Second electoral ratings: Five changes all favor Obama

Two weeks have passed since my first electoral ratings found a tight electoral college race, with 15 states making up the initial batch of battleground states. Since then, the general election has been heating up and the candidates have engaged in tense back-and-forth on issues ranging from energy policy to terrorism. There have also been a number of polls released in the interval, not all of which have confirmed the conventional wisdom.

I will attempt to update ratings every two weeks (and every week once we get closer to the election) to maintain a continuous history. As I wrote last time, these are based on a mixture of polling data, considerations of which states parties are likely to invest in, the candidate's strengths and weaknesses and voting and registration patterns of each state since 2004. Thus, a low double-digits in a poll is not synonymous with likely category, and it will not descend to the "lean" group as soon as a poll shows a single-digit margin. (For electoral ratings that are based on stricter formulas, check the always-excellent Electoral-Vote and FiveThirtyEight.)

For instance, a recent AR poll might have shown a 9% lead for McCain, but the state remains in the "safe" category for now. Not only is one survey not enough to shift a state, but not all 9% leads are equal: Obama's very high unfavorability numbers in that AR poll suggest that he might have reached a ceiling he can only rise in case of a huge boost in black turnout. Until we see whether Obama is committed to such an effort in this particular state, there is no point in upgrading Arkansas to a more competitive category.

Without further delay, here are the second 2008 electoral college ratings (states whose ratings have been changed are in bold). Remember that states that are in the "lean" category are still considered to be very competitive and certain to be hotly contested, but it is possible to say that one candidate has a slight edge at this time.

• Safe McCain: Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska (at large + 3rd congressional district), Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming (87 EVs)

• Likely McCain: Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska (1st and 2nd congressional districts), North Dakota, Texas (87 EVs)

• Lean McCain: Florida, North Carolina (42 EVs)

• Toss-up: Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia (84 EV)

• Lean Obama: Iowa, Oregon, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin (55 EVs)

• Likely Obama: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, New Jersey, Washington (97 EVs)

• Safe Obama: DC, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont (86 EVs)

This gives us the following map (courtesy of the Washington Post's interactive feature, though I was not able to color lean states a lighter shade) and totals:

• Safe + Likely Obama: 183 electoral votes
• Safe + Likely + Lean Obama: 238
• Toss-up: 84
• Safe + Likely + Lean McCain: 216
• Safe + Likely McCain: 174

I will naturally not attempt to provide an explanation for every single one of these ratings and will concentrate instead on the four that have shifted over the past two weeks.

Arizona, Safe McCain to Likely McCain: Perhaps this is a case of an over-eager media looking for a story, but it is hard not to notice the abundance of articles questioning whether John McCain is a sure bet in his home-state, including recent pieces in The Christian Science Monitor and in CQ. The Senator's surprisingly low percentage in the state primary (he beat Mitt Romney by 12%) raised red flags as to his rocky relationship with Arizona's conservative base. The latest poll has an 11% margin and Obama could spell real trouble for McCain if he solidifies the Hispanic vote. The Republican remains heavily favored, if only because Obama is unlikely to push too hard. If he does lose here, however, would that push him towards the retirement in 2010?

Missouri, Lean McCain to Toss-up: The polls showing a tight race between the two candidates were available two weeks ago and were only confirmed by two surveys released since that showed Obama barely edging out McCain. What changed was my confidence that the Obama campaign will not give up on contesting Missouri. In 2004, the Kerry campaign pulled out of the state in October -- though it was certainly never their top priority -- and ended up losing by 7%. This year, the Obama campaign will certainly have enough money to not have to pull out and given their determination to not have to rely on Ohio and Florida they will make sure to push hard in other states that are ripe for pick-up. The fact that Missouri's gubernatorial race right now is an open seat in which the Democratic candidate is polling 20% ahead also tells us a lot about the dismal environment the GOP is facing.

Wisconsin, Toss-up to Lean Obama: Barack Obama is polling well in the "Dukakis five," states with traditional Democratic roots that had been more competitive in the past few cycles. By posting strong leads in Washington, Minnesota in particular, he is demonstrating that the shift in voters' partisan breakdown towards an increased identification with the Democratic Party is making it very difficult for the GOP to contest in states that have a slight blue lean in a neutral environment. Obama is posting narrow leads in Wisconsin, though the latest Badger poll showed him up by double-digits. Neither candidate is likely to create much space here in the coming months -- remember that Wisconsin really seemed lost to the Kerry campaign in the summer and fall of 2004 -- but Obama starts off with a slight edge.

