Tag Archives: Texas

Presidential Polling Report – Part II

By Jim Ellis

Nov. 30, 2020 — Last week, we covered the cumulative polling community’s 2020 accuracy in the Great Lakes region (scroll down below), and today we look at how their predictions fared in President Trump’s five core states of Arizona, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas. If the President had been able to carry all five states, and he has now officially failed in Arizona and Georgia, he would have only needed to win one of the battleground state bordering a Great Lake to secure re-election.

In each place, we take the five publicly released polls conducted closest to the election and analyze whether the cumulative and individual survey research firms came close to the final result or missed beyond the polling margin of error.

Arizona

Canvassing is not yet complete in Arizona, but it appears Mr. Biden scored a 49.4 to 49.1% victory, a margin of just 10,457 votes. Carrying Arizona was the first conversion step for Mr. Biden to win the national election.

The final five pollsters were the NBC News/Marist College; CNBC/Change Research; Reuters/Ipsos, Emerson College, and Rasmussen Reports. Here, NBC/Marist came the closest, predicting the two candidates landing in virtually a dead heat. All five, however, were within the polling margin of error, though Rasmussen Reports did call the winner wrong, predicting President Trump would carry the state by four percentage points.

Arizona – Biden 0.3 percent

NBC News/Marist 10/29 – 11/1 717 LV 48 48 Tie
CNBC/Change Research 10/29 – 11/1 409 LV 50 47 Biden +3
Reuters/Ipsos 10/27 – 11/1 610 LV 49 47 Biden +2
Emerson 10/29 – 31 732 LV 48 46 Biden +2
Rasmussen Reports 10/27 – 29 800 LV 45 49 Trump +4

Florida

Cumulative polling predictions again projected a close Democratic win during most of the late election cycle only to see, for the fourth consecutive time in a major Florida statewide race, the Republican candidate reversing the trend and clinching a close win. The latest Florida data was much closer to the mark as three of the final five pollsters correctly forecast a win for President Trump.

The Trafalgar Group proved the closest with their Trump +2 final projection. CNBC/Change Research missed by the most, a six-plus point swing from their Biden +3 prediction to a Trump +3.3 final result.

The final five Sunshine State pollsters were: Fox 35/Insider Advantage; the Trafalgar Group; CNBC/Change Research; Susquehanna Polling & Research; and Rasmussen Reports.

Florida – Trump 3.3 percent

FOX 35/Insider Adv 11/2 400 LV 47 48 Tie Trump +1
Trafalgar Group 10/31 – 11/2 1003 LV 47 49 Tie Trump +2
CNBC/Change Research 10/29 – 11/1 806 LV 51 49 Tie Biden +3
Susquehanna 10/29 – 11/1 400 LV 46 47 Tie Trump +1
Rasmussen Reports 10/29 – 31 800 LV 48 47 Tie Biden +1

Georgia

Just about everyone missed the final count in Georgia, though pollsters throughout the election cycle were clearly forecasting a close Peach State race that certainly ended in such a manner. With the race now certified, Biden won the state, 49.5 to 49.3 percent, a margin of just 12,670 votes.

The only pollster to correctly predict a Biden victory was Public Policy Polling, while the Trafalgar Group, despite being closest in Arizona, was furthest away in Georgia. The five pollsters were: WSB-TV/Landmark Communications; the Trafalgar Group; Insider Advantage; Emerson College; and Public Policy Polling.

Georgia – Biden 0.2 percent

WSB-TV/Landmark 11/1 500 LV 50 46 Trump +4
Trafalgar Group 10/31 – 11/2 1013 LV 50 45 Trump +5
Insider Advantage 11/1 500 LV 48 46 Trump +2
Emerson 10/29 – 31 749 LV 49 48 Trump +1
PPP 10/27 – 28 661 LV 46 48 Biden +2

North Carolina

North Carolina, being one of the quintessential swing states in the country, again produced a close race in 2020 as President Trump claimed the Tar Heel State with just a 1.3 percentage margin, 49.9 – 48.6 percent. Rasmussen Reports was again closest to the mark, as they were in Pennsylvania. Most of the polling throughout the entire election cycle, however, 57 of 85 published polls with eight ties, forecast Biden as holding a North Carolina lead.

