Talk Elections

Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion => Congressional Elections => Topic started by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 20, 2010, 02:01:44 PM



Title: 2010 Primaries Thread (It's all over now, baby blue)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 20, 2010, 02:01:44 PM
That's all, folks.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on June 20, 2010, 02:34:39 PM
How can someone be "openly black"?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 20, 2010, 02:54:58 PM
You forgot about the Inglis-Gowdy runoff...  :(


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 20, 2010, 03:46:21 PM
You forgot about the Inglis-Gowdy runoff...  :(

Whoops! Added.


It was a joke. Until you stepped on it. Now it's dead.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Eraserhead on June 20, 2010, 05:45:10 PM
Any recent polling on SC-01?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Rowan on June 20, 2010, 06:25:59 PM
Johnny, I really appreciate your posts on the races like this. Thanks.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 20, 2010, 10:13:10 PM
By the way, there are two important SC runoffs the AP is not covering.

5th Circuit Solicitor (D)
Dan Johnson
John Meadors

Berkeley County Supervisor (R)
Henry Brown  (yes, the same Henry Brown who chose to not run for reelection in SC-01)
Dan Davis

This race was a dead heat in the first round, Davis got 40.64% of the vote and Brown got 40.62% (a 3 vote difference).

Incidentally, the AP has some test results on the SC page right now that are strongly labeled as don't use!

However, for giggles, here's who they are listing as having won the runoffs.

Attorney General (R)
Wilson 55%
Lord 45%

Governor (R)
Barrett 55%
Haley 45%

Lieutenant Governor (R)
Ard 55%
Connor 45%

Superintendent of Education (R)
Zais 55%
Moffly 45%

SC-01 (R)
Thurmond 55%
Scott 45%

SC-03 (R)
Duncan 55%
Cash 45%

SC-04 (R)
Inglis 55%
Gowdy 45%

SC-06 (R)
Harrelson 55%
Pratt 45%


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Eraserhead on June 21, 2010, 12:33:12 AM
Well, Haley losing by 10% would make my night! :P


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 21, 2010, 01:30:40 AM
I watched on C-SPAN some of a Marshall Cunningham "debate," with this odd enabling media chick moderator, who seemed to just gush over everything either of them said, wetting her pants. Very odd. Anyway, Marshall will be shredded in the General if she wins the primary. I am quite confident Burr is rooting for her.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Meeker on June 21, 2010, 02:06:12 PM
I disagree with the move to one primary thread FWIW; the primary threads weren't clogging the board. What's clogging the board is peoples' needs to create entirely new threads for single campaign stories and also prediction/support threads.

I personally think we should go to a style of one thread per state and anything new needs to be posted in said thread.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 22, 2010, 01:53:23 PM
Judging by the line on the sign-in sheet, turn out at my precinct was about the same or maybe even slightly higher than two weeks ago.  Of course, we do have a hotly contested State House runoff to generate extra heat, so my precinct may not be typical.

The State Election Commission has a link to the results now up:
http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/16213/28319/en/summary.html (http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/16213/28319/en/summary.html)

Judging by past experience, the AP link will have the results up faster, but as a I mentioned in a prior post (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119066.msg2543379#msg2543379), the SEC site has two races of interest that the AP link doesn't.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 06:31:45 PM
SC and NC have closed. SC has a few precincts in. Haley up 61-39 for Governor, Scott up 67-33 in SC-01, Cash 54-46 in SC-03, Gowdy 85-15 in SC-04 (Spartanburg, obviously).


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 06:34:34 PM
I'm only interested in Scott's and D'Annunzio's race of the ones I follow, really.  I expect Bridgewater, Marshall, and Haley to win their races.  Lee & Cunningham would be much less of a surprise than Barrett winning, of course.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 06:43:08 PM
I can tell South Carolina is going to be as slow tonight as it was two weeks ago.

Marshall up big in early returns, 63-37.

One precinct in for NC-08, it went for Jordan 3-1.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 06:46:32 PM
Scott 65%-35% over Strom spawn with two more precints from Berkley county this time.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Eraserhead on June 22, 2010, 06:46:50 PM
Breaking News, guys:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH6_xx_w8sk&feature=player_embedded


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 06:49:19 PM
Johnson won another precinct in Carbarus county 75-25. The total is now 73-27 district wide for Johnston.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 06:49:34 PM
Breaking News, guys:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH6_xx_w8sk&feature=player_embedded


lol!  Web Video #FAIL


Scott 65%-35% over Strom spawn with two more precints from Berkley county this time.

I'm rooting for Scott, even though that will help the national GOP, just out of basic sanity.  All of the national DC outlets referred to Scott as a "strong frontrunner" for the seat, even though his plurality wasn't that strong to begin with -- in the 30%'s right? -- and all of his opponents endorsed the racist's son.

I just hope the national GOP won't allow him to fail like Steele did talking about race issues, and that they won't think that their problems with reaching out to minorities are any less severe than they were yesterday.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 06:51:21 PM
I doubt D'Annuzio even stands a chance of getting close.  Though I've been wrong before.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 06:51:53 PM
Breaking News, guys:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH6_xx_w8sk&feature=player_embedded


lol!  Web Video #FAIL


Scott 65%-35% over Strom spawn with two more precints from Berkley county this time.

I'm rooting for Scott, even though that will help the national GOP, just out of basic sanity.  All of the national DC outlets referred to Scott as a "strong frontrunner" for the seat, even though his plurality wasn't that strong to begin with -- in the 30%'s right? -- and all of his opponents endorsed the racist's son.

I just hope the national GOP won't allow him to fail like Steele did talking about race issues, and that they won't think that their problems with reaching out to minorities are any less severe than they were yesterday.

I am sure that tomorrow he will be hailed as the "future of the GOP". ;)


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 06:53:53 PM
Scott is winning Charleston 72-28 now, with about 13% of it in.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 06:54:06 PM
Scott up 70-30 a bunch of Charleston came in.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 22, 2010, 06:56:19 PM
I voted for Scott and Haley today. I have a good feeling that at least one will win.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 06:57:30 PM
SC-03 keeps flipping between Cash and Duncan. It's currently 52-48 Duncan. Is there any difference between these two guys?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 06:58:54 PM
I voted for Scott and Haley today. I have a good feeling that at least one will win.

Where is Thurmond and Scott from county wise.


Haley is winning Charleston and Spartanburg. She is in a strong position.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Eraserhead on June 22, 2010, 06:59:14 PM
I voted for Scott and Haley today. I have a good feeling that at least one will win.

Ya think? :P


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:00:52 PM
Dorchester is now 1/6th in and Scott is winning it 75-25. He's really beating the pants off Thurmond.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 07:00:56 PM
I voted for Scott and Haley today. I have a good feeling that at least one will win.

Haley was always a shoo-in, I mean, McMaster endorsed her, and despite his 3rd place showing, he's still a powerhouse in SC GOP politics, and Barrett only got 22% to her 49% in the first-round.

Haley could never act like she's a shoo-in, as she didn't want to depress her turn-out, but Barrett never had a chance without Haley suffering a non-fake scandal.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:02:18 PM
Duncan is the conservative bloggers favorite, as far as I can tell (and probably therefore the establishment favorite).  He's also a State Rep.

Cash is more out of left field - no one expected him to get here in the first place.  He's a businessman and pro-life pastor - pretty hardcore in the movement from what his site says.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 07:02:44 PM
Dorchester is now 1/6th in and Scott is winning it 75-25. He's really beating the pants off Thurmond.

Impressive, no?

Who would have, a year ago, thought that the son of Strom could EVER be soundly beaten by a black guy in a GOP primary SC-01, especially in a case like this where all of Scott's white opponents endorsed whats-his-face-son-of-the-racist?  If post-racial politics can profoundly show up in low-turnout GOP primaries in South Carolina, our country has a promising future indeed!

Remember, Scott only got like 31% in the first round -- not really that convincing of a showing.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:04:34 PM
Most of these races are already over with, so I'll just keep wasting my time here for a while.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:05:27 PM
OTOH, boy was Cal Cunningham a real fail candidate.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 22, 2010, 07:05:30 PM
I voted for Scott and Haley today. I have a good feeling that at least one will win.

Where is Thurmond and Scott from county wise.


Haley is winning Charleston and Spartanburg. She is in a strong position.

Both are from Charleston County. I know Scott is. He was the city council chairman. SC-01 is mostly CHS county anyway.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:06:16 PM
Dorchester is now 1/6th in and Scott is winning it 75-25. He's really beating the pants off Thurmond.

Impressive, no?

Who would have, a year ago, thought that the son of Strom could EVER be soundly beaten by a black guy in a GOP primary SC-01, especially in a case like this where all of Scott's white opponents endorsed whats-his-face-son-of-the-racist?  If post-racial politics can profoundly show up in low-turnout GOP primaries in South Carolina, our country has a promising future indeed!

Remember, Scott only got like 31% in the first round -- not really that convincing of a showing.

I wonder how long this sentiment lasts? Especially when the GOP starts hyping Scott as their Obama. :P Its like their fifth or sixth now I beleive.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 07:06:57 PM
Most of these races are already over with, so I'll just keep wasting my time here for a while.

Yeah, that's why I've already jumped to my extrapolations.  I got burned doing that for the Lincoln/Halter thread too soon, but the only surprise of the night I see at this point being a mild upset of Bridgewater in Utah by the conservative grassroots...no real impact there outside of whether the GOP gets a sewage pipe for a Senator or someone eloquent who votes the exact same.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:07:16 PM
MS is closed; I know you're all on the edge of your seat to see who gets to run against Bennie Thompson.

There's one precinct in from Greenville, and Gowdy won it 62-38. Poor Bob Inglis.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:08:13 PM
8 more precincts in Berkley Scott now is up 68-32 in Berkley County. I Think he is over 70 in three of the 6 counties.

Slight miscaluculation :P


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:10:54 PM
Really don't see how Cash wins in SC-03.  Duncan's base of Laurens hasn't shown up yet in the numbers.

EDIT:  That doesn't mean it won't be close.  Probably within 5 points.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:11:07 PM
Isn't it ironic that there is guy on the ballot whose name is B. Connor? lol


A Thurmond and a Connor both losing.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 07:11:57 PM
Dorchester is now 1/6th in and Scott is winning it 75-25. He's really beating the pants off Thurmond.

Impressive, no?

Who would have, a year ago, thought that the son of Strom could EVER be soundly beaten by a black guy in a GOP primary SC-01, especially in a case like this where all of Scott's white opponents endorsed whats-his-face-son-of-the-racist?  If post-racial politics can profoundly show up in low-turnout GOP primaries in South Carolina, our country has a promising future indeed!

Remember, Scott only got like 31% in the first round -- not really that convincing of a showing.

I wonder how long this sentiment lasts? Especially when the GOP starts hyping Scott as their Obama. :P Its like their fifth or sixth now I beleive.

If anyone is the GOP's "next Obama" it's Marco Rubio until if/when Scott primaries Graham.

J.C. Watts didn't really help the GOP address their disconnect with black voters, as far as I know.  

BUT it's a very promising sign that the three of the GOP's current minority rising stars are taking place in places that were once possibly the center for racist politics (SC & LA).


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:13:10 PM
Big chunk o'Charleston, Scott still ahead by a ridiculous almost-3-1 margin.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:13:51 PM
Bunch of both Spartanburg and Greenville in SC-06, Inglis is getting humiliated.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:14:19 PM
All of the SC races are pretty much over except for the SC-3 race.  


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:14:37 PM
Dorchester is now 1/6th in and Scott is winning it 75-25. He's really beating the pants off Thurmond.

Impressive, no?

Who would have, a year ago, thought that the son of Strom could EVER be soundly beaten by a black guy in a GOP primary SC-01, especially in a case like this where all of Scott's white opponents endorsed whats-his-face-son-of-the-racist?  If post-racial politics can profoundly show up in low-turnout GOP primaries in South Carolina, our country has a promising future indeed!

Remember, Scott only got like 31% in the first round -- not really that convincing of a showing.

I wonder how long this sentiment lasts? Especially when the GOP starts hyping Scott as their Obama. :P Its like their fifth or sixth now I beleive.

If anyone is the GOP's "next Obama" it's Marco Rubio until if/when Scott primaries Graham.

J.C. Watts didn't really help the GOP address their disconnect with black voters, as far as I know.  

BUT it's a very promising sign that the three of the GOP's current minority rising stars are taking place in places that were once possibly the center for racist politics (SC & LA).

I am sure Duke would love to have his favorite new Congressman defeat his favorite Senator in a primary. :D


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Eraserhead on June 22, 2010, 07:14:49 PM
What a snoozer tonight is. Hopefully Utah will be interesting (but it probably won't be).


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Citizen (The) Doctor on June 22, 2010, 07:15:03 PM
Are you guys getting a live stream from AP or something for covering the primaries?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:15:39 PM
Bernie Reeves is losing 58-42 in NC-13; it hasn't been on anyone's radar but he did raise nearly a quarter million. So it will stay off the radar.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:16:20 PM
Big chunk o'Charleston, Scott still ahead by a ridiculous almost-3-1 margin.

Sounds like some kind of Southern dish.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 22, 2010, 07:16:25 PM
Where are y'all getting the results from? Scvotes.org is ridiculously behind.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 07:18:54 PM
OTOH, boy was Cal Cunningham a real fail candidate.

Well, he was always a flop when the DSSC ----***SCREWED***--- him over, long before Marshall entered, by refusing to get behind him out of the slim hope that Etheridge and Shuler would reverse their previous statements that they wouldn't enter the race.  Marshall got into the race when there was a complete vacuum (besides Ken Lewis), and only then did the DSSC, very late in the game, decide, "Hey, let's get behind this young, veteran and elevate his profile, even if he doesn't win, he'll be a better candidate!"  

Of course, by then, it was long too late and Marshall has better connections statewide, having run so many times for statewide and for higher office before, and better name recognition.

Cal's only hope was getting into the race early and having the field cleared for him.  So this is, in my opinion, completely on the DSSC's shoulders for not realizing the obvious early enough.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:19:15 PM
Bernie Reeves is losing 58-42 in NC-13; it hasn't been on anyone's radar but he did raise nearly a quarter million. So it will stay off the radar.


Isn't his opponent African American?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:19:34 PM
Most of these races are already over with, so I'll just keep wasting my time here for a while.

Yeah, that's why I've already jumped to my extrapolations.  I got burned doing that for the Lincoln/Halter thread too soon, but the only surprise of the night I see at this point being a mild upset of Bridgewater in Utah by the conservative grassroots...no real impact there outside of whether the GOP gets a sewage pipe for a Senator or someone eloquent who votes the exact same.

The Lincoln/Halter extrapolation was pretty obvious once we started to get a number of full counties in.  We'll see about later...


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 07:20:09 PM
Yeah I assumed Halter was going to pull off the win before the returns really started hitting...

Dorchester is now 1/6th in and Scott is winning it 75-25. He's really beating the pants off Thurmond.

Impressive, no?

Who would have, a year ago, thought that the son of Strom could EVER be soundly beaten by a black guy in a GOP primary SC-01, especially in a case like this where all of Scott's white opponents endorsed whats-his-face-son-of-the-racist?  If post-racial politics can profoundly show up in low-turnout GOP primaries in South Carolina, our country has a promising future indeed!

Remember, Scott only got like 31% in the first round -- not really that convincing of a showing.

I wonder how long this sentiment lasts? Especially when the GOP starts hyping Scott as their Obama. :P Its like their fifth or sixth now I beleive.

If anyone is the GOP's "next Obama" it's Marco Rubio until if/when Scott primaries Graham.

J.C. Watts didn't really help the GOP address their disconnect with black voters, as far as I know.  

BUT it's a very promising sign that the three of the GOP's current minority rising stars are taking place in places that were once possibly the center for racist politics (SC & LA).

I guess that the epicenter for racial voting among whites may have shifted northwards towards places like West Virginia, PA-12, and Arkansas, which perhaps should be taken into account for any meta-analysis?  PA-12 was the only Kerry-McCain district...

What do you guys think?  


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:21:40 PM
OTOH, boy was Cal Cunningham a real fail candidate.

Well, he was always a flop when the DSSC ----***SCREWED***--- him over, long before Marshall entered, by refusing to get behind him out of the slim hope that Etheridge and Shuler would reverse their previous statements that they wouldn't enter the race.  Marshall got into the race when there was a complete vacuum (besides Ken Lewis), and only then did the DSSC, very late in the game, decide, "Hey, let's get behind this young, veteran and elevate his profile, even if he doesn't win, he'll be a better candidate!"  

Of course, by then, it was long too late and Marshall has better connections statewide, having run so many times for statewide and for higher office before, and better name recognition.

Cal's only hope was getting into the race early and having the field cleared for him.  So this is, in my opinion, completely on the DSSC's shoulders for not realizing the obvious early enough.

Isn't the DSCC lucky Etheridge didn't get in now?  :P

Though I'm not sure Marshall is much better.

Still, as I have long said, when you lose a primary, except on rare occasions, you suck more than the candidate who won.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:22:12 PM
Where are y'all getting the results from? Scvotes.org is ridiculously behind.

AP, the results links are in the OP.

Bernie Reeves is losing 58-42 in NC-13; it hasn't been on anyone's radar but he did raise nearly a quarter million. So it will stay off the radar.


Isn't his opponent African American?

Apparently so.

Edit: Bill Marcy in MS-02 is also black, so black Republicans actually have a chance to win three Congressional primaries tonight.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 07:25:32 PM
I guess that the epicenter for racial voting among whites may have shifted northwards towards places like West Virginia, PA-12, and Arkansas, which perhaps should be taken into account for any meta-analysis?  PA-12 was the only Kerry-McCain district...

What do you guys think?  

Well, remember that places like SC-01 tend to be wealthier suburban whites who have educations (insert Al "class" quote here).


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Eraserhead on June 22, 2010, 07:26:44 PM
Yeah I assumed Halter was going to pull off the win before the returns really started hitting...

Dorchester is now 1/6th in and Scott is winning it 75-25. He's really beating the pants off Thurmond.

Impressive, no?

Who would have, a year ago, thought that the son of Strom could EVER be soundly beaten by a black guy in a GOP primary SC-01, especially in a case like this where all of Scott's white opponents endorsed whats-his-face-son-of-the-racist?  If post-racial politics can profoundly show up in low-turnout GOP primaries in South Carolina, our country has a promising future indeed!

Remember, Scott only got like 31% in the first round -- not really that convincing of a showing.

I wonder how long this sentiment lasts? Especially when the GOP starts hyping Scott as their Obama. :P Its like their fifth or sixth now I beleive.

If anyone is the GOP's "next Obama" it's Marco Rubio until if/when Scott primaries Graham.

J.C. Watts didn't really help the GOP address their disconnect with black voters, as far as I know.  

BUT it's a very promising sign that the three of the GOP's current minority rising stars are taking place in places that were once possibly the center for racist politics (SC & LA).

I guess that the epicenter for racial voting among whites may have shifted northwards towards places like West Virginia, PA-12, and Arkansas, which perhaps should be taken into account for any meta-analysis?  PA-12 was the only Kerry-McCain district...

What do you guys think?  

I think Appalachia has always been and continues to be horrible. And the same goes for Ar-kan-sas.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: nclib on June 22, 2010, 07:28:01 PM
I guess that the epicenter for racial voting among whites may have shifted northwards towards places like West Virginia, PA-12, and Arkansas, which perhaps should be taken into account for any meta-analysis?  PA-12 was the only Kerry-McCain district...

What do you guys think?  

Well, remember that places like SC-01 tend to be wealthier suburban whites who have educations (insert Al "class" quote here).

SC-1 might be the most socially moderate GOP held district in the Deep South. Not that that's saying a lot.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on June 22, 2010, 07:28:11 PM
Apparently Congressman Henry Brown has lost his race for Berkeley County Supervisor.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:29:52 PM
Apparently Congressman Henry Brown has lost his race for Berkeley County Supervisor.

Jeb Bradley anyone?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:31:14 PM
Jeb Bradley won his election to the State Senate. That's a pretty ignominious end to Brown's career.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 22, 2010, 07:31:37 PM
OTOH, boy was Cal Cunningham a real fail candidate.

Well, he was always a flop when the DSSC ----***SCREWED***--- him over, long before Marshall entered, by refusing to get behind him out of the slim hope that Etheridge and Shuler would reverse their previous statements that they wouldn't enter the race.  Marshall got into the race when there was a complete vacuum (besides Ken Lewis), and only then did the DSSC, very late in the game, decide, "Hey, let's get behind this young, veteran and elevate his profile, even if he doesn't win, he'll be a better candidate!"  

Of course, by then, it was long too late and Marshall has better connections statewide, having run so many times for statewide and for higher office before, and better name recognition.

Cal's only hope was getting into the race early and having the field cleared for him.  So this is, in my opinion, completely on the DSSC's shoulders for not realizing the obvious early enough.

Isn't the DSCC lucky Etheridge didn't get in now?  :P

Though I'm not sure Marshall is much better.

Still, as I have long said, when you lose a primary, except on rare occasions, you suck more than the candidate who won.

True, true, I mean, candidate quality matters a lot here.  But Cal had a nice biography, but to have a chance against someone with such high name recognition, regardless of her actual potential to win, the gears had to start rotating a lot sooner.  The reason to run Cal wasn't to beat Burr, but rather to prime him for future statewide office.

I know you aren't a fan of Schumer, but you have to admit he knew a lot about recruitment and a running the right candidates in the right states [Rahm did as well fwiw].  North Carolina would have been entirely different if Roy Cooper was getting a personal call from Schumer every four hours.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:32:19 PM
Jeb Bradley won his election to the State Senate. That's a pretty ignominious end to Brown's career.

I thought he lost.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:32:52 PM
It's been called for Marshall and Haley, by the way.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:34:50 PM
Jeb Bradley won his election to the State Senate. That's a pretty ignominious end to Brown's career.

I thought he lost.

He won pretty handily, actually - 61-39.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:38:02 PM
Inglis is losing Greenville 62-38 with about 60% in. He'll be lucky to break 30% at the end of this.

Edit: Called for Gowdy.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:45:37 PM
Okay, AP, I think you can call SC-01. Scott is winning 69-31 with 3/4th of the precincts in.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:46:05 PM
74-26 for Scott. Three Counties have him above 70%. The other two still have nothing in yet.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 07:47:54 PM
called for Scott


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 07:48:36 PM
Almost all of Horry came in, it went 56-44 Scott. That's what dragged him under 70%.

Called for Scott.

56 precincts in for MS-02, and only 310 votes. Boy, those must have been some boring polls to work.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 08:00:57 PM
Looks like it'll be Duncan in SC-03. Cash is behind by 3,800 votes, and it doesn't look like there's that much left.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on June 22, 2010, 08:01:43 PM
What great news! I'm glad my district thinks like I do. Now on to november for Mr. Scott and Ms. Haley!


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 08:04:53 PM
NC-08 called for Johnson, by the way. Timmy D did manage to get 88% in Hoke County, though.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 08:15:15 PM
McCormick came in and spiced up Duncan's lead to 4,000 votes. It's over for the ice cream man.

The black Republican won NC-13, and the black Republican is winning MS-02. Good night for black Republicans!

Edit: Everything in for SC-03, and Duncan wins by 2,200 votes.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: nclib on June 22, 2010, 08:21:42 PM
I'm pleased with Marshall's win. Interesting in the county map, how concentrated Cunningham's support is.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 08:25:39 PM
I'm pleased with Marshall's win. Interesting in the county map, how concentrated Cunningham's support is.

He won the area where he's from, plus Winston-Salem/Greensboro -- maybe he got a lot of favorable media coverage there? And, oddly, Wilmington.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 22, 2010, 08:28:57 PM
Here's the tally in the Berkeley County Supervisor race with all precincts reporting.

Henry Brown (REP)   
   44.26%   7,062
Dan Davis (REP)   
   55.74%   8,893

Only Richland County is in for the 5th Circuit Solicitor race but there aren't enough votes that Meadors can hope ro gain in Kershaw to overcome the current lead for Johnson.

Dan Johnson (DEM)   
   57.53%   8,207
John Meadors (DEM)   
   42.47%   6,058


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 08:29:45 PM
McCormick came in and spiced up Duncan's lead to 4,000 votes. It's over for the ice cream man.

Edit: Everything in for SC-03, and Duncan wins by 2,200 votes.

Really don't see how Cash wins in SC-03.  Duncan's base of Laurens hasn't shown up yet in the numbers.

EDIT:  That doesn't mean it won't be close.  Probably within 5 points.

Sometimes extrapolations work quite easily.  I'm now back from dinner and want to see what happens in the Utah...


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 08:31:30 PM
Here's the tally in the Berkeley County Supervisor race with all precincts reporting.

Henry Brown (REP)   
   44.26%   7,062
Dan Davis (REP)   
   55.74%   8,893

Henry Brown generally underperformed in his races for Congress, so its not terribly surprising he should underperform in other races too.

Noticed the Gowdy-Inglis numbers.  Now that's what I call a massacre.  :P


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 08:37:58 PM
In ridiculously-close-yet-pointless-primary news, the Republican runoff for SC-06 is currently a 29-vote margin with all but 18 precincts in.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Smash255 on June 22, 2010, 08:42:10 PM
I'm pleased with Marshall's win. Interesting in the county map, how concentrated Cunningham's support is.

Well, of course you are.  When it's a man versus a woman, it's pretty clear how nclib would vote.

Something tells me if Palin gets the GOP nomination and faces Obama in 2012 the chances of nclib voting for her is somewhere around 0%


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 08:47:14 PM
Oh, and black Republicans got the trifecta: Marcy won in MS-02. Not that it matters in November, of course.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 08:56:30 PM
Oh, and black Republicans got the trifecta: Marcy won in MS-02. Not that it matters in November, of course.

You never now. :P Thompson could end up with $90,000 in BP bribe money. :D


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 22, 2010, 08:58:11 PM
I bet the Republicans are going to take a good hard look at how well Tim Scott does among black voters in November.  If he does significantly better than other Republicans on the ballot, then if South Carolina doesn't end up with a requirement to draw two minority-majority CDs based on the 2010 census results, expect to see a Scottmander be drawn that takes in as many black voters as the GOP thinks leaves Scott with a viable district to run in.  Doubtful given our politics that Scott (or any Republican) could win a minority-majority district.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Nhoj on June 22, 2010, 09:11:11 PM
Some early resulst in utah, mike lee is up on 52.63% to bridgewater's 47.37%. lee is also currently leading in salt lake county.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 09:11:58 PM
I bet the Republicans are going to take a good hard look at how well Tim Scott does among black voters in November.  If he does significantly better than other Republicans on the ballot, then if South Carolina doesn't end up with a requirement to draw two minority-majority CDs based on the 2010 census results, expect to see a Scottmander be drawn that takes in as many black voters as the GOP thinks leaves Scott with a viable district to run in.  Doubtful given our politics that Scott (or any Republican) could win a minority-majority district.

Well Steele did win 25% of the black vote in MD in 2006. I would hazard that SC blacks are far more Conservative then MD blacks. Its possible he might meet that if he tries hard enough with some potential for a higher performance, say like 40% or 50% when running for reelection down the road. Huckabee did that well among them in 2002 and even some of my black teachers in NC like Huckabee over many other Republicans which I can't understand. We'll see.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 22, 2010, 09:12:53 PM
Some early resulst in utah, mike lee is up on 52.63% to bridgewater's 47.37%. lee is also currently leading in salt lake county.
I'm pulling for Bridgewater in this race. Utahans will be in for a surprise after this election when they'll have at least one Senator who isn't an old fart.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 09:16:12 PM
Some early resulst in utah, mike lee is up on 52.63% to bridgewater's 47.37%. lee is also currently leading in salt lake county.
I'm pulling for Bridgewater in this race. Utahans will be in for a surprise after this election when they'll have at least one Senator who isn't an old fart.

How old are the two candidates?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 09:18:58 PM
Matheson is off to a roaring start, 65-35.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Kevinstat on June 22, 2010, 09:21:01 PM
I'm sure this has been asked like 100 times, but when did South Carolina's threshold to avoid a runoff go from 35% to 50%?


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 09:21:15 PM
Please count quickly Utah...


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 09:21:15 PM
Here's a tentative map of the NC runoff:

()


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 22, 2010, 09:21:52 PM
Some early resulst in utah, mike lee is up on 52.63% to bridgewater's 47.37%. lee is also currently leading in salt lake county.
I'm pulling for Bridgewater in this race. Utahans will be in for a surprise after this election when they'll have at least one Senator who isn't an old fart.

How old are the two candidates?
Mike Lee is probably in his lower 40's. Tim Bridgewater is probably closer to 50. Both relatively young though compared to Hatch and Bennett.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: tmthforu94 on June 22, 2010, 09:27:21 PM
Some early resulst in utah, mike lee is up on 52.63% to bridgewater's 47.37%. lee is also currently leading in salt lake county.
I'm pulling for Bridgewater in this race. Utahans will be in for a surprise after this election when they'll have at least one Senator who isn't an old fart.

How old are the two candidates?
Mike Lee is probably in his lower 40's. Tim Bridgewater is probably closer to 50. Both relatively young though compared to Hatch and Bennett.


Mike Lee is actually 36, and a real nutter who has said that American law should be based on the Book of Mormon.
Hm, that doesn't sound too bad, given my knowledge of the Book of Mormon. ;) Never really researched him, but my Dad is really liking him, so I figured he might have been something awful. Maybe not...


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 09:29:28 PM
The only place that would seriously cost him would be SLC and right now he is winning that.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 09:45:16 PM
Looking at the county returns (http://electionresults.utah.gov/xmlData/300010.html) in Utah (mostly absentees), Lee is winning in most places, including vote heavy counties like Utah and Washington, along with Salt Lake. I suspect that he will win, unless today voters go a different direction. Lee is just a lot smarter than Bridgewater, and deserved to win.

Is there a link to the AP results?