Pennsylvania, Toss-up to Lean Obama: There is a reason Obama unveiled John Edwards's and Al Gore's endorsements in Michigan rather than in Pennsylvania: The Keystone State is no longer the main target for Republicans anxious to pick-up a blue state. Kerry's margin here in 2004 was smaller than Bush's in Ohio, but the state has shifted in the past four years. The Democratic tsunami ended up submerging PA Republicans more than it did their OH counterparts and the heated Clinton-Obama showdown gave both Democratic contenders weeks of exposure. Hundred of thousands of new voters registered as Democrats or switched their party registration, providing Obama with an increased base, and it's hard to ignore Quinnipiac's insistence that Obama

However, that Obama starts off with a slight edge does not mean that this state does not remain very competitive. If the Illinois Senator ends up weak among blue-collar voters, it will have a major impact on Pennsylvania and McCain will seize on every opportunity to gain in the state's rural regions. And the suburban areas remain a mystery, as Obama performed unexpectedly weakly in Philly's suburbs on April 22nd. The situation here is similar as the one in Florida: Both states will be hotly contested by both parties but it's hard to not think that they would go in opposing camps if the election were held today (I am aware of today's polls that show Obama slightly ahead in FL though I have not changed my rating. More discussion of FL will come in due course).

Massachusetts, Likely Obama to Safe Obama: This is the exception to my rule that ratings will not shift based on a single poll. This state was one of the biggest disappointments for the Obama campaign on February 5th, and he has been polling stunningly weak general election numbers ever since, barely edging out McCain in a series of SUSA polls. Yet, and while it appears likely that Hillary Clinton's margin of victory would have been far greater than Obama's, the latest poll released by Suffolk does show Obama distancing McCain by 23%. The thought of Massachusetts's general election being competitive is too ludicrous for me to entertain it without a constant stream of evidence, so this state is moving back where it should be -- though we will keep a close eye on it.

History of Campaign Diaries' electoral ratings:

• June 18th: +22 Obama (238 for Obama [183 base, 55 lean] and 216 for McCain [174, 42])
• June 4th: +20 McCain (207 for Obama [183, 24] and 227 for McCain [174, 53])

Friday polls: Obama polls better in Ohio, dogged by low numbers with registered Dems

As the Democratic primaries are heading towards their conclusion, more polling outlets are releasing general election surveys, leading to a daily drumbeat of interesting results. Today, we ought to start with the two surveys from Ohio and Pennsylvania, among the most important states in the general election:

• SUSA released one of the first surveys from Ohio that is favorable to Obama for a long time. The Illinois Senator leads John McCain 48% to 39%. Note that the sample contains a very high number of registered Democrats (52%), though it's also important to notice that Obama reaches his highest level of support among registered Democrats in any SUSA poll from Ohio: 76%.


• This is a poll meant to test VP support, so there is no match-up with Clinton. I will not detail the VP tests, but the range goes from +2 McCain for Huckabee/Rendell tickets to +18 Obama for Pawlently/Edwards tickets.


• Meanwhile, a Rasmussen poll from Pennsylvania shows Clinton crushing McCain 50% to 39% while Obama is only ahead 45% to 43%. Last month, Obama trailed by 1 and Clinton led by 6.


• Obama's support among registered Democrats is very low: 63%. McCain and him have comparable favorability levels.

A long series of polls -- cumulating in yesterday's Quinnipiac poll that showed Obama trailing McCain while Clinton crushed him -- suggested that Obama had a big problem in Ohio. This SUSA poll does not fully dispell that notion considering the strange partisan breakdown and the fact that the majority of respondents are registered Democrats. But it also should serve as a reminder that, even if Obama might have electoral maps that are more appropriate for him than the emphasis on OH and FL that could work better for Clinton, Ohio at least still remains competitive and the Obama campaign has enough money to compete there forcefully even while focusing on Virginia and Colorado.

As for Pennsylvania, it merely confirms the series of PA/OH/FL polls I mentioned above that show Clinton polling more strongly than Obama in those states. Yesterday's Quinnipiac poll showed similar results. PA is not a state that the Obama campaign can ignore, to say the least. Not only does it lean more Democratic than OH and FL, but losing all three swing states would make it extremely difficult for Obama to climb back to 270 electoral votes. Meanwhile, two other polls from important swing states were released:

• In Nevada, Rasmussen finds Clinton polling surprisingly better than Obama given that Western states are supposed to be more welcoming to him: Clinton is ahead 46% to 41% and McCain leads Obama 46% to 40%. Obama only gets 65% of registered Democrats.


• In New Hampshire, Rasmussen finds both Democrats reversing the April trend and leading McCain. Clinton is leading 51% to 41% and Obama is ahead 48% to 43%. In the all-important (and symbolic, given what happened on January 8th) battle for independents, Obama is ahead of McCain by 11%.