The five final pollsters were: Insider Advantage; CNBC/Change Research; Emerson College; Reuters/Ipsos; and Rasmussen Reports. While RR was the closest, CNBC/Change Research was furthest away.

North Carolina – Trump 1.3 percent

Insider Advantage 10/30 – 31 450 LV 48 44 Trump +4
CNBC/Change Research 10/29 – 11/1 473 LV 47 49 Biden +2
Emerson 10/29 – 30 855 LV 47 47 Tie
Reuters/Ipsos 10/27 – 11/1 707 LV 48 49 Biden +1
Rasmussen Reports 10/28 – 29 800 LV 48 47 Trump +1

Texas

Media report after media report continued along the theme that the Lone Star State of Texas was in play for Biden but, in the end, Texas remained red and voted for President Trump in a 5.5 percentage spread, 52.0 – 46.5 percent, which was the closest major statewide race in nearly two decades.

At the end of the race, the pollsters were detecting a clear move toward President Trump largely because the oil and gas industry issues, so important to the Texas economy, became the focal point of attack throughout most of the campaign.

The University of Houston poll called the race almost exactly correct, while two academic institution pollsters, Emerson College and Quinnipiac University, were furthest away. The five pollsters were: Emerson College; University of Massachusetts at Lowell; Siena College/New York Times; Quinnipiac University; and the University of Houston.

Texas – Trump 5.5 percent

Emerson 10/29 – 31 763 LV 49 49 Tie
UMass Lowell 10/20 – 26 873 LV 48 47 Trump +1
Siena College/NYT 10/20 – 25 802 LV 47 43 Trump +4
Quinnipiac 10/16 – 19 1145 LV 47 47 Tie
University of Houston 10/13 – 20 1000 LV 50 45 Trump +5

ME-2

For the second time in two presidential elections, the 2nd Congressional District of Maine bucked the statewide trend and supported President Trump. Biden’s larger margin in the ME-1 CD allowed him to carry the statewide count, which earned him three of Maine’s four electoral votes.

As in the US Senate election in which the polling community missed the final result by the largest margin in the country, so too did they underestimate President Trump’s strength in northern Maine.

All five final pollsters forecast a Joe Biden victory in ME-2, but the end result was a substantial win for President Trump. Each missed well beyond the polling margin of error. The five polling firms were: Change Research; Emerson College; Survey USA; Colby College; and Pan Atlantic Research.

ME-2 – Trump 7.9 percent

Change Research 10/29 – 11/2 475 LV 47 46 Biden +1
Emerson College 10/29 – 31 301 LV 50 47 Biden +3
Survey USA 10/23 – 27 509 LV 48 45 Biden +3
Colby College 10/21 – 25 453 LV 46 42 Biden +4
Pan Atlantic Research 10/2 – 6 300 LV 47 43 Biden +4

More on Redistricting

By Jim Ellis

Winners & losers in the redistricting tug of wars

Nov. 19, 2020 — In yesterday’s Update, we ended with the paragraph, “Considering the states that are losing and gaining seats, party control, and changing political trends, the Republicans are still likely to lose a small net number of seats in the transfer process despite holding the most redistricting power.”

This statement generated some questions about why the Republicans could lose seats in the apportionment transfer when they hold the balance of power in more states. Today, we delve deeper.

At this point, and remembering these are only estimates that could change when the actual apportionment formula produces the official number of seats that each state will possess, it appears ten seats will move from one state to others. Therefore, it is projected that Texas (3), Florida (2), Arizona, Colorado, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon will gain districts, while Alabama, California, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia will lose a seat apiece. We will now explore each individually:

States That Lose

• Alabama – Even though Republicans have full control and a 6R-1D delegation, the Republicans will take the loss here. The Democratic district is a Voting Rights seat, so the loss will come from the GOP column even though they hold the redistricting pen.

