### Biden wins +### Harris wins ~~~
- + - + @@ -212,273 +212,273 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Nevada. Not in - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and MI 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and NC 63 288 250BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC 64 289 249BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and PA 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 74 299 239BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 82 307 231BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 83 308 230BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 93 318 220BidenHarris
@@ -488,9 +488,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Nevada. Not in - + - + @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Nevada. Not in
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
~~~ -### Biden wins without Nevada +### Harris wins without Nevada ~~~ @@ -685,9 +685,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Nevada. Not in - + - + @@ -698,217 +698,217 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Nevada. Not in - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
WI, PA and NC 45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, MI and PA 45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, GA and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
GA, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
GA, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
GA, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and PA 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
GA, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 76 301 237BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 87 312 226BidenHarris
@@ -935,7 +935,7 @@ which could also be used to argue that electors must be appointed on election da ## State facts * Electoral votes: 6 -* 2020: Biden +* 2020: Harris * 2016: Trump * 2020 turnout: 1,373,376 * 2020 margin: 33,596 diff --git a/oldnews.md b/oldnews.md index cdc53c6..c5cacac 100644 --- a/oldnews.md +++ b/oldnews.md @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ Governor Kemp signed [SB 189](https://www.legis.ga.gov/legislation/64471). Among ### Michigan -Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. [qualified](https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/18/robert-f-kennedy-jr-michigan-presidential-ballot-2024-election/73371452007/) for the Michigan ballot on April 18, 2024. Beginning with polls conducted in May, the presidential preference polls that include his name as a choice will be used in preference to polls that limit the choice to Biden and Trump. +Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. [qualified](https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/18/robert-f-kennedy-jr-michigan-presidential-ballot-2024-election/73371452007/) for the Michigan ballot on April 18, 2024. Beginning with polls conducted in May, the presidential preference polls that include his name as a choice will be used in preference to polls that limit the choice to Harris and Trump. Democrats [gained control](https://apnews.com/article/michigan-election-majority-democrats-house-deadlocked-77f6261041701e9839c9ce2069d7c24b) of the Michigan House in two special elections. diff --git a/pa.md b/pa.md index 20e5fe5..adc5f11 100644 --- a/pa.md +++ b/pa.md @@ -14,17 +14,17 @@ title = "Pennsylvania" # Model results -In the 2020 election President Biden won 50.59% (0.5059) of the votes cast for Biden or Trump in Pennsylvania. This leaves out votes for third-party candidates. Taking the actual result as a starting point, the model introduces some uncertainty into the result to create a range of outcomes for that election from 50.56% to 50.63%. Next, the results of each month's polling are factored in on a rolling basis. When the plot shows that more of the credible interval lies to the right of the 2020 margin it indicates that Biden is losing ground compared to the 2020 election results, taking the polls at face value. +In the 2020 election President Biden won 50.59% (0.5059) of the votes cast for Biden or Trump in Pennsylvania. This leaves out votes for third-party candidates. Taking the actual result as a starting point, the model introduces some uncertainty into the result to create a range of outcomes for that election from 50.56% to 50.63%. Next, the results of each month's polling are factored in on a rolling basis. When the plot shows that more of the credible interval lies to the right of the 2020 margin it indicates that Harris is losing ground compared to the 2020 election results, taking the polls at face value. Assessments are based on three criteria. -* **Stringent**—Biden wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. +* **Stringent**—Harris wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. * **Historical**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 2020 margin. * **Relaxed**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 50.01% of the two candidate vote. ## June assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion ~~~ @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion ## May assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion ~~~
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion ## April assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion ~~~
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion ## March assessment -Biden win under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris win under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -187,16 +187,16 @@ Pennsylvania's requirement for mail-in ballot envelopes to bear a date survived ## Scenarios -The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Biden.* With 19 electoral votes, Pennsylvania provides support to many of the successful outcomes. It is also involved in the only potential [Electoral College tie vote](./12th). +The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Harris.* With 19 electoral votes, Pennsylvania provides support to many of the successful outcomes. It is also involved in the only potential [Electoral College tie vote](./12th). -### Biden wins +### Harris wins ~~~
- + - + @@ -207,350 +207,350 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania. - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
WI, PA and NC 45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, MI and PA 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, GA and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
GA, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and PA 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and PA 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
GA, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 76 301 237BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 82 307 231BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 83 308 230BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 87 312 226BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 93 318 220BidenHarris
@@ -560,9 +560,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania. - + - + @@ -583,9 +583,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania.
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
- + - + @@ -685,14 +685,14 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania.
