diff --git a/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json b/_freeze/2024-potus/Alabama/execute-results/html.json
index b3cca58f..c88c6ca7 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alabama.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Alabama. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alabama.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Alabama. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 00b7ee82..9665cd5b 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alaska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Alaska. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Alaska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Alaska. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 21941523..4f8c46c4 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Arizona.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Arizona.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 34b171ab..4a5e1b54 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Arkansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Arkansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Arkansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Arkansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 b3b771ba..0fb57f90 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in California.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in California. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in California.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in California. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 dca89623..684373b7 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Colorado.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Colorado. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Colorado.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Colorado. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 1ba6f30c..947991ce 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Connecticut.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Connecticut. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Connecticut.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Connecticut. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 03519c3e..e083d66e 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Delaware.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Delaware. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Delaware.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Delaware. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 0e87581d..70f30623 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in the District of Columbia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in the District of Columbia. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in the District of Columbia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in the District of Columbia. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 e2d7cfc7..a5188996 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Florida.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Florida.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 b017e400..7df5ea4c 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat 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:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat 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:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 c1e3b666..d3b431ab 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Hawaii.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Hawaii. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Hawaii.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Hawaii. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 339bf239..44f5324c 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Idaho.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Idaho. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Idaho.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Idaho. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 0112cb53..9409379f 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Illinois.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Illinois. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Illinois.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Illinois. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 3fba5737..5a4dbc0b 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Indiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Indiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Indiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Indiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 391afb57..7a98b83e 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Iowa.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Iowa. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Iowa.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Iowa. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 b41b35bc..52da66b9 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Kansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Kansas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kansas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 2d96e37b..d336f1e6 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Kentucky.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kentucky. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Kentucky.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Kentucky. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 e89a48d2..859da1fd 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Louisiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Louisiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Louisiana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Louisiana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 4df45848..2ee66bf9 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Maine CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Maine CD-1. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Maine CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Maine CD-1. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 c88be470..467f1588 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat 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
*No polls have been conducted in Maine CD-2. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat 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
*No polls have been conducted in Maine CD-2. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 3c89ad8f..27631cc9 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Maine.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Maine.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 a111af80..3d4bfafa 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Maryland.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Maryland. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Maryland.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Maryland. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 5a53984f..220aad61 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Massachusetts.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Massachusetts. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Massachusetts.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Massachusetts. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 0f200fe3..373e949e 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Michigan.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Michigan.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 cc8ad8ac..d9e90cbc 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Minnesota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Minnesota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 8ef6385d..11e342b7 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Mississippi.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Mississippi. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Mississippi.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Mississippi. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 81c5c01c..7d8fa97b 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Missouri.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Missouri. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Missouri.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Missouri. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 554e74a2..32c382a1 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Montana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Montana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Montana.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Montana. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 c3bd6d3f..507a1402 100644