• California – The lopsided California delegation, even with Republicans gaining one to three seats here when the votes are all finally counted, will likely yield the Democrats losing the district. California is a commission state that operates under strict guidelines. Therefore, the mathematics suggest, in what will potentially end as a 43D-10R delegation that the transfer seat loss will come from the Democratic column.

• Illinois – Though the state delegation features only five Republicans from a group of 18 members, the Democrats control the redistricting process here and 10 years ago produced the most lopsided of partisan gerrymanders. Expect them to figure a way for the Republicans to take the one seat loss.

• Michigan – The voters adopted a new redistricting commission, but the composition parameters look to favor the Democrats. Therefore, expect the 7D-7R delegation to recede by one Republican seat.

• Minnesota – This state features the only state legislature where each party controls one legislative chamber. Though this gives the Republicans a seat at the redistricting table, the population loss in the northern part of the state, where they have two seats, will likely result in the 4D-4R delegation lessening by one Republican seat.

Continue reading →

The Redistricting Prelude

By Jim Ellis

Nov. 18, 2020 — The Census Bureau continues to make progress in completing the decennial population count and it appears the national apportionment report, which details how many congressional seats each state’s population earns, will be delivered to Congress in early January. Because of COVID, the apportionment process has been slightly delayed since the report typically has a year-end deadline.

Once apportionment is known, states then begin receiving their updated data necessary for drawing new congressional and state legislative districts. The states with the earliest primaries are the first to receive their data so they have adequate time to prepare their new congressional and state legislative boundaries.

In terms of apportionment, it is expected that Texas may gain approximately three seats and Florida two. The other gaining states are likely to be Arizona, Colorado, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon. Those losing seats appear to be Alabama, California (for the first time in history), Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia. These estimates are not always completely correct, so this list could change when the actual apportionment is applied and publicly released.

A total of 34 states will draw their new districts solely through the legislative process. The remaining multi-member states operate through a type of commission, either an independent body or one under political control. Seven states are at-large meaning their congressional race is statewide. Rhode Island joins this group in 2021 as it will lose its second seat, while Montana will likely regain the district that was lost in the 1991 reapportionment.

In the Nov. 3 election, Republicans saw a net gain in state legislative seats around the country. Only one state saw its legislative chambers flip, however, the New Hampshire House and Senate moving from Democrat to Republican. This means Republicans will control 61 legislative chambers as compared to the Democrats’ 37. The Nebraska unicameral legislature is elected on a non-partisan basis, but Republicans control that chamber as well.

Republicans will again have the advantage in the states where the legislatures and governors determine the new map boundaries. Democrats, largely under the National Democratic Redistricting Committee that former Attorney General Eric Holder leads, targeted 13 states to protect or gain legislative chambers. They failed in all, as Republicans kept their majorities in each state they previously controlled and flipped New Hampshire to their column.

Continue reading →

The Final Polls

By Jim Ellis

Nov. 2, 2020 — Tomorrow is the official Election Day, but with early voting delivering nearly 87 million votes and 21 states allowing ballots to come in after Nov. 3, it is likely that many Senate and House races will languish in political overtime. With that background, we look at the polling range of the most recent surveys in battleground Senate races along with the number of people who have already cast their ballots in each state (early voting statistics from TargetSmart.com):

ALABAMA:
• Sen. Doug Jones (D) vs. Tommy Tuberville (R)
Polling Range
High: Cygnal (Oct. 26-28) – Tuberville +14
Low: Auburn U Montgomery (Oct. 23-28) – Tuberville +11
No Early Voting

ALASKA:
• Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) vs. Dr. Al Gross (I/D)
Polling Range
High: Gravis Marketing (Oct. 21-23) – Sullivan +3
Low: Change Research (Oct. 16-19) – Sullivan +3

