2016 Primary Map Thread

[Jackie Moon]

Let's create a map so we can see which candidates are leading in each state. I will continually update this map as new polling is done. If you know some polling numbers please post them in this thread.

As much as I don't like to put too much in to these early polls, this is getting pretty exciting.

Just six months ago there's no way that I would have believed that Rand would be leading in 7 out of 14 states - including the two most important of Iowa and New Hampshire - and in a nationwide poll.

I always expected Rand to rise eventually but I assumed it would come during the debates. I was just hoping he'd at least be somewhere near the middle of the pack going in to the debates. Then the combination of people getting to know Rand, the organization and grassroots we have in Iowa, and the other candidates imploding would to bring us to to the top.

Being the front runner this early is amazing. But sometimes I have to stop and ask myself,

[anaconda]

Different polls seem to have different views on this.

How recent are the two Rubio states?

[anaconda]

Being the front runner this early is amazing.

I had assumed we would see a 4 year black out on Rand. It's almost the opposite.

[Bastiat's The Law]

How recent are the two Rubio states?

Not very recent at all. I think NC was polled in 2012, but it's all we have to go on at this point.

[PaleoPaul]

I had assumed we would see a 4 year black out on Rand. It's almost the opposite.

I really really hope Rand continues to sizzle, not fizzle, all the way until 2016!

[Galileo Galilei]

This is a good thread.

[philipped]

So Rand has 7 of 14 states??? OMG

He needs to pick up moves in the south tbh.

[AuH20]

Rand's accent should pay big dividends in the South as more people get to hear him.

[Rocco]

Not only does Rand have 7 of 14, but the other 7 are split between 5 people. In other words, only 2 other candidates have multiple states.

So Rand has 7 of 14 states??? OMG

He needs to pick up moves in the south tbh.

[cocrehamster]

Not only does Rand have 7 of 14, but the other 7 are split between 5 people. In other words, only 2 other candidates have multiple states.

3. Rubio, Bush, Christie.

[alucard13mm]

We can probably assume Texas will go to Rand, as long as Cruz doesn't have any skeletons and if/when he endorses Rand. It'll be a fierce fight between Rand and Jeb Bush in Texas. Especially if Bush won a state or two prior to Texas.

[fr33]

We can probably assume Texas will go to Rand, as long as Cruz doesn't have any skeletons and if/when he endorses Rand. It'll be a fierce fight between Rand and Jeb Bush in Texas. Especially if Bush won a state or two prior to Texas.

Texas tends to go establishment but Rand has shown the ability to change the norm. I'm not sure that he will but am hopeful.

[GunnyFreedom]

Rubio is done. New North Carolina poll from PPP today has Rand at 18% in the lead. Christie is second at 16%. Rubio is at 9%.

The map is looking great for us. With Rubio's collapse and Sarah Palin singing Rand's praises, we should overtake Alaska soon as well.

And NC is an early State in 2016.

[GunnyFreedom]

NC (Probably) votes last Tues in Feb in 2016. Depending on SC's date.

[enoch150]

The four oldest polls in the OP are NC (12/9/12), LA (2/12/13), PA (3/10/13), and FL (3/18/13). They all include Mike Huckabee getting between 9% and 18% and NC also includes Condoleeza Rice at 9% and Sara Palin at 5%.

Excluding those four, adding Arkansas, updating Iowa and New Hampshire, adding dates and how much Rand leads or trails by... OP, please consider using this map and format.

[GunnyFreedom]

Rand needs to get active in NC since we will be holding our Pres Primary in February now. I keep trying to get that info to him but I feel like I am shouting at a brick wall being outside of Kentucky and all that.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Rand needs to get active in NC since we will be holding our Pres Primary in February now. I keep trying to get that info to him but I feel like I am shouting at a brick wall being outside of Kentucky and all that.

I'm sure he will campaign for Brannon if we can get him over the hump.

[Bastiat's The Law]

The four oldest polls in the OP are NC (12/9/12), LA (2/12/13), PA (3/10/13), and FL (3/18/13). They all include Mike Huckabee getting between 9% and 18% and NC also includes Condoleeza Rice at 9% and Sara Palin at 5%.

Excluding those four, adding Arkansas, updating Iowa and New Hampshire, adding dates and how much Rand leads or trails by... OP, please consider using this map and format.

I don't trust Rasmussen polling.

