diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json
index b8409244..e96722ef 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alabama.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Alabama. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alabama.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Alabama. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Alaska/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Alaska/execute-results/html.json
index fd5da14a..0dd686be 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Alaska/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Alaska/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alaska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alaska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Arizona/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Arizona/execute-results/html.json
index f7f5858a..72920ae9 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Arizona/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Arizona/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Arizona.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Arizona.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Arkansas/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Arkansas/execute-results/html.json
index f93ff785..b43b22b1 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Arkansas/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Arkansas/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Arkansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Arkansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Arkansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Arkansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/California/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/California/execute-results/html.json
index 536475d0..cd56e052 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/California/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/California/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in California.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in California.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Colorado/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Colorado/execute-results/html.json
index ccfa0143..c9d490b0 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Colorado/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Colorado/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Colorado.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Colorado.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Connecticut/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Connecticut/execute-results/html.json
index 18c7ffa3..701f51ff 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Connecticut/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Connecticut/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Connecticut.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Connecticut. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Connecticut.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Connecticut. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Delaware/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Delaware/execute-results/html.json
index 2ea7870b..fd9026c8 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Delaware/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Delaware/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Delaware.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Delaware. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Delaware.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Delaware. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/District of Columbia/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/District of Columbia/execute-results/html.json
index 18cfef4f..077bb46a 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/District of Columbia/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/District of Columbia/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in the District of Columbia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in the District of Columbia. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in the District of Columbia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in the District of Columbia. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Florida/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Florida/execute-results/html.json
index 28652daf..95f447ab 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Florida/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Florida/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Florida.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Florida.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Georgia/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Georgia/execute-results/html.json
index 799abd85..9f31932f 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Georgia/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Georgia/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Georgia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Georgia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Hawaii/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Hawaii/execute-results/html.json
index 26990152..d7afbde1 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Hawaii/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Hawaii/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Hawaii.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Hawaii. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Hawaii.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Hawaii. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Idaho/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Idaho/execute-results/html.json
index 0a783e31..0e3a91f4 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Idaho/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Idaho/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Idaho.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Idaho. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Idaho.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Idaho. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Illinois/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Illinois/execute-results/html.json
index b1086aeb..72205217 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Illinois/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Illinois/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Illinois.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Illinois. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Illinois.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Illinois. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Indiana/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Indiana/execute-results/html.json
index 53256282..3f40eac4 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Indiana/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Indiana/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Indiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Indiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Indiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Indiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Iowa/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Iowa/execute-results/html.json
index 527f8df4..8bb82c0b 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Iowa/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Iowa/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Iowa.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Iowa. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Iowa.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Iowa. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Kansas/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Kansas/execute-results/html.json
index f38e1a91..bea2d57d 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Kansas/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Kansas/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Kansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Kansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Kentucky/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Kentucky/execute-results/html.json
index 6e35ddce..b929543e 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Kentucky/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Kentucky/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Kentucky.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kentucky. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Kentucky.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kentucky. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Louisiana/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Louisiana/execute-results/html.json
index 930105bc..a8bcceb7 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Louisiana/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Louisiana/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Louisiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Louisiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Louisiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Louisiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-1/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-1/execute-results/html.json
index 638af73b..3192e1f0 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-1/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-1/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Maine CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Maine CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-2/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-2/execute-results/html.json
index 56d27a4b..4656a38c 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-2/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine CD-2/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Maine CD-2.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Maine CD-2.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine/execute-results/html.json