Great news about Scott winning, and winning big. That might be the best news of the primary season so for the GOP. Good job Charleston, a city that I love anyway.  :)


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 22, 2010, 09:51:58 PM
I'm sure this has been asked like 100 times, but when did South Carolina's threshold to avoid a runoff go from 35% to 50%?

It's been 50% as long as I remember, and I've been voting here since 1984.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 22, 2010, 09:58:16 PM
The only states I know of with a 35% threshold are South Dakota and Iowa (the latter going to a convention rather than a runoff).


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 10:17:26 PM
A slug of today votes just came in, and it was about evenly split between  Bridgewater and Lee. This might be a long night. Critically, Lee won the absentees in Utah County handily, but with the today votes, they were split. Bridgewater could not survive if he were thrashed in Utah County. Apparently he won't be.

Lee is thrashing Bridgewater in smaller but still significant Washington County, down in Utah Dixie, where his ancestor John D. Lee lived who led the slaughter of the Francher party in the Mountain Meadows massacre, and has thousands of descendants, including this particular Lee.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: SvenssonRS on June 22, 2010, 10:21:00 PM

Pretty much this. I've personally switched my support to Lee(although Bridgewater has the cooler last name :P), so the fact that he's winning thus far makes me happy, but we'll see. It'll be interesting, seeing just how split Utah's Republicans are between establishment and Tea Party.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 10:22:30 PM

Pretty much this. I've personally switched my support to Lee(although Bridgewater has the cooler last name :P), so the fact that he's winning thus far makes me happy, but we'll see. It'll be interesting, seeing just how split Utah's Republicans are between establishment and Tea Party.

Technically the establishment met its Waterloo in Utah at the Convention back in May.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 10:23:14 PM
Utah is far too close to even attempt to call right now.  Interesting how the major counties are all pretty split evenly as well as the actual vote is.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 10:30:29 PM

Pretty much this. I've personally switched my support to Lee(although Bridgewater has the cooler last name :P), so the fact that he's winning thus far makes me happy, but we'll see. It'll be interesting, seeing just how split Utah's Republicans are between establishment and Tea Party.

True, but the two big counties that Bridgewater is carrying, Davis and Weber, and disproportionately in, and substantially disproportionately in. The lead in Salt Lake County is see sawing, but basically skin tight.  It may well be that Lee wins because of big margins in Dixie.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 10:33:41 PM

Pretty much this. I've personally switched my support to Lee(although Bridgewater has the cooler last name :P), so the fact that he's winning thus far makes me happy, but we'll see. It'll be interesting, seeing just how split Utah's Republicans are between establishment and Tea Party.

True, but the two big counties that Bridgewater is carrying, Davis and Weber, and disproportionately in, and substantially disproportionately in. The lead in Salt Lake County is see sawing, but basically skin tight.  It may well be that Lee wins because of big margins in Dixie.

Your analysis looks about right to me.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 10:42:07 PM
And no today precincts are in (all 38 of them), in Iron County (Cedar City), where John D. Lee and the MMM killers lived, which was then the "capital" of Dixie. I wonder by what margin Lee carries that county. That might generate a 1,000 vote pad all by itself, if my little historical theory plays out here.

Addendum: 13 of Iron's 38 precincts just came in, and Lee  carried them 3-2, generating a 450 vote margin.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 10:54:21 PM
A bit more of Dixie came in, and Davis has shot its wad, and Lee has a 2,000 vote lead now. He is going to win, unless Bridgewater has pockets of strength in Salt Lake which have not come in yet, which I guess is possible, if Bridgewater is winning the wealthier precincts (I have no idea if he is), of which Salt Lake has a considerable number, and those substantially disproportionately remain uncounted. Bridgewater is going to need to win Salt Lake County by a few thousand votes to win, assuming Utah County stays even, and I assume that it will, since that county is pretty homogenious.

Addendum: Most of the rest of Weber just came in, and that cut Lee's margin down to 1,500, and Bridgewater very narrowly carried the latest smallish batch of votes from Salt Lake. He needs to win in Salt Lake uncounted precincts by a bit more than very narrowly, maybe like 55-45, or 57-43, or something like that.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 10:56:15 PM
A bit more of Dixie came in, and Davis has shot its wad, and Lee has a 2,000 vote lead now. He is going to win, unless Bridgewater has pockets of strength in Salt Lake which have not come in yet, which I guess is possible, if Bridgewater is winning the wealthier precincts (I have no idea if he is), of which Salt Lake has a considerable number, and those substantially disproportionately remain uncounted. Bridgewater is going to need to win Salt Lake County by a few thousand votes to win, assuming Utah County stays even, and I assume that it will, since that county is pretty homogenious.

I agree.  I think it is pretty much over unless Bridgewater wins Salt Lake by a few thousand, at minimum.

You get your lawyer.  :P


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 22, 2010, 11:01:38 PM
I'm sure this has been asked like 100 times, but when did South Carolina's threshold to avoid a runoff go from 35% to 50%?

It's been 50% as long as I remember, and I've been voting here since 1984.

Did a little research. I'd have to stop by the library and look in the South Carolina Code of Laws Annotated to find when the majority requirement for primaries was put into place, but the decision of Simkins v. Gressette 631 F.2d 287 (http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/631/631.F2d.287.80-1370.html) mentions that the majority requirement was in place at least as far back as 1972.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 11:08:20 PM
Well a bunch more precincts in Utah County just came in, and they were not even. Lee carried them by maybe 55-45. This race is now very close to a call. Salt Lake counted a few more precincts, and Bridgewater again carried them, but again very narrowly. Not enough.

Lee has a 4,000 vote margin now, with a bunch more of Dixie left, in case Salt Lake surprises, as a pad. That is why it is very close to a call.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Sam Spade on June 22, 2010, 11:09:33 PM
Well a bunch more precincts in Utah County just came in, and they were not even. Lee carried them by maybe 55-45. This race is now very close to a call. Salt Lake counted a few more precincts, and Bridgewater again carried them, but again very narrowly. Not enough.

Agreed.  I'm calling it a night.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: SvenssonRS on June 22, 2010, 11:23:11 PM
Another vote dump. 700 more precincts left, and Lee enlarges his lead by a few hundred votes.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 11:29:46 PM
Bridgewater needs to pull a rabbit out of the hat in Salt Lake now to have a chance, but so many precincts are out in Salt Lake, and because I don't know enough about the lay of the land there (and that place is the most heterogenious in Utah), that I don't quite want to call it yet. Someone who knew more could, perhaps. Weber has all of its precincts in (the other modest pocket of strength for Bridgewater relatively speaking), so Lee has a remaining small pad yet to come in, in Dixie (maybe a couple of thousand vote margin or something like that), so Bridgewater needs to carry the remaining half of Salt Lake votes by about 6,000 or something. That is a very tall order.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: SvenssonRS on June 22, 2010, 11:36:09 PM
About 550 precincts left. Lee ahead by 4500.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Torie on June 22, 2010, 11:51:45 PM
Yes, and another 150 precincts came in from Salt Lake, and Bridgewater carried them by about 52-48, far short of what he needs, and Utah County still has about 80 precincts out, and there is no reason to believe that Bridgewater will get any margin from those (and probably lose them by about 1,000 votes), and Dixie still has about 1,000 vote pad left for Lee. It's finally over. I am calling it for Lee.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Nhoj on June 22, 2010, 11:53:52 PM
AP also just called it for Lee.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 22, 2010, 11:54:28 PM
AP concurs with Torie.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: SvenssonRS on June 22, 2010, 11:55:46 PM
Well, looks like that last minute endorsement Lee got from Ron Paul boosted him up just enough to win.

Torie, you're a clairvoyant. That was a long-ass night. :P


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on June 23, 2010, 12:01:38 AM
Well thats a relief considering that since Shurtleff dropped out I have been backing Lee.


Well, looks like that last minute endorsement Lee got from Ron Paul boosted him up just enough to win.

Torie, you're a clairvoyant. That was a long-ass night. :P

Yea it was long probably more excruciating for the candidates.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Lunar on June 23, 2010, 06:38:57 AM
Wow, faceplant on Utah.  Lee had it in him after all!


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Kevinstat on June 23, 2010, 06:22:20 PM
I'm sure this has been asked like 100 times, but when did South Carolina's threshold to avoid a runoff go from 35% to 50%?

It's been 50% as long as I remember, and I've been voting here since 1984.

Did a little research. I'd have to stop by the library and look in the South Carolina Code of Laws Annotated to find when the majority requirement for primaries was put into place, but the decision of Simkins v. Gressette 631 F.2d 287 (http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/631/631.F2d.287.80-1370.html) mentions that the majority requirement was in place at least as far back as 1972.

Thanks for the infomation.  I must have been confusing South Carolina with South Dakota or Iowa.  Whatever state I was thinking of had a 35% threshold to avoid a runoff sometime in the last decade, and that obviously isn't South Carolina.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자) on June 26, 2010, 09:05:32 PM
Incidentally, if anyone cares, the recount in the South Carolina 6th District Republican Primary will be held on Monday.  Here are the official results of the first count in the runoff.

Nancy Harrelson (REP)   
   49.79%   13,578
Jim Pratt (REP)
   50.21%   13,690


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on June 26, 2010, 09:23:29 PM
Incidentally, if anyone cares, the recount in the South Carolina 6th District Republican Primary will be held on Monday.  Here are the official results of the first count in the runoff.

Nancy Harrelson (REP)   
   49.79%   13,578
Jim Pratt (REP)
   50.21%   13,690

I have to say, the ridiculously-close results of these "bunch of nobody" primaries (see also NC-12) are really entertaining.


Title: Re: General-Purpose Primary Thread (up next: 6/22 - UT and runoffs in MS/NC/SC)
Post by: Kevinstat on June 26, 2010, 11:22:15 PM
The margin in the Maine Democratic U.S. Senate primary in 2006 (for the right to face Olympia Snowe that fall) was only 1.2%, and the losing candidate (in that primary) openly considered requesting a recount, but ended up not doing so.  The percentage margin at least was large for a recount request in a statewide race, although he could have gotten a free recount as the margin was not greater than 2%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/13 - AL runoffs) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 05, 2010, 07:55:11 AM
Updated the OP with info on next week's Alabama runoffs. Not a lot going on.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/13 - AL runoffs) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 09, 2010, 07:19:09 AM
Looks like Bentley will be winning next week's runoff, if this poll is any indication:

http://blog.al.com/live/2010/07/new_poll_shows_bentley_with_su.html

He's up 53-33 over Bradley Byrne.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/13 - AL runoffs) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 09, 2010, 07:41:06 AM
Apparently there's also a primary on Tuesday for Ohio's 3rd district because the guy who won the first primary dropped out. Not that it matters, of course, especially since none of the Dems filed a pre-primary fundraising report.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/13 - AL runoffs) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 12, 2010, 09:16:52 PM
The obligatory AP results link for tomorrow's runoffs (also added to OP). (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/AL_Page_0713.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/13 - AL runoffs) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 13, 2010, 08:08:14 PM
Well, this certainly is exciting. Bentley is winning by a wide margin, it's Roby by a landslide, and Sewell is up 53-47 with a big chunk of Jefferson county in, so Smoot is clearly done for.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/13 - AL runoffs) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 13, 2010, 08:40:54 PM
I'm not sure how I feel about the governor's race here.  Bentley seems slightly to the left of Byrne on hating all teachers unions [despite the fact that Alabama doesn't really have much in the way of required unionization of teachers or anything] but to the right of Byrne on social issues.  As SSP noted, Byrne & Bentley were the two '"sane" candidates of the four major contenders in the original primary.

Roby winning means that Bright will have to sweat a little more, and could indicate that making crazy YouTube videos isn't effective for winning Republican primaries in Alabama, after the latest victim for Ag Comish


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/13 - AL runoffs) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on July 13, 2010, 10:57:17 PM
Well, this certainly is exciting. Bentley is winning by a wide margin, it's Roby by a landslide, and Sewell is up 53-47 with a big chunk of Jefferson county in, so Smoot is clearly done for.

The Byrne v Bentley race had a huge urban-rural split, one of the most dramatic in a primary that I have ever seen.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 15, 2010, 07:41:25 AM
OP updated with info on the Georgia primaries.

Also, here's a map of the AL-Gov runoff:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 19, 2010, 07:04:00 PM
Here's the results page for tomorrow's primary, and the Georgia SOS site, if it happens to be quicker:

AP results page (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/GA_Page_0720.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)
Georgia Secretary of State (http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on July 19, 2010, 07:06:39 PM
Just to let y'all know, GA reuslts, for whatever reason, are usually very slow in coming in. I don't know if that will be the case for tomorrow.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 20, 2010, 05:40:04 PM
Results delayed until 8:45. Thanks, Va-Highland precinct!

http://blogs.ajc.com/georgia_elections_news/2010/07/20/va-highland-precinct-to-be-open-late-results-delayed/


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 20, 2010, 06:04:02 PM
Is that just Fulton County or all of Georgia?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 20, 2010, 06:17:27 PM
The whole state.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 20, 2010, 06:18:06 PM
Bah.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 20, 2010, 07:51:44 PM
Some numbers in. Hank Johnson is at 56% though it's very early. Clay Cox is, rather surprisingly, 15 points behind with 18% in. There may be a regional dynamic here that I'm not aware of though. Tom Graves is hanging out just below 50% and Regina Thomas is doing better than her 2008 run which, given the anti-incumbency mood and Barrow's "No" vote on the healthcare bill, isn't that surprising in my opinion.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 20, 2010, 07:53:43 PM
And of course the gubernatorial race - Roy Barnes cleaning up with 61%. Handel is at 30%, Deal at 25%, Oxendine at 19% and Johnson at 17%. I suspect the Republican side will be very regional a la Alabama a few weeks ago so take that 16% that's in with caution.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on July 20, 2010, 07:58:14 PM
21% in:

Handel 30%
Deal 26%
Oxendine 19%
Johnson 18%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Eraserhead on July 20, 2010, 08:06:15 PM
What's Deal's deal? (Haha, get it!) I've only really paid attention to Handel and Oxendine.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 20, 2010, 08:07:10 PM
The extreme regionalism and racial polarization is what makes Southern election results so fun to watch.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 20, 2010, 08:11:21 PM
Wow, if The Ox doesn't make the run-off, that's be crazy!

I thought Deal was facing ethical issues and was too tied to Congress to do anything?  Maybe the Newt endorsement works?!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 20, 2010, 08:22:52 PM
Why hasn't this been called for Barnes?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 20, 2010, 08:27:37 PM
Clay Cox is now in third. Conventional wisdom fail.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Rowan on July 20, 2010, 08:29:23 PM
Why hasn't this been called for Barnes?

It has.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 20, 2010, 08:31:24 PM
What the hell did Woodall do to be in first place in GA-07? I swear he didn't have two dimes to rub against each other. Is Linder just that popular that his staffer wins by default?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 20, 2010, 08:45:00 PM
The Ox is down to fourth place. Ouch.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 20, 2010, 08:53:17 PM
In GA-09, Tom Graves is currently 6 votes short of avoiding a runoff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on July 20, 2010, 09:02:39 PM
62% of the vote in:

Handel 32%
Deal 24%
Johnson 19%
Oxendine 18%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Saxwsylvania on July 20, 2010, 09:04:15 PM
This is looking like South Carolina all over again.  A woman, some random dude, a corrupt opportunist, and some random guy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 20, 2010, 09:05:01 PM
Keown's primary performance = impressive.  Austin Scott = not so much (just barely getting 50% now).  Scott, of course, has a much more favorable CD to run in, to put it mildly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on July 20, 2010, 09:19:23 PM
I live in GA-07. Woodall's had an amazingly well-organized campaign throughout the district. I wasn't aware until this thread that people outside the district didn't know that. :P

For what it's worth, I voted for him, as did my entire family. Also, unrelated, but Hice is a horrible person.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 20, 2010, 09:26:22 PM
Looks like Graves and Hawkins are going to the mat again.

Clay Cox is done for unless he happens to represent the outstanding portion of Gwinnett County.

I live in GA-07. Woodall's had an amazingly well-organized campaign throughout the district. I wasn't aware until this thread that people outside the district didn't know that. :P

For what it's worth, I voted for him, as did my entire family. Also, unrelated, but Hice is a horrible person.

Yes, that's the kind of thing people outside the district wouldn't be aware of. Since there's been no polling of the primary, the fact that Woodall had only raised about $95k seemed to suggest he wasn't going to get anywhere.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 20, 2010, 09:31:42 PM
I live in GA-07. Woodall's had an amazingly well-organized campaign throughout the district. I wasn't aware until this thread that people outside the district didn't know that. :P

For what it's worth, I voted for him, as did my entire family. Also, unrelated, but Hice is a horrible person.

What's the difference between them?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 20, 2010, 09:34:33 PM
Meanwhile, looks like Scott is going to escape the runoff and Johnson keeps closing in on Deal (and will likely continue to, given what's out - the 47 Chatham precincts come to mind at minimum), but it's too little too late barring something shocking.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Devilman88 on July 20, 2010, 09:35:23 PM
It is starting to look like the south might have two Republican women candidate for Governor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 20, 2010, 09:36:58 PM
It is starting to look like the south might have two Republican women candidate for Governor.

Handel has a much longer way to go in her run-off than Haley did

Can't believe the Ox is in 4th


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Devilman88 on July 20, 2010, 09:39:08 PM
It is starting to look like the south might have two Republican women candidate for Governor.

Handel has a much longer way to go in her run-off than Haley did

Can't believe the Ox is in 4th

Yea, but I forgot about Mary Fallin in OK, so we could have three Republican Women Candidates for Governor in the South.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on July 20, 2010, 09:40:07 PM
Woodall: On the libertarian side of the GOP, if there still is one. A big issue for him is the Fair Tax; he ghost wrote much of Linder's FairTax Book and favors small government in general without making a fuss over social issues.

Hice: A Baptist pastor and religious talk-show host who emphasizes "bringing God back to America" and tons of even more extreme nonsense. Oh, and he's plastered interstate billboards across the district with this:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on July 20, 2010, 09:41:44 PM
Also, read in the Georgia Megathread over in the Gubernatorial board- I totally called Ox in 4th :P

edit: here's a picture of one of the billboards

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 20, 2010, 09:49:40 PM
It is starting to look like the south might have two Republican women candidate for Governor.

Handel has a much longer way to go in her run-off than Haley did

Can't believe the Ox is in 4th

Runoffs really aren't about "how far you have to go", they're more about what groups make up the undecideds and who actually shows up.

I expect to see some sort of rural/urban divide, but I've been wrong before.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 20, 2010, 09:56:46 PM
How much of Deal's win can and/or should be credited to Newt's endorsement [even appearing in TV ads if I recall correctly] at the end?  Certainly, his actual appearance in the run-off is a mild surprise, and pundits like to attribute such things as wins for potential presidential candidates rather than anything that happened on the ground



So, what does the Deal - Handel run-off look like?


Handel is endorsed by Jan Brewer, and Deal is running on a platform of bringing Arizona's laws to Georgia.   Evidence: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtlKzckj_5s&feature=player_embedded



How did Deal vote on TARP?



Deal seems like he has ethics toublez & a D.C. resume that will put him at a disadvantage.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 20, 2010, 09:59:44 PM
Oh man, this Deal ad is so gross:

http://www.youtube.com/user/thedealreel#p/a/u/1/3l2m_-PRDno


The way he says "I'm a man of my word" sounds so patronizing


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 20, 2010, 10:05:23 PM
How much of Deal's win can and/or should be credited to Newt's endorsement [even appearing in TV ads if I recall correctly] at the end? 

How well did Deal run in Newt's old CD?  Or Newt's newer CD?  

With regards to his newer CD, Handel beat everyone handily (no pun intended) in the Atlanta area, but that was to be expected.  Maybe he performed better than otherwise due to the endorsement.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 20, 2010, 10:13:05 PM
How much of Deal's win can and/or should be credited to Newt's endorsement [even appearing in TV ads if I recall correctly] at the end?  

How well did Deal run in Newt's old CD?  Or Newt's newer CD?  

I'm not sure.  I haven't been following this race [why would I?], but I do follow D.C. politics, and thus Newt's endorsement broke the threshold to enter into my consciousness, and, I imagine, tons of D.C. reporter type peoples' minds.

The only things I ever remember reading about Nathan Deal on, say, Politico's 2010 stuff:
1) He resigned early, which helped the Democratic majority threshold in the House
2) Ethics troubles
3) Newt endorsement


But to be fair, Newt has a national persona & certainly ran ads and had fans throughout the media market(s) affecting his district.

Palin certainly played a role in Handel's surge, so I imagine that Newt will be at least modestly credited with Deal's odd late surge?  


It seems that Deal based a huge component of his campaign on opposing illegal immigration, which makes Brewer's odd endorsement of Handel even more funky.  Brewer's endorsement being funky, of course, because she hasn't even been elected to her first term yet as governor, but she's making endorsements in Georgia's race [although, admittedly, they were both Secretary of States and probably kind of knew each other].  Probably explains why Brewer's primary challengers are dropping like flies.  How many other governors running for their first full-term make endorsements in primaries on the other side of the country?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 20, 2010, 10:24:21 PM
How much of Deal's win can and/or should be credited to Newt's endorsement [even appearing in TV ads if I recall correctly] at the end?  

How well did Deal run in Newt's old CD?  Or Newt's newer CD?  

I'm not sure.  I haven't been following this race [why would I?], but I do follow D.C. politics, and thus Newt's endorsement broke the threshold to enter into my consciousness, and, I imagine, tons of D.C. reporter type peoples' minds.

The only things I ever remember reading about Nathan Deal on, say, Politico's 2010 stuff:
1) He resigned early, which helped the Democratic majority threshold in the House
2) Ethics troubles
3) Newt endorsement


But to be fair, Newt has a national persona & certainly ran ads and had fans throughout the media market(s) affecting his district.

Palin certainly played a role in Handel's surge, so I imagine that Newt will be at least modestly credited with Deal's odd late surge?  


It seems that Deal based a huge component of his campaign on opposing illegal immigration, which makes Brewer's odd endorsement of Handel even more funky.  Brewer's endorsement being funky, of course, because she hasn't even been elected to her first term yet as governor, but she's making endorsements in Georgia's race [although, admittedly, they were both Secretary of States and probably kind of knew each other].  Probably explains why Brewer's primary challengers are dropping like flies.  How many other governors running for their first full-term make endorsements in primaries on the other side of the country?

Fwiw, I turn off the TV every time I see Newt coming on.  But then again, I do that for a lot of people, which is the reason why I don't watch many news programs any more.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on July 20, 2010, 10:27:53 PM
Incidentally, on the topic of the Gingrich and Palin endorsements, there's an excellent chance that CA and NY will both move their presidential primaries back to March or later, while GA won't.  Which would make GA the biggest primary on what's currently Super Tuesday.  Thus the 2012 presidential primary in Georgia might actually be important, and it might actually be relevant who gets endorsed by Gov. Handel or Gov. Deal or Gov. Whoever It's Going To Be.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 20, 2010, 11:36:13 PM
Barrow ended up only beating Thomas 58-42. Not to sound too Sam Spade-ish but that one turned out how I expected it to.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Eraserhead on July 21, 2010, 01:24:09 AM

It turns out he really wasn't much of an Ox at all.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Holmes on July 21, 2010, 12:55:23 PM
Oh man, this Deal ad is so gross:

http://www.youtube.com/user/thedealreel#p/a/u/1/3l2m_-PRDno


The way he says "I'm a man of my word" sounds so patronizing

She's just worried about the gays.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on July 21, 2010, 03:15:53 PM
()

GOP Gubernatorial Primary map I just made!

Handel wins by carrying the Atlanta metro convincingly, and also performs very well in the Augusta area (by the looks of this I think she targeted that area specifically; in races like this Augusta would "usually" vote like Savannah [or sometimes Athens]. If so, a smart move on the part of the Handel campaign to keep Deal or Johnson from overtaking her). She also won Colombus as well as Macon and its suburbs, narrowly. She performed well in central Georgia generally.

Deal won his CD, and especially Hall county in a rout. He also seems to have done pretty well in the northern part of Broun's district that are pretty similar to Deal's territory.

Johnson wins the Savannah area, but surprisingly failed to gain traction in Augusta. Seems to have some appeal in the white farming areas downstate.

Chapman wins his home county and a bit more in the coastal area.

It looks like Oxendine basically won wherever the "don't vote for Oxendine" meme was too slow to reach. Case in point: 40% of the vote in the Okefenokee swamp, lol. Alternative explanation: all that money he spent on organization throughout the state for two years payed off in letting him win (most of) the areas none of the other candidates payed attention to.

Also, lol ray mcberry.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/20 - GA) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on July 21, 2010, 08:04:24 PM
Also, worth noting that there's not really any effect from the Gingrich endorsement in any area he used to represent. His endorsement didn't really amount to much beyond maybe helping Deal a bit with the momentum shift.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 22, 2010, 07:02:10 AM
Oklahoma up next, OP updated. Probably not a very exciting night.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on July 22, 2010, 12:00:21 PM
Does OK have a runoff threshold of 50%, or is it one of those places with a rule of "no runoff if one candidate has >X% and at least Y% more than anyone else" or whatever?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 22, 2010, 06:22:41 PM
Standard 50% threshold.


Title: Tomorrow is Oklahoma's Primary
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on July 26, 2010, 03:26:59 PM
It's our turn to finally pick our candidates for office.

I think the nastiest campaign to date has been our CD-5 seat being vacated by Republican Mary Fallin who is running for the Governor's seat being vacated by Democrat Brad Henry.  In the Republican primary, I'm pulling for James Lankford, who is the director of the Baptist Youth Camp in southern Oklahoma.  I'm in District 4, and Tom Cole is running unopposed on the Democratic side, so he is a shoo-in for re-election.

On the Governor's side, I will probably cast my vote for Democratic Lt Governor Jari Askins.  She is running in the primary against Atty General Drew Edmondson.  Both are great people, but I prefer Askins.  On the Republican side Mary Fallin is running up against one Randy Brogdon, who doesn't even have a prayer in this race.  So, it is very likely that come January, Oklahoma will swear in her first female governor, either Democrat Jari Askins or Republican Mary Fallin.

We also have numerous and vicious races for our state constitutional offices.

I will update you on the results tomorrow night.


Title: Re: Tomorrow is Oklahoma's Primary
Post by: Franzl on July 26, 2010, 03:59:21 PM
Does it really matter?


Title: Re: Tomorrow is Oklahoma's Primary
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 26, 2010, 06:40:26 PM
We have a primary thread. (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119066.0)


Title: Re: Tomorrow is Oklahoma's Primary
Post by: SPC on July 26, 2010, 07:40:06 PM
Tom Cole still has a primary opponent though (R.J. Harris)


Title: Re: Tomorrow is Oklahoma's Primary
Post by: Vepres on July 26, 2010, 08:22:01 PM

Any excuse to make maps :D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 27, 2010, 06:53:34 AM
Here's the AP results link (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/OK_Page_0727.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS). Polls close at 8 Eastern.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on July 27, 2010, 07:20:51 AM
Oklahoma up next, OP updated. Probably not a very exciting night.

It depends on who you are.  I think it will be a very exciting night.  Of course, I'm from Oklahoma City, as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 27, 2010, 07:31:25 AM
Oklahoma up next, OP updated. Probably not a very exciting night.

It depends on who you are.  I think it will be a very exciting night.  Of course, I'm from Oklahoma City, as well.

You're from Oklahoma City?  Really, I would have never known...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Franzl on July 27, 2010, 07:45:12 AM
You're from Oklahoma City?  Really, I would have never known...

Me neither. I wonder...do you think he's single..or engaged or something? No idea where I could find that out either.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on July 27, 2010, 07:49:39 AM
You're from Oklahoma City?  Really, I would have never known...

Me neither. I wonder...do you think he's single..or engaged or something? No idea where I could find that out either.

The information is concealed... in plain sight...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on July 27, 2010, 04:44:04 PM
I just got back from casting my ballot about 70 minutes ago.

Jari Askins (D) received my vote for Governor and then there were 4 other downballot races that mean absolutely nothing to the rest of the country.

EDIT:  I also picked Atty Mark Myles (D) to be the sacrificial lamb for Sen. Tom Coburn.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 27, 2010, 07:30:24 PM
Polls are closed now. Early votes have Jari Askins up 59-41 so far. Mary Fallin is up 63-31. Perennial candidate Jim Rodgers is winning 70-30 for the Dem Senate nomination. Tom Cole and Dan Boren are beating the pants off their primary challengers.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 27, 2010, 08:00:20 PM
Askins still winning. Lankford and Calvey leading in OK-05.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 27, 2010, 08:47:03 PM
Half the precincts in and Askins is maintaining a 53-47 lead. Apparently the Barry Switzer endorsement may have put her over the top like it did Brad Henry in 2002.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: rbt48 on July 27, 2010, 09:04:44 PM
Who would have guessed that Barry Switzer could be a Democrat?  I never would have thought it possible.

However, I am noting that the primary vote totals are roughly 57%D, 43%R.  So, Barry is with the majority.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 27, 2010, 09:14:58 PM
Dem primary is far from over looking at what's out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 27, 2010, 09:39:39 PM
Best guess is Askins wins by a couple of thousand, but it really depends on what parts of Tulsa and Oklahoma City are out and how many votes actually exist.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 27, 2010, 09:58:09 PM
All that's left is Rogers (outside of Tulsa) and 1/3rd of Tulsa, where Edmondson is winning 62-38. Askins is up by 3,722 votes. Wow, what a close one.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 27, 2010, 10:08:05 PM
All that's left is Rogers (outside of Tulsa) and 1/3rd of Tulsa, where Edmondson is winning 62-38. Askins is up by 3,722 votes. Wow, what a close one.

