diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json index 35ce0d7a..50c6a722 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Alabama.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Alabama.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 681e6f54..ef83c5f3 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 90% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Alaska.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 89% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Alaska.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 399c8566..c254be58 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 63% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Arizona.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 60% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Arizona.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 da68f3fd..5fb57d35 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 99% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Arkansas.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Arkansas.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 24117fa3..0f67701f 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/California.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/California.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 a2b0f850..24bdf9ca 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 93% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Colorado.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 93% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Colorado.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 9a5b8b23..365fe568 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 98% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Connecticut.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Connecticut.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 029554f5..2ffb09a8 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 97% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Delaware.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 97% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Delaware.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 eb757121..466f9bf3 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/District of Columbia.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/District of Columbia.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 f2fc8930..0d2ba178 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 82% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Florida.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 80% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Florida.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 0fb24d6f..03f8fd6c 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 63% chance of beating Kamala Harris** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Georgia.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 61% chance of beating Kamala Harris** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Georgia.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 2d0a5667..fae37fe2 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Hawaii.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Hawaii.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 1da86401..2cf16434 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Idaho.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Idaho.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 68322845..74df2c7b 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 97% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Illinois.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 97% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Illinois.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 5a7d0ff5..38e674c7 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Indiana.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Indiana.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 3c980d72..021b04b6 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 82% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Iowa.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 80% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Iowa.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 504b7ea3..8590dc12 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 95% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Kansas.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 95% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Kansas.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 c57afdd4..860d3762 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Kentucky.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Kentucky.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 37c83564..38573dc4 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 97% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Louisiana.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 97% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Louisiana.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 b14440b8..5437d048 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maine CD-1.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maine CD-1.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 c8d492a5..ce1f09ec 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 74% chance of beating Kamala Harris** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maine CD-2.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 72% chance of beating Kamala Harris** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maine CD-2.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 a8dfe0d2..085cff9d 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 92% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maine.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 93% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maine.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 330e80b9..518f2978 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maryland.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Maryland.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 9f763e00..95062cac 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Massachusetts.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Massachusetts.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 56963cfa..91a60890 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 55% chance of beating Donald Trump** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Michigan.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 59% chance of beating Donald Trump** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Michigan.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 0191def6..273c6476 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 81% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Minnesota.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 82% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Minnesota.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 f1e609f8..15c9d783 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 95% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Mississippi.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 94% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Mississippi.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 023a95dc..aa7c0f92 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Missouri.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Missouri.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 b62a55a0..895a0ea7 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Montana.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Montana.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 cf94908d..74df00a1 100644 --- a/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json +++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ "hash": "30f18cb853999354865df51e58333e90", "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\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=80%}\n\n\n\nAs of September 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 51% chance of beating Kamala Harris** in the electoral college.\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=20%}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/dev/img/harris.png){width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n\n


**Kamala Harris** currently has a **49%** chance of being elected America's next president.\nShe's projected to win between **157** and **423** electoral college votes.

\n\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/dev/img/trump.png){width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n\n


**Donald Trump** currently has a **51%** chance of re-taking the white house.\nHe's projected to win between **115** and **381** electoral college votes.

\n\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\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:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\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---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\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:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\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\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\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:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\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\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\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:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\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::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\n
\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\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:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n![](National_files/figure-html/plot-conditionals-1.png){width=1152}\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\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::: {.column width=\"70%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 52% chance of beating Donald Trump** in the electoral college.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=20%}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/dev/img/harris.png){width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n


**Kamala Harris** currently has a **52%** chance of being elected America's next president.\nShe's projected to win between **158** and **428** electoral college votes.

\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/dev/img/trump.png){width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n


**Donald Trump** currently has a **48%** chance of re-taking the white house.\nHe's projected to win between **110** and **380** 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\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![](National_files/figure-html/plot-conditionals-1.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 5ed19ecf..ad1b0882 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 7a481813..c301c739 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 93% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska CD-1.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 93% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska CD-1.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 562a0cc9..3e216e7f 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 74% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska CD-2.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 76% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska CD-2.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 1ffcae94..b86269cb 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska CD-3.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska CD-3.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 fba60edb..d7bcab41 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nebraska.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 3d56cf51..f2b3a6ea 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 52% chance of beating Kamala Harris** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nevada.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 51% chance of beating Donald Trump** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Nevada.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 b002bed2..b97413f8 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 81% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New Hampshire.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 82% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New Hampshire.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 62422e1c..7dc19271 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 94% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New Jersey.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 95% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New Jersey.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 fa5f1205..a18dc02a 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 86% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New Mexico.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 87% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New Mexico.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 e40922af..a467e7ef 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New York.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/New York.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 8fb1c7c4..c3fe38f9 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 64% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/North Carolina.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 61% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/North Carolina.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 f001b4f9..bf36efea 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/North Dakota.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/North Dakota.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 86b3ce21..6535184d 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 96% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Ohio.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 96% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Ohio.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 bac7fb5e..d9bf77cb 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Oklahoma.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Oklahoma.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 84bec152..2362506d 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 91% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Oregon.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 92% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Oregon.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 75dc3867..2c35f3a0 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 51% chance of beating Kamala Harris** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Pennsylvania.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 52% chance of beating Donald Trump** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Pennsylvania.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 a91c5e75..4788fefa 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Rhode Island.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n
\n\n
\n\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Rhode Island.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 a99ac1ff..8f833d76 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 92% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/South Carolina.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 92% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/South Carolina.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 a8d76429..745ca90b 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/South Dakota.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 97% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/South Dakota.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 33c8573d..a12d810b 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 98% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Tennessee.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Tennessee.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 fdae239c..7652b6cc 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 91% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Texas.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a 88% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Texas.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 2f5bd4d9..2e2e139e 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Utah.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Utah.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 0967fffb..63bf1447 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Vermont.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Vermont.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 7701bf4d..7e048cc8 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 86% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Virginia.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 86% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Virginia.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 f9892d30..6005a13e 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Washington.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Washington.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 93b5487b..21bcc048 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/West Virginia.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/West Virginia.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 b362560f..a96fe466 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 19th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 56% chance of beating Donald Trump** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Wisconsin.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Kamala Harris a 59% chance of beating Donald Trump** 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\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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Wisconsin.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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 75034f8f..79431100 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 19th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Wyoming.png){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**
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.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 20th, the forecast gives **Donald Trump a >99% chance of beating 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![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/main/img/Wyoming.png){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**
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.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"