index cf665dbf..80891fb3 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maine/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Maine.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Maine.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maryland/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maryland/execute-results/html.json
index 3f9c97f4..0ce48897 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Maryland/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Maryland/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Maryland.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Maryland.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Massachusetts/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Massachusetts/execute-results/html.json
index 422ae357..c4de8bf5 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Massachusetts/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Massachusetts/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Massachusetts.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Massachusetts. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Massachusetts.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Massachusetts. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Michigan/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Michigan/execute-results/html.json
index c38cf79e..7c73deb6 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Michigan/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Michigan/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Michigan.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Michigan.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Minnesota/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Minnesota/execute-results/html.json
index 50dd75b2..471be2b5 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Minnesota/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Minnesota/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Minnesota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Minnesota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Mississippi/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Mississippi/execute-results/html.json
index 3b6a199b..dac97813 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Mississippi/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Mississippi/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Mississippi.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Mississippi. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Mississippi.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Mississippi. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Missouri/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Missouri/execute-results/html.json
index cc9d1de4..d898a616 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Missouri/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Missouri/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Missouri.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Missouri.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Montana/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Montana/execute-results/html.json
index 20a3c591..6af4b53f 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Montana/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Montana/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Montana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Montana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json
index b6a0a152..2bc77562 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "7954565330d8d2e3cfd7405c9090876a",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=80%}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** the presidency.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=20%}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Kamala Harris** currently has a **46%** chance of being elected America's next president.\nShe's projected to win between **149** and **422** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Donald Trump** currently has a **54%** chance of re-taking the white house.\nHe's projected to win between **116** and **389** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Projected electoral college votes\nThe model is updated daily, blending state and national polls with non-polling predictors, like economic growth and presidential approval, to generate a range of potential outcomes in the electoral college.\nAs we get closer to election day, the uncertainty around the estimate will decrease.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\nThere is a less than 1% chance of a tie in the electoral college.\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Chance of winning each state\nState-level results determine the makeup of the electoral college.\nMost states heavily favor a particular party, leaving a few competitive battlegrounds that will be decisive in determining the next president.\nHover/click to see more information about a particular state.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Conditional outcomes\nFrom the thousands of simulations, the model can see how the electoral college outcome changes when each candidate wins in a specific state.\nIf Harris wins in a red-leaning state, for example, it's likelier that she also wins in competitive states.\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n{width=1152}\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"70%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=80%}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** the presidency.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=20%}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Kamala Harris** currently has a **46%** chance of being elected America's next president.\nShe's projected to win between **150** and **423** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Donald Trump** currently has a **54%** chance of re-taking the white house.\nHe's projected to win between **115** and **388** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Projected electoral college votes\nThe model is updated daily, blending state and national polls with non-polling predictors, like economic growth and presidential approval, to generate a range of potential outcomes in the electoral college.\nAs we get closer to election day, the uncertainty around the estimate will decrease.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\nThere is a less than 1% chance of a tie in the electoral college.\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Chance of winning each state\nState-level results determine the makeup of the electoral college.\nMost states heavily favor a particular party, leaving a few competitive battlegrounds that will be decisive in determining the next president.\nHover/click to see more information about a particular state.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Conditional outcomes\nFrom the thousands of simulations, the model can see how the electoral college outcome changes when each candidate wins in a specific state.\nIf Harris wins in a red-leaning state, for example, it's likelier that she also wins in competitive states.\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n{width=1152}\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"70%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n",
"supporting": [
"National_files"
],
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/National/figure-html/plot-conditionals-1.png b/_freeze/2024-potus/National/figure-html/plot-conditionals-1.png
index 989a22a0..c8473351 100644
Binary files a/_freeze/2024-potus/National/figure-html/plot-conditionals-1.png and b/_freeze/2024-potus/National/figure-html/plot-conditionals-1.png differ
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-1/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-1/execute-results/html.json
index 87788fd9..0b719b51 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-1/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-1/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-1. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-1. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-2/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-2/execute-results/html.json
index 5d0d5c5b..340da757 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-2/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-2/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Nebraska CD-2.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Nebraska CD-2.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-3/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-3/execute-results/html.json
index 01ea8028..7244ff57 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-3/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska CD-3/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-3.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-3. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-3.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-3. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska/execute-results/html.json
index cd1c72a1..4e73d00e 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nebraska/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nevada/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nevada/execute-results/html.json
index f62bb048..cfa50832 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Nevada/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Nevada/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Nevada.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Nevada.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/New Hampshire/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/New Hampshire/execute-results/html.json