The two Southwestern states (New Mexico and Nevada) and New Hampshire will feautre some of this year's tightest battles, though none of them offer a lot of electoral votes. The Southwstern showdown, however, will be key to future presidential elections, as Democrats need to make gains in the region as their Northeastern strongholds will continue to lose electoral votes.

Note, however, that in both Nevada and Pennsylvania Obama's principal weakness comes from registered Democrats, a phenomenon that we have documented at great length by now but that is nonetheless always surprising to notice. The Illinois Senator will surely rise above numbers like 63-66% support as the party is reunited, but there is no doubt that he will face major difficulties in his efforts to solidify the base. How well he addresses the concerns of registered Democrats reluctant to support him appears to be the key to November.

Finally, three polls were released from states that should safe for one party or the other:

• In Mississippi, a Research 2000 poll found McCain beating both Dems,54% to 39% against Obama and 55% to 36% against Clinton.


• In California, Rasmussen finds both Democrats leading, 52% to 38% for Obama and 55% to 36% for Clinton. McCain's favorability rating is at 46%, Obama's at 57%.


• PPIC also polled California and found Obama with a bigger lead, 54% to 37%, while Clinton's lead was 51% to 39%.


• Finally, Behavior Research Center finds McCain leading in his home-state of Arizona: 50% to 39% against Obama, 51% to 36% against Clinton.

Democrats should be heartened that all four of their leads in California are double-digits. If California polls show any sign of tightening, Democrats would be forced to spend precious time and resources defending these must-win 55 electoral votes. Meanwhile, McCain's numbers in Mississippi and Arizona are underwhelming. Some around the Obama campaign insist that states like Mississippi could be in play as Obama will boost black turnout, but the internals of the Research 2000 polls show that will come at a price: white voters will turn to the GOP more than they usually do. Obama only got 18% of the white vote in this Mississippi poll.

Wednesday polls: The battle for independents, and Kentucky is Clinton country

After 2 days filled with polls from Indiana and North Carolina, only one primary poll was released today. SUSA polled Kentucky for the third time, and confirms that this could be one of the biggest Clinton states:

• Clinton now leads Obama 63% to 27%. Two weeks ago, the margin was identical: 62% to 26%.
• Confirming that Obama's toughest region in the country is the Appalachians, he loses Eastern Kentucky 84% to 10%, implying there is a risk Obama might not be viable in at least one district.

If Hillary Clinton is still in the race after May 6th, it could mean two very rough weeks for Obama as results in West Virginia on the 13th and Kentucky on the 20th aren't likely to look very good for him. The demographics of these states will allow Clinton, if she lives up to the potential of this SUSA poll, to further her argument that Obama is too weak among white blue-collar voters to win the general election. Whether or not that hurts Obama among superdelegates, such conversation would continue to put him on the defensive.

National polls confirm that Clinton has found a second life since her Pennsylvania primary. Today's Gallup poll has Clinton edging out Obama 47% to 46% for the second day in a row; it had been quite a while Clinton had been on top two consecutive days. And Fox News's latest poll released today has Clinton leading 44% to 41%. These polls are obviously useless measures, since most states have already voted by now; but they still hint at the mood of the electorate and the two candidates' momentum.

Meanwhile, a series of general election surveys confirms how difficult it is to establish electability comparisons:

• Fox News finds Clinton edging out McCain nationally, 45% to 44%; Obama trails 46% to 43%. Among independents, a group Obama typically does better in, Clinton now performs better but McCain beats them both (by 4% against Clinton, by 10% against Obama).
• Interestingly, an Obama-Clinton ticket would beat a McCain-Romney ticket 47% to 41%, suggesting that Democrats would have an edge if they can present a united front.

• Update: A new New York Times poll was just released. It shows Obama leading Clinton 46% to 38% in the primary but it also shows Clinton running better in the general, leading McCain 48% to 43% while Obama and McCain are tied at 45%.
  

• A poll taken in AZ by Arizona State, meanwhile, finds McCain in single-digits against Obama, leading 47% to 38%. He leads against Clinton by a wider 53% to 37%.

• Finally, a somewhat surprising poll by Monmouth University from New Jersey finds McCain trounced by both candidates. He trails Obama 56% to 32% and Clinton 52% to 38%. The main difference between the two candidates is their strength among independents, as Clinton leads by 1% and Obama by 17%.

