Ben Highton finds one:
To make predictions for 2016, I analyzed how the popular vote margin (the Democratic minus the Republican percentage of the vote) compared to the national vote in every state from 1992 through 2012. I examined the states individually to detect any long-term trends. For example, while Oklahoma was already significantly more Republican than the nation in 1992, it steadily became even more Republican over time. …
Even if the trends across the states slow to – on average – half their current rates, things still look very good for the Democrats. Under this scenario, the probability of the Democrats winning the Electoral vote is 83 percent. Taken together, these two sets of simulations suggest that if the national vote is evenly split, then the Democrats’ chances of winning the Electoral College vote are between 83 and 89 percent.
Harry Enten casts doubt on this alleged advantage:
From 1952 to 2012, the majority of electoral votes leaned more Republican than the nation seven times and more Democratic nine times. But in the past five elections, Democrats appear to have opened up a bit of an edge. They could have won the Electoral College while losing the popular vote four of five times. Still, in that streak was 2000, when Republicans won the Electoral College without winning the popular vote.
Indeed, knowing how many electoral votes leaned more toward one party than the nation in one election tells us very little about how many will lean toward that party in the next election. An Electoral College advantage is often taken as a sign of a structural advantage, but for the most part, it’s been cyclical. The Democratic edge in 2008 and 2012 may be more due to randomness than demographics.
The Dish 