--- a/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json
+++ b/_freeze/2024-potus/National/execute-results/html.json
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
"hash": "8de2885fa15790db09aece34fd92d188",
"result": {
"engine": "knitr",
- "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=80%}\n\n\nAs of August 5th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** the presidency.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=20%}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Kamala Harris** currently has a **36%** chance of being elected America's next president.\nShe's projected to win between **114** and **407** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Donald Trump** currently has a **64%** chance of re-taking the white house.\nHe's projected to win between **131** and **424** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Projected electoral college votes\nThe model is updated daily, blending state and national polls with non-polling predictors, like economic growth and presidential approval, to generate a range of potential outcomes in the electoral college.\nAs we get closer to election day, the uncertainty around the estimate will decrease.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\nThere is a less than 1% chance of a tie in the electoral college.\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Chance of winning each state\nState-level results determine the makeup of the electoral college.\nMost states heavily favor a particular party, leaving a few competitive battlegrounds that will be decisive in determining the next president.\nHover/click to see more information about a particular state.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"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**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)\n\n
**All states**
[Alabama](Alabama.qmd)
[Alaska](Alaska.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[Arkansas](Arkansas.qmd)
[California](California.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Connecticut](Connecticut.qmd)
[Delaware](Delaware.qmd)
[District of Columbia](District of Columbia.qmd)
[Florida](Florida.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Hawaii](Hawaii.qmd)
[Idaho](Idaho.qmd)
[Illinois](Illinois.qmd)
[Indiana](Indiana.qmd)
[Iowa](Iowa.qmd)
[Kansas](Kansas.qmd)
[Kentucky](Kentucky.qmd)
[Louisiana](Louisiana.qmd)
[Maine CD-1](Maine CD-1.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Maryland](Maryland.qmd)
[Massachusetts](Massachusetts.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Mississippi](Mississippi.qmd)
[Missouri](Missouri.qmd)
[Montana](Montana.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-1](Nebraska CD-1.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-3](Nebraska CD-3.qmd)
[Nebraska](Nebraska.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[New Jersey](New Jersey.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[New York](New York.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[North Dakota](North Dakota.qmd)
[Ohio](Ohio.qmd)
[Oklahoma](Oklahoma.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[Rhode Island](Rhode Island.qmd)
[South Carolina](South Carolina.qmd)
[South Dakota](South Dakota.qmd)
[Tennessee](Tennessee.qmd)
[Texas](Texas.qmd)
[Utah](Utah.qmd)
[Vermont](Vermont.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Washington](Washington.qmd)
[West Virginia](West Virginia.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Wyoming](Wyoming.qmd)\n\n\n\n:::::\n",
+ "markdown": "---\nformat: \n html:\n code-fold: true\n page-layout: custom\n fig-align: center\n fig-width: 12\n fig-height: 4\nexecute: \n message: false\n warning: false\n echo: false\nparams:\n branch: \"dev\"\n---\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n::::: {.column-body-custom}\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=80%}\n\n\nAs of August 6th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** the presidency.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=20%}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Kamala Harris** currently has a **39%** chance of being elected America's next president.\nShe's projected to win between **116** and **414** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"12%\"}\n{width=120}\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"38%\"}\n\n\n\n
**Donald Trump** currently has a **61%** chance of re-taking the white house.\nHe's projected to win between **124** and **422** electoral college votes.
\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Projected electoral college votes\nThe model is updated daily, blending state and national polls with non-polling predictors, like economic growth and presidential approval, to generate a range of potential outcomes in the electoral college.\nAs we get closer to election day, the uncertainty around the estimate will decrease.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\nThere is a less than 1% chance of a tie in the electoral college.\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Chance of winning each state\nState-level results determine the makeup of the electoral college.\nMost states heavily favor a particular party, leaving a few competitive battlegrounds that will be decisive in determining the next president.\nHover/click to see more information about a particular state.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"70%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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": [],
"filters": [
"rmarkdown/pagebreak.lua"
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 6b2a6178..bfcb6697 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-1. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-1.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-1. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 82815e09..dddc9aa7 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** 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
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-2. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** 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
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-2. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 822c4684..17e0e893 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-3.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-3. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska CD-3.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska CD-3. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 c2222590..24ebe1f9 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Nebraska.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Nebraska. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 7bac194e..9401a547 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat 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:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat 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:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 4d361d68..51afccce 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in New Hampshire.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Hampshire.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 46f15bf1..cc03a9c1 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Jersey.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in New Jersey. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Jersey.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in New Jersey. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 6e622d71..01166ded 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Mexico.