Most polls taken in New Jersey suggest a close race; the latest poll prior to this one has both Democrats ahead by 5% and McCain has been able to remain very competitive in Northeastern states. This poll thus looks to overstate the Democrats' advantage, but it still stands as a reminder of how tough the Garden State still is for Republicans; they seem to waste a lot of money only two years for very little rewards.

Meanwhile, the results in Arizona confirm that McCain starts clearly ahead and it would probably make little sense for Democrats to spend resources here; but I would not be surprised if the race ends up being more competitive here than the conventional wisdom suggests. You might remember that McCain did not even break 50% on February 5th, besting Romney by 12%; McCain seems to have some problems in his home state.

Tuesday polls: Should we paint New York purple?

The six-week lull is over, and it's Election Day! The afternoon and evening coverage will be heavy with Pennsylvania analysis, of course, so let us start with the day's polls -- many of which are not Pennsylvania related.

• Zogby released his last tracking poll from Pennsylvania, finding Hillary Clinton jumping to a 10% lead, 51% to 41%. There is a clear trendline in favor of Hillary in the final days, as her lead moves from three to six to ten points.
• Zogby confirms which group holds the key to today's election: white men, particularly Catholics.

• Insider Advantage, meanwhile, also released its second poll in two days and finds Clinton's lead at 7%, 49% to 42%. Yesterday's survey showed a 10% lead.
  

The expectations have been set by the wave of polls released yesterday, all but one showing Clinton in the lead with anywhere from low single-digits to low double-digits. If Clinton stays in that range, this is likely to be a disappointing night for her; if she goes beyond it and wins by solid double-digits, we are in this race for the long haul.

Naturally, as early as tomorrow morning we will be on to the May 6th primaries and things are not going very well for Hillary there either, with the North Carolina contest increasingly looking like it could sink her:

• PPP's latest poll released yesterday shows Obama opening a 25% lead against Clinton, 57% to 32%.
  
• Note that PPP is the only institute that has shown Obama leading in Pennsylvania -- and has done so consistently. Depending on today's results, we will know if their turnout model is good or if it has flaws.

There is no doubt that Clinton cannot survive May 6th if she suffers such a loss, whatever happens in Indiana. First, it would only deepen her delegate predicament; second, it would be a terrible symbolic blow in one of the country's biggest states; third, such a large Obama victory would undoubtedly be accompanied by his progressing among the groups Clinton wants to show he is weak in. Naturally, if Hillary posts a very strong victory today it could help her down the line (not that we have seen momentum carry the candidates to further victories this cycle).

Finally, a wave of general election polls:

• In New York, first, Siena University paints a very worrisome picture for Democrats as McCain is extremely competitive against both Hillary Clinton (46% to 42%) and Barack Obama (45% to 40%). The favorability ratings are also remarkable, with Clinton only standing at 48-46 in her home state, behind both McCain (54-35) and Obama (54-34).

• Rasmussen confirms that Democrats have no chance in Arizona, McCain's home state, despite its having been a swing state in past elections. The Republican beats Clinton 60% to 32% and Obama 57% to 37%. Note that there are competitive House races in Arizona (AZ-01 and possibly AZ-05 and AZ-08) in which McCain's strength could help the GOPers.

• Finally, a national poll by USA Today/Gallup (this is not the tracking poll) shows both Democrats posting a narrow lead over McCain. Clinton leads 50% to 44% and Obama is ahead 47% to 44%.

There have been enough New York polls showing a tight race at this point that Democrats should start getting worried; the Marist poll two weeks ago showed Obama actually trailing McCain; both Quinnipiac and SUSA's last week showed Obama held in single-digits (though Clinton was in double-digits). Despite the Siena poll's assertion that Clinton is as weak as Obama in a match-up, the Illinois Senator typically has more trouble in past polls.

It would be a catastrophe for Democrats to have to spend any money or time in one of the country's most expensive media markets in order to defend one of the states that has been the most reliably Democratic in past cycles. In fact, the New York Republican Party is slowly but surely dying -- but it would be a great blessing for them if McCain's coattails were unexpectedly strong enough to save their majority in the state Senate.

It is still unlikely that New York becomes competitive -- but we will have to keep an eye on the polls. After all, at the heart of McCain's general election strength is his appeal to independents and moderate Democrats.

Morning polls, and lots of them: Colorado is a toss-up

• Colorado's Senate seat: Definitely a toss-up

We had seen some polls starting in September showing Mark Udall and Bob Shaffer in a toss-up in the open Colorado Senate seat; but most of them were internal polls, so I had left the race ranked "lean take-over" in my Senate rankings. But the latest poll from Rasmussen makes it more difficult to do so: Shaffer gets 42% and Udall 41%.