Early Voting Stats:
Republican: 49.1% Total Early Voting 2020: 131,261
Democrat: 33.0% Total Early Voting 2016: 64,583
Unaffiliated: 17.9% Percent Increase: 103%

ARIZONA:
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) vs. Mark Kelly (D)
Polling Range
High: Siena College/NYT (Oct. 26-30) – Kelly +7
Low: Emerson College (Oct. 29-31) – Kelly +3

Early Voting Stats:
Republican: 47.0% Total Early Voting 2020: 2,376,706
Democrat: 46.4% Total Early Voting 2016: 1,658,410
Unaffiliated: 6.6% Percent Increase: 43%

COLORADO:
• Sen. Cory Gardner (R) vs. Ex-Gov. John Hickenlooper (D)
Polling Range
High: RMG Research (Oct. 9-15) – Hickenlooper +9
Low: Morning Consult (Oct. 11-20) – Hickenlooper +8

Early Voting Stats:
Democrat: 47.0% Total Early Voting 2020: 2,376,706
Republican: 42.7% Total Early Voting 2016: 1,658,410
Unaffiliated: 9.6% Percent Increase: 39%

GEORGIA-A:
• Sen. David Perdue (R) vs. Jon Ossoff (D)
Polling Range
High: Public Policy Polling (Oct. 27-28) – Ossoff +3
Low: Landmark Communications (Oct. 28) – Even

GEORGIA-B: Jungle Primary
• (Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) vs. Rev. Raphael Warnock (D) and Rep. Doug Collins (R)
High: Public Policy Polling (Oct. 27-28) – Warnock +19
                                                             – Loeffler + 8
                                                               (over Collins)
Low: Emerson College (Oct. 29-31) – Warnock +11
                                                        – Collins +3
                                                          (over Loeffler)

Early Voting Stats:
Republican: 49.8% Total Early Voting 2020: 3,812,140
Democrat: 42.9% Total Early Voting 2016: 2,385,990
Unaffiliated: 7.3% Percent Increase: 60%

Continue reading →

Senate: Early Voting Numbers

By Jim Ellis

Oct. 28, 2020 — The Target Smart statistical website has tracked the national early voting process throughout the country and reports segmentation by state.

Nationally, through yesterday’s report, they logged over 55.58 million people already voting, an increase of 108 percent from the same period when compared to the last presidential election in 2016. If national voter turnout projections of more than 150 million people prove correct, then approximately 37 percent of 2020 voters have already cast their ballots.

Though the first couple of days in early voting greatly favored Democrats, the last few have yielded a Republican increase.

In the 15 most competitive Senate states (Georgia has two races) — 12 of which have an early voting process in both 2020 and 2016, while one is added for this year (Kentucky) — we see a greater turnout from Democrats in seven states: Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina. More Republicans are voting in six states: Alaska, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Montana, Texas.

Interestingly, in gauging which political entities are gaining the most in early voting percentage today when compared with 2016, the Democrats, Republicans, and Unaffiliateds all break even with an advantage in four states apiece: Democrats (Alaska, Arizona, Kansas, Michigan); Republicans (Colorado, Montana, North Carolina, Texas); Unaffiliateds (Georgia, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota).

It is difficult to say how these numbers will affect the final results. The states possibly producing the most significant early turnout results could be Arizona and Texas. In Arizona, Democrats lead for the first time in early voting aggregate ballots returned, while despite supposition to the contrary, Texas Republicans not only lead in 2020 as they have in the past, but also have gained more in percentage returned when compared to 2016.

Other stats of note: Though behind in 2020 aggregate voting, Democrats have seen an increase in their standing from 2016 in Alaska and Kansas. Republicans, on the other hand, also while trailing on the aggregate count have improved their position more than Democrats when compared to 2016 in Colorado and North Carolina.

For more details, click on the chart below, or go here: Target Early / Target Smart

 

ALASKA

2020 Total Early Votes: 77,128
2016 Total Early Votes: 19,296

2020 – Democratic: 36.0%
2020 – Republican: 46.1%
2020 – Unaffiliated: 17.9%

2016 – Democratic: 26.3%
2016 – Republican: 57.4%
2016 – Unaffiliated: 16.3%

Current Advantage: Republican
Gaining Most from 2016: Democratic

Continue reading →

Can Repubs Win 49 of 52 Competitive House Races to Win Majority?

