My 2020 Presidential and Senate Simulator/Now Cast.

[ultraviolet]

Yay! Finally got the map to pretty much where I want it:



Does this look about right?

Looks pretty good!

I’d say GA votes left of OH though, and MT-Sen is more likely to flip than KS-Sen.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Yay! Finally got the map to pretty much where I want it:



Does this look about right?

Looks pretty good!

I’d say GA votes left of OH though, and MT-Sen is more likely to flip than KS-Sen.

I agree, but OH polling has been pretty good for Biden, so it makes OH bluer than I like. As for KS senate I'll trash all the Kobach vs Bollier polls if Kobach doesn't win the primary, which would make it about 90% R

[ProgressiveModerate]

Weighted fundraising in each state by Biden and Trump. Made the Northern States slightly more favorable to Biden, while making the sunbelt shift slightly towards Trump. Debating if I should factor unemployment, because some hard hit states like NV seem like they should be more solid for Biden tha  say, WI. So many variables!

[ProgressiveModerate]

Added the unemployment rate per state. This gets places like NV more where they ought to be at. In general, the results support my theory that trends will stall this election, and we will see an EC map that's more like a mix of 2012 and 2016, but a landslide.

Trump's chances in every state:

Nebraska #3 - 100.00%
Oklahoma - 100.00%
West Virginia - 100.00%
Wyoming - 100.00%
North Dakota - 99.99%
Alabama - 99.98%
South Dakota - 99.96%
Idaho - 99.95%
Kentucky - 99.83%
Arkansas - 99.78%
Nebraska-AL - 99.60%
Nebraska #1 - 98.68%
Mississippi - 98.82%
Tennessee - 98.35%
Louisiana - 98.16%
Kansas - 95.45%
Indiana - 95.17%
Montana - 93.78%
Utah - 90.11%
South Carolina - 88.96%
Missouri - 86.95%
Alaska - 85.16%
Maine #2 - 68.61%
Texas - 52.83%
Iowa - 50.45%
Georgia - 49.85%
Ohio - 35.41%
Arizona - 31.25%
Nebraska #2 - 29.19%
North Carolina - 28.01%
Florida - 13.30%
Wisconsin - 11.81%
Nevada - 10.00%
New Hampshire - 9.68%
Pennsylvania - 8.93%
Michigan - 8.27%
Maine-AL - 5.19%
Minnesota - 4.05%
Virginia - 2.17%
New Mexico - 1.48%
Colorado - 1.45%
Maine #1 - 0.38%
Oregon - 0.27%
Connecticut - 0.14%
Rhode Island - 0.08%
Delaware - 0.06%
New Jersey - 0.02%
Illinois - 0.01%
Washington - 0.01%
California - 0.00%
DC - 0.00%
Hawaii - 0.00%
Maryland - 0.00%
Massachusetts - 0.00%
New York - 0.00%
Vermont - 0.00%

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

TX isnt safe, Covid 19 has hit the state hard and Hegar can win and we can pick up Congressional districts

[ProgressiveModerate]

TX isnt safe, Covid 19 has hit the state hard and Hegar can win and we can pick up Congressional districts

TX isn't safe, but Cornyn is a 94% favorite to win. Basically all polls have him outperforming Biden narrowly, and Hegar doesn't have great fundraising or anything. Typically, if Biden wins TX, it's by a narrow margin enough for Cornyn to squeak by

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Cornyn is only up by 6 pts, that isnt a landslide.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Cornyn is only up by 6 pts, that isnt a landslide.

Also, finally got Bluxas on the presidential level!



I know some people gonna say I'm biased, but factors like fundraising actually shift TX towards Trump, so he fact he's STILL slightly behind should scare him

[ProgressiveModerate]

Back tested the model to 2018:



It held up pretty well; only FL was off as it is in most models. I really tried not to overweight incumbency, and partisanship largely won out. The incumbency edge also matters more in smaller states, which is another factor my model accounts for.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Senate simulator
AZ, CO, GA R, GA S, IA, ME and NC are the states Ds are most concerned with

WI, MI and PA likewise is the 278 map Ds are most concerned with. Dems should not be giddy about inflated poll numbers in TX, FL, AZ,,GA and NC due to 3rd party voters

[ProgressiveModerate]

This table shows the % chnace Republicans have of winning a senate race under 2 slightly different methods. Which column has better % chnace in your view?