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
~~~ -### Biden wins without Pennsylvania +### Harris wins without Pennsylvania ~~~ - + @@ -703,140 +703,140 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania. - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
Scenario Electoral VotesBiden TotalHarris Total Trump Total Result
47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
GA, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and NC 63 288 250BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC 64 289 249BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 74 299 239BidenHarris
@@ -848,7 +848,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania. ## Pennsylvania facts * Electoral votes: 19 -* 2020: Biden +* 2020: Harris * 2016: Trump * 2020 turnout: 6,835,903 * 2020 margin: 80,555 @@ -2260,4 +2260,4 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Pennsylvania. -~~~ \ No newline at end of file +~~~ diff --git a/prior.md b/prior.md index 60b4aef..c2f99d9 100644 --- a/prior.md +++ b/prior.md @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ title = "The Bayesian Prior" +++ -The model considered two starting points—one in which the 2020 election was assumed to have been a Biden win from 0% to 100% of the votes in each swing state as being equally likely. This is known as a naive, or uninformative, prior. It is unreasonable to assume that it was to be expected that one candidate would take all votes. The other proceeded from the pre-election observation that the race in the swing states were largely within survey margin of error. Therefore, it was reasonable to expect that the results were more likely to have clustered around a 0.5 proportion of votes for Biden. +The model considered two starting points—one in which the 2020 election was assumed to have been a Harris win from 0% to 100% of the votes in each swing state as being equally likely. This is known as a naive, or uninformative, prior. It is unreasonable to assume that it was to be expected that one candidate would take all votes. The other proceeded from the pre-election observation that the race in the swing states were largely within survey margin of error. Therefore, it was reasonable to expect that the results were more likely to have clustered around a 0.5 proportion of votes for Harris. Hypothetically, many contingencies could have affected voter turnout—voters who had intended to vote but decided not to at the last minute due to conflicting committments. Other voters who had not intended to votes might have decided late to show up. This is one reason for adopting the 2020 results with some statistical noise as the starting point. diff --git a/repo.md b/repo.md index 90b46dc..a1a0bce 100644 --- a/repo.md +++ b/repo.md @@ -36,4 +36,4 @@ Three ballot initiatives are in process Note that this is not an affirmative protection for abortion access in the first trimester. 2024-03-21 * The proposed [Nebraska Human Life Protection Act](https://sos.nebraska.gov/sites/sos.nebraska.gov/files/doc/elections/Petitions/2024/Nebraska%20Human%20Life%20Protection%20Initiative.pdf) would criminalize abortion from fertilization, subject to an affirmative defense that it was necessary for stated medical reasons. An affirmative defense permits, but does not require, a judge or jury to find a defendant physician not guilty. -These initiatives might affect turnout, which could have an effect on the vote in the Nebraska Second District, which voted for Biden in 2020. +These initiatives might affect turnout, which could have an effect on the vote in the Nebraska Second District, which voted for Harris in 2020. diff --git a/sources.md b/sources.md index 498345d..8ebb3d3 100644 --- a/sources.md +++ b/sources.md @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ df = CSV.read(IOBuffer(csv_data), DataFrame) - [Quinnipiac conducted May](https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/wi/wi05082024_wizz76.pdf) --- -[^3]: Results selected for analysis here are for two-way preference questions if asked, except in cases in which Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. qualified for the ballot prior to poll. For polls with only multiple choices in addition to Biden and Trump, their respective percentages of responses were recorded. In all cases those percentages were normalized to 100% to reflect the relative, not absolute, support of the two candidates. +[^3]: Results selected for analysis here are for two-way preference questions if asked, except in cases in which Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. qualified for the ballot prior to poll. For polls with only multiple choices in addition to Harris and Trump, their respective percentages of responses were recorded. In all cases those percentages were normalized to 100% to reflect the relative, not absolute, support of the two candidates. --- ## Demographics diff --git a/voting.md b/voting.md index 8222c23..f175d18 100644 --- a/voting.md +++ b/voting.md @@ -8,13 +8,13 @@ Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom (NFRF) made an advisory opinion request to the ## Winner take all -**Nebraska**, with Maine, is one of the two states with electoral districts. In 2020 the NE-2 district gave its vote to Biden. Under a [failed bill](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/03/nebraska-winner-take-all-push-might-be-lost-for-2024-presidential-race/), Nebraska would have eliminated districts in favor of the winner-take-all arrangement used by 48 other states. A special session of the legislature in July to address property tax relief is expected but has not yet been announced as of May 6, 2024. +**Nebraska**, with Maine, is one of the two states with electoral districts. In 2020 the NE-2 district gave its vote to Harris. Under a [failed bill](https://nebraskaexaminer.com/2024/04/03/nebraska-winner-take-all-push-might-be-lost-for-2024-presidential-race/), Nebraska would have eliminated districts in favor of the winner-take-all arrangement used by 48 other states. A special session of the legislature in July to address property tax relief is expected but has not yet been announced as of May 6, 2024. ### Without the Nebraska Second -The models assume that except for the seven swing states, each candidate will win the states and