Unless there are tons of Dem votes in the portions of Tulsa left or they disproportionately lean Dem, he'll still fall about 1-2000 votes short.  I doubt Rogers will have a sufficient enough margin, but who knows - he'd need numbers similar to his home county of Muscogee, I expect.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 27, 2010, 10:46:55 PM
Askins up by 2000 with 50 precincts remaining. I think she's got this.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: rbt48 on July 27, 2010, 10:48:12 PM
Well, Askins lead is down to 2,552 votes, but very little left out.  I wonder how close it needs to be for Edmondson to get an automatic recount?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: politicalchick20 on July 27, 2010, 11:10:46 PM
Edmondson has just conceded to Askins. For the first time in state history, Oklahoma will have a female governor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: rbt48 on July 27, 2010, 11:12:16 PM
Who would have been stronger against Fallin?  The Lt Gov, or the 16-year State Attorney General?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 27, 2010, 11:19:24 PM
Who would have been stronger against Fallin?  The Lt Gov, or the 16-year State Attorney General?

Who knows?  Fallin will need to make some missteps, it's hard to say who would be the more talented candidate to capitalize on them should they occur

[as someone who hasn't followed this race]


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on July 27, 2010, 11:44:45 PM
Who would have been stronger against Fallin?  The Lt Gov, or the 16-year State Attorney General?

Who knows?  Fallin will need to make some missteps, it's hard to say who would be the more talented candidate to capitalize on them should they occur

[as someone who hasn't followed this race]

I think Jari Askins has a great shot at beating Mary Fallin.  It will be a very close race this November just like it was in 2002 between Brad Henry and Steve Largent.  That race wasn't called until Wednesday morning.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on July 28, 2010, 12:06:42 AM
Wow, the primary poll by Sooner/Tulsa World sucked big time.

It had Edmondson winning by 16 points and Fallin by 38 points.

()

As for the GE, the Sooner poll has Askins down by 6 against Fallin, but Rasmussen had her down by more than 20 points ... :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 28, 2010, 12:09:23 AM
Who would have been stronger against Fallin?  The Lt Gov, or the 16-year State Attorney General?

Who knows?  Fallin will need to make some missteps, it's hard to say who would be the more talented candidate to capitalize on them should they occur

[as someone who hasn't followed this race]

I think Jari Askins has a great shot at beating Mary Fallin.  It will be a very close race this November just like it was in 2002 between Brad Henry and Steve Largent.  That race wasn't called until Wednesday morning.

Why?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on July 28, 2010, 12:15:20 AM
Who would have been stronger against Fallin?  The Lt Gov, or the 16-year State Attorney General?

Who knows?  Fallin will need to make some missteps, it's hard to say who would be the more talented candidate to capitalize on them should they occur

[as someone who hasn't followed this race]

I think Jari Askins has a great shot at beating Mary Fallin.  It will be a very close race this November just like it was in 2002 between Brad Henry and Steve Largent.  That race wasn't called until Wednesday morning.

Why?

Because Mary Fallin has been accused of voting with Nancy Pelosi and agreeing with her on some things, which may cause some Republicans to stay home.  They dont necessarily want Askins, but they don't want to work across the aisle and damn anyone who does.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 28, 2010, 07:13:41 AM
All that's left is Rogers (outside of Tulsa) and 1/3rd of Tulsa, where Edmondson is winning 62-38. Askins is up by 3,722 votes. Wow, what a close one.

Unless there are tons of Dem votes in the portions of Tulsa left or they disproportionately lean Dem, he'll still fall about 1-2000 votes short.  I doubt Rogers will have a sufficient enough margin, but who knows - he'd need numbers similar to his home county of Muscogee, I expect.

Sometimes the call just turns out right...  :)  Anyway, Askins by 1533 with 3 precincts still outstanding.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on July 28, 2010, 07:18:09 AM
Who would have guessed that Barry Switzer could be a Democrat?  I never would have thought it possible.

Strange.  I thought everyone knew that.

Quote
However, I am noting that the primary vote totals are roughly 57%D, 43%R.  So, Barry is with the majority.

Last time I checked, the party registration statistics (ya, you have to register by party in Oklahoma) were 50% D, 38% R, 12% I in Oklahoma.  So there should be more Dem primary voters.  The actual division ended up being 52% D, 48% R, btw, but that fits pretty much everywhere this cycle.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 28, 2010, 06:08:28 PM
Here's a map of the Dem primary.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 28, 2010, 08:04:27 PM
Heh, I didn't realize this Youth Camp Director was going to be a Congressman until now

()

Note the URL for that imge:

http://images.politico.com/global/news/100728_lankford_headscratch_ap_289.jpg


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 28, 2010, 08:11:25 PM
Well, there's still the runoff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 7/27 - OK) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on July 28, 2010, 08:13:35 PM

Yeah, but when have those done anything interesting lately?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on July 28, 2010, 09:04:39 PM
OP updated with next week's stuff. I stuck to statewide races, open seats, and competitive seats, due to space limitations and the fact that there's only so many ways to talk about a bunch of nobodies running in a primary for the right to lose to a safe incumbent.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 29, 2010, 12:58:04 AM
Tim Gobble's signs were the highlight of my trip to Tennessee earlier this summer.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on July 29, 2010, 01:01:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hvaeHllwtw&feature=player_embedded


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 06:39:16 AM
Results pages for tonight: KS (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/KS_Page_0803.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | MI (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/MI_Page_0803.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | MO (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/MO_Page_0803.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)

Polls close at 8 ET in all three states.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 04:42:19 PM
Well I guess I will make some predicitions for the these three since I have had some interest in them

KS GOP
Senate  - Moran by 10% or more
KS-01 - Jim Barnett
KS-02 - Lynn Jenkins
KS-03 - Kevin Yoder (A shame that Jordan dropped out)
KS-04 - Hartmen or Pompeo


KS-02 and 04 might be somewhat interesting with Tevis and Goyle as Democratic nominees in the general. Despite Moore's wife running in the third, I think the GOP is fairly strong in that race for several reasons, and as for KS-01, especially with a former statewide candidate in Barnett, its as safe as any open GOP seat could possibly be.

Michigan

Governor - GOP: Cox or Hoekstra. ( I started out with Cox but I have seen Hoekstra in interviews and I really like him. He seems better at Foriegn policy and in my opinion would be a better Senator then Governor). DEM: Mayor Bernero seems to have the upper hand. 

MI-01 - GOP: State Senator Jason Allen seems to be the strongest GOP candidate and with him as the nominee, I would say weak GOP Gain, without him, Weak to Mod Dem Hold as the rest of the GOP field is underfunded and inexperienced. DEM: State Rep. McDowell appears to be unopposed for the Dem nomination.
MI-02 - GOP: Jay Riemersma
MI-03 - GOP: State Rep Justin Amash
MI-07 - GOP: Interesting primary between former Rep. Tim Walberg and the brother of Representative Tom Rooney (R-FL), Brian Rooney. I think Rooney might be best by being a newer face. DEM: Rep. Mark Schauer
MI-09 - GOP: I think that Raczkowski will win the GOP nomination. If the GOP wave is strong enough he might pull it off but it is unlikely. He has run statewide (against Levin in 2002) and has been in the State Senate I beleive. He also is moderately well funded. DEM: Rep. Gary Peters.
MI-13 - DEM: Will Kilpatrick be sent home? One would hope. However I won't dare try to predict this one.


MO
Senate: GOP: Roy Blunt wins the primary, not confident of the margin however.


Anybody have any other ideas or opinions on these races?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 03, 2010, 07:26:22 PM
Generally agree with those, with the caveat that I think Snyder will pull it out. Everyone else has serious flaws, with Hoekstra having the least, though having been present when he was briefed on Pakistani politics once while he chaired the intelligence committee, suffice to say I got a very unimpressive impression.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for inf
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 03, 2010, 07:28:25 PM
Just a few thousand votes counted in MI so far:

Hoekstra 50%
Snyder 21%
Cox 20%
Bouchard 7%

That's only 0.4% of precincts reporting though.  :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for inf
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 03, 2010, 07:30:59 PM
Just a few thousand votes counted in MI so far:

Hoekstra 50%
Snyder 21%
Cox 20%
Bouchard 7%

That's only 0.4% of precincts reporting though.  :P

The thing is that Snyder seems to be performing very similarly to how Karen Handel did in Georgia. She lost most of the state, but she was a close second in most of her opponents strongholds, so her own was able to carry her to victory. Its early but thats the image I am getting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 07:35:17 PM
St. Louis County 2/610
41 1% 44 2% 187  7% 2,006 70% 63  2%


Considering Blunt is at 70% in St. Louis, I would say he is in good shape.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 03, 2010, 07:38:25 PM
I think Snyder has this.

Why is Upton in trouble though?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 03, 2010, 07:41:17 PM
Snyder's ad campaign to victory, should he win this, will be one for the history books imo.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 07:43:51 PM
I think Snyder has this.

Why is Upton in trouble though?

Probably the same reason the strongest candidate is losing in MI-01.



Blunt looks like he has it in the bag.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for inf
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 03, 2010, 07:46:55 PM
3% of the vote in:

Snyder 33%
Hoekstra 32%
Cox 26%

Bernero 60%
Dillon 40%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 07:51:15 PM
Benishek winning early on in MI-01. Same for Kuipers in MI-02. Amash dominating in MI-03. Walberg up in MI-07. Once precinct in MI-09, Raczkowski winning. One precinct in MI-13, Cheeks Kilpatrick in distant second.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 03, 2010, 08:02:22 PM
I can't hate on the Tough Nerd too much, even if he's a Republican


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 03, 2010, 08:08:24 PM
I can't hate on the Tough Nerd too much, even if he's a Republican

I agree, he'd be the least bad of the GOP nominees, and you gotta love his ad campaign at least. Cox and Hoekstra tore each other apart trying to win the "true conservative" mantle, I think Snyder will sneak through.

Hoping for a Bernero win in the Dem primary. Dillon was epic fail as House Speaker IMO.

Also glad to see Benishek up in my CD. He's a loon who will be much easier to defeat than Allen.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 08:14:34 PM
Hartzler up in MO-04. Mann slightly up in KS-01. Nothing from KS-04 yet. Moran up 54-38 for Senate. Allen closing the gap in MI-01, but still behind. Huizenga/Kuipers tie in MI-02, with Riemersma slightly behind. Hoogendyk really should have raised some money, he could've knocked off Upton; as it stands Upton remains ahead 56-44. Walberg up big in MI-07. Hansen Clarke dominating MI-13, although only 1% in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 08:23:59 PM
Allen back in the lead in MI-01.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 08:25:54 PM
Snyder's up to a 36-27 lead over Hoekstra. He's currently beating Mike Bouchard in his home county of Oakland. Clarke leading Kilpatrick 46-36 in MI-13, 11% in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 08:26:57 PM
In MI-13, the black parts usually report last - be guided accordingly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 08:30:16 PM
AP calls MO for Blunt.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 08:36:03 PM
MO-04 - a race between Hartzler and Souffer to face off against Skelton
MO-07 - Long is defeating Goodman for Blunt's open seat, somewhat of a surprise, atleast to me.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 08:41:10 PM
KS
Moran 49%
Tiarht 44%

MI
Clarke 49%
Kilpatrick 32%

Rocky 46%  (The Polish guy in MI-09)
Welday 27%

Walberg 58%
Rooney 32%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 08:50:39 PM
It's too early in a lot of these races yet.  Be patient.  :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 08:50:57 PM
Moran up by 1 47-46


I think most if it is do to Sedgwick county coming in for Tiarht. Nearly all of Johnson is out but the 1 precinct we have has Moran up by 8. Moran is winning Douglas county by 20 points if that is any indication of how Johnson will vote.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 08:53:49 PM
It's too early in a lot of these races yet.  Be patient.  :)

That being said, Michigan Gov is over.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 08:55:57 PM
It's too early in a lot of these races yet.  Be patient.  :)

Who is being impatient?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Saxwsylvania on August 03, 2010, 09:00:35 PM
It's too early in a lot of these races yet.  Be patient.  :)

Who is being impatient?

Your mom, when your dad is trying to sport an erection.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 09:05:13 PM
trying to figure out makeup of counties left in MI-01

In MO-04, you can't say anything until Ray and Saline come in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 03, 2010, 09:06:06 PM
It's too early in a lot of these races yet.  Be patient.  :)

Who is being impatient?

Your mom, when your dad is trying to sport an erection.

That would, of course, be impossible for a variety of reasons which I shall not disclose here.

 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 09:06:26 PM
Hartzler maintaining a lead in MO-04. Huelskamp now up in KS-01. Pompeo up in KS-04. Moran winning Senate 47-46. Allen and Huizenga slightly ahead in MI-01 and MI-02. Walberg still crushing in MI-07. Clarke up 48-38 in MI-13, about 1/3rd in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: muon2 on August 03, 2010, 09:06:40 PM
Moran up by 1 47-46


I think most if it is do to Sedgwick county coming in for Tiarht. Nearly all of Johnson is out but the 1 precinct we have has Moran up by 8. Moran is winning Douglas county by 20 points if that is any indication of how Johnson will vote.

I agree that the counties outside their respective CDs are going to tell for this election. Johnson is the big prize, and it's just now coming in at 0.2%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 09:09:16 PM
Three counties are still out in the UP, so I think Benishek will probably pull ahead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 09:14:32 PM
In MO-04, Hartzler's showings in these other outstanding counties is making the 75% Stouffer will get in Ray and Saline irrelevant, if it continues this way.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 09:20:36 PM
These Midwesterners are slow as crap at counting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 09:26:13 PM
In MI-01, what is highly amusing is that Benishek is keeping close by absolutely destroying Allen in the west UP (the Bart Stupak homebase - and historically the most Dem area) even as he loses everywhere else.  Only exception so far is the east UP counties of Chippewa and probably Mackinac too (when it comes in), as those are part of his senate district.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 09:27:08 PM
Billy Long holding on to a 35-29 lead in MO-07. It's now a Kuipers-Huizenga race in MI-02.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 09:31:56 PM
It looks to me like Moran is going to win. The county Wichita is in, is largely already in (Sedgwick County), which Tiahrt carried massively. He seems to have largely shot his wad. Am I missing anything?

Addendum: I see that my better, beat me to the punch by a minute or two.  :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 03, 2010, 09:32:28 PM

Outside of it not mattering?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 09:32:55 PM
MO-04 = over

MI-01 = dogfight

I tend to agree on Moran-Tiahrt with the above - but it's still too early.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 09:34:09 PM

I don't like Tiahrt much, so yes, it matters to me!  :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 03, 2010, 09:35:42 PM
Regarding MI-1, Benishek is from Iron County in the UP, while Allen is from the LP. That explains the results.

I never saw or heard a single Allen ad on radio or TV here in Marquette, while there were plenty of Benishek ads. Not sure if that was reversed in the Traverse City market or not, but I wouldn't be surprised.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 09:36:57 PM
Who are supposed to be the strongest candidates in the general for MI-1 in both parties?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 09:38:31 PM
Regarding MI-1, Benishek is from Iron County in the UP, while Allen is from the LP. That explains the results.

I never saw or heard a single Allen ad on radio or TV here in Marquette, while there were plenty of Benishek ads. Not sure if that was reversed in the Traverse City market or not, but I wouldn't be surprised.

The results explain that difference - however, Benishek was much stronger in the UP than Allen was in the LP - otherwise Benishek wouldn't be close.  It is still too close to call.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 09:43:39 PM
Upton looks like he is going to win. Thanks heavens. It would be awful if he lost. He is an excellent congressperson. I wonder what was going on there. Is this another tea party thing?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 03, 2010, 09:44:46 PM
Benishek is the tea party candidate, probably helped him in the more rural parts of the LP also (I realize most folks would consider this entire district rural).

Given what's left to count, I doubt Allen can make up the difference of roughly 1,000 votes as it currently stands. The only really pro Allen area I see outstanding is Mackinac County, but Allen didn't win the larger Chippewa County by 1,000 votes, plus there seems to be some scattered UP precincts left.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 03, 2010, 09:47:54 PM
40% in and Hansen Clarke leads Carolyn Kilpatrick 50-37.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 03, 2010, 09:49:16 PM
Who are supposed to be the strongest candidates in the general for MI-1 in both parties?

The Dem primary was uncontested, nominee will be State Rep. Gary McDowell. He's a pro-life pro-gun Dem in the Stupak mold, a good fit ideologically and geographically for the district (he's from the eastern UP).

Allen is the establishment GOP candidate who didn't actually live in the district until recently, he lived in Traverse City (which was part of the old 1st pre-2000, but was drawn out), though his State Senate district encompasses a good portion of it. Benishek is the outsider tea party candidate who has never run for office before but is good at saying the buzzwords that the tea party folks want to hear. So who is more electable depends on your view of whether base turnout vs. appealing to swing voters matters more, no polling has been done for the general here that I know of.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 09:49:31 PM
Quote
Benishek is the tea party candidate,

Sounds ominous. The GOP is trying hard not to take control of the House it seems.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 09:49:55 PM
Benishek is the tea party candidate, probably helped him in the more rural parts of the LP also (I realize most folks would consider this entire district rural).

The tea party phenomenon is almost universally a GOP suburb phenomenon (it might have effect in historically GOP other (i.e. rural) areas but I haven't seen it), so I doubt that given the UP.

The latter observation (which I haven't observed so far) maybe explains why he did better in the LP than Allen did in the UP.  How's that for confusing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 09:53:47 PM
Heh, Tiahrt won Johnson County.  Still probably not enough - but note my last post yet again.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 09:57:38 PM
Heh, Tiahrt won Johnson County.  Still probably not enough - but note my last post yet again.

Color me confused. The top line in this race say Total   1781/3316, suggesting that about 1600 precincts are out, but when I look at the individual counties, I have trouble getting to 500 out, if that much. If it is that low, then Tiahrt may well win, since about 70 precincts are out in Sedgwick.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 03, 2010, 09:58:39 PM
Benishek is the tea party candidate, probably helped him in the more rural parts of the LP also (I realize most folks would consider this entire district rural).

The tea party phenomenon is almost universally a GOP suburb phenomenon (it might have effect in historically GOP areas but I haven't seen it), so I doubt that given the UP.

The latter observation (which I haven't observed so far) maybe explains why he did better in the LP than Allen did in the UP.  How's that for confusing.

Yeah a bit confusing. There really isn't anything in this district that would come anywhere close to being defined as a suburb. Traverse City and its environs aren't in the 1st, I guess some of the Bay City outlying areas could qualify, maybe, if you really stretch the definition.

But yeah, you are right in your assumption that the tea party hasn't really been that visible on the ground here, but that doesn't mean that they can't have fairly strong influence in a low turnout primary in as you say historically Dem areas where a lot of folks still vote in the Dem primary. Would have to compare turnout of D vs. R primaries in these areas to see if that theory holds any water.

Might just come down to as I mentioned the ad exposure that Benishek had here while Allen was invisible, a pretty big miscalculation on Allen's part. I know Benishek got some national publicity in conservative circles for getting into the race before Stupak dropped out, probably a big reason why an otherwise unknown candidate was able to fundraise as well as he did.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 10:09:04 PM
Benishek is the tea party candidate, probably helped him in the more rural parts of the LP also (I realize most folks would consider this entire district rural).

The tea party phenomenon is almost universally a GOP suburb phenomenon (it might have effect in historically GOP areas but I haven't seen it), so I doubt that given the UP.

The latter observation (which I haven't observed so far) maybe explains why he did better in the LP than Allen did in the UP.  How's that for confusing.

Yeah a bit confusing. There really isn't anything in this district that would come anywhere close to being defined as a suburb. Traverse City and its environs aren't in the 1st, I guess some of the Bay City outlying areas could qualify, maybe, if you really stretch the definition.

But yeah, you are right in your assumption that the tea party hasn't really that visible on the ground here, but that doesn't mean that they can't have fairly strong influence in a low turnout primary in as you say historically Dem areas where a lot of folks still vote in the Dem primary. Would have to compare turnout of D vs. R primaries in these areas to see if that theory holds any water.

Might just come down to as I mentioned the ad exposure that Benishek had here while Allen was invisible, a pretty big miscalculation on Allen's part. I know Benishek got some national publicity in conservative circles for getting into the race before Stupak dropped out, probably a big reason why an otherwise unknown candidate was able to fundraise as well as he did.

In other words, "all politics is local".  I hate to beat it into the ground, but the tea party is not very important out in rural areas.  The primary results so far have made that rather obvious.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:09:31 PM
Well the top line precincts out number must be a typo or something. Sedgwick is all in, and Moran has a 3,000 vote lead. A few small counties are not in at all, and it may matter a lot where they are, since this race seem driven by geography to a substantial extent, which is not surprising between two competing congressmen.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 10:10:24 PM
Oh, where are you, black precincts?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 03, 2010, 10:14:02 PM
Yep, very true Sam.

Though as I check the results again, Benishek is now all of 36 votes ahead with 28 precincts yet to be counted. Also not sure if absentees are included in the totals. Of course, the above analysis still stands, this race really shouldn't have been close considering the profiles of the two candidates.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 10:15:28 PM
So, we have 28 precincts left and Benishek leads by 36 votes.  Let me see what's left.

Alpena (1) - Benishek +5% so far
Arenac (3) - Allen +3% so far
Bay (3) - Allen +3% so far
Charlevoix (1) - Allen +33% so far
Dickenson (7) - Benishek +54% so far
Iosco (4) - Benishek +14% so far
Mackinac (1) - Allen +3% so far
Presque Isle (3) - Allen +1% so far

Any guesses?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 10:19:13 PM
So GOP turnout is going to be about twice that of Dem turnout in Missouri.  Just noting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:28:18 PM
So, we have 28 precincts left and Benishek leads by 36 votes.  Let me see what's left.

Alpena (1) - Benishek +5% so far
Arenac (3) - Allen +3% so far
Bay (3) - Allen +3% so far
Charlevoix (1) - Allen +33% so far
Dickenson (7) - Benishek +54% so far
Iosco (4) - Benishek +14% so far
Mackinac (1) - Allen +3% so far
Presque Isle (3) - Allen +1% so far

Any guesses?

How many registered voters are in the precincts that are out? The tea party man would seem to have the edge, given Dickenson, but some precincts sometimes tend to be have a lot more voters than others. How many precincts are in, in Dickenson, and what is the raw total in the GOP primary? That may give a clue about the size of the uncounted precincts.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 03, 2010, 10:31:31 PM
The teabagger should have the edge based on that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:32:38 PM
Sumner   0/42   

Sumner is just south of Wichita and in the T man's district. Just saying. Moran leads by 1,000 votes or so. Sumner in case you all are not aware of it, has the highest wheat production in the United States of any county, or did when I read this factlet about 20 years ago or whatever. It is wheat fields from county line to county line, with very little interruption.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: muon2 on August 03, 2010, 10:36:24 PM
Well the top line precincts out number must be a typo or something. Sedgwick is all in, and Moran has a 3,000 vote lead. A few small counties are not in at all, and it may matter a lot where they are, since this race seem driven by geography to a substantial extent, which is not surprising between two competing congressmen.

Most of the more populated counties that have yet to report are from western Kansas, besides Butler and Riley.
Sumner   0/42   

Sumner is just south of Wichita and in the T man's district. Just saying. Moran leads by 1,000 votes are so. Sumner in case you all are not aware of it, has the highest wheat production in the United States of any county, or did when I read this factlet about 20 years ago or whatever. It is wheat fields from county line to county line, with very little interruption.

Sumner and Butler should go for T, while Riley and Reno are out still for M. Similar populations, so it's hard to see who gets the better turnout at this stage.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:37:16 PM
The teabagger should have the edge based on that.

The Tea Party guy is up by about 400 now, with 4 precincts still out in Dickenson. It looks close to over now, absent arithmetic errors.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 10:38:22 PM
Still too close to call in KS in my book.  There are some variations in the expected numbers that I've been observing that create my unwillingness.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: muon2 on August 03, 2010, 10:43:06 PM
Well the top line precincts out number must be a typo or something. Sedgwick is all in, and Moran has a 3,000 vote lead. A few small counties are not in at all, and it may matter a lot where they are, since this race seem driven by geography to a substantial extent, which is not surprising between two competing congressmen.

Most of the more populated counties that have yet to report are from western Kansas, besides Butler and Riley.
Sumner   0/42   

Sumner is just south of Wichita and in the T man's district. Just saying. Moran leads by 1,000 votes are so. Sumner in case you all are not aware of it, has the highest wheat production in the United States of any county, or did when I read this factlet about 20 years ago or whatever. It is wheat fields from county line to county line, with very little interruption.

Sumner and Butler should go for T, while Riley and Reno are out still for M. Similar populations, so it's hard to see who gets the better turnout at this stage.

Politico has Riley at 100% and Butler at 98% now. M's lead is about 1700 now by their count.

Don't be fooled by the numbers of precincts.

Reno and Riley both have over 60,000.

Sumner has around 25,000.

But Riley has a much lower turnout compared to population.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:45:38 PM
Riley and Butler have done their thing. So it is Reno v Sumner, with a few other small counties out (where are they located?), with Moran up by 1,700.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:49:43 PM
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:53:02 PM
Hays is the town where that horrific murder occurred, about which Truman Capote wrote in his major novel, In Cold Blood. I just thought I would add some local color. The killer said it was a real nice family, and he really liked them all, until the moment he cut all their throats. The guy seemed to have some emotional issues I guess.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: muon2 on August 03, 2010, 10:53:42 PM
A big batch of Moran's counties just came in including part of Reno - he's up almost 6K.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 10:54:40 PM
A big batch of Moran's counties just came in including part of Reno - he's up almost 6K.

Yes, it is over. Moran just won. Most of Sumner also came in, so the T man is out of cards.

Well we still have the "black precincts" phenom as Spade described it. Whatever.  Maybe the jurisdiction of Kansas includes the moon, and it has a lot of precincts.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 10:59:53 PM
A big batch of Moran's counties just came in including part of Reno - he's up almost 6K.

Yes, it is over. Moran just won. Most of Sumner also came in, so the T man is out of cards.

Well we still have the "black precincts" phenom as Spade described it. Whatever.  Maybe the jurisdiction of Kansas includes the moon, and it has a lot of precincts.

The black precincts comment refers to another race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:01:18 PM
A big batch of Moran's counties just came in including part of Reno - he's up almost 6K.

Yes, it is over. Moran just won. Most of Sumner also came in, so the T man is out of cards.

Well we still have the "black precincts" phenom as Spade described it. Whatever.  Maybe the jurisdiction of Kansas includes the moon, and it has a lot of precincts.

The black precincts comment refers to another race.

Oh, I assumed it was a reference to black as in black holes -  a cosmic term. :P

By the way, Greenwood is still out, all out, all 19 precincts, and it is in the T zone. Does it have enough voters to close a 6,000 vote gap? Er no. Maybe a 500 vote gap - at best for the T man.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:06:15 PM
A big batch of Moran's counties just came in including part of Reno - he's up almost 6K.

Yes, it is over. Moran just won. Most of Sumner also came in, so the T man is out of cards.

Well we still have the "black precincts" phenom as Spade described it. Whatever.  Maybe the jurisdiction of Kansas includes the moon, and it has a lot of precincts.

The black precincts comment refers to another race.

Oh, I assumed it was a reference to black as in black holes -  a cosmic term. :P

See MI-13.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:09:19 PM
Look at this. Oh my. The counties not shown in the snapshot are all counted.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:13:24 PM
Now for MI-1, 5 precincts out:

Total   503/508   26,904    26,961

Bay    9/11   904        776

Iosco 15/18   567        852

Two tiny counties get the limelight. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:15:04 PM
Benishek will end up ahead by somewhere around this margin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:16:13 PM
Benishek will end up ahead by somewhere around this margin.

You are familiar with the five precincts eh?  :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: muon2 on August 03, 2010, 11:17:53 PM
Benishek will end up ahead by somewhere around this margin.

You are familiar with the five precincts eh?  :)

I'm not, but projecting the current counts in those counties would lead me to expect them to cancel out. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:20:26 PM
Alright, I'm going to bed in 10 minutes.  I'm tired of waiting for MI-13 to manufacture its votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:20:54 PM
Does MI-13 have any white precincts outside the Points burbs, which will not generate that many Dem votes, certainly not enough I don't think to generate the margin of difference that is in play, even if most of those precincts are in?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:21:57 PM
2 precincts left - Benishek up by 39 votes.  The last 3 precincts in Iosco were not favorable for him.  Probably will be about a tie.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:23:29 PM
Does MI-13 have any white precincts outside the Points burbs?

Not really.  Makeup is 29% white, 61% black, 10% other.  It's just that here, whites are counted first, blacks last and cemeteries if there are any issues...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:25:34 PM
2 precincts left - Benishek up by 39 votes.  The last 3 precincts in Iosco were not favorable for him.  Probably will be about a tie.

Sometime extrapolations are dangerous Sam. The trick is to know when that is the case, and when it isn't. Small rural counties this close, with a handful of votes in play, is such a case. You don't know whether the couple of precincts out are in the county seat or something, and may vote differently from the tweakers in some cabin somewhere. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:26:24 PM
2 precincts left - Benishek up by 39 votes.  The last 3 precincts in Iosco were not favorable for him.  Probably will be about a tie.

Sometime extrapolations are dangerous Sam. The trick is to know when that is the case, and when it isn't. Small rural counties this close, with a handful of votes in play, is such a case. You don't know whether the couple of precincts out are in the county seat or something, and may vote differently from the tweakers in some cabin somewhere. :)

Of course.  I was just trying to look cool, like I did with Halter/Lincoln.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:26:41 PM
Does MI-13 have any white precincts outside the Points burbs?

Not really.  Makeup is 29% white, 61% black, 10% other.  It's just that here, whites are counted first, blacks last and cemeteries if there are any issues...

Are you sure the white precincts are counted first in general? Are you sure most of the Points vote is in?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:29:05 PM
Does MI-13 have any white precincts outside the Points burbs?

Not really.  Makeup is 29% white, 61% black, 10% other.  It's just that here, whites are counted first, blacks last and cemeteries if there are any issues...