In general, way 2 gives a slight boost to Democrats in most senate races. Here's a map showing the differences between column 1 and column 2:

[Epaminondas]

You deserve praise just for the sheer amount of time you spent on this.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

AK isnt going blue Sullivan is up by 13

[ProgressiveModerate]

BTW if anyone wants to check out the new file here it is: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/718993823753175186/738821114247118890/Simulator_Auto_Main_July31.xlsm

[ProgressiveModerate]

AK isnt going blue Sullivan is up by 13

Current, Sullivan has about a 93% chnace of victory. The reason why there's still a 7% chance Gross wins is because of the 2 polls of AK-Sen, one was close, and the other, while it had Sullivan leading by a lot, had many undecides

[ProgressiveModerate]

You deserve praise just for the sheer amount of time you spent on this.

Lol thanks. Doing it in part for fun, but also because I really really want to get into statistics in my high school next year (assuming statistics is still being offered; who knows with all the potential budget cuts)

[Chips]

Interesting.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Anyone got any ideas how to code MT-SEN in a fair way that will boost Bullock's chances, without making places like AL any bluer? Right now, Daines has  7/10 chance of winning which seems quite high considering the rest of the senate map. The issue I have is that if I weight things that would indicate Bullock is a well liked figure in the state, then the model will automatically not let partisanship win out and gives someone like Jones a 20% chance of winning, just because fundementals in the AL race favor Jones (Jones has good fundraising, he's an incumbents). Daines is technically the incumbent, so he gets a boost over Bullock for that, when in reality, Bullock is prolly a bigger name than Daines in MT. Anyone got any ideas on how to fix this?

BTW, I also tried doing an index of how much states split ballot, and that didn't work out because then people like Swearengin in WV started winning

[ultraviolet]

Anyone got any ideas how to code MT-SEN in a fair way that will boost Bullock's chances, without making places like AL any bluer? Right now, Daines has  7/10 chance of winning which seems quite high considering the rest of the senate map. The issue I have is that if I weight things that would indicate Bullock is a well liked figure in the state, then the model will automatically not let partisanship win out and gives someone like Jones a 20% chance of winning, just because fundementals in the AL race favor Jones (Jones has good fundraising, he's an incumbents). Daines is technically the incumbent, so he gets a boost over Bullock for that, when in reality, Bullock is prolly a bigger name than Daines in MT. Anyone got any ideas on how to fix this?

BTW, I also tried doing an index of how much states split ballot, and that didn't work out because then people like Swearengin in WV started winning

Maybe AL isn’t as safe as we all assume? Idk

[ProgressiveModerate]

How does this senate map look? I think this will be the final change to the methodology.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Anyone got any ideas how to code MT-SEN in a fair way that will boost Bullock's chances, without making places like AL any bluer? Right now, Daines has  7/10 chance of winning which seems quite high considering the rest of the senate map. The issue I have is that if I weight things that would indicate Bullock is a well liked figure in the state, then the model will automatically not let partisanship win out and gives someone like Jones a 20% chance of winning, just because fundementals in the AL race favor Jones (Jones has good fundraising, he's an incumbents). Daines is technically the incumbent, so he gets a boost over Bullock for that, when in reality, Bullock is prolly a bigger name than Daines in MT. Anyone got any ideas on how to fix this?

BTW, I also tried doing an index of how much states split ballot, and that didn't work out because then people like Swearengin in WV started winning

Maybe AL isn’t as safe as we all assume? Idk

I have a very very hard time seeing Jones winning, but right now polling and fundraising does suggest that Rs margin of victory in that senate race might be embarrassing. In the right circumstances, I could see MS being a real sleeper race

[Roll Roons]

How does this senate map look? I think this will be the final change to the methodology.

Montana is more likely to go D than either of Iowa or Kansas. Apart from that, looks decent.

[ProgressiveModerate]

How does this senate map look? I think this will be the final change to the methodology.

Montana is more likely to go D than either of Iowa or Kansas. Apart from that, looks decent.

Hopefully, that will be fixed through more polling. Bullock is currently slightly behind Daines by a point in a state Trump is a favorite to win in. Ernst is in a more competative state, and polling has her 2 points behind Greenfield. KS should move to 95% R or so if Kobach isn't the nominee

[ProgressiveModerate]

Working on some fun visuals

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Daines is clearly favored now