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in New Mexico. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in New Mexico.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in New Mexico. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 f4268946..901727c2 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in New York.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in New York.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 a39cd740..809edfee 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in North Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is likely to beat Kamala Harris** in North Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 b7a44617..26ad55e7 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in North Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in North Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in North Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in North Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 9a1a8718..c4cc2951 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Ohio.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Ohio.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 ba4ce027..dc0440b5 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Oklahoma.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Oklahoma. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Oklahoma.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Oklahoma. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 bedeba75..216d133b 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Oregon.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Oregon.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 b3480f86..76cee721 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Pennsylvania.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Pennsylvania.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 59093700..7b3891cd 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Rhode Island.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Rhode Island. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Rhode Island.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Rhode Island. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 a94bd5c6..a469a980 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Carolina. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Carolina.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Carolina. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 e527eb82..99b9d6cb 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in South Dakota.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in South Dakota. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 703e48ff..26fdc8da 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Tennessee.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Tennessee. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Tennessee.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Tennessee. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 872ae48e..87582258 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Texas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Texas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Texas.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Texas. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 043ed240..8f2b3a2b 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Utah.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Utah. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is very likely to beat Kamala Harris** in Utah.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Utah. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 4397f8c7..3a0bf3a5 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Vermont.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Vermont. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is all but guaranteed to beat Donald Trump** in Vermont.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Vermont. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 43f2fcad..778f7803 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is likely to beat Donald Trump** in Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 58024de6..7bcdc984 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Washington.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Kamala Harris is very likely to beat Donald Trump** in Washington.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 c58945f1..420ada28 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in West Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in West Virginia. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in West Virginia.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in West Virginia. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 a032fcae..9f7d1f3b 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Wisconsin.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that it's **unclear whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win** in Wisconsin.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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 f02fbbaf..8a5cd9e8 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 August 5th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Wyoming.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Wyoming. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.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 August 6th, the forecast indicates that **Donald Trump is all but guaranteed to beat Kamala Harris** in Wyoming.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"20%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Presidential probabilities\nEach day, the model simulates thousands of plausible election results, from landslide victories to tightly contested races.\nEach candidate’s probability of winning is the proportion of simulations that they’ve won.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### Forecasted election-day voteshare\nThe model first constructs a polling average, pooling data across similar states when polls are sparse.\nIt then projects forward to election day, initially relying on non-polling indicators like economic growth and partisanship, but aligning more closely with the polling average as election day approaches.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n::: {.cell}\n::: {.cell-output-display}\n\n```{=html}\n\n\n```\n\n:::\n:::\n\n
*No polls have been conducted in Wyoming. The projected voteshare is estimated using economic and approval indicators, as well as polling information from similar states.*
\n\n::: {.cell}\n\n:::\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"60%\"}\n\n\n### State similarities\nThe model uses state characteristics, like demographic composition, population density, and education, to estimate how similar states are to one another.\nSimilar states are more likely to share polling biases and see similar shifts in polling trendlines.\n\n\n:::\n::: {.column width=\"40%\"}\n:::\n::::\n\n\n\n{height=700 fig-align='center'}\n\n\n\n---\n\n:::: {.columns}\n::: {.column width=\"30%\"}\n\n\n\nSources: Ballotpedia; Cook Political Report; The Economist; Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; FiveThirtyEight; Urban Stats; 270towin.com\n
\n
\n[{{< fa brands github >}} View the source code](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main)\n
\n[{{< fa solid database >}} Explore the output](https://github.com/markjrieke/2024-potus/tree/main/out)\n\n\n\n:::\n::::\n\n---\n\n:::::\n\n::::: {.column-margin-custom}\n\n\n\n**[National Forecast](National.qmd)**
[How this works](../posts/2024-07-04-forecast-methodology/index.qmd)\n\n
**Competitive states**
[Michigan](Michigan.qmd)
[Nebraska CD-2](Nebraska CD-2.qmd)
[Wisconsin](Wisconsin.qmd)
[Pennsylvania](Pennsylvania.qmd)
[New Hampshire](New Hampshire.qmd)
[Virginia](Virginia.qmd)
[Nevada](Nevada.qmd)
[Georgia](Georgia.qmd)
[Minnesota](Minnesota.qmd)
[New Mexico](New Mexico.qmd)
[Maine](Maine.qmd)
[Arizona](Arizona.qmd)
[North Carolina](North Carolina.qmd)
[Colorado](Colorado.qmd)
[Oregon](Oregon.qmd)
[Maine CD-2](Maine CD-2.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"