Are you sure the white precincts are counted first in general? Are you sure most of the Points vote is in?

In Dem primaries, they always are.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:32:11 PM
I do want to point out that the Free Press already says Kilpatrick has lost.  We'll see.

http://www.freep.com/article/20100803/NEWS15/100803079/1435/Clarke-upsets-Cheeks-Kilpatrick


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 03, 2010, 11:34:22 PM
I'm done for the night.  Check in tomorrow morning.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 03, 2010, 11:34:41 PM
I do want to point out that the Free Press already says Kilpatrick has lost.  We'll see.

http://www.freep.com/article/20100803/NEWS15/100803079/1435/Clarke-upsets-Cheeks-Kilpatrick

In trying to infer how much of the white vote is in, this data point isn't very helpful is it?  :P

U.S. House - District 13 - GOP Primary
Eastern Wayne
Uncontested race, no results will be reported.
County   Precincts   J. Hauler
(GOP)
Total   0/0   0
0%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 04, 2010, 12:08:36 AM
2 precincts left - Benishek up by 39 votes.  The last 3 precincts in Iosco were not favorable for him.  Probably will be about a tie.

27,058  27,160

B's lead seem to have expanded to 102 votes, without any more precincts coming in. And there you have it. Two precincts still out in Bay County, which Allen is carrying by a bit. Those two precincts won't generate a 100 vote margin however, I don't think. So Allen needs some votes to come in or something like for B without any more precincts coming in. Stay tuned.

And maybe there are some late absentees or overseas votes left to be counted anyway. I assume there will be a recount.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 04, 2010, 12:12:05 AM
I do want to point out that the Free Press already says Kilpatrick has lost.  We'll see.

http://www.freep.com/article/20100803/NEWS15/100803079/1435/Clarke-upsets-Cheeks-Kilpatrick

In trying to infer how much of the white vote is in, this data point isn't very helpful is it?  :P

U.S. House - District 13 - GOP Primary
Eastern Wayne
Uncontested race, no results will be reported.
County   Precincts   J. Hauler
(GOP)
Total   0/0   0
0%

I'm not sure what race you're looking at, but Wayne County Michigan's election results are here, which may or may not be more up-to-date than the AP count:
http://www.waynecounty.com/documents/elections_docs/CAND_LST.pdf

Edited to add: You can infer what's out from the county convention races.  It's not the Pointe.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 04, 2010, 12:13:27 AM
Good polls this time by EPIC/MRA for both Governor races and the MI-13 race.

The KS polls by SUSA and Singularis were also good, with SUSA showing Tiahrt narrowing the gap in the final weeks.

If the primary would have been next week, Tiahrt probably would have moved ahead of Moran ...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 04, 2010, 12:26:27 AM
I´m already waiting for the Rasmussen poll that will come out in the next days showing a 25-point Snyder lead over Bernero ... ;)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 04, 2010, 12:32:45 AM
2 precincts left - Benishek up by 39 votes.  The last 3 precincts in Iosco were not favorable for him.  Probably will be about a tie.

27,058  27,160

B's lead seem to have expanded to 102 votes, without any more precincts coming in. And there you have it. Two precincts still out in Bay County, which Allen is carrying by a bit. Those two precincts won't generate a 100 vote margin however, I don't think. So Allen needs some votes to come in or something like for B without any more precincts coming in. Stay tuned.

And maybe there are some late absentees or overseas votes left to be counted anyway. I assume there will be a recount.

Well the last two precincts came in, and there was no vote change! No precincts come in and the vote changes, and then precincts come in, and there is no vote change. Fancy that. So the TP man has a final 102 vote lead for the night, it seems. Of course, it may be the last two precincts in Bay came in, and favored the guy otherwise losing the county, the obverse of Iosco, but the input guy forgot to change the precincts counted number.

Total   508/508   27,058 27,160


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 04, 2010, 12:51:14 AM
Kansas R Senate results by county so far (Moran win/leading Blue; Tiahrt win/leading Red; No results Gray):

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Republic on August 04, 2010, 01:26:37 AM
Here's some better maps of both KS primaries:



KS-Sen: GOP

()

Moran 49% :: Tiahrt 45%





KS-Sen: DEM

()

Johnston 31% :: Schollenberger 24% :: Haley 19% :: Wiesner 16%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: RI on August 04, 2010, 01:54:44 AM
Some have already beat me to these, I see, but I can at least add one more map (and a more complete one):

()

Kansas:

Blue - Moran
Red - Tiahrt

Michigan:

Blue - Snyder
Red - Hoekstra
Green - Cox


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 04, 2010, 02:50:13 AM
MI-1 Republican Benishek 27,070 [38%] Allen 27,058 [38%]):

()

()



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Shilly on August 04, 2010, 04:47:44 AM
()

Bernero in red, Dillon in blue.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: muon2 on August 04, 2010, 06:47:09 AM
2 precincts left - Benishek up by 39 votes.  The last 3 precincts in Iosco were not favorable for him.  Probably will be about a tie.

27,058  27,160

B's lead seem to have expanded to 102 votes, without any more precincts coming in. And there you have it. Two precincts still out in Bay County, which Allen is carrying by a bit. Those two precincts won't generate a 100 vote margin however, I don't think. So Allen needs some votes to come in or something like for B without any more precincts coming in. Stay tuned.

And maybe there are some late absentees or overseas votes left to be counted anyway. I assume there will be a recount.

Well the last two precincts came in, and there was no vote change! No precincts come in and the vote changes, and then precincts come in, and there is no vote change. Fancy that. So the TP man has a final 102 vote lead for the night, it seems. Of course, it may be the last two precincts in Bay came in, and favored the guy otherwise losing the county, the obverse of Iosco, but the input guy forgot to change the precincts counted number.

Total   508/508   27,058 27,160


And now this morning, Benishek's vote total went down without any change for Allen (27,070 to 27,058). That leaves Benishek with a 12 vote lead. Michigan has an automatic recount provision, and I would assume this is close enough, if the law applies to congressional primaries.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 04, 2010, 06:53:04 AM
Bye Carolyn.

Looks like MI-02 hasn't been called for the Republican, but Bill Huizenga has a 660-vote lead over Jay Riemersma with all the precincts in, so I doubt that will change.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 04, 2010, 07:17:14 AM
So GOP turnout is going to be about twice that of Dem turnout in Missouri.  Just noting.

Same in Michigan, fwiw.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 04, 2010, 09:23:20 AM
I wonder why that one county (Decatur) in northwest Kansas went for Tiahrt. It sticks out like a sore thumb.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 04, 2010, 12:42:25 PM
2 precincts left - Benishek up by 39 votes.  The last 3 precincts in Iosco were not favorable for him.  Probably will be about a tie.

27,058  27,160

B's lead seem to have expanded to 102 votes, without any more precincts coming in. And there you have it. Two precincts still out in Bay County, which Allen is carrying by a bit. Those two precincts won't generate a 100 vote margin however, I don't think. So Allen needs some votes to come in or something like for B without any more precincts coming in. Stay tuned.

And maybe there are some late absentees or overseas votes left to be counted anyway. I assume there will be a recount.

Well the last two precincts came in, and there was no vote change! No precincts come in and the vote changes, and then precincts come in, and there is no vote change. Fancy that. So the TP man has a final 102 vote lead for the night, it seems. Of course, it may be the last two precincts in Bay came in, and favored the guy otherwise losing the county, the obverse of Iosco, but the input guy forgot to change the precincts counted number.

Total   508/508   27,058 27,160


And now this morning, Benishek's vote total went down without any change for Allen (27,070 to 27,058). That leaves Benishek with a 12 vote lead. Michigan has an automatic recount provision, and I would assume this is close enough, if the law applies to congressional primaries.

Its now down to one vote. Given regional polarization, does anyone think the GOP's shot in the general here took and enormous dive?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 04, 2010, 01:29:04 PM
Here (http://record-eagle.com/latest/x1243785828/Allen-accepts-1-vote-shortfall-recount-looms) is a story on the one vote "victory."


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 04, 2010, 02:30:38 PM
Its now down to one vote. Given regional polarization, does anyone think the GOP's shot in the general here took and enormous dive?

I doubt it.  Some of the regional polarization might be explained by TV market - the Marquette and Wisconsin markets versus Traverse City.  I'll try to do more analysis if I have time tonight.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 04, 2010, 03:10:07 PM
Its now down to one vote. Given regional polarization, does anyone think the GOP's shot in the general here took and enormous dive?

I doubt it.  Some of the regional polarization might be explained by TV market - the Marquette and Wisconsin markets versus Traverse City.  I'll try to do more analysis if I have time tonight.

I got the impression Benishek won the UP vote based on regionalism. I would think that if Allen pulls this out in a recount, especially with SEIU help, the UP vote might not be there for him in the general.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 04, 2010, 03:18:51 PM
Its now down to one vote. Given regional polarization, does anyone think the GOP's shot in the general here took and enormous dive?

I doubt it.  Some of the regional polarization might be explained by TV market - the Marquette and Wisconsin markets versus Traverse City.  I'll try to do more analysis if I have time tonight.

I got the impression Benishek won the UP vote based on regionalism. I would think that if Allen pulls this out in a recount, especially with SEIU help, the UP vote might not be there for him in the general.

For whatever reason, Benishek won the western UP (Marquette market) but not parts of the eastern UP (Traverse City market).  He also won Alpena County, which is in its own TV market.  I want to do an analysis of the margin in various counties before concluding anything definitive, though.

Where in the district is the Democratic candidate from, anyway?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 04, 2010, 03:25:51 PM
http://107.housedems.com/district-map/

Cheboygan County (part)
Koehler township
Tuscarora township
Chippewa County
Emmet County
Mackinac County
 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 04, 2010, 03:36:12 PM
http://107.housedems.com/district-map/

Cheboygan County (part)
Koehler township
Tuscarora township
Chippewa County
Emmet County
Mackinac County
 

Thanks.  He appears to be from Chippewa County (Sault Ste. Marie area), which is in the Eastern UP and Traverse City TV market.  Allen is more or less from the same area, but on the Lower Peninsula (the Emmet County part of McDowell's district).  Benishek is from Iron County in the Western UP on the Wisconsin border.

Whether someone from Chippewa County has a better chance of picking up the Western UP than someone from Emmet County is probably debateable.  Stupak was from the Western UP, FWIW.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 04, 2010, 05:51:47 PM
So wait, Allen lives outside the district, right? Doesn't that mean that he lost because he (and, presuming he's married, his wife) couldn't vote for himself? I realize that the final count will probably not end in a 1-vote margin for Benishek, but it's still a wonderful thought.

Anyway, here are some quick and dirty maps of a few of the House primaries:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: nclib on August 04, 2010, 06:59:53 PM
I'm surprised Tiahrt won the KC metro since he is even more conservative than Moran.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 04, 2010, 07:10:34 PM
I'm surprised Tiahrt won the KC metro since he is even more conservative than Moran.

If Spade's theory as to what the Tea Party actually is happens to be accurate, then it makes a lot of sense.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 04, 2010, 07:29:59 PM
So wait, Allen lives outside the district, right? Doesn't that mean that he lost because he (and, presuming he's married, his wife) couldn't vote for himself? I realize that the final count will probably not end in a 1-vote margin for Benishek, but it's still a wonderful thought.

Anyway, here are some quick and dirty maps of a few of the House primaries:

()

No.  Allen is from Emmet County, which is in the district.  He represents the Eastern UP and Northern LP in the Michigan Senate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 04, 2010, 07:52:31 PM
Okay, so who's the guy that's outside the district then? I can't keep all these generic Republican state legislators straight.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: memphis on August 04, 2010, 11:25:06 PM
Oooh, ooh, my state's next :) Haslam's pretty much has the gubernatorial nomination for the GOP. Cohen's going to demolish Herenton in TN-9, which is going to be so much fun. The GOP TN-8 race has been really ugly. The local paper says that it's been the most expensive race in the country. I think Fincher's got that one, but I'm not as sure as I don't live in the district.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 04, 2010, 11:44:43 PM
I'm surprised Tiahrt won the KC metro since he is even more conservative than Moran.

If Spade's theory as to what the Tea Party actually is happens to be accurate, then it makes a lot of sense.

And that theory is...?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 04, 2010, 11:44:47 PM
Herenton, as a big city mayor, really proves the importance of this thing we call an "issue" for upsetting incumbents in primaries.

Do SOMETHING.  It doesn't have to be something that the majority of the electorate agrees with you on.  For challengers going after solidly liberal/conservative incumbents, as long as it's something you believe in, it's better, in my opinion to passionately back an issue that 45% of the electorate agrees with you on, 55% disagrees, than to never have any policy distinction between you and your opponent whatsoever

Do something to make your campaign interesting.  The race argument was lame, and everyone knows it.  Reporters covered Herenton's "just one" campaign message as a gimmick when his real #1 argument should have been "Cohen can't care the jobs we need, I can."  



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 12:01:23 AM
I'm surprised Tiahrt won the KC metro since he is even more conservative than Moran.

If Spade's theory as to what the Tea Party actually is happens to be accurate, then it makes a lot of sense.

And that theory is...?

He probably thinks it is more a lower middle class suburban and exurban movement, than anything more rural. That is my guess anyway.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: memphis on August 05, 2010, 12:25:40 AM
Herenton, as a big city mayor, really proves the importance of this thing we call an "issue" for upsetting incumbents in primaries.


The GOP disagrees. For them, it's all about OMGZ teh socialsim  obama muslim pelosi kenya.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 06:33:57 AM
I'm surprised Tiahrt won the KC metro since he is even more conservative than Moran.

If Spade's theory as to what the Tea Party actually is happens to be accurate, then it makes a lot of sense.

And that theory is...?

He probably thinks it is more a lower middle class suburban and exurban movement, than anything more rural. That is my guess anyway.

I don't know whether class has anything to do with it - rather my point is that the Tea Party is a phenomenon that is primarily associated with motivating and getting out GOP voters in the suburbs, not voters in rural areas.

In Kansas, the KC metro suburbs is the area that fits, obviously.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 06:34:55 AM
Polls close at 8 ET tonight. Here's the AP results link. (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/TN_Page_0805.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) I'll see you at the polls, and have a nice day.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Verily on August 05, 2010, 07:42:19 AM
Herenton, as a big city mayor, really proves the importance of this thing we call an "issue" for upsetting incumbents in primaries.


The GOP disagrees. For them, it's all about OMGZ teh socialsim  obama muslim pelosi kenya.

That's still an "issue" (note the scare quotes). Some of the incumbents who lost were defeated because they were perceived as too close to Obama/the Democrats--even though only delusional crazies would see Bob Inglis that way. (Others, like Cannon, did lose on an issue; in his case, not hating Hispanics enough.)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 05, 2010, 09:00:06 AM
So wait, Allen lives outside the district, right? Doesn't that mean that he lost because he (and, presuming he's married, his wife) couldn't vote for himself? I realize that the final count will probably not end in a 1-vote margin for Benishek, but it's still a wonderful thought.

Anyway, here are some quick and dirty maps of a few of the House primaries:

()

He lived in Traverse City until the time of declaring his candidacy. I think he always had a summer home in Emmet County and just made it his official residence.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 05, 2010, 09:08:44 AM
But yeah, GOP chances in MI-1 certainly took a hit. Benishek would be a much weaker candidate in the general geographically considering that the majority of the population of the district lives much closer to McDowell, not to mention he's much more conservative and inexperienced thus more likely to make a gaffe and make himself the issue. If Allen ultimately wins the nomination the regionalism plays to McDowell's advantage in the UP.

Plus if there's a recount and the battle for the nomination drags on that obviously doesn't help.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 05, 2010, 09:09:53 AM
Another observation is that Benishek tended to do well in the same places as Cox in the western U.P. They are both similar ideologically and had Tea Party backing, which could be a coincidence, or not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 05, 2010, 10:29:17 AM
Herenton, as a big city mayor, really proves the importance of this thing we call an "issue" for upsetting incumbents in primaries.


The GOP disagrees. For them, it's all about OMGZ teh socialsim  obama muslim pelosi kenya.

That's still an "issue" (note the scare quotes). Some of the incumbents who lost were defeated because they were perceived as too close to Obama/the Democrats--even though only delusional crazies would see Bob Inglis that way. (Others, like Cannon, did lose on an issue; in his case, not hating Hispanics enough.)

Cannon lost in 2008. You might be thinking of Bennet, who lost on the same "issues" that Inglis did.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 05, 2010, 10:54:02 AM
I'm surprised Tiahrt won the KC metro since he is even more conservative than Moran.

Not really. If so, not by any significant amount. But of course I am not in Kansas, so that may very well have been how the narrative played out.


In hindsight I should have taken into count the recent polling data and lowered my prediction from 10 to 5% for Moran. I got some of the districts wrong like the first mainly because in the absence of having heard anything about it in weeks, I just assumed the former statewide candidate (Barnett) to have the advantage. Jenkings, Yoder, and Pompeo were pretty much as I expected. the KS-02 Dem primary was a little surprising but it probablly won't matter. KS will have four GOP House members for the first time since 1996.

In Michigan, I didn't give Snyder enough credit nor did I have a good sense of the race and how it progressed. I see no reason why the GOP shouldn't be able to reclaim the MI Governorship. MI-01 was definately interesting and will remain so for a little while, AP has Benishek up by 14 now I beleive. Riemersma was much weaker then expected and certainly didn't live up to the hype surronding his candidacy. Amash won the MI-03 primary as expected. I thought MI-07 would be closer. Rocky won in MI-09 and will give Peters a race, the environment and how strong he is will determine the outcome, put it in the CO-07 category of seats. Kilpatrick has finally been sent packing and will no longer be there to disgrace the great state of MI.

Blunt won by Toomeyesque margins which was much better then I expected. The talk of Purgason upsetting him was all without any base in reality appearently.



As for Tennessee, Haslam will win the primary for Governor. Not sure about TN-03, 06, or 08 GOP primaries.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 12:48:05 PM
But yeah, GOP chances in MI-1 certainly took a hit. Benishek would be a much weaker candidate in the general geographically considering that the majority of the population of the district lives much closer to McDowell, not to mention he's much more conservative and inexperienced thus more likely to make a gaffe and make himself the issue. If Allen ultimately wins the nomination the regionalism plays to McDowell's advantage in the UP.

Plus if there's a recount and the battle for the nomination drags on that obviously doesn't help.

Well, Stupak was as geographically removed from the center of the district as possible but somehow managed to get elected and re-elected.  Benishek would probably be the better candidate geographically for the GOP since he's a Yooper and Allen isn't.  

Red State has a geographical analysis of the MI-01 primary results that seems sound:
http://www.redstate.com/republican_michigander/2010/08/04/in-depth-analysis-on-mi-01-benishekallen-race-geography-matters/


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: memphis on August 05, 2010, 01:03:27 PM
Even for a rural GOP primary, Fincher has the most generic ads ever. The first one is on tv constantly.

http://stephenfincher.org/tv/


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 05:25:41 PM
The TN Department of State also promises results tonight on their website:

http://tnsos.org/elections/Results/20100805Results.php


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 06:15:24 PM
All three of the major gubernatorial candidates are from eastern Tennessee. Who's going to win the rest of the state?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 05, 2010, 07:06:23 PM
Basil Marceaux is listed as a candidate in the 3rd CD Republican primary as well as the primary for Governor. Is that a typo or is he really running for both?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 07:14:28 PM
The early voting results in Tennessee usually mean a lot, just FYI.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 07:23:37 PM
If the early results are any indication, the answer to my question would be Haslam.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 07:29:57 PM
Well, the one interesting result so far is that Jim Cooper's nobody primary challenger is currently pulling 41% of the vote in Davidson County.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 07:31:39 PM
The early voting results in Tennessee usually mean a lot, just FYI.

I think the TN DoS website is crashed, but before it did, I had the following results in the Governor's race:

Haslam 46,251   
Ramsey 23,294   
Wamp 20,273
Kirkpatrick 750   
Marceaux 236   

The AP results are lagging.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 07:33:02 PM
The House races are the only thing interesting to me tonight - the Governor's race has been over a long time ago.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 07:39:47 PM
DesJarlais has a slight lead in TN-04. Fincher's ahead in TN-08. The other two races just don't have enough in yet.

A really old Dem State Senator (Douglas Henry, age 84, SD-21) is currently losing 51-49. And a Republican State House member (Eric Swafford, HD-25) is getting crushed 68-32. Anyone know what's going on with these two?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: muon2 on August 05, 2010, 07:42:59 PM
The early voting results in Tennessee usually mean a lot, just FYI.

I think the TN DoS website is crashed, but before it did, I had the following results in the Governor's race:

Haslam 46,251   
Ramsey 23,294   
Wamp 20,273
Kirkpatrick 750   
Marceaux 236   

The AP results are lagging.


This is a new feature for the TN SoS. It looks like they didn't shake it down enough before the roll out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 07:54:45 PM
Smith slightly ahead of Fleischmann in TN-03.

It would appear that the TN-05 thing was a mistake, as Cooper's up to a 90-10 lead in Davidson now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 08:01:22 PM
In early voting, Jim Tracy ran horribly outside his Senate district - I'm really inclined to say that Diane Black has it in the bag.  Still far too early - just a gut feeling.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Brittain33 on August 05, 2010, 08:03:40 PM
A really old Dem State Senator (Douglas Henry, age 84, SD-21) is currently losing 51-49. And a Republican State House member (Eric Swafford, HD-25) is getting crushed 68-32. Anyone know what's going on with these two?

I just looked up that first race because the young guy is a FOAF (who would have no idea who I am) and it looks like it's just new energy and a more liberal issue base vs. someone who has been in office forever. The challenger is pro-choice, incumbent is pro-life.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 05, 2010, 08:07:01 PM
Fantastic new that Haslam has been declared the winner of the Republican primary. :D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 08:12:36 PM
Shelby County's crap-ass elections site says Cohen is beating Herenton 81-19.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Rowan on August 05, 2010, 08:20:39 PM
Sarah Palin's "Mama Grizzly" in TN-05 is in third place right now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Rowan on August 05, 2010, 08:27:10 PM
GOP turnout in 2006 was about 320,000. Looks like we're going to smash that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 08:27:14 PM
Smith maintaining a slim lead over Fleischmann in TN-03. DesJarlais still up in TN-04. Black up 33-30-29 over Tracy and Zelenik. Fincher still winning in TN-08.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 05, 2010, 08:29:16 PM
GOP turnout in 2006 was about 320,000. Looks like we're going to smash that.

Err, it's an open primary with nothing even remotely interesting on the Dem side outside of TN-09. My Obama-voting grandmother voted in the Republican primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Rowan on August 05, 2010, 08:33:10 PM
GOP turnout in 2006 was about 320,000. Looks like we're going to smash that.

Err, it's an open primary with nothing even remotely interesting on the Dem side outside of TN-09. My Obama-voting grandmother voted in the Republican primary.

Was there anything interesting on the DEM side in 2006?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 08:34:40 PM
Looks like the Swafford guy was one of the first adopters of the birther movement. His opponent is a generic conservative.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 05, 2010, 08:35:38 PM
Nevermind. There was the senate race that year. But still, this is impressive.

If you say so.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 08:43:15 PM
In early voting, Jim Tracy ran horribly outside his Senate district - I'm really inclined to say that Diane Black has it in the bag.  Still far too early - just a gut feeling.

That prediction sucked for now - lol

otoh - I think it's pretty obvious Fincher will win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 08:49:03 PM
Fleischmann is now less than 200 votes behind Smith. Unfortunately for him, it looks like the remaining areas are going to break for Smith. DesJarlais seems to be sitting on a comfortable 6-point lead. That Palin-backed candidate in TN-05 is doing pretty well in Davidson, but not enough to win. It's now Zelenik-Tracy-Black in TN-06. Edit: Black back in the lead. This is ridiculous.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 09:10:31 PM
Wow, Fleischmann somehow is pulling ahead. He's up by 500 votes now. TN-04 is tightening too, DesJarlaias is down to a 4-point lead. Black is up to 33-30 now in TN-06. Fincher got called the winner by the AP.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 09:15:25 PM
Fleischmann is now less than 200 votes behind Smith. Unfortunately for him, it looks like the remaining areas are going to break for Smith. DesJarlais seems to be sitting on a comfortable 6-point lead. That Palin-backed candidate in TN-05 is doing pretty well in Davidson, but not enough to win. It's now Zelenik-Tracy-Black in TN-06. Edit: Black back in the lead. This is ridiculous.

Yeah, it looks like Hall is going to win in TN-05 with less than 30% of the vote.   Heck, it might even be less than 25%.   Will there be any runoffs?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 09:18:03 PM
More are voting in the GOP primary than the Dem primary in TN-5? It seems that folks are not interested in voting in Dem primaries when they have a choice, just about everywhere lately. What that portends remains to be seen I guess.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 09:19:39 PM
Smith maintaining a slim lead over Fleischmann in TN-03. DesJarlais still up in TN-04. Black up 33-30-29 over Tracy and Zelenik. Fincher still winning in TN-08.

Is there any reason for anyone to care who wins here?  Do the candidates have different political profiles?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 09:22:42 PM
Smith maintaining a slim lead over Fleischmann in TN-03. DesJarlais still up in TN-04. Black up 33-30-29 over Tracy and Zelenik. Fincher still winning in TN-08.

Is there any reason for anyone to care who wins here?  Do the candidates have different political profiles?

Robin Smith is kind of a horrible person, so I'm rooting for her to lose.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 09:23:19 PM
More are voting in the GOP primary than the Dem primary in TN-5? It seems that folks are not interested in voting in Dem primaries when they have a choice, just about everywhere lately. What that portends remains to be seen I guess.

The TN-5 Democratic primary doesn't seem like it was effectively contested.  The incumbent will win with 85+% of the vote.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 09:26:15 PM
More are voting in the GOP primary than the Dem primary in TN-5? It seems that folks are not interested in voting in Dem primaries when they have a choice, just about everywhere lately. What that portends remains to be seen I guess.

The TN-5 Democratic primary doesn't seem like it was effectively contested.  The incumbent will win with 85+% of the vote.

Yes, but there are other offices on the ballot, so unless you assume that it was the CD race that activated folks, is that relevant, and if so, by how much?  Maybe the Dems assume all of their statewide candidates will lose, so who cares though. Who knows?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 09:27:04 PM
Fincher must have a real strong personal vote in Crockett County.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 09:28:04 PM
Smith maintaining a slim lead over Fleischmann in TN-03. DesJarlais still up in TN-04. Black up 33-30-29 over Tracy and Zelenik. Fincher still winning in TN-08.

Is there any reason for anyone to care who wins here?  Do the candidates have different political profiles?


Robin Smith is kind of a horrible person, so I'm rooting for her to lose.

Why do you think Robin is horrible? Does Robin remind you of Angle or something? Just asking, since I don't have a clue of course as to who these particular personages are.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 09:31:03 PM
The only statewide office on the ballot this year is Governor, and the Dems are pretty much assured of being steamrolled. They also didn't even bother to try and hold TN-06. I'd say they're putting all their chips on holding TN-08 and protecting Davis in TN-04 (which shouldn't be too hard, considering his opposition).

Smith maintaining a slim lead over Fleischmann in TN-03. DesJarlais still up in TN-04. Black up 33-30-29 over Tracy and Zelenik. Fincher still winning in TN-08.

Is there any reason for anyone to care who wins here?  Do the candidates have different political profiles?


Robin Smith is kind of a horrible person, so I'm rooting for her to lose.

Why do you think Robin is horrible? Does Robin remind you of Angle or something? Just asking, since I don't have a clue of course as to who these particular personages are.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25447.html

In other words, she's just a horrible, shrill partisan hack. I realize any Republican elected from a district like TN-03 will be a 100% party-line voter, but I'd rather them be a polite, faceless backbencher than an angry bomb-thrower.

Fincher must have a real strong personal vote in Crockett County.

He's from there (Frog Jump, as someone around here, I can't remember who, is so happy to point out).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 09:35:47 PM
Fincher must have a real strong personal vote in Crockett County.

He's from there (Frog Jump, as someone around here, I can't remember who, is so happy to point out).

Oh, I know he's from there.  The point is that the result (numbers and turnout) there is quite impressive even though he's from there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 09:37:52 PM
Really don't see how DesJarlais and Fleischmann don't win at this point.  TN-06 is still anyone's game.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 05, 2010, 09:39:11 PM
Herron's primary challenger carried Montgomery and Shelby Counties. They're on opposite ends of the district. Um... okay?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 09:41:02 PM
Thanks Johnny for the info. She does seem well, unfortunate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 09:43:18 PM
Really don't see how DesJarlais and Fleischmann don't win at this point.  TN-06 is still anyone's game.

Ya, it seems like a "false alarm" as it were. Not enough precincts left to close the gap for Robin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 05, 2010, 10:03:43 PM
Herron's primary challenger carried Montgomery and Shelby Counties. They're on opposite ends of the district. Um... okay?

Dickson over in the east part is almost tied too.  Herron also ran weakly in the black belt counties outside his State senate seat against his no-name opponent, fwiw - most of the whites there seem to have jumped over to vote for Fincher.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 10:13:35 PM
Per Cinyc's map, I always get curious about these little islands in regional races, in this case, Henderson and Decatur. Why? I note in passing that Henderson was a pro union island in a rebel sea back when. Whatever.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 10:26:03 PM
Per Cinyc's map, I always get curious about these little islands in regional races, in this case, Henderson and Decatur. Why? I note in passing that Henderson was a pro union island in a rebel sea back when. Whatever.

I deleted the map to check data integrity when I noticed a precinct that had 0% reporting yet showed results.  Turned out, that was due to early voting.   Given that, I assume the data's correct.  Here's a repost:

TN-R Gov
(Haslam 48%, Wamp 29%, Ramsey 22%, Haslam-Ramsey exact tie, No Data)
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 10:43:56 PM
It looks like D. Black won the GOP primary in TN-6, whomever he is.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 11:01:28 PM
Per Cinyc's map, I always get curious about these little islands in regional races, in this case, Henderson and Decatur. Why? I note in passing that Henderson was a pro union island in a rebel sea back when. Whatever.

