2016 Electoral Map Predictions Using Primary Results

 

 



One measure of who might win the key swing states is how many total people voted in each party in their respective Primaries compared to previous elections. (Yes some Cruz supporters may not vote for Trump, nor will some Sanders supporters vote for Hillary. However, it is a measure of voter enthusiasm. )



Real Clear Politics: Base "Create Your Own Map"



I compared the primary totals to the general election votes in 2008 & 2012. Then I looked at 2016 primary totals and extrapolated based on a pro-rata share. This method couldn't be used in a couple states because the 2008 and 2012 republican nominees were effectively decided by the time the primary hit their state (shown in orange below).  Some caucus states (in purple) are too messy to be able to extrapolate data or lacked in a popular vote (such as the infamous Colorado vote in 2016 for Republicans).

I had to combine the primary enthusiasm data with common sense. For the remaining states, I had to make judgment calls based on what data was available. So here are my calls and the rationale behind them.

Arizona: This is probably a good example of the extrapolation method. Both Republicans and Democrats had declines in their primary totals, but Republicans should hold easily.

Colorado: Republican totals for 2016 were not available but enthusiasm from Democrats was quite high.

Florida: This is a flaw in the extrapolation method. Republicans got more votes in the general in 2012 than 2008 but managed more general election votes. If you extrapolate based on 2008 data for Republicans, then Democrats pick up this state.

Indiana: The Republican nominee was effectively decided by the time Indiana's primaries wrapped up in 2008 and 2012, but what is striking is the decline in Democrat turnout.

Maine: Maine has too muddy of a primary process to consider, but given the levels of victory in 2008 and 2012, I think it remains in the Democrat column.

Michigan: Michigan for the Dems in 2008 had the issue where Obama wasn't on the ballet, so that data isn't helpful. For the Republicans total votes could be 2.75M or 3M depending if you extrapolate based on 2012 or 2008 data, respectively. I think Democrats hold it, but it will be surprisingly competitive.

Minnesota: Poor data to evaluate on, but I would be really surprised if it didn't go for Clinton.

Missouri: Turnout for Republicans was huuuge compared to previous years. Democrats have weak numbers.

North Carolina: Huge decline in Democrat turnout. Stay Republican.

New Hampshire: A rare state with declining Republican turnout, coupled with increased Democrat turnout. I think this is going to be solid blue.

Nevada: There is no real Democrat data to go on, but the increase in Republican turnout should have Democrats nervous. I think this one flips.

Ohio: Even though  I don't think Republicans will win Ohio with 75% of the vote, the fact that 69% more people voted in the Republican primary in Ohio in 2016 than 2012 is surprising. By contrast, Democrats only managed 52% of their 2008 total. Given that both contests were competitive until the end, I believe that the results are informative. 

Pennsylvania: While this state was actually competitive for Republicans this year in the primaries, the fact that more Democrats voted in their primary than Republicans is bad news. Democrats tend to turnout higher percent of people for the general than compared to the primary.

Virginia: Increase in Republican turnout combined with decline in Democrat turnout should be sufficient to overcome the general election deficits.

Wisconsin: I should have extrapolated based on 2012 data (I don't feel like re-uploading the photo), but Virginia should still flip to Republican.