index 7f953875..2b9e36aa 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/New Hampshire/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/New Hampshire/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Hampshire.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Hampshire.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/New Jersey/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/New Jersey/execute-results/html.json
index 03da9e1c..3f77838d 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/New Jersey/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/New Jersey/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Jersey.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in New Jersey. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Jersey.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in New Jersey. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/New Mexico/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/New Mexico/execute-results/html.json
index a94269d8..433dae02 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/New Mexico/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/New Mexico/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Mexico.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Mexico.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/New York/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/New York/execute-results/html.json
index 69929844..1ea20cac 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/New York/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/New York/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in New York.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in New York.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/North Carolina/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/North Carolina/execute-results/html.json
index 0ec56de3..61c96b2f 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/North Carolina/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/North Carolina/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in North Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in North Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/North Dakota/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/North Dakota/execute-results/html.json
index 01033d99..6f27f7ba 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/North Dakota/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/North Dakota/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in North Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in North Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in North Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in North Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Ohio/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Ohio/execute-results/html.json
index 143f66da..2e6f01bd 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Ohio/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Ohio/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Ohio.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Ohio.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Oklahoma/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Oklahoma/execute-results/html.json
index 0b8e4c95..6f7b8464 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Oklahoma/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Oklahoma/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Oklahoma.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Oklahoma.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Oregon/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Oregon/execute-results/html.json
index 9e3252a1..ef71e6ae 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Oregon/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Oregon/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Oregon.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Oregon.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Pennsylvania/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Pennsylvania/execute-results/html.json
index 8fbe82e1..925dc9e8 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Pennsylvania/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Pennsylvania/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Pennsylvania.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Pennsylvania.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Rhode Island/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Rhode Island/execute-results/html.json
index 6d55cd2f..a8666dcd 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Rhode Island/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Rhode Island/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Rhode Island.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Rhode Island. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Rhode Island.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Rhode Island. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/South Carolina/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/South Carolina/execute-results/html.json
index d39d75c6..e83a4a86 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/South Carolina/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/South Carolina/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Carolina. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Carolina. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/South Dakota/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/South Dakota/execute-results/html.json
index 5dc8dd03..9ddc857a 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/South Dakota/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/South Dakota/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Tennessee/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Tennessee/execute-results/html.json
index b7dc9726..42dc0cbf 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Tennessee/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Tennessee/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Tennessee.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Tennessee. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Tennessee.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Tennessee. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Texas/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Texas/execute-results/html.json
index da7579b8..8b6a180a 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Texas/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Texas/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Texas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Texas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Utah/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Utah/execute-results/html.json
index 9be1e10d..5d4e330c 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Utah/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Utah/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Utah.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Utah.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Vermont/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Vermont/execute-results/html.json
index ace94ae4..889ebae0 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Vermont/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Vermont/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Vermont.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Vermont.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Virginia/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Virginia/execute-results/html.json
index adca4c7f..bcf6a6b9 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Virginia/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Virginia/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Washington/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Washington/execute-results/html.json
index 1fba3186..2e2548ae 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Washington/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Washington/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Washington.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Washington.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/West Virginia/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/West Virginia/execute-results/html.json
index 1aab9aa5..68537047 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/West Virginia/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/West Virginia/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in West Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in West Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Wisconsin/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Wisconsin/execute-results/html.json
index e4e66dce..0ce89732 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Wisconsin/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Wisconsin/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Wisconsin.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Wisconsin.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Wyoming/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Wyoming/execute-results/html.json
index b4ac86a6..a0a5cb01 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/Wyoming/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/Wyoming/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "33ef22863f8e8a8325bc405c8322e46f",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 10th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Wyoming.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Wyoming. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n state: \"Oklahoma\"\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"80%\"}\n\n\nAs of September 11th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Wyoming.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Wyoming. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n\n",
"supporting": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"