It seems like an area of the state (perhaps TV market) where it was a true three-way race.  Ramsey barely took over the lead in neighboring Hardin County, which shifted the color to redish.

Anyway, with 2130/2177 reporting:
()

Generally, Wamp won the Chatanooga area, Ramsey the Tri-Cities area and Haslam most of the rest of the state.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 05, 2010, 11:09:37 PM
Regarding TV markets, is there a TV station in Jackson or something?  I once saw a movie in Jackson. It was the first time I saw a separate glassed in section, where mother's could take their crying babies.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 11:24:43 PM
Regarding TV markets, is there a TV station in Jackson or something?  I once saw a movie in Jackson. It was the first time I saw a separate glassed in section, where mother's could take their crying babies.

Yeah, there's a Jackson TV market.  Last I checked, Henderson and Hardin are in it.  Decatur technically isn't (though it could be in the Jackson TV station's area of influence).

Tennessee TV markets, FWIW:
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 05, 2010, 11:29:21 PM
Oh right, today's election day.

The YouTube guy didn't win?  The gospel singer from frog jump or whatever it's called easily won?  Cohen creamed his opponent?  

Next thing you're going to tell me is that Arizona's GOP primary is going to be boring as well.  Sure, Hayworth is roadkill, having been run over by $16 million dollars from John "I never said I was a maverick" McCain who has engaged his primary election to keep his Senate seat with far more vigor & excitement than the two times he ran for president, and all of Brewer's opponents seem to have dropped out and endorsed her, but...yeah, okay, that'll be a sleeper too


It seems like viral videos have formed an extremely poor basis for campaigns this cycle.  That one guy who plays dress-up in his basement talking about revolution lost, that crazy guy lost today, etc.  I guess Demon Sheep won, but I don't think that really mattered.

Who's going to elect sneezing panda in 2012 now??


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 05, 2010, 11:33:27 PM
Oh right, today's election day.

The YouTube guy didn't win?  The gospel singer from frog jump or whatever it's called easily won?  Cohen creamed his opponent?  

Next thing you're going to tell me is that Arizona's GOP primary is going to be boring as well.  Sure, Hayworth is roadkill and all of Brewer's opponents seem to have dropped out and endorsed her, but...yeah, okay, that'll be a sleeper too


It seems like viral videos have formed an extremely poor basis for campaigns this cycle.  That one guy who plays dress-up in his basement talking about revolution lost, that crazy guy lost today, etc.  I guess Demon Sheep won, but I don't think that really mattered.

Who's going to elect sneezing panda in 2012 now??

We have Connecticut next week, which may have a few interesting races.  The gubernatorial ad war is heating up, even in the NYC market.  Colorado and Minnesota are up next week, too,  I think.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: memphis on August 06, 2010, 12:41:48 AM
It looks like D. Black won the GOP primary in TN-6, whomever he is.

FYI, the D stands for Diane :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/3 - KS, MI, MO; 8/5 - TN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 06, 2010, 01:15:33 AM
It looks like D. Black won the GOP primary in TN-6, whomever he is.

FYI, the D stands for Diane :P

I am such a pig in so many ways, aren't I?  :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 06, 2010, 06:12:13 AM
Updated OP with next week's stuff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Saxwsylvania on August 06, 2010, 12:59:11 PM
On himself garnering 20% of the vote against Cohen last night: "It was a referendum on Willie Herenton, and that’s really how it is."


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 06, 2010, 07:03:46 PM
Maps of last night's House primaries:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Bo on August 06, 2010, 07:26:28 PM

How do you make/where do you get these maps?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 06, 2010, 08:20:16 PM
MS Paint, manually editing the Atlas maps.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 06, 2010, 11:57:50 PM
How do you make/where do you get these maps?

I'm getting a little more high tech.  MapWindow GIS (http://www.mapwindow.org/), directly from a spreadsheet of the AP data.  County (and other) vector data courtesy of the U.S. Census Bureau (http://www2.census.gov/cgi-bin/shapefiles2009/county-files?county=36119). 

I still can't figure out the RGB values for the typical Atlas coloring, though - and I'm not exactly great with color shading by eye.

Hopefully, I'll have enough time this week to try to use Connecticut as my first test run for the November package.    I have to get the maps and data in order.  If things go as planned, it should be Massachusetts special election-level epic.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: RI on August 07, 2010, 02:18:56 AM
I still can't figure out the RGB values for the typical Atlas coloring, though - and I'm not exactly great with color shading by eye.

I'm not an expert on colors, but this page (https://uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/map_gen.php) might help. It has the full Atlas color pallette on it, and if you click on a color it gives you a six-character RGB color code. The pallette has more colors than are used normally on Atlas, but if you click on Fill Default, it fills in the codes for the typical Atlas red, blue, and green shades from 20% to 90%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 07, 2010, 02:24:48 AM
The eye dropper tool thingy should get any specific values, no?

Using the link above

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 09, 2010, 01:05:34 PM
Last-minute primary polls:

Colorado (PPP):

Gov: 41-40 McInnis.
Sen: 49-43 Bennet, 45-43 Norton (!).

Connecticut (Quinnipiac):

Gov: 45-42 Lamont, 38-30-17 Foley-Fedele-Griebel.
Sen: 50-28-15 McMahon-Simmons-Schiff.

Georgia (Mason-Dixon):

Gov: 47-42 Handel.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 09, 2010, 01:12:49 PM
Last-minute primary polls:

Colorado (PPP):

Gov: 41-40 McInnis.
Sen: 49-43 Bennet, 45-43 Norton (!).

Connecticut (Quinnipiac):

Gov: 45-24 Lamont, 38-30-17 Foley-Fedele-Griebel.
Sen: 50-28-15 McMahon-Simmons-Schiff.

Georgia (Mason-Dixon):

Gov: 47-42 Handel.

The MN primary numbers (510 Likely DFL Voters):

Dayton: 43%
Kelliher: 27%
Entenza: 22%
Idusogie: 1%

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=d1f59a92-85c3-4355-93bb-8c888ff8faa0


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 09, 2010, 01:21:24 PM
Oh, I mixed up the numbers for Lamont-Malloy. It's 45-42, not 45-24.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 09, 2010, 04:31:35 PM
Oh, I mixed up the numbers for Lamont-Malloy. It's 45-42, not 45-24.

Lamont-Malloy should be an interesting one.  Lamont is running ads on NYC local TV. I've yet to see a Malloy ad.  Same for Foley on the Republican side (has aired ads in NYC) versus Fedele and Griebel (have not) and McMahon (has aired a ton of ads in NYC) versus Schiff and Simmons (none), for that matter.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 09, 2010, 05:13:50 PM
It looks like a lot of these are going to be very interesting, surprisingly enough. I wish I didn't have to work 6-11 tomorrow. :(

I guess I'll just pour through the thread when I get home.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 09, 2010, 06:27:50 PM
Here are my predictions for the Republican side on the high profile races. Democratic side will be posted later.

Colorado

Senate- Jane Norton
Governor- Dan Maes
Treasurer- JJ Ament
Colorado 3rd- Scott Tipton
Colorado 4th- Cory Gardner
Colorado 7th- Ryan Frazier

BTW Why is no Republican running for Lt. Governor in the state?

Connecticut
Senate- Linda McMahon :'(
Governor- Tom Foley
Lt. Governor- Mark Boughton
Attorney General- Martha Dean

Connecticut 1st- Ann Brickley
Connecticut 2nd- Janet Peckinpaugh
Connecticut 4th- Dan Debicella
Connecticut 5th- Justin Bernier

Georgia

Governor- Karen Handel
Insurance Commissioner- Maria Sheffield
Georgia 7th- Rob Woodall
Georgia 9th- Tom Graves
Georgia 12th- Carl Smith
Georgia 13th- Deborah Honeycutt

Minnesota

Governor- Tom Emmer
Lt. Governor- Annette Meeks
Attorney General- Chris Barden
Minnesota 4- Teresa Collett
Minnesota 7- Lee Byburg





Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 09, 2010, 06:50:48 PM
BTW Why is no Republican running for Lt. Governor in the state?

The Lt. Governor runs on the same ticket as the Governor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 09, 2010, 07:00:26 PM
Last-minute primary polls:

Colorado (PPP):

Gov: 41-40 McInnis.
Sen: 49-43 Bennet, 45-43 Norton (!).

Connecticut (Quinnipiac):

Gov: 45-42 Lamont, 38-30-17 Foley-Fedele-Griebel.
Sen: 50-28-15 McMahon-Simmons-Schiff.

Georgia (Mason-Dixon):

Gov: 47-42 Handel.


After what happened to Lowden and Grayson, has Norton decided to do something to avoid such a gruesome fate? Why the sudden rebound?


What is PPP's record in Colorado?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: xavier110 on August 09, 2010, 07:27:48 PM
My guesses...

Minnesota DFL Gov: Dayton
Colorado GOP Gov: Maes
Colorado GOP Sen: Norton
Colorado Dem Sen: Romanoff
Georgia GOP Gov: Handel
Connecticut GOP Gov: Foley
Connecticut GOP Sen: McMahon
Connecticut Dem Gov: Lamont

This should be an enjoyable night! Some close races tomorrow..


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 09, 2010, 07:30:31 PM
think Malloy has the CT party establishment & the momentum.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 09, 2010, 07:52:27 PM
Colorado

Senate- Andrew Romanoff

Connecticut

Governor- Ned Lamont
Lt. Governor- Nancy Wyman
Secretary of State- Denise Merrill
Comptroller- Kevin Lembo

Minnesota

Governor- Mark Dayton
Lt. Governor- Yvonne Prettner Solon
Minnesota 2nd- Shelley Madore




Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 09, 2010, 08:11:40 PM
If Norton wins, that would be an amazing recovery. Maybe the protest, anti-establishment, tea party and Left protest vote for that matter on the Dem side is fading a bit. On the GOP side, it did not do that well in Tennessee.

Bennett has a late hit negative story about some spending program he pushed going really bad, but the bulk of the voters have already voted, and he was leading by a bit. If the poll were accurate, will this late hit still sink him?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 09, 2010, 08:30:31 PM
think Malloy has the CT party establishment & the momentum.

Didn't Lieberman have that too though (the latter part towards the very end)....


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Lunar on August 09, 2010, 10:32:02 PM
think Malloy has the CT party establishment & the momentum.

Didn't Lieberman have that too though (the latter part towards the very end)....

Malloy doesn't have blind hatred towards himself.  I mean, today, hell, Liebers has more Republicans liking him than Independents in 2010, and Liebers voted for health care, financial reform, the stimulus, and is at the front of cap-n-trade.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 09, 2010, 10:48:38 PM
If Norton wins, that would be an amazing recovery. Maybe the protest, anti-establishment, tea party and Left protest vote for that matter on the Dem side is fading a bit. On the GOP side, it did not do that well in Tennessee.

Bennett has a late hit negative story about some spending program he pushed going really bad, but the bulk of the voters have already voted, and he was leading by a bit. If the poll were accurate, will this late hit still sink him?

Good. I think its about time. Though it would be nice if could rear its head at the end of the month in LA and AK. Getting rid of Vitter and Murkowski would make up for the trouble they caused us in my opinion. It would be nice if by Sept it were over. That way the Maine ladies, Hatch, and Corker will be safe from defeat. We can quietly switch out Hutchinson with Williams and Ensign with Hellar (that might require a primary though), and possibly Lugar with Daniels. We will be rid of scum like Specter, Vitter, Murkowski, and Bennett  yet keep those worthy of holding office and bring in some new blood of different varities (ranging from Kirks, and Castles to Blunt's and Toomey's). That would be a happy ending. Of course, that is why it will never happen. ;)   (sorry, its the music talking)


It depends on what you mean by bulk. 50% maybe, more then that probably not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 09, 2010, 10:53:36 PM
If Norton wins, that would be an amazing recovery.

Well, not AMAZING.  It's not like she had anything going for her beforehand, a former Lt. Governor isn't exactly a tier one candidate.  Buck's got a loud mouth, and a tracker finally picked it up on YouTube.

Bennett has a late hit negative story about some spending program he pushed going really bad, but the bulk of the voters have already voted, and he was leading by a bit. If the poll were accurate, will this late hit still sink him?

Gotta watch your T's on Bennet & Bennett if you're only referring to them by last name, because Bennett and Bennet are two entirely different Senators, but yeah, it's a mess of a story occurring at the worst time.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 09, 2010, 10:56:07 PM
I was going to do a Minnesota megathread but realized it wouldn't be very interesting, just lots of incumbent vs. joke or two essentially identical candidates races.

Two State Senate seats worth looking at though are 50 and 67. 50 has the embattled DFL incumbent with some revealed ethical issues having his endorsement revoked and is facing a former State Rep who now has the party endorsement. Seat is heavily leaning DFL but could conceivably flip with a damaged candidate like the incumbent. 67's DFL primary is a literal free-for-all, there is NINE DFL candidates running, three of which are Hmong like the outgoing incumbent, one who is Indian, and one who is black. Seat is on the east side of St. Paul, completely safe DFL. Senate Seat 7 is a safe seat being vacated by Dayton's running mate, and there's a primary between a former Republican and standard liberal Democrat.

The GOP primary in House district 08B might be interesting too, the former mayor of the town of Mora and described moderate will face a 22-year old teabagger for the GOP nomination. Seat is fairly conservative but has a DFL incumbent who barely won last time. Can't think of a better opponent for him than some young teabagger nut. A few other seats have establishment candidate vs. teabagger matchups, including 29A being vacated by Randy Demmer to run against Tim Walz. The teabagger is actually kind of hot though in a very trashy way: http://www.kerrystoick.com Although from looking at her site it appears she has six kids even though from her timeline of education she's only about 33. Um, that's just...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 09, 2010, 10:57:55 PM
If Norton wins, that would be an amazing recovery. Maybe the protest, anti-establishment, tea party and Left protest vote for that matter on the Dem side is fading a bit. On the GOP side, it did not do that well in Tennessee.

At this point she embraces the far-right more than Buck.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 09, 2010, 11:21:48 PM
Who are people on here rooting for between Bennet and Romanoff?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Lunar on August 09, 2010, 11:26:49 PM
Who are people on here rooting for between Bennet and Romanoff?

I'm a Bennet fan, and I still am, but it's such a perplexing general election situation that it's hard to know which would be the best general election candidate at this point.  Pretty much all I care about is the GE here, and I have no clue who would do better.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 09, 2010, 11:27:54 PM
I think Romanoff would be the stronger GE candidate, so him. Bennet isn't a bad guy but he's really out of his league, should've just agreed to be a placeholder which he would be fine for.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 09, 2010, 11:30:30 PM
Next question: Lamont or Malloy, Atlas Forum?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 09, 2010, 11:32:11 PM
Gotta stick with Lamont out of residual loyalty.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 09, 2010, 11:35:31 PM

Yeah, same here. I think CT is probably a D pickup in the general election no matter what... even if the other dude would be slightly better candidate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 12:09:18 AM
If Norton wins, that would be an amazing recovery.

Well, not AMAZING.  It's not like she had anything going for her beforehand, a former Lt. Governor isn't exactly a tier one candidate.  Buck's got a loud mouth, and a tracker finally picked it up on YouTube.

Bennett has a late hit negative story about some spending program he pushed going really bad, but the bulk of the voters have already voted, and he was leading by a bit. If the poll were accurate, will this late hit still sink him?

Gotta watch your T's on Bennet & Bennett if you're only referring to them by last name, because Bennett and Bennet are two entirely different Senators, but yeah, it's a mess of a story occurring at the worst time.  

Hey, I might be related to the Colorado guy.  The last name of my great, great grandfather was Bennet (http://books.google.com/books?id=KbjGAVICYwIC&pg=PA49&lpg=PA49&dq=%22bennet+and+henderson%22+royal&source=bl&ots=BY-vE6NQUm&sig=yMCx_XHmgkjh5TvF27-swwomPEQ&hl=en&ei=fd1gTJOQLYfCsAOo5bTECA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22bennet%20and%20henderson%22%20royal&f=false), and that spelling is really unusual. Maybe I should send him an email. :P  Also, come to think of it, my grand uncle from the same family (grandson of the one mentioned above), whom I actually knew, who directed some 450 films or some such crazy number. But I know he is not descended from the film guy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 12:55:44 AM
My predictions:

GA Runoff

Deal: 54.8%
Handel: 45.2%

CT Governor & Senate

Foley: 36.7%
Fedele: 35.9%
Griebel: 27.4%

Malloy: 50.2%
Lamont: 49.8%

McMahon: 51.1%
Simmons: 29.7%
Schiff: 19.2%

MN Governor (Democrats)

Dayton: 38.1%
Kelliher: 34.7%
Entenza: 25.8%
Idusogie: 1.4%

CO Governor & Senate

Maes: 51.4%
McInnis: 48.6%

Bennet: 50.7%
Romanoff: 49.3%

Norton: 51.9%
Buck: 48.1%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 01:06:26 AM
Who are people on here rooting for between Bennet and Romanoff?


I think it doesn´t really matter, all 4 are acceptable candidates and once the primary is over the folks who backed the defeated should move over to the winner side. If Romanoff had more money, I´d prefer him over Bennet. In CT, I don´t really care, both candidates have made arguments to abolish the state´s death penalty which is fine with me. The Republicans will be destroyed in the GE anyway.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Cubby on August 10, 2010, 03:15:19 AM
I'll be voting for Dan Malloy today. I'll let you guys know what I see after I get back. Too bad I can't vote in the GOP Gubernatorial race. Fedele is way better than Foley. Fedele reminds me of Rowland (in a good way, I started liking Rowland the day he was hounded out of office by his own party).

My friend is voting for Lamont because she feels he deserves to be elected since he was unfairly denied election in 2006 (i.e. Republicans crossed over in the G.E. and voted for Lieberman).

I'm going to miss Schiff's attack ad showing McMahon kicking a guy in the crotch during a fight.

Willard Romney has been robo-calling people in support of Schiff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 06:00:25 AM
My predictions:

GA Runoff

Handel: 50.4%*
Deal: 49.6%

CT Governor & Senate

Foley: 39.8%*
Fedele: 31.8%
Griebel: 25.4%

Lamont: 51.2%
Malloy: 48.8%*

McMahon: 53.1%*
Simmons: 21.8%
Schiff: 11.1%

CO Governor & Senate

McInnis: 50.4%*
Maes: 49.6%

Bennet: 50.9%*
Romanoff: 49.1%

Norton: 51.4%*
Buck: 48.6%

* - Indicates candidate whom I'd support


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 07:05:22 AM
Ah, election day once again. Results links: CO (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/CO_Page_0810.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | CT (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/CT_Page_0810.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | GA (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/GA_Page_0810.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | MN (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/MN_Page_0810.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)

Polls close at 7 ET in Georgia, 8 in Connecticut, and 9 in Colorado and Minnesota. However, the majority of the counties in Colorado are conducting this election by mail (http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/docs/primary_map.pdf), so there's no telling if or when we will know the victors in Colorado.


Title: Colorado Congressional Primaries
Post by: California8429 on August 10, 2010, 11:06:09 AM
My predictions

Ryan Frazier 59
Lang Sias 41

Bob McConnell 46
Scott Tipton 54

Frazier may even pull a wider lead, but CD-3 may be closer


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:08:12 AM
It's raining pretty bad in Minneapolis now. Doubt that'll affect much as only more hardcore voters will show up on primaries anyway. I dislike rainwater though so I took a second shower just after getting back. Should clear up in the afternoon though, a second wave is coming but won't hit us until after the polls close, if there was something big in western Minnesota that could be a factor.

Voted around 10:45AM and was the 96th person in my precinct to vote. Not bad turnout really. Voted for Margaret Anderson-Kelliher and for Keith Ellison, Lori Swanson and Mark Ritchie over their token opposition.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 10, 2010, 03:41:53 PM
Some very quick and not especially informed guesstimates:

GA Runoff

Deal: 52%
Handel: 48%

CT Governor & Senate

Foley: 41%
Fedele: 34%
Griebel: 25%

Lamont: 52%
Malloy: 48%  (ZOMG: The same result as Lamont/Lieberman!)

McMahon: 50%
Simmons: 33%
Schiff: 17%

MN Governor (Democrats)

Dayton: 42%
Kelliher: 33%
Entenza: 22%
Idusogie: 3%

CO Governor & Senate

Maes: 54%
McInnis: 46%

Bennet: 51%
Romanoff: 49%

Buck: 51%
Norton: 49%


Title: Re: Colorado Congressional Primaries
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 10, 2010, 05:36:02 PM
I see no reason to disagree. They seem like the best option in each race as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 05:54:32 PM
I think Handel's going to win in Georgia; Deal could win, though. It largely depends on if he's managed to get the support from Oxendine and Johnson voters. Handel's campaign did an amazing job at messaging before the primary, basically making a case of "it's Handel against these three guys who are all the same"; if that didn't sink in to Johnson/Ox voters, maybe her Deal-specific attacks won't either.

I also wonder what's going on downstate right now. If Deal can win Chatham and Houston counties (and their environs), he'll win.

Also, everything I'm seeing on the ground is making me very fearful of Hice winning here in GA-7. I hope not; I hate that guy.   


Title: Re: Colorado Congressional Primaries
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 05:57:19 PM
We have a thread to discuss these things... (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119066.0)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 06:00:05 PM
A few predictions before polls close

Senate District 47: Ginn 60%
GA 7: Hice 53%
Governor: Handel 55%
Insurance Commish: Sheffield 60%
PSC: Douglas 53%
Attorney General: Olens 54%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 06:04:22 PM
GA should be rural vs. suburban/urban.  If it's anything else, I'll be surprised.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 06:04:46 PM
The few Dems I know who actually live in CT are all Malloy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 06:18:20 PM
A few hundred votes are in from GA:

Handel 54%
Deal 46%

But that's with just 0.4% of precincts reporting.  :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 06:34:29 PM
The SOS site (http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/election_results/2010_0810/swfed.htm) looks to be faster than the AP site.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Verily on August 10, 2010, 06:36:51 PM
GA should be rural vs. suburban/urban.  If it's anything else, I'll be surprised.

I would think suburban beats rural any time, and easily, in a GA GOP primary simply because so many in rural areas are still registered Dem. Or is it an open primary?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 06:46:01 PM
13% in:

Handel 51.5%
Deal 48.5%

NOTE: Looks like that's mostly from early voting.  The % of precincts reporting from "election day voting" is only 5%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 06:52:36 PM
GA should be rural vs. suburban/urban.  If it's anything else, I'll be surprised.

I would think suburban beats rural any time, and easily, in a GA GOP primary simply because so many in rural areas are still registered Dem. Or is it an open primary?

Pretty sure it's completely open.  Anyway, these things depend on where - Alabama no.  Georgia used to be no, but I'm suspecting it's yes now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 06:53:42 PM
Verily: it's open, GA don't even have partisan registration.

Also, look at the results so far for Deal in Gwinnett- he's holding even; pretty promising for him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Hash on August 10, 2010, 06:54:12 PM
GA should be rural vs. suburban/urban.  If it's anything else, I'll be surprised.

Deal being the rural guy and Handel being the suburban/urban gal?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 06:57:41 PM
GA should be rural vs. suburban/urban.  If it's anything else, I'll be surprised.

Deal being the rural guy and Handel being the suburban/urban gal?

That's what he's getting at, yeah. I don't think it'll be so
cut and dry though. I wouldn't be surprised if Handel won rural south GA by a mile.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 06:58:20 PM
Deal takes the lead, 50.6%-49.4%, which is about a 700 vote margin at this point.  Deal's lead would be double that if not for Handel's lead in Cobb County.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 07:08:11 PM
CT just closed.  No results yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 07:10:15 PM
Woodall, Graves, McKinney, and Crane are leading in the House runoffs.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 07:10:33 PM
The results are actually quite surprising in a number of areas (Deal strength in Atlanta suburbs, Handel strength in South Georgia), FYI.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 07:11:42 PM
The results are actually quite surprising in a number of areas (Deal strength in Atlanta suburbs, Handel strength in South Georgia), FYI.

So...your very important "rural, suburban, urban" model for this election might not be holding true?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 07:16:00 PM
33% in:

Deal: 52%
Handel: 48%

http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/election_results/2010_0810/swfed.htm


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 07:23:17 PM
With 2% in:

Foley: 46%
Fedele: 34%
Griebel: 20%

Malloy: 56%
Lamont: 44%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 10, 2010, 07:27:00 PM
3.1% in

McMahon: 47.9

Simmons: 30.2

Schiff: 22.9%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 07:28:52 PM
Caligiuri has a slight lead in CT-05.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 07:34:27 PM
38% in:

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 10, 2010, 07:35:06 PM
5.4 in:

McMahon: 47.6
Simmons: 29.1
Schiff: 23.2

Schiff is doing surprisingly well, presumably because of the "Liberal Linda" ad.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Thomas D on August 10, 2010, 07:37:03 PM
Only 8% of the vote is in from Fulton County. That's good news for Handel.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 07:37:42 PM
54% in:

Deal: 50.9%
Handel: 49.1%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 10, 2010, 07:38:31 PM
6.6 in:

McMahon: 48.3
Simmons: 29
Schiff: 22.7


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 07:41:24 PM
There's not really an urban/rural dynamic; in the first round Handel was "urban/suburban" and won the Atlanta area because of support in her political base of Fulton County plus extremely effective campaign concentration in the rest of the Atlanta media market. Deal was "rural" because his campaign focused on running up the vote in his own congressional district in the mostly rural north. Extrapolation from the votes then to the runoff now is very misleading. Also note, btw, Johnson won both "urban/suburban" and "rural" areas throughout the southern part of the state.

This election has many more dimensions at work.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 07:45:09 PM
If these results hold and the race remains a tie, Insider Advantage had the best poll (46-46), followed by Landmark (44-42 Deal) and Mason Dixon (47-42 Handel).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 07:45:31 PM
10% in and Malloy still leads 57-43. Foley still up 46-35. Pretty stable leads so far.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 07:47:13 PM
The results are actually quite surprising in a number of areas (Deal strength in Atlanta suburbs, Handel strength in South Georgia), FYI.

So...your very important "rural, suburban, urban" model for this election might not be holding true?

No one's perfect.  There are a lot of oddities in this one actually - equalling amusing is how poorly Deal is running in a lot of his own CD.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 07:48:18 PM
You would think a Palin endorsement would help more in Georgia. Handel should be in the lead not the homophobe Deal.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: xavier110 on August 10, 2010, 07:48:51 PM
You would think a Palin endorsement would help more in Georgia. Handel should be in the lead not the homophobe Deal.

Well...this is Georgia.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 07:51:01 PM
Handel's going to win this with about 54% percent it looks like.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 07:51:19 PM
Not surprisingly, Simmons is winning his old CD.  McMahon is winning everywhere else:

()

I see no other real pattern in the results thus far.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 07:53:05 PM
Not surprisingly, Simmons is winning his old CD.  McMahon is winning everywhere else:

()

I see no other real pattern in the results thus far.

Great the possibility of two crappy candidates as nominees tonight. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 10, 2010, 07:53:12 PM
You would think a Palin endorsement would help more in Georgia. Handel should be in the lead not the homophobe Deal.

This is Huckabee territory more then Palin territory.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 07:56:41 PM
There's a TV market disparity so far (which I'd expect, since McMahon was heavily advertising in NYC and the others weren't).  But it's too early to tell if it's significant.

()

There's also a major TV market disparity in the Republican Governor's race, with Griebel (who?) getting slaughtered in the NYC market.

NYC Market=Fairfield County.  Hartford-New Haven=Rest of State


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 07:59:48 PM
FWIW, a crappy last-minute model that I only had time to create for the CT Dem Gov race has Malloy winning it 52.6-47.4. 

We'll see if that works.  I doubt it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Verily on August 10, 2010, 08:00:51 PM
There's a TV market disparity so far (which I'd expect, since McMahon was heavily advertising in NYC and the others weren't).  But it's too early to tell if it's significant.

()

There's also a major TV market disparity in the Republican Governor's race, with Griebel (who?) getting slaughtered in the NYC market.

NYC Market=Fairfield County.  Hartford-New Haven=Rest of State

That this is significant seems to be disproved by the CD data, since McMahon is doing equally well in every CD except Simmons'. It just so happens that Simmons' CD is in the Hartford-New Haven market.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:02:00 PM
67% in:

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 08:03:02 PM
For the record, Handel went out of her way to be as much of a homophobe as Deal in the campaign, mostly to mitigate the damage her old pro-gay positions would have caused.  

Also, while endorsements are usually overrated, Palin did help her win a bunch of former Ox supporters who were abandoning his sinking ship before the first round.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 08:04:33 PM
CT-Sen R by town so far (McMahon Blue, Schiff Green, Simmons Red):

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:04:55 PM
I agree with BK. The Palin endorsement helped Handel tremendously.

And, yeah, Handel has pretty clearly taken the side against gay marriage.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:05:58 PM
69% in:

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%

If Deal wins, it'll be by a squeaker. I still think Handel will win by a few points.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:07:53 PM
If these results hold and the race remains a tie, Insider Advantage had the best poll (46-46), followed by Landmark (44-42 Deal) and Mason Dixon (47-42 Handel).

I project a 53-47 Handel win now and therefore Mason-Dixon will have the best poll, followed by Insider Advantage and Landmark.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:08:17 PM
GA-09 once again called for Graves.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:09:24 PM

lol at Lee Hawkins.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 08:09:54 PM
FWIW, in the CT-Rep Gov Race Griebel seems to be doing his best in thee less-educated towns.  Foley, the opposite:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 08:09:59 PM
Norton is in the lead 54-45%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 08:11:28 PM
First 10% or so reporting in CO:

Romanoff 51%
Bennet 49%

Norton 58%
Buck 42%

McInnis 51%
Maes 49%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 08:12:04 PM
I agree with BK. The Palin endorsement helped Handel tremendously.