Texas could be the key state in determining whether the Democrats will gain seats. If Republicans are to make a run at the majority, they will have to maintain their historically strong showing in the Lone Star State, and also win just about everywhere else.

By Jim Ellis

Oct. 27, 2020 — Virtually all election analysts are predicting that the Democrats will maintain their majority in next week’s national election with the principal unanswered question prompting speculation about whether they will add members to their party conference.

Irrespective of predictions, it appears that 113 congressional races still feature legitimate competition, meaning the two major party nominees in each situation have adequate resources with which to communicate their respective messages. Though the incumbent, or incumbent party in the open seats, is the favorite in most of the races, enough districts are in play for Republicans to end the election cycle by making a dent into the relatively small 17-seat Democratic majority.

One can divide the competitive races into three tiers, with those in the first segment being the most likely to see an incumbent or incumbent party fall to a challenger candidate, and are the subject of this Update. Unfortunately for Republicans, the Democrats are on offense in 56 percent of the contested seats. Obviously, this gives the Dems more opportunities for gains, thus increasing their chances of adding to their majority margin.

Within our 52 rated first-tier competitive category, Democrats are on offense in 30 of them, thus making retaining the chamber majority probable and allowing multiple opportunities to increase their aggregate total.

Texas could be the key state in determining whether the Democrats will gain seats. We see 11 of the Lone Star seats falling into the competitive category, five of them in the top tier. Of the 11, only one is a Democratic seat, that held by freshman Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D-Houston), meaning the Texas campaigns will likely prove to be ground zero in previewing the overall House result.

Continue reading →

The Latest Numbers

By Jim Ellis

Oct. 23, 2020 — Polls are being updated daily in the competitive Senate races. Below are the most recent two surveys from each major contest. Some states provide disparate results, others more consistent. The data source is FiveThirtyEight Polls.

ALABAMA

Moore Information (OCT. 11-15; 504 likely Alabama voters, live interview)
• Tommy Tuberville (R) – 55%
• Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 40%

FM3 Research (Oct. 11-14; 801 likely Alabama voters; live interview)
• Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 48%
• Tommy Tuberville (R) – 47%

ALASKA

Public Policy Polling (Oct. 19-20; 800 Alaska voters, interactive response system)
• Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) – 44%
• Al Gross (D/I) – 41%

Siena College/NYT (Oct. 9-14; 423 likely Alaska voters, live interview)
• Sen. Dan Sullivan (R) – 45%
• Al Gross (D/I) – 37%

ARIZONA

Ipsos/Reuters (Oct. 14-21; 658 likely Arizona voters, online)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 51%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 43%

Rasmussen Reports/Pulse Opinion (Oct. 18-19; 800 likely Arizona voters, automated)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 48%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 44%

GEORGIA-A

Emerson College (Oct. 17-19; 506 likely Georgia voters; interactive voice response)
• Sen. David Perdue (R) – 46%
• Jon Ossoff (D) – 45%

Garin Hart Yang Research (Oct. 11-14; 600 likely Georgia voters; live interview)
• Jon Ossoff (D) – 48%
• Sen. David Perdue (R) – 43%

GEORGIA-B – Special Election

Siena College/NYT (Oct. 13-19; 759 likely Georgia voters, live interview)
Jungle Primary; top two advance to Jan 5 runoff
• Raphael Warnock (D) – 32%
• Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) – 23%
• Rep. Doug Collins (R) – 17%
• Matt Lieberman (D) – 7%
• Ed Tarver (D) – 2%

Emerson College (Oct. 17-19; 506 likely Georgia voters, interactive voice response)
• Raphael Warnock (D) – 27%
• Rep. Doug Collins (R) – 27%
• Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R) – 20%
• Matt Lieberman (D) – 12%
• Ed Tarver (D) – 2%

Continue reading →

Senate: A Polling Comparison

By Jim Ellis

Sept. 24, 2020 — Today, we look at the competitive Senate races and segment the group around polling consistency. Several races routinely report point spreads between the two major party candidates that are wildly inconsistent, while others vary over a small difference often within the same polling period.