[Okaloosa]

http://frontloading.blogspot.com/p/2...-calendar.html

2016 Presidential Primary Calendar

January

Monday, January 18:
Iowa caucuses 1(***tentative given current information***)


Tuesday, January 26:
New Hampshire (***tentative given current information***)


February
Tuesday, February 2:
Colorado caucuses2
Minnesota caucuses3
Missouri (2013 Legislation: March primary: House/Senate, April primary -- all Died in Committee)
Utah4 (2013 Legislation: Primary funding -- Signed into Law)


Saturday, February 6:
Nevada caucuses (***tentative given current information***)

Saturday, February 13:
South Carolina (***tentative given current information***)

Tuesday, February 16:
North Carolina (***tentative given current information***)

Tuesday, February 23:
Arizona (2013 Legislation: Fix primary date to date of Iowa caucuses)
Michigan
March
Tuesday, March 1:
Colorado caucuses2
Florida5 (2013 Legislation: March primary -- Died in Committee; Primary on first unpenalized date -- Signed into Law)
Massachusetts (2013 legislation: June primary)
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas (2013 Legislation: Saturday primary, February primary -- all Died in Committee)
Vermont
Virginia


Tuesday, March 8:
Alabama
Hawaii Republican caucuses
Mississippi
Ohio


Tuesday, March 15:
Illinois


Saturday, March 19:
Louisiana


April
Tuesday, April 5:
Maryland
Washington, DC (2013 Legislation: June primary)
Wisconsin6


Tuesday, April 26:
Connecticut
Delaware
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island


May
Tuesday, May 3:
Indiana


Tuesday, May 10:
Nebraska
West Virginia


Tuesday, May 17:
Kentucky
Oregon


Tuesday, May 24:
Arkansas


June
Tuesday, June 7:
California
Montana (2013 Legislation: May primary -- Died in Committee)
New Jersey
New Mexico
South Dakota


Primary states with no specified date:
Georgia
Kansas7
Maine (2013 Legislation: establish primary -- Died in Committee)
Nevada8 (2013 Legislation: January primary -- Died in Committee)
New Hampshire
New York
North Carolina9 (2013 Legislation: Move primary to Tuesday after South Carolina primary if South Carolina is before March 15 -- Signed into Law)
South Carolina


Without dwelling on something that is WELL before its time, FHQ should note that those February states are only problematic in 2016 if the two parties' delegates selection rules mirror the rules from the 2012 cycle. They may or may not. The real problem children, if you will, are the primary states without specified dates for 2016. As of June 2013 they remain the free agents for the 2016 primary calendar and the ones that may bear the most intense watching between now and mid-2015. That said, first things first: The first step is a set of rules from the DNC and RNC. We have a ways to go before the parties settle on/finalize something on that front (summer 2014). The Republican Party is further along in its process than are the Democrats.


--
1 This date does conflict with the Martin Luther King Day holiday in 2016. As John Deeth points out that is an issue that was a source of some discontent among Iowa Democrats when the caucuses and holiday overlapped in 2004. If that is an issue again in 2016, it may affect the date of the caucuses above. Moving it up further would perhaps push the envelope a bit too much, but the state parties may opt to hold the caucuses on a Tuesday -- a week before New Hampshire on January 19 -- as they did in 2012.
2 The state parties have the option of choosing either the first Tuesday in March date called for in the statute or moving up to the first Tuesday in February.
3 The state parties must agree on a date on which to hold caucuses by March 1 in the year prior to a presidential election. If no agreement is reached, the caucuses are set for the first Tuesday in February.
4 The Western States Presidential Primary in Utah is scheduled for the first Tuesday in February, but the contest will only be held on that date if the state legislature decides to allocate funds for the primary.
5 Democratic-sponsored legislation would establish a specific date for the Florida presidential primary; the second Tuesday in March.
6 See definition of "Spring primary" for clause dealing with the timing of the presidential primary.
7 Kansas has not held a presidential primary since 1992. Funds have not been appropriated by the legislature for the primary since that time. That said, there are laws in place providing for a presidential preference primary. Assuming funding, the Kansas secretary of state has the option of choosing a date -- on or before November 1 in the year preceding the presidential election -- that either coincides with at least 5 other states' delegate selection events or is on the first Tuesday in April or before.
8 A Republican-sponsored bill during the 2013 session of the Nevada legislature would create a consolidated primary (presidential primary together with state primaries) and move the contest from June to January.
9 The North Carolina primary is now scheduled for the Tuesday following the South Carolina primary if the South Carolina contest is prior to March 15. Given the protected status South Carolina enjoys with the national parties, a primary prior to March 15 is a certainty for both parties in the Palmetto state. The link to the North Carolina statute does not yet reflect the change made to the presidential primary law. Language laying out the parameters for the primary can be found in the bill (HB 589) recently signed into law.

[Keith and stuff]

Thanks for sharing.

Colorado caucuses2
Minnesota caucuses3
Missouri (2013 Legislation: March primary: House/Senate, April primary -- all Died in Committee)
Utah4 (2013 Legislation: Primary funding -- Signed into Law)

If these states go before NV and SC, they are gonna have a bad time. Why cannot government workers learn! Rand Paul can maybe do very well in at least MN. The people that control the party should move it back so that MN will get all of its delegates. Rand might need those. No need to throw them away...