And, yeah, Handel has pretty clearly taken the side against gay marriage.

and everything else, too.

paraphrasing Handel from the second-to-last debate: "yes, when I first ran to head the Fulton County government I gave money to the log cabin republicans and got endorsed by them, but that doesn't matter because when I was in office I made sure same-sex partners didn't get benefits, and I'd veto anything like it as governor"


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:12:31 PM
First 10% or so reporting in CO:

Romanoff 51%
Bennet 49%

Norton 58%
Buck 42%

McInnis 51%
Maes 49%


As expected these races will be fun to watch in the next hours ... :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 08:14:47 PM
Now we have over 20% reporting, and Buck leads Norton 50.1%-49.9%, and Bennet leads Romanoff 52-48%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Bacon King on August 10, 2010, 08:15:22 PM

"At this point, I'm just running to beat him."
-Hawkins in a July debate on Gainesville's NPR station


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:16:01 PM
Wow, Colorado is kicking ass at this vote-by-mail thing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 08:16:51 PM
In the CT House races, Brickley will win CT-01 and Debicella CT-04.  Then there's these two races.  Peckinpaugh has a solid lead in CT-02, but CT-05 is really close - a true three-way horse race.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 08:17:02 PM
Very early returns in MN:

Dayton 43%
Kelliher 29%
Entenza 28%

Only 0.1% reporting though.  :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:17:58 PM
Looks like Minnesota's SOS site (http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20100810/ElecRslts.asp?M=S&Races=0331) will be faster than the AP as well. 18 precincts in, Kelliher up 43-31 over Dayton.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:18:31 PM
77% in:

You guessed it! :P

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:19:41 PM
77% in:

You guessed it! :P

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%

Still almost nothing in from Fulton.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:19:55 PM
40% in for Colorado, Bennet up 53-47, Norton up 51-49. Governor numbers still not updated yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 10, 2010, 08:20:33 PM
47.5 reporting:

Bennet: 53.2
Romanoff: 46.8

42.8 reporting:

Norton: 51.4
Buck: 48.6

39.5 reporting:

Maes: 51.6
McInnis: 48.4


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Thomas D on August 10, 2010, 08:22:54 PM
There's an Independence primary in Minnesota?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:23:35 PM
Currently, it looks like PPP did a slightly better job than SurveyUSA in Colorado.

PPP got D-Sen. and R-Sen right, but R-Gov. wrong.

SUSA got R-Gov. right, but the Senate wrong.

SUSA also gets MN wrong if trends hold.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 08:24:30 PM
Looks like Minnesota's SOS site (http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20100810/ElecRslts.asp?M=S&Races=0331) will be faster than the AP as well. 18 precincts in, Kelliher up 43-31 over Dayton.

58 precincts in, and Kelliher still leads.  I have no idea which precincts those are though.  Is there an easy way to navigate that page for county results?  It looks a bit confusing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:24:59 PM
82% in:

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 08:25:45 PM
Only 21% in from Fulton candidate and Handel's doing pretty well thus far. I think she's got this! :D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:26:02 PM
Buck overtakes Norton and leads 51-49, with 51% in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 10, 2010, 08:26:24 PM

Looks like I wasn't wrong supporting Barnes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:27:12 PM
It's actually starting to tighten in Connecticut. Foley's down to a 44-38 lead. Meanwhile, Lamont isn't even winning his home town of Greenwich.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:28:11 PM
Looks like Bill Clinton (supports Romanoff) is still a drag in CO and Obama (supports Bennet) still a win ...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 08:28:23 PM
Updated CT-R-Senate map - yeah, it's basically East of the Connecticut River = Simmons, West of the Connecticut River = McMahon - except for the town on the NY/Mass border that voted for Schiff.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 08:29:15 PM
A Maes, Buck, Foley, Deal, Emmer win here tonight is best for the national Democrats.  

imo, Deal losing would be best for humanity, but I'm willing to accept that Georgia Republicans don't always act in the interests of humanity [i.e. Gingrich].



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 10, 2010, 08:29:28 PM
Romanoff is dead. Boulder and Denver are nearly all in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 08:30:51 PM
From the AP results, looks like Kelliher's lead is all from Ramsey County.  Still only a few % reporting statewide though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 08:31:22 PM
Updated CT-R-Senate map - yeah, it's basically East of the Connecticut River = Simmons, West of the Connecticut River = McMahon - except for the town on the NY/Mass border that voted for Schiff.

()


Yeah, that's not gonna cut it.   There's not enough Red Sox voters to put him over the top.



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 08:33:08 PM
It's actually starting to tighten in Connecticut. Foley's down to a 44-38 lead. Meanwhile, Lamont isn't even winning his home town of Greenwich.

Mapping the CT-R Gov race - Foley in Blue, Fedele in Green, Griebel in Red.  The pattern is not as clear cut as the Senate race:

()

(267 Precincts in)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:33:56 PM
FWIW, SUSA (2 wins, 1 fail) now more accurate in CO than PPP (2 fail, 1 win).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 10, 2010, 08:34:15 PM
Buck overtakes Norton and leads 51-49, with 51% in.
;D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 10, 2010, 08:34:49 PM
Will McMahon's two very egotistical opponents endorse her in the general?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:34:57 PM
Tipton leading 57-43 in CO-03, Frazier easily winning 2-1 in CO-07.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:36:08 PM
87% in:

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%

It all comes down to what counties are still counting...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 08:37:58 PM
It's actually starting to tighten in Connecticut. Foley's down to a 44-38 lead. Meanwhile, Lamont isn't even winning his home town of Greenwich.

Yeah, Lamont's losing pretty much everywhere.  (Malloy Blue (sorry), Lamont Green):

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:38:11 PM
87% in:

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%

It all comes down to what counties are still counting...

The AP seems to have a lot more in from Fulton than the SoS site, 65%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Thomas D on August 10, 2010, 08:38:26 PM
I know it's still early but, Poor Ned Lamont :(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 08:39:38 PM
Ned Lamont = lol fail

Personally, I doubt there's enough to push Handel over the hump.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 08:40:59 PM
87% in:

Deal: 51%
Handel: 49%

It all comes down to what counties are still counting...

The AP seems to have a lot more in from Fulton than the SoS site, 65%.

Yeah. I'm using WSB's numbers (http://www.wsbtv.com/election-results/24563824/detail.html). Not sure where they getting them from, though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 08:41:36 PM
No tears should be lost over Lamont.  Malloy sets up a FANTASTIC contrast with Foley, and Lamont tacked to the center with a lot of his advertising this cycle anyhoo


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:42:53 PM
No tears should be lost over Lamont.  Malloy sets up a FANTASTIC contrast with Foley, and Lamont tacked to the center with a lot of his advertising this cycle anyhoo

He hired Creigh Deeds' campaign manager, and, well...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:44:45 PM
GA-07 called for Woodall. Good riddance, idiot Jody Hice.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 08:45:14 PM
13% in:

Kelliher 48%
Dayton 35%
Entenza 17%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Thomas D on August 10, 2010, 08:45:33 PM
Handel now within 7000 Votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:48:13 PM
CT called for Malloy. Foley maintaining a 43-37 lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on August 10, 2010, 08:48:46 PM
hahalamont


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 08:49:04 PM
I'm feeling very confident about Karen Handel's chances. Fulton county just needs to keep coming in at the same rate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:50:19 PM
Caligiuri has surged ahead in CT-05. He's now up 41-30-29 over Bernier and Greenberg, respectively.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 08:51:23 PM
I'm feeling very confident about Karen Handel's chances. Fulton county just needs to keep coming in at the same rate.

If there really are a lot of votes outstanding, she can win.  Gwinnett and Forsyth are about 50-50, so I don't expect much change there.  Problem is we don't know how many of these precincts are white or minority.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 08:51:45 PM
CT-05 is a mess:

()

Caliguiri blue; Bernier green; Greenberg red.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 08:54:02 PM
Colorado has slowed down to a trickle. Bennet is still up 54-46, while Buck and Maes both lead by about 5,000 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 08:54:26 PM
Deal
273,348

Handel
268,192

According to the Georgia Sec of State site. 83% in


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 08:54:51 PM

Reading some of the posts earlier in this thread...everyone seemed to be rooting for him because he deserved something, rather than any interest in who runs Connecticut's government.

I said this privately, but didn't post it here, if Malloy pulled this race into the margin of error in the polls, he was always going to win.  It just comes down the whole "who's gonna vote for you on election day" demographic...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 08:56:03 PM
83% of precincts reporting:

Deal: 273,348
Handel: 268,192

SoS is coming in faster than WSBTV. Handel has gained about 5,000 votes in the last 3% of precincts. Fulton county is still only at 27%, and she's winning it 26,000-10,000 thus far.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 08:57:59 PM
83% of precincts reporting:

Deal: 273,348
Handel: 268,192

SoS is coming in faster than WSBTV. Handel has gained about 5,000 votes in the last 3% of precincts. Fulton county is still only at 27%, and she's winning it 26,000-10,000 thus far.

The AP says Fulton is 75% in - with the same amount of votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 09:00:08 PM
83% of precincts reporting:

Deal: 273,348
Handel: 268,192

SoS is coming in faster than WSBTV. Handel has gained about 5,000 votes in the last 3% of precincts. Fulton county is still only at 27%, and she's winning it 26,000-10,000 thus far.

The AP says Fulton is 75% in - with the same amount of votes.

AP is probably incorrect then.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 09:00:08 PM
83% of precincts reporting:

Deal: 273,348
Handel: 268,192

SoS is coming in faster than WSBTV. Handel has gained about 5,000 votes in the last 3% of precincts. Fulton county is still only at 27%, and she's winning it 26,000-10,000 thus far.

The AP says Fulton is 75% in - with the same amount of votes.
That is correct. SoS needs to change that. ;) They're saying that 276 of the 333 precincts have come in though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:00:27 PM
MAK still up 47-35 with 16%. However, the Twin Cities are almost all in, while so far Dayton has been winning almost everywhere else.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:00:33 PM
Updated CT-05 (92 of 148).

()

Bernier's only hope is the Hartford-area towns go heavily toward him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Beet on August 10, 2010, 09:01:40 PM
83% of precincts reporting:

Deal: 273,348
Handel: 268,192

SoS is coming in faster than WSBTV. Handel has gained about 5,000 votes in the last 3% of precincts. Fulton county is still only at 27%, and she's winning it 26,000-10,000 thus far.

The AP says Fulton is 75% in - with the same amount of votes.
That is correct. SoS needs to change that. ;) They're saying that 276 of the 333 precincts have come in though.

SoS is saying Gwinett at 49,680 with 32% in. And there were roughly the same number of McCain votes in Fulton and Gwinett in 2008. So if the SoS Gwinett numbers are right, AP must be wrong on Fulton.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:03:51 PM
Stick a fork in Bernier in CT-05.  He's done.  There's little of Hartford County left and more New Haven, which Debicella is winning big.

McMahon has been declared the winner (no shock there).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 10, 2010, 09:04:03 PM
()

McDouche

Simmons


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 09:05:26 PM
Hey all. Nice to get off work and be here.

Looks like the DFL ground game has been fantastic. I received calls from Kelliher's people, so it's not too surprising, but she is way overperforming.

Also the mentioned ethically challenged State Senator in district 50 is going down in flames...

Another seat to watch is the GOP race in District 12. The incumbent is a gay who was outed in 2005. He got a primary challenger in 2006 who basically insisted that he wasn't running because the other guy was gay even though he couldn't give any other reasons and defeated him soundly. This year though he lost the endorsement after a revelation he once lived with a gay porn star. With 5/79 precincts reporting he's at 35% and going down hard.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 09:05:46 PM
BTW, why does the AP have 2898 precincts and the SoS only 2860 ?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 09:06:12 PM
Stick a fork in Bernier in CT-05.  He's done.  There's little of Hartford County left and more New Haven, which Debicella is winning big.

McMahon has been declared the winner (no shock there).

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 09:08:20 PM
I have come not to trust the number of precincts in numbers, after the mess with the last primary day election. There were errors galore for example in Kansas. One needs to add the precincts actually counted by county.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Thomas D on August 10, 2010, 09:08:53 PM
Stick a fork in Bernier in CT-05.  He's done.  There's little of Hartford County left and more New Haven, which Debicella is winning big.

McMahon has been declared the winner (no shock there).

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :(

I know. I'm so happy she's not a Democrat.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:09:03 PM
Maes' lead is down to 2,400 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:09:11 PM
Soo...Simmons won his old CD and that's about it?

I'm not sure there was ever a route of victory for Simmons in this primary.  There wasn't a lot for conservatives to get excited about with his record outside of electability and his military service, and McMahon destroyed the electability argument by indicating her willingness to spend 50 million bucks or whatever it is to win this race.

I'm still a secret fan of Simmon's possum strategy for the underdog candidate...you're underfunded, you can't keep going toe-to-toe 'till election day, you save your $500k or whatevsky it is, and your principle opponent is too afraid of bombarding you with attacks while your campaign is "suspended," and he/she/it'll want your endorsement...it's a hail mary strategy at best, but I'm not sure if it was a bad call by Simmons.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 10, 2010, 09:09:58 PM
Whatever the result of the Georgia runoff, the loser is gonna be demanding a recount . . .


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:10:04 PM

Yikes!

If McInnis wins, what are the odds he actually stays in the race?  I know he said he would, but he's not an anti-establishment character, and the CO GOP wants him out an some random millionaire to replace him sooooo badly


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 10, 2010, 09:10:41 PM
Stick a fork in Bernier in CT-05.  He's done.  There's little of Hartford County left and more New Haven, which Debicella is winning big.

McMahon has been declared the winner (no shock there).

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :(

Disgusting. Connecticut sucks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:11:15 PM
The wet dream going around the GOP blogs is apparently having McInnis drop out and replace him with Norton, which would apparently cause Tancredo to drop out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Barnes on August 10, 2010, 09:11:23 PM
Whatever the result of the Georgia runoff, the loser is gonna be demanding a recount . . .

Certainly. I can't remember what the percentage is for an automatic recount. Maybe .5 percent?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:11:37 PM
Blumenthal just sent out an email blast announcing his opponent as McMahon.

Damn if that's not the quickest damn email blast in response to a real-time event that I ever saw.

Quote
Dear Friend,

It's official. Tonight, wrestling CEO Linda McMahon won the Republican primary and will be opposing Dick Blumenthal in Connecticut's U.S. Senate race.

There is a real choice in this election. Dick Blumenthal has stood up to the special interests and fought for the people of Connecticut for more than 20 years, making a difference in people's lives.

And while he was serving the people of Connecticut? Linda McMahon was putting her own interests and her own profits first.

In tough times, we need someone in touch with the people of Connecticut -- someone who has been in the trenches and will fight for us and for our future.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:11:47 PM

Here's the updated CT-R-Sen town map with 440 of 772 in:

()

(McMahon blue, Schiff green, Simmons Red).

I've added the CT-Congressional District layer to further make the point - Simmons won his CD and not much else.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:13:35 PM
Called for Bennet. Buck is up to a 52-48 lead now (10,000 votes). McInnis has retaken the lead, by about 2,000 votes.

MAK's lead is shrinking, she's down to 45.8-36.4 now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:14:15 PM
Cinyc, glad you included Schiff :)  That county has less than 4k residents...which still makes it bigger than the city I spent most of my life in heh


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 09:15:50 PM
Heh, my precinct:

    OLE' SAVIOR AND TODD "ELVIS" ANDERSON    1   10.00   
    LESLIE DAVIS AND GREGORY K. SODERBERG    2   20.00   
    BOB CARNEY JR AND WILLIAM MCGAUGHEY    1   10.00   
    TOM EMMER AND ANNETTE T. MEEKS    6   60.00

    MARGARET ANDERSON KELLIHER AND JOHN GUNYOU    195   49.62   
    PETER IDUSOGIE AND LADY JAYNE FONTAINE    0   0.00   
    MATT ENTENZA AND ROBYNE ROBINSON    66   16.79   
    MARK DAYTON AND YVONNE PRETTNER SOLON    132   33.59

The Republican running unopposed for CD 5 has 8 votes. On the DFL side:

    BARB DAVIS WHITE    23   6.08   
    KEITH ELLISON    341   90.21   
    GREGG A. IVERSON    14   3.70

Davis White was Ellison's Republican opponent in 2008, and she has more votes than the actual Republican.

Now of course it's true that there was no real reason for Republicans to vote but still quite amusing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 09:15:54 PM
Whatever the result of the Georgia runoff, the loser is gonna be demanding a recount . . .

Certainly. I can't remember what the percentage is for an automatic recount. Maybe .5 percent?
This is just ridiculously close. I was hoping Handel would be leading by the end, but I'm worried we may have a slight Deal lead. There will be a recount regardless.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: 🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸 on August 10, 2010, 09:16:48 PM
at least Simmons seems to have handily won my birthplace of Groton. if only there were a runoff!  if I were in CT I dont know which major party sleezeball I could support. I wonder how many other CT voters feel the same way. right now I'm guessing Schiff launches a 3rd party run.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:17:16 PM
And Connecticut R-Governor.

The towns outlined in yellow have Italian American populations of 20% or more.  There's not as much of a pattern as I expected - though Fedele seems to be winning the heaviest ones (New Haven suburbs).

()



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:17:39 PM
Blumenthal just sent out an email blast announcing his opponent as McMahon.

Damn if that's not the quickest damn email blast in response to a real-time event that I ever saw.

Quote
Dear Friend,

It's official. Tonight, wrestling CEO Linda McMahon won the Republican primary and will be opposing Dick Blumenthal in Connecticut's U.S. Senate race.

There is a real choice in this election. Dick Blumenthal has stood up to the special interests and fought for the people of Connecticut for more than 20 years, making a difference in people's lives.

And while he was serving the people of Connecticut? Linda McMahon was putting her own interests and her own profits first.

In tough times, we need someone in touch with the people of Connecticut -- someone who has been in the trenches and will fight for us and for our future.


hahahahaha, I got Linda McMahon's campaign email blast AFTER Blumenthal's on the subject, awesome.  

Quote
Excitement is in the air -- moments ago, the Associated Press called the primary race for us.

Before I speak to the crowd here at the victory party, I wanted to send you a quick note thanking you for the key role you played in our victory.

We built a grassroots movement made up of extraordinary people just like you, and tonight, we sent a strong message to all the career politicians that we want a different kind of Senator...

... A Senator who knows how to create jobs, a Senator who will put an end to politics as usual, a Senator who won't be beholden to special interests, a Senator who will stop the runway spending, and -- most importantly -- a Senator who will put our state back to work.

Now, it's on to November.

Let's keep the momentum building today so that we can begin changing Washington in 84 days.

Please forward this email to five friends and ask them to join you in supporting our campaign.

This was your victory tonight.

Thanks for all that you do.

On to victory,

Linda McMahon

P.S. We've won the Republican nomination, but our final challenge lies ahead: winning in November. Let's keep the momentum and excitement of our primary victory going. Can I count on you to forward this email to five friends and ask them to join you in supporting our campaign?

P.P.S. Be sure to tune in tomorrow morning to NBC's Today Show, ABC's Good Morning America and CBS's The Early Show. I will be a guest on all three programs.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:18:20 PM
Cinyc, glad you included Schiff :)  That county has less than 4k residents...which still makes it bigger than the city I spent most of my life in heh

It's a town, not a county.  New England states report results by town - which makes data analysis a lot more interesting because more census data is available.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:19:22 PM
at least Simmons seems to have handily won my birthplace of Groton. if only there were a runoff!  if I were in CT I dont know which major party sleezeball I could support. I wonder how many other CT voters feel the same way. right now I'm guessing Schiff launches a 3rd party run.

McMahon may end up with over 50% in the end, given what's still out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:19:34 PM
Ohrly?  Still.  Cool maps.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 10, 2010, 09:19:43 PM

Here's the updated CT-R-Sen town map with 440 of 772 in:

()

(McMahon blue, Schiff green, Simmons Red).

I've added the CT-Congressional District layer to further make the point - Simmons won his CD and not much else.

Yay, Peter Schiff won a town.

Schiff should just declare an independent candidacy right away now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:20:19 PM
A runoff would not help Simmons, it'd only hurt McMahon


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:21:17 PM
Apparently there was an error, so Maes is still ahead. However, his lead is down to about 1,300 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:22:13 PM
Apparently there was an error, so Maes is still ahead. However, his lead is down to about 1,300 votes.

If McInnis is lying about his intention to stay in this race, then the future of the CO:Gov race is in the balance.  If he's telling the truth, then it's not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 09:22:45 PM
Handel just narrowed the gap to 3500. Fulton county is still steadily trickling in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:23:18 PM
Yeah, Fedele is getting a slight bump in Italian-American >20% towns:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 09:24:42 PM
The Deal-Handel race looks like just about a tie. It all comes down to how many GOP voters are in the 50 or so precincts out in Fulton (if in black neighborhoods, Deal wins; if up in the northern part of Fulton, then Handel may have a slight edge. The remaining 30 or so precincts elsewhere kind of look like a wash, with about 8 largely empty precincts still out in a small county.

The Norton Buck race also looks like close to a tie. It may be almost all of the precincts will have to be counted to make a call.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Thomas D on August 10, 2010, 09:24:59 PM
Fulton County is to Handel as Cook County is to JFK.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:25:33 PM
The Deal-Handel race looks like just about a tie.

A slight Deal win with a recount would be the best situation possible for Barnes


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 10, 2010, 09:26:06 PM
Caliguiri won in CT-05.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 09:26:12 PM
Fulton County is to Handel as Cook County is to JFK.
Exactly, and the turnout in the county may end up beating how it was back on the 20th. Only needs 4000 more votes for that to happen. She's winning it with 70% I'd say.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:26:30 PM
MAK still bleeding... 45-37 now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 09:27:56 PM
The Deal-Handel race looks like just about a tie.

A slight Deal win with a recount would be the best situation possible for Barnes
I beg to differ. Deal, who used to be a Democrat, worked with Barnes in the Senate for over a decade. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Deal endorsed him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 09:28:14 PM
As I suspected about 30 minutes ago, it'll take a Handel margin of about 20,000-22,000 in Fulton to win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:28:19 PM

Called for Peckinpaugh and (finally) Debicella too.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:28:24 PM

And Peckinpaugh in CT-02.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 09:29:30 PM
Seems like Deal will have a slight 1000-2000 vote advantage after all is in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 09:30:21 PM
Fulton County is to Handel as Cook County is to JFK.
Exactly, and the turnout in the county may end up beating how it was back on the 20th. Only needs 4000 more votes for that to happen. She's winning it with 70% I'd say.

I think Deal has won. Only 13 precincts left in Fulton. What was left that came in, did not have many GOP voters. And there are 3 precincts out or so in Gwinett, a county Deal is carrying by a bit. So unless there are arithmetic errors, this race I think is over. And I think there are only these 16 precincts out. The total suggesting that about 40 are out is wrong.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 09:32:21 PM
FYI, Sam-

The CT turnout differential doesn't seem to be much.  In the towns fully in so far, about 25% of 2009 active Democrats voted in the Governor's race; about 29% of 2009 active Republicans voted in the Republican Senate race (28% in the Republican Governor's race).

The best Republican turnout so far was in CT-05, which had the most competitive Congressional race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 09:33:19 PM
Fulton County is to Handel as Cook County is to JFK.
Exactly, and the turnout in the county may end up beating how it was back on the 20th. Only needs 4000 more votes for that to happen. She's winning it with 70% I'd say.

I think Deal has won. Only 13 precincts left in Fulton. What was left that came in, did not have many GOP voters. And there are 5 precincts out or so in Gwinett, a county Deal is carrying by a bit. So unless there are arithmetic errors, this race I think is over.

Oh, I agree unless GA SOS is correct.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 09:43:00 PM
Fulton County is to Handel as Cook County is to JFK.
Exactly, and the turnout in the county may end up beating how it was back on the 20th. Only needs 4000 more votes for that to happen. She's winning it with 70% I'd say.

I think Deal has won. Only 13 precincts left in Fulton. What was left that came in, did not have many GOP voters. And there are 5 precincts out or so in Gwinett, a county Deal is carrying by a bit. So unless there are arithmetic errors, this race I think is over.

Oh, I agree unless GA SOS is correct.

Looks like it ain't - we're up to 66% and nothing changed.  lol


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 10, 2010, 09:44:19 PM
Fulton County is to Handel as Cook County is to JFK.
Exactly, and the turnout in the county may end up beating how it was back on the 20th. Only needs 4000 more votes for that to happen. She's winning it with 70% I'd say.

I think Deal has won. Only 13 precincts left in Fulton. What was left that came in, did not have many GOP voters. And there are 5 precincts out or so in Gwinett, a county Deal is carrying by a bit. So unless there are arithmetic errors, this race I think is over.

Oh, I agree unless GA SOS is correct.

Looks like it ain't - we're up to 66% and nothing changed.  lol

They probably counted the votes and incuded it into the state total, but didn´t update the Fulton percentages ...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:46:28 PM
CT finally called for Foley. MAK is down to a 44-38 lead. Maes is down to a 700-vote lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 09:50:21 PM
If Buck wins this one, he can thank it on his complete and utter domination of Norton in the Fort Collins/Greeley area where he's from.  Norton's winning most of the other places, just not by much.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 09:53:52 PM
Ah, CO-07 finally called for Frazier. Tipton is still up 56-44 in CO-03, so he should make it through as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 09:54:45 PM
Does Ken Buck not have a wikipedia or am I tripping here?



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 09:55:34 PM
Georgia is over.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 10, 2010, 09:58:31 PM
I expect a recount, however. Handel just pulled within 3000 votes. This really sucks. :(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 10:03:42 PM
I don't know if this has been said, but Bennet won. He's 9 points ahead right now. McInnis and Maes are within a tenth of a percent of each other.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 10, 2010, 10:05:02 PM
Does Ken Buck not have a wikipedia or am I tripping here?

Ken Buck does not have a Wikipedia page.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 10:06:41 PM


I expected Handel to pull off a Haley-lite victory here to be honest.  Never expected her to dominate like Haley, but I expected the whole corrupt-DC-congressman vibe to lose to the mamma grizzly thing that Handel was running with.

Whatever, Barnes will have better contrasts to draw against Deal and I think he'll make a better governor anyhow


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 10, 2010, 10:10:46 PM
Half the precincts are in, and MAK is down to a 3-point lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 10:17:32 PM
Don't really see Buck loses at this point, given what's out.  GOV is anyone's game.

MN-GOV is anyone's game too.  The advantage for Dayton is that a lot of Duluth is still out and games often happen there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 10:17:56 PM


I expected Handel to pull off a Haley-lite victory here to be honest.  Never expected her to dominate like Haley, but I expected the whole corrupt-DC-congressman vibe to lose to the mamma grizzly thing that Handel was running with.

Whatever, Barnes will have better contrasts to draw against Deal and I think he'll make a better governor anyhow

Well, I hope Barnes wins, after that execrable ad Deal ran. F him!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 10:26:13 PM
MN-GOV is anyone's game too.  The advantage for Dayton is that a lot of Duluth is still out and games often happen there.

Which if so would benefit Kelliher, the DFL establishment candidate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 10:27:37 PM
It looks to me that Buck will probably win. Too many precincts are out in Larimer which Buck is winning better than 60%, and Weld, which Buck is winning by 3-1 or something. Norton is winning by small margins in some other big counties, with a clear margin in Arapahoe (sp), but eye balling it, it does not look like enough. I would guess Buck will win by about 15,000 votes maybe (could be 20,000 really). I am not calling it yet, but the odds are about 85%-90% that Buck will win, is what it looks like to me. I can't call it because of the empty precinct phenomenon. Sometimes a lot of precincts don't generate that many votes, and sometimes they do.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 10:28:25 PM
Huckabee finally managed to back a candidate who won his primary (Deal).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 10:31:38 PM
Fedele lost, but one of these things is not like the other:

()

He's also winning Fairfield County and CT-04 so far.

Top Ancestry or Race is the highest percentage of first-listed ancestry or Hispanic or Asian subgroup (which for some bizarre reasons aren't ancestries to the Census Bureau) or African-American, excluding "Other" in each town.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 10:32:39 PM
MN-GOV is anyone's game too.  The advantage for Dayton is that a lot of Duluth is still out and games often happen there.

Which if so would benefit Kelliher, the DFL establishment candidate.

However, Dayton's been kicking her butt there so far.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 10, 2010, 10:36:50 PM
CO-Sen called for Buck.

I'm not staying up for CO-Gov or MN-Gov.  Nite.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 10:38:21 PM
Re: Buck

I think everyone wins here.  Democrats win with a less palatable general election candidate, and Republicans win with someone who isn't an establishment puppet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 10:39:12 PM
Quote
CO-Sen called for Buck.

Ughh. Guess I better get on the Bennett and Barnes band wagon then.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 10, 2010, 10:40:52 PM

Yay! One less neocon creep in the Senate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 10:41:41 PM
Haven't really been tracking Colorado for a while.  Are the vote counts there still increasing, or have the vote counters all called it a night?  Seems like the rate of increase of votes has slowed to a trickle.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 10:42:51 PM
MN-GOV is anyone's game too.  The advantage for Dayton is that a lot of Duluth is still out and games often happen there.

Which if so would benefit Kelliher, the DFL establishment candidate.

However, Dayton's been kicking her butt there so far.

Dayton's running mate is from there.

But yeah that would make it good for him that much of it is still out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 10:44:19 PM
Re: Buck

I think everyone wins here.  Democrats win with a less palatable general election candidate, and Republicans win with someone who isn't an establishment puppet.

Reminds me of Lowden, really.   Someone picked out of the blue by the state party establishment, but never really had a credible case as to why, y'know, anyone should actually vote for her?