The two most extreme surveys during the month are listed for each state with the most extreme first and the closest second. You will notice that the British firm, Redfield & Wilton Strategies, is often listed as the most extreme.

We begin, alphabetically by state, with the inconsistent group. Only the two Georgia races are in the September consistent segment.

INCONSISTENT

Arizona
Number of September polls: 14
Polling range: 16 points

Redfield & Wilton Strategies
(Sept. 12-16; 855 likely Arizona voters; combination online and live interview)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 52%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 35%

ABC News/Washington Post
(Sept. 15-20; 579 AZ likely voters; live interview)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 49%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 48%

Iowa
Number of September polls: 2
Polling range: 8 points

Fabrizio Ward/Hart Research (for AARP)
(Aug. 30-Sept. 5; 800 likely Iowa voters; live interview)
• Sen. Joni Ernst (R) – 50%
• Theresa Greenfield (D) – 45%

Selzer & Company
(Sept. 14-17; 658 likely Iowa voters; live interview)
• Sen. Joni Ernst (R) – 45%
• Theresa Greenfield (D) – 42%

Continue reading →

Why Arizona is So Pivotal

By Jim Ellis

Does Arizona hold the key in a Trump-Biden election?

Sept. 16, 2020 — For several reasons, the Grand Canyon State of Arizona is possibly the most important state on the political map to determine the ultimate presidential election outcome.

Primarily, Arizona is one of five core states that President Trump must win to form a foundation for a favorable remaining state coalition map. The other four, geographically from west to east, are Texas, Georgia, Florida, and North Carolina. Should Joe Biden break through in any one of these five states, he will likely win the national election.

At this point, Arizona appears to be the most precarious of the Trump core states. While the President’s numbers are improving here, the September polls find him trailing Biden in all six publicly released surveys from a range of one to nine points among likely voters, with a mean average of Biden plus-4, and a median of Biden plus-3.5.

The five states are so critical to President Trump, or any Republican national candidate, because, as a unit, they yield a relatively easy remaining victory map. Carrying the five southern sector domains and assuming no leakage in Ohio or Iowa, and even while not winning Nevada or New Hampshire, the GOP nominee then claims the presidency with a victory in any one of the key Great Lakes states: Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin. For a Democrat to win under this scenario, he or she would be forced to sweep the aforementioned quartet.

President Trump won the 2016 Electoral College vote 306-232, which means he can relinquish a net 36 electoral votes in 2020 and still win the national election. Under the scenario of him taking either Wisconsin or Minnesota, along with keeping Arizona, he would defeat Biden with exactly 270 electoral votes. This model also assumes he wins the 2nd Congressional District from both Nebraska and Maine, the two states that split their electoral votes. He won both in 2016. Under this scenario, Michigan and Pennsylvania would go to Biden.

Arizona, now potentially teetering toward the Democrats, is critical to the president’s prospects because Trump cannot afford to trade it for one of the western Great Lakes States, either Minnesota or Wisconsin. Such a loss would force the president to win two of the four Great Lakes, but only one could be Minnesota or Wisconsin since those two states have 10 electoral votes and Arizona has 11.

Therefore, simply put, losing Arizona because of its 11th electoral vote would mean that Trump would be forced to carry either Michigan or Pennsylvania in addition to one of the other three remaining Great Lakes States. A further scenario involving Trump losing Arizona and replacing it with both of the 10-electoral vote states (MN and WI) could result in the election ending in a 269-269 tie. This would force a tiebreaker to be decided in the US House of Representatives.