[enoch150]

I don't trust Rasmussen polling.

... am I missing something?

The New Hampshire poll was done by the University of New Hampshire and WMUR, the Iowa poll was done by Cygnal, and the Arkansas poll was done by The Polling Company.

In any case, I was talking more about adding dates and leads than any specific poll.

There might be worse than Rasmussen.

[PatriotOne]

Louisiana has gone green...in a good way.

PPP 2016 GOP Primary Poll - Louisiana / Rand Paul 1st with 18%

http://www.scribd.com/doc/161910086/...ll-August-2013

Louisiana
August 16-19, 2013
274 Republican primary voters

Paul 18%
Bush 17%
Ryan 11%
Christie 10%
Jindal 10%
Cruz 8%
Rubio 8%
Santorum 5%
Martinez 0%

[RabbitMan]

Can we get this updated?

Louisiana has gone green...in a good way.

PPP 2016 GOP Primary Poll - Louisiana / Rand Paul 1st with 18%

http://www.scribd.com/doc/161910086/...ll-August-2013

Louisiana
August 16-19, 2013
274 Republican primary voters

Paul 18%
Bush 17%
Ryan 11%
Christie 10%
Jindal 10%
Cruz 8%
Rubio 8%
Santorum 5%
Martinez 0%

[Bastiat's The Law]

Updated!

[Uriah]

Looks good at the moment.

[cjm]

I was doing this for a while in 2011/12, until the first dozen primaries and caucuses were over. I ended up putting the date of the poll on the state. Things can change fast and a poll six months out of date isn't worth as much. A date lets people judge what it's worth for themselves.

I also used the most recent poll, not an average. An average of two or three polls from the last two weeks might tell you something, but a current poll and one from three months ago doesn't mean much.

I ended up making two maps, one with polls just for Paul, and one showing the leaders in each state. The second one had how many points behind Paul was from the leader, if he wasn't in the lead.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-state-polling

"The Votemaster" has always had pretty good results with averaged polls. But like enoch150 says, you need to average recent polls, not polls from several weeks or months back. He also uses lighter and darker shades of a color to indicate how strongly a candidate is winning a state. Knowing that Paul is winning in NH is nice, but is he up by 1% or 8%?

From the electoral-vote.com FAQ:

Which polls do you use?
First of all, only neutral pollsters are used. Pollsters whose primary business is helping Democrats or Republicans get elected are not used. They tend to make their horse look better. When there are multiple polls for a race, the most recent poll is always used. The middle date of the polling period is what counts (not the release date). If other polls have middle polling dates within a week of the most recent one, they are all averaged together. This tends to smooth out variations.

What algorithm formula) is used to compute the map?
In 2004, we ran three different algorithms. The main page just used the most recent poll. The second algorithm averaged three days' worth of polls using only the nonpartisan pollsters. The third one included a mathematical formula for predicting how undecided voters would break based on historical data. The second one was most stable and gave the best final result, so this time a slight variation of it is used: The most recent poll is always used, and, if any other polls were taken within a week of it, they are all averaged together. This method tends to give a more stable result, so the colors don't jump all over the place due to one unusual poll.

Feedback/suggestions aside, great thread! Subscribed!

[Xenliad]

PPP is asking where to poll next.

Voting open for where we'll poll this weekend, choices are CT, FL, IL, ME, MD, MN, NH, NM, and WI: hxxp://publicpolicypolling.com/main/

Should we strategize in this thread every time they have an online poll?

Current results are

Connecticut
33%
Florida
4%
Illinois
13%
Maine
31%
Maryland
7%
Minnesota
1%
New Hampshire
3%
New Mexico
3%
Wisconsin
5%

[Meritocrat]

This confirms my thinking. I see Paul as having the best chance of getting the nomination followed by Bush, followed by Ryan. One could fairly easily extrapolate the other states, e.g., NM would go to Cruz, NY, CT, MA to Christie... As soon as intrade.com 2016 presidential future market opens I'm probably going to make a bet on Paul.

[tennman]

Wow! Way early on this and I love that because this is important and I want to talk about it now!

I bet that Rand Paul will take a lot of those states like Tennessee, Florida and others who don't have a state income tax. The people in those states, I've found, are usually more conscious of how the government (both federal and state) tries to get its hands in their pockets and I think that would push a lot of them toward Rand whose political philosophies are to keep the government's hands it its own pockets.

I don't see Christie doing well and he shouldn't. He's a big-government "conservative" with a few conservative bits and pieces.

How Bush is running second right now is beyond me.

[Uriah]

Ohio out now. Rand tied in 1st with Christie at 17%.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ul-1st-with-17