Inspired by this 2012 article in the NY Times’ FiveThirtyEight blog, I used Nate Silver’s tipping point methodology to identify key swing states in the last presidential election.
The outcome of a presidential election depends on each of the states that together cast a combined total of 270 or more electoral votes for a candidate. But, only in some states is the race close enough to actually be considered competitive and not predetermined based on ingrained party loyalty. In addition, thanks to the electoral college, some states are given more weight than others.
The basic gist is that the “tipping point” state, the one that cast the 270th electoral college vote, is the
Why is this relevant?
It seems to me that identifying this “tipping point” state and, let’s say, ten of its nearest neighbors (based on margin of victory and electoral votes) is a way to identify battleground states for the next election, or as a logical focal point for trying to win the political hearts and minds of the nation.
This attempt at playing political moneyball, of course, carries with it all sorts of assumptions. One of the biggest is using the past to predict the future. Another is looking at a single presidential election and making broad generalizations. We are assuming stable demographics. We are assuming more of the same, politically speaking, by disregarding the possibility of an inspiring candidate who can transcend partisan divisions.
But, by taking a long view and spreading investments over, say, 10 or 11 states, I believe that progressives can occupy this “sweet spot” in the electoral system and make real, lasting differences felt across the country.
As someone who believes in the power and righteousness of the grassroots (meaning everyday people who are directly impacted by a given policy issue), I think that progressives should invest in on-the-ground, local infrastructure and relationships. Efforts should be made to create two-way channels of communication, activities, and solutions between national-level focused progressives and state-level minded ones.
Justice Brandeis observed, states act as “laboratories of democracy.” This means to me that there are a lot of opportunities to demand and implement progressive solutions to social and economic issues.
To get started, I gathered the following data:
- The number of electoral votes per state
- Presidential candidates’ party affiliation and margin of victory in the last presidential election – based on an easy calculation using the popular vote in each state
Using these two sources and a bit of copying and pasting, I built a quick spreadsheet containing the source data.
My next step was to calculate the margin of victory for each state.
It is the difference in votes between the two parties divided by the number of total votes. This allows us to order the states by those most in favor of the Democratic presidential candidate on one end and those most in favor of the Republican presidential candidate on the other.
I populated a new column titled “Margin of Victory,” using the following formula:
Those states that have the potential to determine the election and provide a presidential candidate with the 270th electoral vote are the swing states.
And since margin of victory was calculated in the previous step, I sorted my spreadsheet by that column in ascending order – from the most Democratic states to the least.
Then it was a simple matter of counting up electoral votes for a candidate and identifying the state that cast the 270th electoral vote.
Power matrix of the 11 most swing-prone states
Countless times I watched organizers at the Alliance for a Just Society draw power matrix visualizations on butcher paper during brainstorming sessions to help analyze relationships with allies, opponents, and decision-makers.
In this power matrix each of the 11 most swing-prone states has been plotted with the number of electoral college votes along one axis and the margin of victory for the two leading political parties’ candidates on the other axis.
The goal of this visualization is to encourage viewers to take a close look at the data and draw their own conclusions easier than, say, looking at a table full of numbers. This power matrix illustrates power, as measured by electoral votes, alongside degrees of partisan support.
Is the visualization successful? Are you, the viewer, able to get precise information? Would you rather look at a spreadsheet?
If you were a rich and powerful progressive seeking to skew the next presidential election leftward, which six of the 11 swing states would you pick to invest in?