I tried to compare Election Eve 2016 vs 2020 for NV.
“IF” I did my calculations correctly, I have
2020: Ds 39.72% - Rs 35.57% ==> Ds +4.15%
2016: Ds 42.00% - Rs 36.20% ==> Ds +5.80%
Trump lost by 2.4%
NV looks like it could be very close.
Your calculations appear accurate. I want to have faith in NV...
Speedy: “I tried to compare Election Eve 2016 vs 2020 for NV.
“IF” I did my calculations correctly, I have
2020: Ds 39.72% - Rs 35.57% ==> Ds +4.15%
2016: Ds 42.00% - Rs 36.20% ==> Ds +5.80%
Trump lost by 2.4%
NV looks like it could be very close.”
Very close indeed. I told you I thought .5% Biden, but now my guess is flat even. From Ralston earlier today:
*******************************
[Clinton had a 73,000-ballot lead in Clark going into Election Day; Biden has a 90,000-ballot lead (at least). Do the math: Clinton ended up winning Clark by 80,000 votes.
In 2016, I underestimated Trump’s rural Nevada win — he won by 58,000 votes. This cycle, I think he will win by at least 70,000, maybe even 80,000. But unless Washoe County, which has been blue the last two cycles, goes to the president by a solid margin, he will probably need a 90,000-vote win in the rurals to win Nevada. That is virtually impossible.
About 600,000 votes left out there. Not sure how many mail ballots will be put into the system today that might make it even more difficult for the Republicans. But this much seems clear: If turnout does get to 1.4 million (80 percent and bigger than 2016), that means Trump would probably have to win Election Day by double digits, the same conundrum he faced in 2016 here. (Dems and GOP essentially tied in ballots cast on Election Day; Dems had a slight edge.)
]
*****************************************************
But after the afternoon update:
*******************************************************
SOS just posted an update, with 1.1 million voted, equal to 2016 turnout.
Will do deeper dive later,, but even with rurals in, statewide lead for Dems is 47K. That’s 4 percent or right at registration.
*******************************************************
Ralston’s original firewall, gotten by projecting the population growth from 2016, was 87,000 to be comparable.
47,000 is 3.3% of the potential vote. A 40,000 shortfall from the expected 87,000 is 2.85%.
The math is fuzzy, but if you subtract 2.85% from Clinton’s 2.4% win, you get Trump by .35%.
This is before you add in male/female ratio, enthusiasm, fewer college students, black and Hispanic, police/fire unions, and multiple Covid effects from unemployment.
I’ve fooled myself before by being overly optimistic. I think Nevada is too close to call, but not out of reach if the Trump army shows up.