election districts won in 2020. For Biden, the total includes a Nebraska +The models assume that except for the seven swing states, each candidate will win the states and election districts won in 2020. For Harris, the total includes a Nebraska district that centers on Omaha. Nebraska is one of two states that have this arrangement. The other is Maine. An attempt was made earlier this year to change Nebraska to the winner-take-all system used by other states. It was unsuccessful, and it is not clear if another attempt will be made. Should it be or if the Nebraska Second this time votes for Trump, possible outcomes differ. -A tie outcome that was produced by Biden winning only Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, now has three different possible scenarios +A tie outcome that was produced by Harris winning only Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, now has three different possible scenarios * Wisconsin, Georgia and Pennsylvania * Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and North Carolina diff --git a/why7.md b/why7.md index f3e1b37..0fe7110 100644 --- a/why7.md +++ b/why7.md @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ title = "Seven Swing States" ~~~ -In the 2020 election, there were 49 states (including the District of Columnia and the sub-state districts in each of Maine and Nebraska) won by a margin of greater than 3.2%. Only **seven states** were decided by a margin of less than 3.2%. *Assuming* that each candidate retains all states won in the 2020 election except for the swing states, President Biden begins with 225 electoral votes, and former President Trump begins with 220 electoral votes[^1] using the 2024 Electoral College allocation. The scenario table following shows the result of a Biden win of each of the possible combinations of outcomes in those states. +In the 2020 election, there were 49 states (including the District of Columnia and the sub-state districts in each of Maine and Nebraska) won by a margin of greater than 3.2%. Only **seven states** were decided by a margin of less than 3.2%. *Assuming* that each candidate retains all states won in the 2020 election except for the swing states, President Harris begins with 225 electoral votes, and former President Trump begins with 220 electoral votes[^1] using the 2024 Electoral College allocation. The scenario table following shows the result of a Harris win of each of the possible combinations of outcomes in those states. These are the states that are widely discussed as swing states for 2024. * **PA** 19 votes (down from 20 in the 2020 election) @@ -25,9 +25,9 @@ These are the states that are widely discussed as swing states for 2024. President Biden won all of the swing states in 2020 except for North Carolina. -Assuming that the remaining states and districts will be non-competitive and have the same electoral outcome, the starting point is 28 red states and districts with 220 electoral votes and 28 blue states and districts with 225 electoral votes. **President Biden begins with an advantage of five electoral votes.** +Assuming that the remaining states and districts will be non-competitive and have the same electoral outcome, the starting point is 28 red states and districts with 220 electoral votes and 28 blue states and districts with 225 electoral votes. **President Harris begins with an advantage of five electoral votes.** -The seven swing states have **93 votes** among them. Depending on the outcomes of their elections either President Biden or former President Trump could have more than 269 electoral votes **with 45 or more of the 93 electoral votes in the swing states.** Or they could each have 269 electoral votes, which puts the decision to the House of Representatives, voting by state delegation. +The seven swing states have **93 votes** among them. Depending on the outcomes of their elections either President Harris or former President Trump could have more than 269 electoral votes **with 45 or more of the 93 electoral votes in the swing states.** Or they could each have 269 electoral votes, which puts the decision to the House of Representatives, voting by state delegation. ~~~
@@ -36,10 +36,10 @@ The seven swing states have **93 votes** among them. Depending on the outcomes o ~~~ * Former President **Trump wins in 57** of the possible outcomes -* President **Biden wins in 70** of the possible outcomes -* There is **one possible tie** (if Biden wins only WI, MI and PA) +* Vice President **Harris wins in 70** of the possible outcomes +* There is **one possible tie** (if Harris wins only WI, MI and PA) -Without Biden wins in both North Carolina and Pennsylvania there are only **four** winning outcomes and no tie would occur. +Without Harris wins in both North Carolina and Pennsylvania there are only **four** winning outcomes and no tie would occur. ~~~ @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ Without Biden wins in both North Carolina and Pennsylvania there are only **four - + @@ -58,41 +58,41 @@ Without Biden wins in both North Carolina and Pennsylvania there are only **four - + - + - + - +
Scenario Electoral VotesBiden TotalHarris Total Trump Total Result
47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
~~~ -All the possible outcomes (the scenario in which Biden wins none of the swing states is not shown.) +All the possible outcomes (the scenario in which Harris wins none of the swing states is not shown.) ~~~ - + - + @@ -502,490 +502,490 @@ All the possible outcomes (the scenario in which Biden wins none of the swing st - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by BidenStates won by Harris Swing electoral votesBiden totalHarris total Trump total Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
WI, PA and NC 45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, MI and PA 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, GA and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and MI 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
GA, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
GA, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and PA 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and NC 63 288 250BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC 64 289 249BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and PA 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