I've always been a huge fan of drawing contrasts.  Even artificial contrasts.  Me-tooism on the issues is lame.  If you're behind, come out with some anti-GOP positions, backed by polling and survey research, that grabs attention and plays to the demographics that you're trying to reach.  DO SOMETHING.  Nothing is more frustrating than 3-6 candidates in a tight race who can't find anything to disagree on.

If you agree on every single issue, well, turning the election into grassroots vs. the establishment is not gonna work for ya in this cycle.  So what are you doing?  What was the central Norton message against Buck? 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 10, 2010, 10:45:44 PM
Re: Buck

I think everyone wins here.  Democrats win with a less palatable general election candidate, and Republicans win with someone who isn't an establishment puppet.

Norton wasn't a fricken establishment puppet. Buck is the one who supports a pathway for citizenship for illegal aliens, pull out from Afghanistan, and increased spending. Whatever, as far as I'm concerned Republicans have shown they don't deserve to take back the senate by nominating Angle and Buck. The GOP also has a bigger problem in that Buck and most likely Deal winning will just contribute to Democrat attacks that the party is unwilling to nominate more female candidates. A record number of women were running for office this year, and a paltry if any increase has been shown in their nominations by Republicans.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 10:48:24 PM
Well District 50 is almost all in and Chaudhary went down hard. He didn't even break 30% and got wiped out almost everywhere.

Also in District 12 Koering, the gay Republican is down 13 points with over 80% of precincts in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 10:49:46 PM
Re: Buck

I think everyone wins here.  Democrats win with a less palatable general election candidate, and Republicans win with someone who isn't an establishment puppet.

Norton wasn't a fricken establishment puppet. Buck is the one who supports a pathway for citizenship for illegal aliens, pull out from Afghanistan, and increased spending. Whatever, as far as I'm concerned Republicans have shown they don't deserve to take back the senate by nominating Angle and Buck. The GOP also has a bigger problem in that Buck and most likely Deal winning will just contribute to Democrat attacks that the party is unwilling to nominate more female candidates. A record number of women were running for office this year, and a paltry if any increase has been shown in their nominations by Republicans.

Buck is no Angle. He's been a DA for years, and comes off very moderate. He is endorsed by the Tea Party, but he has not had many great things to say of the Tea Party. Norton seemed to move far to the right during the primary, and knowing the state, I think she is less electable.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 10, 2010, 10:49:57 PM
Re: Buck

I think everyone wins here.  Democrats win with a less palatable general election candidate, and Republicans win with someone who isn't an establishment puppet.

Norton wasn't a fricken establishment puppet. Buck is the one who supports a pathway for citizenship for illegal aliens,

That has more to do with sanity..you can't deport12 million people out of the USA, and you can't ignore them.


She said this explicitly?  What's the quote?

  
She said this explicitly?  What's the quote?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 10:51:08 PM
Re: Buck

I think everyone wins here.  Democrats win with a less palatable general election candidate, and Republicans win with someone who isn't an establishment puppet.

Norton wasn't a fricken establishment puppet. Buck is the one who supports a pathway for citizenship for illegal aliens,

That has more to do with sanity..you can't deport12 million people out of the USA, and you can't ignore them.


She said this explicitly?  What's the quote?

  
She said this explicitly?  What's the quote?


He said he doesn't want to have Afghanistan be an open commitment, though he doesn't support a public timetable.

On spending, he increased it as Weld County DA, but only because he was required to.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 10:51:30 PM
MN Dem Gov Map (2770 precincts in):

()

Anderson Kelliher in Blue, Dayton in Green, M. Entenza in Red, P. Idusogie would be in yellow.  Gray= no data.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 10:53:53 PM
Uh, MAK won Hennepin County pretty solidly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 10:55:10 PM
MN Dem Gov Map (2770 precincts in):

()

Anderson Kelliher in Blue, Dayton in Green, M. Entenza in Red, P. Idusogie would be in yellow.  Gray= no data.

The AP has Kelliher winning Hennepin and Ramsey.  Is that a mistake?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 10:55:57 PM
Actually comparing the SoS site it looks like he just picked colors at random. The two he has going for Entenza voted over 50% for Dayton.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 10:57:03 PM
MN Dem Gov Map (2770 precincts in):

()

Anderson Kelliher in Blue, Dayton in Green, M. Entenza in Red, P. Idusogie would be in yellow.  Gray= no data.

The AP has Kelliher winning Hennepin and Ramsey.  Is that a mistake?


I very quickly put that together.  I'll have to check for data integrity.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 10:57:19 PM
Kelliher's lead is down to ~4000 votes, or 1% of the vote.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 10:57:36 PM
Some maps! (not all precincts are in)

Rep Sen

()

Blue is Buck
Green is Norton
Dark Grey is Tie

Dem Sen

()

Red is Bennet
Green is Romanoff

CO-03 Rep

()

Blue is Tipton
Green is McConnell


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 10:58:20 PM
Actually comparing the SoS site it looks like he just picked colors at random. The two he has going for Entenza voted over 50% for Dayton.

I didn't pick colors at random.  I'm taking the data directly from the AP tally.  The first listed candidate gets blue, second green, third red, fourth yellow.  In theory.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 10:59:59 PM
Actually comparing the SoS site it looks like he just picked colors at random. The two he has going for Entenza voted over 50% for Dayton.

I didn't pick colors at random.  I'm taking the data directly from the AP tally.  The first listed candidate gets blue, second green, third red, fourth yellow.  In theory.

Well then, there has to be a bug, because that map does not match what I'm seeing in the AP table of results.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:00:41 PM
Or me either. And it's quite off from the Minnesota SoS site that I'm reading.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 11:02:42 PM
Actually comparing the SoS site it looks like he just picked colors at random. The two he has going for Entenza voted over 50% for Dayton.

I didn't pick colors at random.  I'm taking the data directly from the AP tally.  The first listed candidate gets blue, second green, third red, fourth yellow.  In theory.

Well then, there has to be a bug, because that map does not match what I'm seeing in the AP table of results.


Yes, it was a bad formula mismatching the counties.  This should be fixed:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:04:38 PM
Man Nobles County is weird. Always is.

Entenza has over 50% there, what? He's not from anywhere near there, he's from St. Paul.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 11:06:52 PM
Man Nobles County is weird. Always is.

Entenza has over 50% there, what? He's not from anywhere near there, he's from St. Paul.

Who knows?  It's a small county in the Sioux Falls TV market. 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: King on August 10, 2010, 11:08:53 PM
These have been some thrilling races culminating tonight in all four states.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Nhoj on August 10, 2010, 11:10:03 PM
Man Nobles County is weird. Always is.

Entenza has over 50% there, what? He's not from anywhere near there, he's from St. Paul.
I remember seeing an ad of his saying that he grew up there, and his page confirms that.
http://entenza.com/about/Meet_Matt



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sarnstrom on August 10, 2010, 11:12:09 PM
Dayon is going to overtake her very shortly now. He's surging at this point. With 83% in he's behind by 2200 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:12:38 PM
Hmmm I always knew he was born in California.

Oddly he's getting owned in the counties just to the west of it. Demographically based on the rest of the map it's very odd how strong they are for MAK...I wonder if it's because they're hyper-conservative and the few Democrats are establishment hacks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 11:12:57 PM
It looks to me like Maes is going to win. McInnis had only one thing going for him, Mesa County. In fact, looking at the counties, the vote totals look wrong. Maes should have a bigger margin, per my eye balling. Whatever.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 10, 2010, 11:14:16 PM
Dayon is going to overtake her very shortly now. He's surging at this point. With 83% in he's behind by 2200 votes.

BRTD had it right 45 minutes ago. It was only a matter of time, assuming later Duluth matched earlier Duluth.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:14:52 PM
Well that Young Republican teabagger douche I mentioned is down big with 50% in, though he got almost a third, which is kind of impressive. Though Mora isn't in yet, the town his opponent was mayor of.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 11:27:31 PM
Kelliher lead down to 1400 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 11:28:46 PM
The Colorado Republican Treasurer's race is very close, here's the map with 4270/5458    precincts in:

()

Blue is Stapleton
Green is Ament


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 11:30:12 PM
Dayon is going to overtake her very shortly now. He's surging at this point. With 83% in he's behind by 2200 votes.

BRTD had it right 45 minutes ago. It was only a matter of time, assuming later Duluth matched earlier Duluth.

Yeah, Dayton is winning almost all the counties that are still out.  (100% counted=red outline; 80+% counted=yellow outline).  Dayton is in green, MAK in blue, the other guy in red.

This was with 3515/4136 reporting in the AP count.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 11:32:02 PM
The Colorado Republican Treasurer's race is very close, here's the map with 4270/5458    precincts in:

()

Blue is Stapleton
Green is Ament

It's an east-west thing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:34:20 PM
That's an interesting map, demographic-wise...

Yeah Dayton has won. Not a single precinct in from his running mate's State Senate district.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 11:44:54 PM
Colorado Republican Governor 4329/5458 precincts in:

()

Blue is McInnis
Green is Maes


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:47:05 PM
That Young Republican teabagger prick in 8B has impressively closed the gap and up to 44%, but Mora is still out. He ain't winning, but it's amusing he ran so well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 10, 2010, 11:49:15 PM
I got back from work and just read through the thread.

Bummer about Lamont. That should be the end of his (non) career in politics. Malloy is fine though and he'll be the next Governor of Connecticut.

I'm kind of pleased with the Bennet victory. MSM will probably take it as a slap in the face of Bill Clinton, which while it probably isn't, it's still amusing on some level.

As for GA, well, the bigger of the two dirtbags has won...



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 11:52:41 PM
Funny that the Colorado races won't fit into the media's narrative. On one hand you have the establishment Bennet winning, but anti-establishment Buck winning.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 10, 2010, 11:54:08 PM
Dayton finally pulled ahead of MAK in the AP MN-D-Gov count.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Eraserhead on August 10, 2010, 11:54:41 PM
Funny that the Colorado races won't fit into the media's narrative. On one hand you have the establishment Bennet winning, but anti-establishment Buck winning.

MSM memes = epic fail.

This shouldn't be much of a surprise though... and even I actually called the correct winners in those two races!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 11:55:28 PM
Teller County's 31 precincts all came in at once just now. It gave slight boosts to Maes in the Gubernatorial race and Ament in the Treasurer's race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 10, 2010, 11:55:47 PM
Yeah, Dayton leads by a bit over 300 votes (and growing).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: xavier110 on August 10, 2010, 11:56:19 PM
I sort of didn't expect MAK to do this well, so good for her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 10, 2010, 11:58:22 PM
I'll concede that Dayton is probably the stronger candidate, based on the demographics of the map.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 10, 2010, 11:58:38 PM
It looks to me like Maes is going to win. McInnis had only one thing going for him, Mesa County. In fact, looking at the counties, the vote totals look wrong. Maes should have a bigger margin, per my eye balling. Whatever.

The Republicans are concentrated in different areas. For instance, Mesa county has more total votes than Denver county. The high Republican population counties that Maes won were by close-ish margins, while McInnis is pulling in huge margins in most of the counties of his former district.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 11, 2010, 12:13:03 AM
It looks to me like Maes is going to win. McInnis had only one thing going for him, Mesa County. In fact, looking at the counties, the vote totals look wrong. Maes should have a bigger margin, per my eye balling. Whatever.

The Republicans are concentrated in different areas. For instance, Mesa county has more total votes than Denver county. The high Republican population counties that Maes won were by close-ish margins, while McInnis is pulling in huge margins in most of the counties of his former district.

So what's left is basically suburban Denver (Arapahoe, Boulder, Douglas, Jefferson) and Colorado Springs (El Paso), where Maes is winning, versus Pueblo, where McInnis is ahead?  And there are many more precincts out in the Maes counties than Pueblo?

Maes should have this.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sarnstrom on August 11, 2010, 12:23:33 AM
The AP has called the race for Mark Dayton.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 11, 2010, 12:25:20 AM
The AP has called the race for Mark Dayton.

Maes has to be next.  He's pulling away.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: minionofmidas on August 11, 2010, 04:25:10 AM
Man Nobles County is weird. Always is.

Entenza has over 50% there, what? He's not from anywhere near there, he's from St. Paul.
It probably just wants to be in Iowa.

Which just goes to show how weird it is.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 11, 2010, 04:41:43 AM
Red = Deal
Green = Handel
Grey = Tie

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 11, 2010, 04:54:47 AM
There is a logic to the GA map, of sorts, actually.

As for MN, since they have the habit of electing the worst candidates possible, why am I not surprised - Dayton has always been a grade A idiot and so is Emmer.  ugh.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 11, 2010, 04:57:27 AM
Dayon is going to overtake her very shortly now. He's surging at this point. With 83% in he's behind by 2200 votes.

BRTD had it right 45 minutes ago. It was only a matter of time, assuming later Duluth matched earlier Duluth.

BRTD? ahem...  ;)

MN-GOV is anyone's game too.  The advantage for Dayton is that a lot of Duluth is still out and games often happen there.



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 11, 2010, 05:08:00 AM
It´s time to check through my predictions:

My predictions:

GA Runoff

Deal: 54.8%
Handel: 45.2%

Actual: Deal 50.2%, Handel 49.8%

CT Governor & Senate

Foley: 36.7%
Fedele: 35.9%
Griebel: 27.4%

Actual: Foley 42%, Fedele 39%, Griebel 19%

Malloy: 50.2%
Lamont: 49.8%

Actual: Malloy 58%, Lamont 42%

McMahon: 51.1%
Simmons: 29.7%
Schiff: 19.2%

Actual: McMahon 49%, Simmons 28%, Schiff 23%

MN Governor (Democrats)

Dayton: 38.1%
Kelliher: 34.7%
Entenza: 25.8%
Idusogie: 1.4%

Actual: Dayton 41%, Kelliher 40%, Entenza 18%, Idusogie 1%

CO Governor & Senate

Maes: 51.4%
McInnis: 48.6%

Actual: Maes 51%, McInnis 49%

Bennet: 50.7%
Romanoff: 49.3%

Actual: Bennet 54%, Romanoff 46%

Norton: 51.9%
Buck: 48.1%

Actual: Buck 52%, Norton 48%

I´m happy, too bad Norton didn´t win, it would have been 8/8.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: minionofmidas on August 11, 2010, 05:30:34 AM
Dayon is going to overtake her very shortly now. He's surging at this point. With 83% in he's behind by 2200 votes.

BRTD had it right 45 minutes ago. It was only a matter of time, assuming later Duluth matched earlier Duluth.

BRTD? ahem...  ;)

MN-GOV is anyone's game too.  The advantage for Dayton is that a lot of Duluth is still out and games often happen there.


Everybody knows you're his sock account.

There is a logic to the GA map, of sorts, actually.

As for MN, since they have the habit of electing the worst candidates possible, why am I not surprised - Dayton has always been a grade A idiot and so is Emmer.  ugh.
I don't understand the far southwest (nor Catoosa). Otherwise, certainly so. Much as one would guess, actually.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 11, 2010, 11:19:49 AM
Final maps!

Colorado Republican Senate:

()

Blue is Buck
Green is Norton

Colorado Democratic Senate:

()

Red is Bennet
Green is Romanoff

Colorado Republican Governor:

()

Green is Maes
Blue is McInnis

Colorado Republican Treasurer:

()

Blue is Stapleton
Green is Ament


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Vepres on August 11, 2010, 11:25:25 AM
Maes won, and by a large enough margin to avoid an automatic recount.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 11, 2010, 11:26:13 AM
Just to note in passing from Campaign Spot,  Maes appears to be a kook. So in one night, two kooks got nominated for the GOP: Deal and Maes. Good job GOP!

"Scott McInnis and Dan Maes battled relentlessly in an exceptionally hard-fought contest to not be the GOP gubernatorial nominee, but in the end, Maes’s suggestion that a Denver bike program represented a United Nations plot — and willingness to go on MSNBC to discuss the idea before an incredulous anchor! — just wasn’t enough when matched up against McInnis’s admission that he used part of a judge’s work for a series of essays on water rights that the gubernatorial candidate published without crediting it, a mistake he called unacceptable and inexcusable, but also unintentional. (Initially blaming the staff was a nice touch.) As you probably guessed, Maes will be an underdog against the Democratic nominee, Denver mayor Hickenlooper."


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: RI on August 11, 2010, 11:42:41 AM
Some maps I uploaded (click to go to their page):

Georgia Republican Governor:
() (https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=13&elect=4&off=5&year=2010)

Minnesota Democratic Governor:
() (https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=27&elect=1&off=5&year=2010)

Minnesota Independece Governor:
() (https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?f=0&fips=27&elect=5&off=5&year=2010)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 11, 2010, 12:08:50 PM
Re: Buck

I think everyone wins here.  Democrats win with a less palatable general election candidate, and Republicans win with someone who isn't an establishment puppet.

Norton wasn't a fricken establishment puppet. Buck is the one who supports a pathway for citizenship for illegal aliens,

That has more to do with sanity..you can't deport12 million people out of the USA, and you can't ignore them.

Subjective opinion. I think its insane to reward law breaking. The fact is you can through a varity of methods, you just don't want to.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 11, 2010, 01:16:57 PM
So I guess I owe you some updated Connecticut maps.  No results are in at all from Berlin or Union on both party primaries, Sherman in the Democratic primaries and Bethel in the Republican primaries.  New Haven is only about half in.  Bridgeport and a few other towns are also missing precincts.

All maps use the Atlas 100% color scale, with the first AP-listed candidate in blue, second green, third red, fourth yellow, etc. if necessary:

Starting with CT-Gov-D:
()

Malloy in blue, Lamont in Green.  Lamont loses almost everywhere.

Now, CT-Gov-R:

()

Foley in blue, Fedele in green, Griebel in red.  Foley wins much of the state, generally except some towns in Fairfield and New Haven counties, some of which have heavy Italian-American populations.  Griebel won a few towns in Northern Hartford County - is he from there?

Finally, CT-Sen-R:

()

A very clear pattern here.  Simmons (in red) wins his old CD, especially the easternmost portion, where he lives.  Simmons took over 70% of the vote in some SE Connecticut towns.  McMahon (in blue) wins the rest of the state, except Salisbury on the NY/Mass line, which went to Schiff (in green).  The island of gray in Simmons' sea of red, Griswold, was an exact tie.

More to come, including CT-CD-R maps and perhaps some turnout and thematic maps.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 11, 2010, 01:18:18 PM
There is a logic to the GA map, of sorts, actually.


Cities and suburbs vs. rural GA?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 11, 2010, 01:36:47 PM
In case anyone didn't know, Karen Handel has conceded from the race and will not be requesting a recount. She has also warmly endorsed Nathan Deal. I suppose it's for the good of the party, since Deal stated he wouldn't endorse her. It's all too bad. :(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Bacon King on August 11, 2010, 01:39:52 PM
Actually, what the Georgia gov map almost looks like at a glance is "McCain + Romney = Handel" and "Huckabee = Deal", with a couple obvious exceptions. Of course, don't read into this that Huckabee's endorsement meant anything at all, because it definitely didn't.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 11, 2010, 01:42:56 PM
The CT-CD Republican primaries.

CT-01:

()

CT-01 was a bloodbath.  Pending results from Berlin, Brickley (in blue) won 60-40, and took all towns save a few on the fringes of the oddly-shaped district.  Zydanowicz (in green) took Bristol by 17 votes and New Hartford by 2 votes.

CT-02:

()

Peckinpaugh (in red) racked up big margins in the western part of the district, especially Middlesex County.   Novak (in blue) was competitive everywhere else, but didn't win any county.  Dubitsky (in green) won 4 random towns, in all but Chaplin, not by much.  Windham was an exact tie.  Results from Union are missing.

CT-04:

()

Not much to say here.  Debicella (in blue) won big, taking every town but Wilton, which Merkle (in green) won handily, and Bridgeport, where Torres (in red) won - but practially nobody voted in the Republican primary.  

Note - according to the AP count, for some odd reason, there were about 10x more votes for CT-Gov-R in Bridgeport than CT-Sen-R or CT-04-R.  Must be a typo somewhere.

Finally, CT-05:

()

A true three-way race.  Caligiuri (in blue) won by racking up the vote in the New Haven County part of the district.  Bernier (in green) won much of the rest.  Greenberg (in red) took Danbury and did best in the five Fairfield County towns that have reported (Bethel is missing).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 11, 2010, 04:08:49 PM
Roy Barnes 2010!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 11, 2010, 05:49:45 PM
Updated OP with next week's primaries, such as they are.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Sam Spade on August 11, 2010, 06:17:09 PM
Actually, what the Georgia gov map almost looks like at a glance is "McCain + Romney = Handel" and "Huckabee = Deal", with a couple obvious exceptions. Of course, don't read into this that Huckabee's endorsement meant anything at all, because it definitely didn't.

That's not what I'm seeing.  The Southern 2/3rds of the Georgia map (and especially rural areas) looks an awful lot like the racial breakdown of the state, with Handel doing better in areas with more blacks and Deal in areas with more whites.  The correlation is not *that* striking (or dispositive of anything), but there is something going on, I suspect.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 11, 2010, 09:30:38 PM
I was going to muse about why Entenza won the majority black precincts in Minneapolis until I remembered that his running mate is black.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: minionofmidas on August 12, 2010, 04:19:17 AM
Actually, what the Georgia gov map almost looks like at a glance is "McCain + Romney = Handel" and "Huckabee = Deal", with a couple obvious exceptions. Of course, don't read into this that Huckabee's endorsement meant anything at all, because it definitely didn't.
Yeah, it's just that Deal appeals to Huckabee for the same reason that they appeal to the same kind of voters. Real (esp. White) Georgia vs Fake (esp. White) Georgia if you ask me. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: Torie on August 12, 2010, 08:45:03 AM
Actually, what the Georgia gov map almost looks like at a glance is "McCain + Romney = Handel" and "Huckabee = Deal", with a couple obvious exceptions. Of course, don't read into this that Huckabee's endorsement meant anything at all, because it definitely didn't.

That's not what I'm seeing.  The Southern 2/3rds of the Georgia map (and especially rural areas) looks an awful lot like the racial breakdown of the state, with Handel doing better in areas with more blacks and Deal in areas with more whites.  The correlation is not *that* striking (or dispositive of anything), but there is something going on, I suspect.

Assuming Deal is viewed as the more troglodytic of the two (that gay bashing commercial still has me really freaked out), it is interesting to ponder if whites these days who rub shoulders a lot with blacks are now a bit less bigoted than whites who do not down in what used to be the racist belt. That would be a bit surprising, but what else would explain the pattern, if it is a real pattern, as opposed to a class pattern, or a regional one (Deal carrying the counties in the north can be explained be regionalism)?  It might be interesting to see if upper middle class precincts voted differently from those which are not, to a substantial degree.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: minionofmidas on August 12, 2010, 08:48:39 AM
The heavily Black counties of Southwest Georgia probably don't have all that many people voting in the R primary. Ie, it's probably just a class thing. (And it need not be specifically about gays. Just about the good ole folks back home vs all these incomers who're trying to take over the state.)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 12, 2010, 08:56:02 AM
The heavily Black counties of Southwest Georgia probably don't have all that many people voting in the R primary. Ie, it's probably just a class thing. (And it need not be specifically about gays. Just about the good ole folks back home vs all these incomers who're trying to take over the state.)

Handel was viewed as some kind of outsider? 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: minionofmidas on August 12, 2010, 08:59:40 AM
The heavily Black counties of Southwest Georgia probably don't have all that many people voting in the R primary. Ie, it's probably just a class thing. (And it need not be specifically about gays. Just about the good ole folks back home vs all these incomers who're trying to take over the state.)

Handel was viewed as some kind of outsider?  
Deal was the good old boy, traditional candidate. I mean, the guy's been in Congress these last twenty years and was a Democrat til 95. And had pork issues. While Handel had Tea Party support, and that's a suburban, rootless, evil phenomenon.
I don't know when Handel first moved to Atlanta, but it must have been sometime between 1992 and 2002, as an adult. She's from the Beltway originally.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 12, 2010, 09:06:02 AM
The heavily Black counties of Southwest Georgia probably don't have all that many people voting in the R primary. Ie, it's probably just a class thing. (And it need not be specifically about gays. Just about the good ole folks back home vs all these incomers who're trying to take over the state.)

Handel was viewed as some kind of outsider?  
Deal was the good old boy, traditional candidate. I mean, the guy's been in Congress these last twenty years and was a Democrat til 95. And had pork issues. While Handel had Tea Party support, and that's a suburban, rootless, evil phenomenon.
I don't know when Handel first moved to Atlanta, but it must have been sometime between 1992 and 2002, as an adult. She's from the Beltway originally.

Sounds reasonable. I did not know Handel's bio. Thanks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/10 - CO, CT, GA runoff, MN) - See OP for i
Post by: cinyc on August 12, 2010, 01:02:20 PM
Actually, what the Georgia gov map almost looks like at a glance is "McCain + Romney = Handel" and "Huckabee = Deal", with a couple obvious exceptions. Of course, don't read into this that Huckabee's endorsement meant anything at all, because it definitely didn't.

That's not what I'm seeing.  The Southern 2/3rds of the Georgia map (and especially rural areas) looks an awful lot like the racial breakdown of the state, with Handel doing better in areas with more blacks and Deal in areas with more whites.  The correlation is not *that* striking (or dispositive of anything), but there is something going on, I suspect.

Assuming Deal is viewed as the more troglodytic of the two (that gay bashing commercial still has me really freaked out), it is interesting to ponder if whites these days who rub shoulders a lot with blacks are now a bit less bigoted than whites who do not down in what used to be the racist belt. That would be a bit surprising, but what else would explain the pattern, if it is a real pattern, as opposed to a class pattern, or a regional one (Deal carrying the counties in the north can be explained be regionalism)?  It might be interesting to see if upper middle class precincts voted differently from those which are not, to a substantial degree.

Well, the correlation between county Non-Hispanic white percentage and Deal vote percentage is very weak - the r squared is only .11.  Both won counties that are heavily non-white, including in Southern Georgia.  Both won white counties, too.  Here's a map (Deal vote in blue; Handel in green; Counties with <65% whites outlined in red).  Non-Hispanic white percentage is based on 2009 census estimates.  It's NOT the voting age population number.

()

The bigger distinction I see is urban/suburban versus rural.  Handel won the counties that include Atlanta and most of its suburbs, Macon and its main suburbs, Augusta, Savannah, Brunswick, Valdosta, Albany, Columbus and even suburban Chattanooga.  Deal won most of the rest of the state.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 12, 2010, 01:54:34 PM
Great map cinyc. There are enough anomalies to the urban versus rural bit however from your map, that I strongly suspect it is more class based. Notice that Handel won Forsyth, while losing Gwinnett. The proof in the pudding would be to look at at sampling of higher income precincts across the state and see how they voted, and then look at white working or lower middle class precincts in more urban areas and see how they voted, or as compared to the county at large for that matter, since most of the electorate in the GOP primary would be white. It might be interesting to see how the bourgeoisie precincts of Savannah voted. I know where those are if I saw a precinct map. For some reason, I have gotten to know Savannah pretty well - much better than that Atlanta metro region. I hate Atlanta, and its outlying areas even more, and hate most of all its airport.

You really do great maps Cinyc (with all of that analytical stuff you do that is reflected therein, coming up as you do with interesting hypotheses to test); I know they take a lot of work, and you really don't get thanked for it the way you should. So I am pleased to try to try to make some amends on that, by expressing my thanks, and how much I enjoy your maps.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 12, 2010, 01:56:04 PM
I'm tending to agree more with you, Torie.  What's odd is the most of Forsyth is in Deal's district, whereas Gwinnett isn't.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 12, 2010, 02:59:53 PM
I'm tending to agree more with you, Torie.  What's odd is the most of Forsyth is in Deal's district, whereas Gwinnett isn't.

Too much is being made of the Forsyth/Gwinnett divide.  Deal won Gwinnett 50.7%-49.3%.  Deal lost Forsyth 49.4%-50.6%.

Great map cinyc. There are enough anomalies to the urban versus rural bit however from your map, that I strongly suspect it is more class based. Notice that Handel won Forsyth, while losing Gwinnett. The proof in the pudding would be to look at at sampling of higher income precincts across the state and see how they voted, and then look at white working or lower middle class precincts in more urban areas and see how they voted, or as compared to the county at large for that matter, since most of the electorate in the GOP primary would be white. It might be interesting to see how the bourgeoisie precincts of Savannah voted. I know where those are if I saw a precinct map. For some reason, I have gotten to know Savannah pretty well - much better than that Atlanta metro region. I hate Atlanta, and its outlying areas even more, and hate most of all its airport.

You really do great maps Cinyc (with all of that analytical stuff you do that is reflected therein, coming up as you do with interesting hypotheses to test); I know they take a lot of work, and you really don't get thanked for it the way you should. So I am pleased to try to try to make some amends on that, by expressing my thanks, and how much I enjoy your maps.

Thanks for the kind words.

I don't have the data to do precinct level analysis - and perhaps never will because of ever-shifting precinct boundaries.   Plus, more census data is available at aggregate levels like county and town than lower levels like voting precinct or block, which is necessary to aggregate into precinct-level data.  The economic data in particular isn't necessarily there unless precinct boundaries follow block groups.

What I can tell you based on quick calculations is this:  The correlation coefficient for Deal% vs. county-level Median Household Income is very weak - about -.09 (r squared .008).   The correlation coefficient for other county-level things is a bit higher, but none that I've tested so far higher than county non-Hispanic white percentage:

CategoryCorrel CoeffR Squared
% Non-Hispanic White (2009).34.11
% Ancestry = "American".31.1
County GA PVI (Dem>0, Rep<0)-.31.1
% Lived out-of-state in 1995-.24.06
County Inside a Metro Area?-.24.06
% Bachelor's Degree or higher-.21.05
% Born in Georgia.21.05
Median Household Income-.09.008
% Below Poverty Level-.05.002

Note: I didn't do any fancy multiple regression.  I just had Excel calculate correlation coefficients.  All data except the Non-Hispanic White percentage is from the 2000 Census, which is getting old.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 12, 2010, 03:53:02 PM
Do we have a final map of the CT Senate primary?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 12, 2010, 04:34:56 PM
Do we have a final map of the CT Senate primary?