Let’s look at the chances of Trump winning Arizona by comparing his current standing to where he was at this point in 2016. Looking at the Real Clear Politics polling archives, we find that 19 Arizona polls were conducted during the entire 2016 election cycle. In 2020, just since the July 4th holiday break, 25 surveys were publicly reported in the Grand Canyon State.

Four years ago, at the end of August through mid-September, two individual polls came from Gravis Marketing (Aug. 25-27, 2016) and NBC News/Marist College (Sept. 6-8, 2016). These surveys yielded Trump four and one-point leads, respectively. Shortly thereafter, the trend began to turn Hillary Clinton’s way. The OH Predictive Insights survey (Sept. 28-30, 2016) found the two candidates tied at 42 percent apiece, while Emerson College (Oct. 2-4, 2016) and the Arizona Republic newspaper poll (Oct. 10-15, 2016) detected consecutive leads for Clinton of two and five points.

Therefore, Arizona did not turn toward Trump for good until the Monmouth University survey in late October (Oct. 21-24, 2016), which put him just one point ahead. Going into the election from that point, and remembering the 2016 election was on Nov. 8, Trump led in the final four polls from a two to five-point margin. He would eventually win the actual vote count by 3.6 percentage points, 48.7 – 45.1 percent, meaning a raw vote margin of 91,234 votes of more than 2.573 million ballots cast.

Because of Arizona’s fast population growth, the state has changed in four years. During that interval, the overall population expanded five percentage points to 7,278,717 individuals according to the Census Bureau’s July 2019 estimate, the latest available.

Minorities, specifically Hispanics and blacks, account for approximately 69 percent of the population gain, thus at least partially explaining Biden’s improved prospects in the state. Overall, Hispanics represent 31.7 percent of the overall Arizona population, and blacks 5.2 percent, as compared to the non-Hispanic white position receding to 54.1 percent.

The population changes suggest that this already tight political state will likely become even closer as we head for Nov. 3.

Where the Senate Stands

By Jim Ellis

Aug. 28, 2020 — A tough battle is underway for the US Senate majority, and both parties are fiercely attempting to assume control in the next Congress. Republicans hold a 53-47 majority, but a win in Alabama would send them to 54-46, and that makes the Democrats’ road to the majority all the more difficult.

Democrats need a net conversion of three Republican seats if Joe Biden is elected president, and four if President Trump wins re-election.

Today, we take a snapshot look at polling figures in the key campaign states. How the states listed below eventually fall will determine which party runs the Senate for the 117th Congress.

Below, we provide you the two most extreme results of recent publicly released surveys from the competitive campaigns. The Ellis Insight ratings depict where the race is today, which is not solely based upon polling.

ALABAMA – Lean R (possible conversion)

Morning Consult (July 24-Aug. 2; 80 likely Alabama voters)
• Tommy Tuberville (R) – 52%
• Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 35%

Auburn University at Montgomery (July 2-9; 55 registered Alabama voters)
• Tommy Tuberville (R) – 44%
• Sen. Doug Jones (D) – 36%

ARIZONA – Lean D (possible conversion)

Redfield & Wilton Strategies (Aug. 16-18; 856 likely Arizona voters)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 53%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 34%

OnMessage (Aug. 2-4; 40 likely Arizona voters)
• Mark Kelly (D) – 48%
• Sen. Martha McSally (R) – 48%

COLORADO – Lean D (possible conversion)

Public Policy Polling (Aug. 18-19; 731 Colorado voters)
• Ex-Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) – 51%
• Sen. Cory Gardner (R) – 42%

Morning Consult (July 17-26; 61 likely Colorado voters)
• Ex-Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) – 48%
• Sen. Cory Gardner (R) – 42%

GEORGIA–A – Lean R/Toss

Garin Hart Yang Research Group (Aug. 10-13; 60 likely Georgia voters)
• Jon Ossoff (D) – 48%
• Sen. David Perdue (R) – 46%

Survey USA (Aug. 6-8; 62 likely Georgia voters)
• Sen. David Perdue (R) – 44%
• Jon Ossoff (D) – 41%

Continue reading →