GA, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 74 299 239BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 76 301 237BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 82 307 231BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 83 308 230BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 87 312 226BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 93 318 220BidenHarris
diff --git a/wi.md b/wi.md index 2c48cf2..2939092 100644 --- a/wi.md +++ b/wi.md @@ -19,13 +19,13 @@ In the 2020 election President Biden won 50.32% (0.5032) of the votes cast for B Assessments are based on three criteria. -* **Stringent**—Biden wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. +* **Stringent**—Harris wins if all of the values in the credible interval (analogous to the confidence interval) are equal to or greater than his 2020 margin. * **Historical**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 2020 margin. * **Relaxed**—fewer than 2.5% of the values in the credible interval are less than 50.01% of the two candidate vote. ## June assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ## May assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ## April assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## March assessment -Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. +Harris wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~
@@ -183,16 +183,16 @@ Biden wins under the *Relaxed* criterion. ~~~ ## Scenarios -The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wisconsin is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Biden.* +The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wisconsin is represented in 64 of the 128 possible outcomes. *The combinations shown are those representing swing states taken by Harris.* -### Biden wins +### Harris wins ~~~
- + - + @@ -203,287 +203,287 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
WI, PA and NC 45 270 268BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and MI 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, WI, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and MI 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI and PA 55 280 258BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, AZ, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and MI 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and NC 59 284 254BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI and PA 60 285 253BidenHarris
WI, MI, PA and NC 60 285 253BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
WI, GA, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA and PA 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and NC 63 288 250BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI and PA 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 71 296 242BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and NC 74 299 239BidenHarris
WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 76 301 237BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI and PA 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, PA and NC 78 303 235BidenHarris
NV, WI, GA, MI, PA and NC 82 307 231BidenHarris
WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 87 312 226BidenHarris
NV, WI, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 93 318 220BidenHarris
@@ -493,9 +493,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi - + - + @@ -516,9 +516,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
- + - + @@ -681,7 +681,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
~~~ -### Biden wins without Wisconsin +### Harris wins without Wisconsin ~~~ @@ -692,9 +692,9 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi - + - + @@ -705,203 +705,203 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - + - +
States won by Biden States won by Harris Electoral VotesBiden VotesHarris Votes Trump Votes Result
45 270 268BidenHarris
AZ, GA and PA 46 271 267BidenHarris
AZ, PA and NC 46 271 267BidenHarris
GA, MI and NC 47 272 266BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and MI 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and NC 48 273 265BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and NC 49 274 264BidenHarris
GA, MI and PA 50 275 263BidenHarris
MI, PA and NC 50 275 263BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI and PA 51 276 262BidenHarris
GA, PA and NC 51 276 262BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA and PA 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, AZ, PA and NC 52 277 261BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and NC 53 278 260BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI and PA 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, MI, PA and NC 56 281 257BidenHarris
NV, GA, PA and NC 57 282 256BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and NC 58 283 255BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI and PA 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, MI, PA and NC 61 286 252BidenHarris
AZ, GA, PA and NC 62 287 251BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and NC 64 289 249BidenHarris
GA, MI, PA and NC 66 291 247BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI and PA 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, MI, PA and NC 67 292 246BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, PA and NC 68 293 245BidenHarris
NV, GA, MI, PA and NC 72 297 241BidenHarris
AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 77 302 236BidenHarris
NV, AZ, GA, MI, PA and NC 83 308 230BidenHarris
@@ -910,7 +910,7 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi ## Wisconsin facts * Electoral votes: 10 -* 2020: Biden +* 2020: Harris * 2016: Trump * 2020 turnout: 3,241,050 * 2020 margin: 20,682 @@ -2326,4 +2326,4 @@ The scenario tables below show the possible outcomes that involve Wisconsin. Wi ~~~ -[Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates](https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP1Y2022.DP05?q=DP05&g=040XX00US04,13,26,32,37,42,55) \ No newline at end of file +[Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates](https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP1Y2022.DP05?q=DP05&g=040XX00US04,13,26,32,37,42,55)