| Clinton (D) | Johnson (L) | McMullin (I) | Stein (G) | Trump (R) |
---|
Alabama 9 Electoral Votes | 31% | 8% | | 2% | 53% 100% |
Alaska 3 Electoral Votes | 42.39% | 3.78% | | 5.97% | 44.5% 88.08% |
Arizona 11 Electoral Votes | 42.63% | 4.47% | | 2.66% | 46.22% 82.8% |
Arkansas 6 Electoral Votes | 35.68% | 3.5% | | 2% | 59.01% 100% |
California 55 Electoral Votes | 55.71% 100% | 3.51% | | 2.11% | 31.65% |
Colorado 9 Electoral Votes | 43.47% 70.61% | 5.31% | 1% | 2.73% | 41.21% |
Connecticut 7 Electoral Votes | 47.1% 100% | 8.8% | | 3.6% | 33.93% |
Delaware 3 Electoral Votes | 51% 100% | 7% | | 2% | 30% |
District of Columbia 3 Electoral Votes | No Data |
Florida 29 Electoral Votes | 46.74% 60.95% | 2.61% | 1% | 1.11% | 45.67% |
Georgia 16 Electoral Votes | 44.62% | 3.8% | | 2.07% | 48.56% 89.42% |
Hawaii 4 Electoral Votes | 51% 100% | 7% | | 7% | 25% |
Idaho 4 Electoral Votes | 26.55% | 5.11% | 10% | 3% | 50.13% 100% |
Illinois 20 Electoral Votes | 50.43% 99.93% | 4.12% | | 1.66% | 37.15% |
Indiana 11 Electoral Votes | 37.98% | 5.82% | | 3% | 49.57% 100% |
Iowa 6 Electoral Votes | 42.02% | 4.59% | 2% | 2.35% | 44.33% 100% |
Kansas 6 Electoral Votes | 35.87% | 6.8% | | 0.28% | 54% 100% |
Kentucky 8 Electoral Votes | 34.79% | 1.14% | 1% | 1.4% | 52.28% 99.82% |
Louisiana 8 Electoral Votes | 36.03% | 5.29% | | 3% | 47.86% 99.86% |
Maine 4 Electoral Votes | 45.77% 99.24% | 5.59% | | 2.41% | 39.23% |
Maryland 10 Electoral Votes | 62.36% 100% | 4% | | 2% | 26.41% |
Massachusetts 11 Electoral Votes | 57.39% 100% | 6.84% | | 2.72% | 24.98% |
Michigan 16 Electoral Votes | 46.58% 86.92% | 4.32% | | 2.06% | 40.75% |
Minnesota 10 Electoral Votes | 48.32% 99.99% | 4.84% | | 1.83% | 39.72% |
Mississippi 6 Electoral Votes | 43% | 4% | | 2% | 46% 100% |
Missouri 10 Electoral Votes | 38.65% | 4.67% | | 1.92% | 50.83% 100% |
Montana 3 Electoral Votes | 31.63% | 11% | | 2% | 44.55% 100% |
Nebraska 5 Electoral Votes | 29.29% | 7.29% | | 1.14% | 55.71% 100% |
Nevada 6 Electoral Votes | 44.75% | 3.55% | | 1.22% | 45.55% 60.54% |
New Hampshire 4 Electoral Votes | 44.7% 76.9% | 5.08% | 0.9% | 1.64% | 41.19% |
New Jersey 14 Electoral Votes | 50.06% 99.92% | 2.99% | | 1.44% | 37.93% |
New Mexico 5 Electoral Votes | 44.69% 80.7% | 9.46% | | 1.25% | 41.15% |
New York 29 Electoral Votes | 52.13% 100% | 3.43% | | 1.99% | 35.53% |
North Carolina 15 Electoral Votes | 46.7% 56.63% | 2.26% | | 0.96% | 46.05% |
North Dakota 3 Electoral Votes | 32% | 8% | | 1% | 43% 100% |
Ohio 18 Electoral Votes | 43.78% | 4.65% | | 1.84% | 46.88% 79.14% |
Oklahoma 7 Electoral Votes | 30.7% | 3.91% | | 7% | 59.46% 100% |
Oregon 7 Electoral Votes | 43.19% 80.91% | 5.56% | | 3.98% | 39.3% |
Pennsylvania 20 Electoral Votes | 46.86% 78.91% | 3.84% | | 1.69% | 43.62% |
Rhode Island 4 Electoral Votes | 51.83% 100% | 5.33% | | 4.83% | 32.33% |
South Carolina 9 Electoral Votes | 40.51% | 2.8% | 1% | 1.02% | 47.96% 99.38% |
South Dakota 3 Electoral Votes | 35.03% | 6.9% | | 3% | 49.31% 100% |
Tennessee 11 Electoral Votes | 34.06% | 7.28% | | 1.57% | 44.09% 100% |
Texas 38 Electoral Votes | 38.21% | 5.45% | 0% | 2.54% | 49.3% 99.99% |
Utah 6 Electoral Votes | 25.08% | 3.54% | 26.39% | 1.37% | 38.04% 98.39% |
Vermont 3 Electoral Votes | 52% 100% | 5.59% | | 3.23% | 25.61% |
Virginia 13 Electoral Votes | 47.18% 88.42% | 2.92% | 1.22% | 1.15% | 42.21% |
Washington 12 Electoral Votes | 50.65% 100% | 3.72% | | 1.1% | 36.18% |
West Virginia 5 Electoral Votes | 29.39% | 4% | | 4% | 57.11% 100% |
Wisconsin 10 Electoral Votes | 47.41% 98.17% | 4.42% | | 1.39% | 41.33% |
Wyoming 3 Electoral Votes | 19% | 10% | | 2% | 54% 100% |
Total 538 Electoral Votes | 314 99.87% >270 | 4.5% | 2.26% | 2.1% | 221 |
National Methodology & Explanation
Our objective is to assess the accuracy of polling, not to predict the outcome of the election. The values depicted above intend to represent an aggregate
view of state-level public polling. Our values can be thought of as the polling implied outcome; if polling is correct, the election's outcome
should match our values.
Each state's outcome is treated as an independent event as is each candidate's percentage. In reality this is not the case. Outcomes are most certainly
correlated based upon empirical information like geography and demographics. Our view, which is consistent with letting polling tell the story, is that
any such correlation should be observable and expressed through polling.
Candidate totals are calculated using a quadratic local regression with an alpha of 80%; if too few polls are available a least-squares regression is
used. The calculated value for each candidate’s regression, along with the variance, is used as input to calculate the probability that a given candidate's
total will be greatest. A standard distribution is used to determine the likelihood of victory in a given state. Once each state's probability is known,
a 51-dimension cartesian product is generated to assess the likelihood of receiving 270 or
more electoral votes.
More thorough information containing technical details and our data collection criteria is available in our
methodology series.