The SUSA poll from November 5th had Udall up 48% to 41% but there is now too much evidence that Bob Shaffer is keeping things much more competitive than expected in Colorado. Given what happened in 2006, where relatively unknown Democrat Ritter broke ahead of GOP star Beauprez early and never looked back, most people were expecting the same thing to happen here -- but it looks like the GOP is getting a break in the state and has a real chance of holding it. The question is: will they put choose to fight here when they might have so many other endangered seats to protect?

• Rasmussen polls Arizona, Colorado and Kansas's general election

Rasmussen also came out with some presidential polls from three states that Bush won comfortably in 2004. Republicans look to be ahead in all three -- though Clinton gets decent showings:

• In Colorado, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani beat Hillary Clinton 44% to 40%.
• Hillary is behind Mike Huckabee 42% to 41% but she leads Mitt Romney 43% to 40%.

• In Arizona, McCain's home state, he crushes all three Democrats: 57% to 34% against Clinton, 55% to 33% against Obama, and 56% to 30% against Edwards.
• Clinton is a bit stronger against other GOPers, though she still laggs behind: 47% to 38% against Giuliani, 45% to 41% against Romney.

• Finally, Kansas, a state Bush won with 62% in 2004. Clinton is distanced, but she keeps all Republicans but McCain who leads her 55% to 32%.
• Giuliani is ahead 49% to 36%, Romney 47% to 35%, and Huckabee 47% to 38%.

Another poll from Kansas released a week ago showed Democrats a bit more competitive, but the bottom line was the same: McCain crushed both Obama and Clinton, but Giuliani barely mustered a 5% lead against both -- and Clinton and Obama both led against Romney.

Clearly these 3 polls have no particular good news for Clinton, but they at least reinforce the fact that she would in no way be destroyed in those red states the NYT claims she would drown in.

• California's initiative could pass

SUSA asked voters in California whether all of CA's 55 votes should go to the winner, or whether they should be divided between different candidates in a new poll released yesterday. 35% said winner-take-all, and 47% answered divided. This certainly suggests that there is the potential that the electoral vote initiative prepared by GOP activists could pass.

But, the poll is also certainly not bad news for Democrats. SUSA did not ask this in the form of electoral intentions on an initiative; it was asked as a policy question. The "yes" has to be strongly above 50% from the start in polling of referendums for the initiative to be able to pass; that is even more true when the poll only asks it as a principle. When voters have to look at a specific proposal, the "no" goes up significantly. In 2005, California voters had to decide whether to give the redistricting process to independent judges rather than to the legislature. While most agreed with the principle, the measure was likely perceived to have the potential to hurt Democrats -- and it failed.

Democrats land two new House candidates... and look ahead to 2010!

Exciting news for House Democrats on this Thursday morning, as they are putting two new House seats in play by recruiting some strong challengers. The first is the Alaska at large seat, held by Don Young. The entire Alaska congressional delegation has been hit by strong allegations of unethical misconduct and is under investigation, so that Democrats smell blood and want to take advantage of the GOP's troubles.

Ethan Berkowitz, the state's House Minority Leader from 1999 to 2006, has announced his bid to take on Young. Berkowitz lost a race for lieutenant governor in 2006, and Democrats believe he could cause real trouble for Young who only got 56% in his last race, and that was before the allegations against him really picked up. Berkowitz will have a primary fight, however, as former state party chair Jake Metcalfe and Diane Benson, Young's 2006 opponent, are already in the race.

And in Florida, Democrats are moving in on Rep. Tom Feeney, who is under investagation also for his links to lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Dems have been pressuring Feeney for a while, hoping to force a retirement by running ads against him early, and they now have a candidate they believe can take Feeney down: former state Rep. Suzanne Kosmas. The DCCC alluded to a poll taken showing the race to be very competitive, but did not release the numbers (which is really cheap... what is the point of touting such a poll if we cannot confirm it?).

Finally, Democrats are very excited about a Rasmussen poll of... a 2010 Senate race. It shows John McCain would have trouble winning re-election in Arizona if Democrats nominate Governor Napolitano to run against him. McCain trails her by only 1% (46-45). A similar poll taken a few months ago had McCain much further down. This is naturally completly meaningless, since who knows what the political situation will be in 2010, but could numbers like this push McCain to retire if he fails in his presidential bid? In more interesting numbers, the poll also shows Republicans favored to win the state in the presidential election:

• Rudy Giuliani defeats Hillary Clinton 48% to 39%.
• McCain wins 52% to 40%. The fact that he does only marginally better than Giuliani is certainly a sign of weakness of McCain... certainly confirmed by the new ARG primary poll from Arizona in which McCain comes in first, but with a very pale 26%.