We're still missing a precinct in Bridgeport (and I still think the vote tally there is wrong - no way only 64 Republicans voted in the Republican Senate primary and nearly 500 in the Republican Gubernatorial primary).  McMahon in blue, Simmons red, Schiff Green.  There was a tie in the town of Griswold:

()

And, assuming I haven't screwed up any formuals in the spreadsheet, relative turnout by town in the Senate primary.  Overall Republican turnout was just under 30%:

()

I'm using the Atlas margin scale for this map.  >40% is the darkest red.  Every other red shade is in 5 point increments.   Bridgeport is missing - it's not 100% in, so no turnout percentage was calculated.

Turnout percent is of percentage of active Republicans in 2009, the last date on which the CT SoS released data in the days immediately before the election.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: tpfkaw on August 12, 2010, 04:37:39 PM

Thanks!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 13, 2010, 08:38:05 PM
Does anybody know if there will be television coverage of the August 24 primaries?  That seems like of the last two big primary days before we fully enter the general campaign. (September 14 being the very last big day).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 13, 2010, 08:57:04 PM
Why would you need television coverage when you have the Atlas forum? Sam Spade is a better predicator than those fancy-talkin' picture box folks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 13, 2010, 08:59:10 PM
Why would you need television coverage when you have the Atlas forum? Sam Spade is a better predicator than those fancy-talkin' picture box folks.

Am I just chopped liver ahole?  :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 13, 2010, 09:01:10 PM
I don't remember you predicting anything Toriesters.  Predict something for me right now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 13, 2010, 09:07:00 PM
Why would you need television coverage when you have the Atlas forum? Sam Spade is a better predicator than those fancy-talkin' picture box folks.

Am I just chopped liver ahole?  :P

Well, if the shoe fits...  kidding. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 13, 2010, 09:08:25 PM
Why would you need television coverage when you have the Atlas forum? Sam Spade is a better predicator than those fancy-talkin' picture box folks.

Because I like those fancy-talkin' picture box folks.  I like the colors and the colorful commentary!!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 13, 2010, 09:08:43 PM
I don't remember you predicting anything Toriesters.  Predict something for me right now.

I predict all kinds of things on election night. Isn't that what was the context here?  I used to predict what would happen in November race by race for Congress (Sam will tell you, and I did pretty well), but Sam "learned" so much from me, that I decided to just leave it all to him. :P

I did make one prediction though for this cycle. The GOP has a 60% chance of taking over the House, based on my gut. We shall see. Oh, and that Whitman would beat Brown, and by a comfortable margin. You can write that down. Cheers buddy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 13, 2010, 09:47:26 PM
Why would you need television coverage when you have the Atlas forum? Sam Spade is a better predicator than those fancy-talkin' picture box folks.

You're not too bad either (mutual admiration society at work :) )

Torie is very good at predicting races as the votes come in based on past results.  Really better than me, actually, in certain places.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 14, 2010, 10:22:49 PM
Just bumping this up to note that Benishek ended up having a 15-vote win in the final tally and Allen decided to concede and not ask for a recount.

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/eyeon2010/2010/08/allen-benishek-mcdowell-stupak.html


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 15, 2010, 12:58:51 PM
Benishek was the teabagger right?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 15, 2010, 01:49:21 PM

Yes. It sucks. But there are being a string of disappointments as seen through the lens of this particular Pubbie.  All of this positive reinforcement of the nutter wing is discouraging and demoralizing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 15, 2010, 02:30:18 PM

Yes. It sucks. But there are being a string of disappointments as seen through the lens of this particular Pubbie.  All of this positive reinforcement of the nutter wing is discouraging and demoralizing.

From what I've read (linked a while back), due to geography, he'll probably make the better Republican candidate in November, though.  Allen was a troll (from under the bridge on the main part of Michigan).  Benishek is a Yooper from the Western UP.  Yoopers vote for other Yoopers, but aren't as likely to vote for a troll.  MI-01 trolls are more Republican and will vote for Yoopers. 

Stupak is a Yooper from the Western UP on the Wisconsin border.  The Democrat nominee in this race is a Yooper from the Sault Ste. Marie area.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Holmes on August 15, 2010, 03:07:41 PM
cinyc, as someone who knows little to nothing about Michigan (and especially the UP), I have no idea what you just said. Yooper? Troll?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Republic on August 15, 2010, 03:16:22 PM
People from the UP ("Yoo Pee") are nicknamed Yoopers.  And cinyc explained the meaning of 'trolls' in this context already.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 15, 2010, 03:50:36 PM
cinyc, as someone who knows little to nothing about Michigan (and especially the UP), I have no idea what you just said. Yooper? Troll?

The Upper Peninsula is the part of Michigan that is attached to Wisconsin and is separated from the rest of Michigan - which Michigan got as a consolation prize for ceding the Toledo area to Ohio.  There's a bridge that separates the Upper Peninsula of Michigan from the mainland called the Mackinac Bridge.   People from the Upper Peninsula are called "Yoopers".  They call the mainlanders in MI-01 "trolls", since they live under the bridge, geographically speaking.

Allen is from the mainland part of the district.  Benishek is from the Western UP (like the current incumbent, Stupak).  The Democratic nominee is from the Eastern UP and represents both the Eastern UP and parts of mainland Northern Michigan at the state level.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 07:15:56 AM
Results links for tonight's primaries: WA (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/WA_Page_0817.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | WY (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/WY_Page_0817.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)

Wyoming closes at 9 ET, while Washington closes at 11. Of course, based on the past performance of Washington's vote-by-mail system, it'll probably take forever to get the votes counted.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Nym90 on August 17, 2010, 08:01:48 AM

Yes. It sucks. But there are being a string of disappointments as seen through the lens of this particular Pubbie.  All of this positive reinforcement of the nutter wing is discouraging and demoralizing.

From what I've read (linked a while back), due to geography, he'll probably make the better Republican candidate in November, though.  Allen was a troll (from under the bridge on the main part of Michigan).  Benishek is a Yooper from the Western UP.  Yoopers vote for other Yoopers, but aren't as likely to vote for a troll.  MI-01 trolls are more Republican and will vote for Yoopers. 

Stupak is a Yooper from the Western UP on the Wisconsin border.  The Democrat nominee in this race is a Yooper from the Sault Ste. Marie area.

To a certain extent that's true, yes, although the majority of the district's population is actually in the LP, and thus closer to and more familiar with McDowell than Benishek.

Benishek is far more conservative. I guess it's up to the individual to decide whether the extra base enthusiasm that inspires makes up for the swing voters it scares away.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 17, 2010, 11:13:06 AM
As Johnny mentioned, around 1/3 of the ballots in Washington won't even arrive until late tonight or tomorrow. Don't expect complete results until the end of the week.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 03:38:12 PM
This is definitely in the just because I can category:

Wyoming PVI by County:
()

Wyoming PVI by Wyoming House District:
()

City HD close-ups:

Cheyenne:
()

Casper:
()

Laramie:
()

Green River-Rock Springs:
()

Lander-Riverton:
()

Some House Districts are a bit of an estimate because about 27 precincts are in two WY House Districts.  The vote was allocated straight-line by percentage of the vote in each House race.

Note this is Wyoming PVI, not US PVI - which is why more than just Teton (and perhaps Albany) counties are red.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Hash on August 17, 2010, 06:17:50 PM
What's with that very red district in Fremont County outside of Lander?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SPC on August 17, 2010, 06:52:32 PM
If by some fluke Murray manages to get a majority, does that mean there won't be a general election in November?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 08:00:38 PM
No, the top two finishers go on to November regardless.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 17, 2010, 08:19:42 PM
What's with that very red district in Fremont County outside of Lander?

Looks like it includes the Wind River Indian Reservation... Don't forget that house districts have less than 10,000 people in WY!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 08:20:43 PM
What's with that very red district in Fremont County outside of Lander?

Wind River Indian Reservation.  Riverton (the unlabled gray outlined city in the light blue HD to the north) is technically on the reservation, but overwhelmingly white.  Lander is not on the reservation and is also very white.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 08:41:15 PM
Wyoming closed at 9 Eastern.  Results are slowly trickling in.  2/3rds of Sweetwater came in in the D Gov and R US House races.  Gosar is leading in the Dem Gov race.  The incumbent Lummis is winning the US Rep primary.  Nothing significant in the Rep Gov race, last I checked.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 17, 2010, 08:43:20 PM
WY gov. primaries:

Dem:
Gosar 54%
Petersen 34%

GOP:
Micheli 39%
Mead 29%
Meyer 19%
Simpson 11%

That's with only 5% reporting though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 08:45:22 PM
I am officially proud of my county. Overwhelming Micheli majority ftw. :D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 08:46:06 PM
Interesting, I was expecting Leslie Petersen to be a shoo-in for the Democrats. For whatever that's worth.

The incumbent Education Superintendent is currently losing 43-26. Wonder why.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 08:49:42 PM
The incumbent Education Superintendent is currently losing 43-26. Wonder why.

His website is basically a launchpad for GAWD BLESS 'MURICAH! That and the public school system has sucked a big testicle soufflé under him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 17, 2010, 08:54:07 PM
my light reading of the situation in Wyoming was that Micheli was the one candidate that might not consolidate absolute GOP support after a primary, a pattern that has haunted Wyoming Republican candidates in the past [Democrats have done really well at this seat int he last 25 years IIRC].

In this year, it probs won't matter, but that's all I know


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 08:59:06 PM
my light reading of the situation in Wyoming was that Micheli was the one candidate that might not consolidate absolute GOP support after a primary, a pattern that has haunted Wyoming Republican candidates in the past [Democrats have done really well at this seat int he last 25 years IIRC].

In this year, it probs won't matter, but that's all I know

He'd only chase away the neocon types. Basically, Meyer's base.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 09:02:05 PM
Hmm, it looks like Petersen is winning in all the non-Sweetwater (dammit, now I've got an obscure indie-rock song stuck in my head) counties. So I guess it's a little premature to forecast an upset.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 09:02:18 PM
WY Gov D (Gosar blue, Petersen green)
()

WY Gov R (Mead blue, Myer green, Micheli red)
()

With 33/486 in.  It's probably a bit old now, though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 09:05:34 PM
Yeah, it just bumped up to 61 precincts in. Meyer by a handful of votes over Mead and Micheli.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Lunar on August 17, 2010, 09:08:44 PM
my light reading of the situation in Wyoming was that Micheli was the one candidate that might not consolidate absolute GOP support after a primary, a pattern that has haunted Wyoming Republican candidates in the past [Democrats have done really well at this seat int he last 25 years IIRC].

In this year, it probs won't matter, but that's all I know

He'd only chase away the neocon types. Basically, Meyer's base.

Why is being a neocon, or lack thereof, remotely relevant to being governor of one of possibly the least populous, most internationally isolated states in the United States?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 09:10:50 PM
64/486 in:
WY Gov D (Gosar blue, Petersen green):
()

WY Gov R  (Mead blue, Myer green, Micheli red):
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 17, 2010, 09:12:32 PM
Yeah, it just bumped up to 61 precincts in. Meyer by a handful of votes over Mead and Micheli.

Yep.  Meyer 30%, Mead 29%, Micheli 28%.  Essentially, a 3-way tie, but that's still with less than 15% of precincts reporting.

EDIT: And just as I was posting, Mead took the lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 09:17:22 PM
Peterson is killing in Teton.  The Republican map continues to get more colorful:
 
WY Gov D:
()

WY Gov R:
()

*84/486 reporting


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 09:20:10 PM
Assuming my spreadsheet isn't buggy, in the first full county in, Washakie, Democratic Gov turnout is running about 36% of registered Democrats as of early August.  Republican Gov turnout is running about double that - 65%.  So 2:1.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 09:37:30 PM
With about 30% in, Peterson leads by 4 and Mead by 0.2 points over Myer.

WY Dem Gov Gosar blue, Petersen green):
()

WY Gov R (Mead blue, Myer green, Micheli red):
()

(Platte is an exact Mead-Myer tie, but is colored blue because he's listed first).

Percent of each county reporting (darker=more)
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 09:51:32 PM
Meyer snuck back into the lead with 202/468.  The Republican map looks even more colorful, with Simpson leading in Park.  Petersen's lead is more or less unchanged.

()

Four counties are now fully in (Sublette, Platte, Sweetwater and Washakie).  So far, Democratic turnout is at 46%.  Republican turnout at 65%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 17, 2010, 09:58:12 PM
Meyer is now less than 1% behind Mead


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:01:02 PM

Petersen is up by 7 and probably has it.  Meyer versus Mead should be interesting.  The Republican map looks like a rainbow.   Natrona (Casper) is now all in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:03:02 PM
... and now Micheli takes the lead.  ALL Republicans are under 30%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 10:03:38 PM
Here's the official SOS site for Washington. (http://vote.wa.gov/Elections/WEI/Results.aspx?RaceTypeCode=O&JurisdictionTypeID=1&ElectionID=36&ViewMode=Results)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 17, 2010, 10:08:34 PM
With only ~15,000 votes in:

Murray 45%
Rossi 35%
Didier 13%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:08:39 PM
Republican map 285/486:

()

The pattern is clear - Micheli's winning the SW corner, Simpson, Park County, Mead, Teton County and some rural counties, and Meyer the rest - especially the counties containing Cheyenne and Casper.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 17, 2010, 10:09:30 PM
Wow Rossi might come in first in the primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:11:50 PM
Wow Rossi might come in first in the primary.

Even ahead of M. The Mover and Goodspaceguy?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 10:18:15 PM
I love how AP's still only reporting three precinct in Uinta - a county with eleven precincts.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Sam Spade on August 17, 2010, 10:20:24 PM
WA-3 is a mess, but for now its Herrera, then Heck.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 10:20:33 PM
After a little eyeballing, it looks like Murray's doing about 5-10 points worse than her 2004 performance (55%). If this were to continue at this rate, she'd end up at about 45-48% of the vote.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:22:04 PM
I love how AP's still only reporting three precinct in Uinta - a county with eleven precincts.

Well, even the county's website is only up to 5 of 11.   The AP will catch up.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CultureKing on August 17, 2010, 10:22:49 PM
Warning!:
Remember that generally Washington results come quickly from rural areas, then the puget sound area and often times Seattle comes last (often by days, which is maddening). Perhaps it is because many dems are last minute voters...

oh and I love that this is the message from the Sec of State's website, right as polls close:
VOTE.WA.GOV is currently down for system maintenance and should be available shortly. Please check back later.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 17, 2010, 10:23:17 PM
After a little eyeballing, it looks like Murray's doing about 5-10 points worse than her 2004 performance (55%). If this were to continue at this rate, she'd end up at about 45-48% of the vote.

Comparing it to a general? Interesting. She got ~48% in the 1998 primary and ended up with about ~58% in the general.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 17, 2010, 10:24:37 PM
They might as well call the WY-Dem race for Petersen.  71%, and he leads by 8 points.  Gosar has no chance.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 17, 2010, 10:26:39 PM
Also, the Palin magic touch continues. Didier is winning... Adams County.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:27:10 PM
They might as well call the WY-Dem race for Petersen.  71%, and he leads by 8 points.  Gosar has no chance.


Unless Gosar is from Gillette, Rawlins or Buffalo, yes, he's toast.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CultureKing on August 17, 2010, 10:27:20 PM
Currently Cowlitz and Lewis are the two counties reporting out of WA-03. Castillo is getting mauled by Herrera in Cowlitz... Also explains Heck's low numbers.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 17, 2010, 10:28:01 PM
Currently Cowlitz and Lewis are the two counties reporting out of WA-03. Castillo is getting mauled by Herrera in Cowlitz... Also explains Heck's low numbers.

Crist is doing surprisingly well in Cowlitz at 16%, and Heck is under 30%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CultureKing on August 17, 2010, 10:31:29 PM
Currently Cowlitz and Lewis are the two counties reporting out of WA-03. Castillo is getting mauled by Herrera in Cowlitz... Also explains Heck's low numbers.

Crist is doing surprisingly well in Cowlitz at 16%, and Heck is under 30%.

Interesting, I really though Crist would fall on her face all over the district... Not sure if it is necessarily bad news for Heck though because I am willing to bet almost all of those voters will hold their noses and vote for him in the general. The odd part is that Herrera is beating Heck there currently eventhough the republican vote is so divided (though once again Castillo is not doing well at all down there).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 17, 2010, 10:34:16 PM
Mead now leads Meyer by a mere 24 votes (!).  Micheli trails them both by about 1600 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CultureKing on August 17, 2010, 10:36:43 PM
Rumbaugh is officially done by the way, he is not even winning King county. Sad to see that this one wasn't even close...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:37:34 PM
With 386/486 (Mead blue, Meyer green, Micheli red, Simpson yellow):
()

Mead +24 votes.  Gillette (Campbell County) is probably going to decide this.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:39:29 PM
...now, Meyer +50 votes....


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CultureKing on August 17, 2010, 10:41:29 PM
By the way isn't Crist from Olympia? I feel like she would be strongest there, amazing that she is doing so well, over 10%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: xavier110 on August 17, 2010, 10:42:07 PM
The Republicans set Murray's 'expectation' mark at 45%. The Dems set Rossi's at his gubernatorial 46% in 2008, which is just absurd...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 17, 2010, 10:42:36 PM
If Murray had gotten 50% plus, would she have won the general election by default since the primary system is based off of run-offs?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 17, 2010, 10:47:40 PM
If Murray had gotten 50% plus, would she have won the general election by default since the primary system is based off of run-offs?

No. This question has been asked several times.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CultureKing on August 17, 2010, 10:52:26 PM
Update:
Murray: 48.88%
Rossi: 33.40%
Didier: 9.82%
Akers: 2.17%

Pretty good for Murray at the moment, though this is only with about 600,000 votes in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 10:57:17 PM
Update:
Murray: 48.88%
Rossi: 33.40%
Didier: 9.82%
Akers: 2.17%

Pretty good for Murray at the moment, though this is only with about 600,000 votes in.

King County is disproportionately represented in the results in so far.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 17, 2010, 11:02:41 PM
Hedrick is beating Castillo in WA-3 now, lol. Ouch...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 17, 2010, 11:04:26 PM
They might as well call the WY-Dem race for Petersen.  71%, and he leads by 8 points.  Gosar has no chance.

Leslie Petersen is a "she" ... ;D

http://www.peopleforpetersen.com/Biography.aspx


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 17, 2010, 11:04:56 PM
Hedrick is beating Castillo in WA-3 now, lol. Ouch...

I thought Castillo would have done much better.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CultureKing on August 17, 2010, 11:08:06 PM
Hedrick is beating Castillo in WA-3 now, lol. Ouch...

I thought Castillo would have done much better.

I think his campaign was really lackluster. Personally though I would rather have him than Herrera for the simple reason that he can come up with his own policy ideas where as Herrera is something of an empty suit (at least at this point).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Badger on August 17, 2010, 11:09:07 PM
This is definitely in the just because I can category:

Wyoming PVI by County:
()

Wyoming PVI by Wyoming House District:
()

City HD close-ups:

Cheyenne:
()

Casper:
()

Laramie:
()

Green River-Rock Springs:
()

Lander-Riverton:
()

Some House Districts are a bit of an estimate because about 27 precincts are in two WY House Districts.  The vote was allocated straight-line by percentage of the vote in each House race.

Note this is Wyoming PVI, not US PVI - which is why more than just Teton (and perhaps Albany) counties are red.  

These maps are AWESOME, cynic!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 17, 2010, 11:10:28 PM
Ugh Wyoming looks like it is heading for a repeat of Georgia :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 11:11:25 PM
Ugh Wyoming looks like it is heading for a repeat of Georgia :P

Mead isn't bad at all. He's my second pref. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 11:15:13 PM
Mead took Campbell - and should take the election  (Mead blue, Meyer green, Micheli red, Simpson yellow):

()

Mead up by 1300 votes with 9 precincts left (5 in Park County; 4 in Laramie County).

The turnout percentages more or less held, pending completion of the count in the last 2 counties - Democratic turnout in the Gov race at 36% of the last released registered Democrat numbers; Republican turnout in the Gov race at 66% of registered Republicans.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 17, 2010, 11:19:42 PM
Ugh Wyoming looks like it is heading for a repeat of Georgia :P

Mead isn't bad at all. He's my second pref. :P

Perhaps you're right. Very few people can top being as bad as Nathan Deal.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Torie on August 17, 2010, 11:20:36 PM
Good showing by Murray I suspect, even if King is overrepresented. This not much value added dumb incumbent, will be hard to put away I suspect. Just why Washingtonians (Seattle is probably the least "dumb" metro area in the US), want a dumb to represent them, escapes me, but they do. Why don't they elect a Left smart?  Just asking.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 11:20:53 PM
Ugh Wyoming looks like it is heading for a repeat of Georgia :P

Mead isn't bad at all. He's my second pref. :P

Perhaps you're right. Very few people can top being as bad as Nathan Deal.

If Mead slaughtered the competition in Teton County (a.k.a. Jackson Hole a.k.a. resort towns), he can't be all that bad.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 17, 2010, 11:22:39 PM
Good showing by Murray I suspect, even if King is overrepresented. This not much value added dumb incumbent, will be hard to put away I suspect. Just why Washingtonians (Seattle is probably the least "dumb" metro area in the US), want a dumb to represent them, escapes me, but they do. Why don't they elect a Left smart?  Just asking.

Don't you talk like that about my Pattykins!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 17, 2010, 11:24:12 PM
They might as well call the WY-Dem race for Petersen.  71%, and he leads by 8 points.  Gosar has no chance.

Leslie Petersen is a "she" ... ;D

http://www.peopleforpetersen.com/Biography.aspx

Oops.  :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 17, 2010, 11:25:13 PM
Ugh Wyoming looks like it is heading for a repeat of Georgia :P

Mead isn't bad at all. He's my second pref. :P

Perhaps you're right. Very few people can top being as bad as Nathan Deal.

If Mead slaughtered the competition in Teton County (a.k.a. Jackson Hole a.k.a. resort towns), he can't be all that bad.

He's not. I'm just sad that Meyer is likely to lose, and in a close contest too like Georgia. Not saying Mead is anywhere on the same level as Deal. He is a good candidate, just not the one I wanted to win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 11:27:33 PM
Ugh Wyoming looks like it is heading for a repeat of Georgia :P

Mead isn't bad at all. He's my second pref. :P

Perhaps you're right. Very few people can top being as bad as Nathan Deal.

If Mead slaughtered the competition in Teton County (a.k.a. Jackson Hole a.k.a. resort towns), he can't be all that bad.

He's not. I'm just sad that Meyer is likely to lose, and in a close contest too like Georgia. Not saying Mead is anywhere on the same level as Deal. He is a good candidate, just not the one I wanted to win.

Fair enough. I wanted Micheli to win, myself, but good enough is good enough. ;)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 17, 2010, 11:40:28 PM
Seems like 2 other Palin endorsements didn´t help (Didier in WA, Meyer in WY).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 11:41:25 PM
I have no idea why AP hasn't called WYGOV yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 11:48:11 PM
WA Senate Primary Map by County (Murray red, Rossi blue, Didier green):

()

Your typical east-west divide.

This was with 3382/6000 reporting.  I threw this together quickly and will double check data integrity.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 17, 2010, 11:50:26 PM
WA Senate Primary Map by County (Murray red, Rossi blue, Didier green):

()

Your typical east-west divide.

This was with 3382/6000 reporting.  I threw this together quickly and will double check data integrity.

Murray is winning Pacific county with 50%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 11:51:21 PM
I have no idea why AP hasn't called WYGOV yet.

They should now.  With 486/486 reporting, Mead wins by 714.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 17, 2010, 11:52:27 PM
I have no idea why AP hasn't called WYGOV yet.

They should now.  With 486/486 reporting, Mead wins by 714.

Suppose they might be waiting to see if anyone requests a recount.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 17, 2010, 11:52:47 PM
Murray is winning Pacific county with 50%

Now, perhaps.  But not with 3382/6000 reporting in the AP count, from whence I got the data.  There's a lag between me making a map and the data - usually a longer one the first time.

Edit:  Yes - with 3548/6000 in, some of both Pacific and Whatcom reported, with Murray leading in both:

()

Whitman is the only county fully missing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 18, 2010, 12:15:54 AM
Final Wyoming Maps:

WY Gov D (Gosar blue, Petersen green):
()

WY Gov R (Mead blue, Meyer green, Micheli red, Simpson yellow):
()

WY US House R (Lummis blue, Slafter would have been green if he won anything):
()

Turnout in the WY Gov D primary was 34% of registered Democrats.  Turnout in the WY Gov R primary was 67% of registered Republicans.  Turnout maps by county (darker blue is higher).

Democratic (very weak):
()

Republican:
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SPC on August 18, 2010, 12:24:50 AM
Why are the Washington returns coming in so slowly? It's been at 59.4% for half an hour @ Politico.com. Is there something fishy going on?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: RI on August 18, 2010, 12:30:59 AM
Why are the Washington returns coming in so slowly? It's been at 59.4% for half an hour @ Politico.com. Is there something fishy going on?

No, that's just the nature of the all-mail system. They may have even stopped counting for tonight.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 18, 2010, 12:32:08 AM
Two Washington maps.  The first, showing the WA Senate leader by county (Murray red, Rossi blue, Didier green):

()

The second, showing the PARTY that received the most votes so far in each county (Republican blue, Democrats red):

()

Republicans lead statewide by about 50-48, roughly 14,000 votes.

This was with 3564/6000 in the AP count.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SPC on August 18, 2010, 12:33:30 AM
On one hand, the Republicans hold a narrow lead, which might be a good sign for them. On the other hand, they actually had a contested "primary", so Democratic turnout might be higher in the general election.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 18, 2010, 12:45:31 AM
()
I was hoping Didier would do better but Rossi will have to do.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 18, 2010, 12:46:43 AM
I was hoping Didier would do better but Rossi will have to do.

Basically the theme of the night. Wish someone else won, but the winner will have to do.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 18, 2010, 12:47:04 AM
On one hand, the Republicans hold a narrow lead, which might be a good sign for them. On the other hand, they actually had a contested "primary", so Democratic turnout might be higher in the general election.

They won't hold that narrow lead at the end of the count. Half of King county, including virtually all of Seattle is still out. And probably 70%+ of the outstanding votes are in counties where the Democrats are over 50%. In the final count the Democrats should be between 51-52%.

After looking at the estimated outstanding ballots, there are about 242,000 of them, of which about 115,000 are in counties where the Democrats are over 50%, with 86,000 in King's, Snomish and Thurston. So the final should probably be a narrow, 50 -49ish Democratic lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 18, 2010, 12:57:22 AM
On one hand, the Republicans hold a narrow lead, which might be a good sign for them. On the other hand, they actually had a contested "primary", so Democratic turnout might be higher in the general election.

They won't hold that narrow lead at the end of the count. Half of King county, including virtually all of Seattle is still out. And probably 70%+ of the outstanding votes are in counties where the Democrats are over 50%. In the final count the Democrats should be between 51-52%.

Uh, not really. They're perhaps a bit underrepresented relative to the rest of the state at the moment, but certainly not to the extent you're suggesting. What is your source anyway?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 18, 2010, 01:02:12 AM
On one hand, the Republicans hold a narrow lead, which might be a good sign for them. On the other hand, they actually had a contested "primary", so Democratic turnout might be higher in the general election.

They won't hold that narrow lead at the end of the count. Half of King county, including virtually all of Seattle is still out. And probably 70%+ of the outstanding votes are in counties where the Democrats are over 50%. In the final count the Democrats should be between 51-52%.

Actually, the lead was only about 12,000 votes, since Goodspaceguy "prefers" the Democratic party.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 18, 2010, 01:06:05 AM
On one hand, the Republicans hold a narrow lead, which might be a good sign for them. On the other hand, they actually had a contested "primary", so Democratic turnout might be higher in the general election.

They won't hold that narrow lead at the end of the count. Half of King county, including virtually all of Seattle is still out. And probably 70%+ of the outstanding votes are in counties where the Democrats are over 50%. In the final count the Democrats should be between 51-52%.

Uh, not really. They're perhaps a bit underrepresented relative to the rest of the state at the moment, but certainly not to the extent you're suggesting. What is your source anyway?

Sorry, redid the math. It probably will come out about equal. But I did from the CD's reporting on Politico. the 3rd, 4th and 5th districts are at 71%, 73% and 67% in, the 7th is at only 44% and the 1st at 51%.  And within the 5th, the largest portion out is in Spokane, where the combined GOP total is only around 54%. King is half out, and the reporting split between the 8th and 7th implies that their is a bias within it towards the more GOP areas.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 18, 2010, 01:06:11 AM
Didier might win Adams county, there is only a 4 vote gap between him and Rossi with 70% in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 18, 2010, 01:07:12 AM
On one hand, the Republicans hold a narrow lead, which might be a good sign for them. On the other hand, they actually had a contested "primary", so Democratic turnout might be higher in the general election.

They won't hold that narrow lead at the end of the count. Half of King county, including virtually all of Seattle is still out. And probably 70%+ of the outstanding votes are in counties where the Democrats are over 50%. In the final count the Democrats should be between 51-52%.

Actually, the lead was only about 12,000 votes, since Goodspaceguy "prefers" the Democratic party.

That was the other thing. I was combining all of the Democrats.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 18, 2010, 01:23:03 AM
Unofficial results submitted to Atlas!

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2010&off=3&elect=6&fips=53&f=0

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 18, 2010, 01:26:20 AM
Washington briefly had separate party primaries (including the 2004 primaries) but 1998 had an open primary.

Amusingly enough, it resembles this one somewhat... ;D

1998:
46% Murray (D)
32% Smith (R)
15% Bayley (R)

2010:
46% Murray (D)
34% Rossi (R)
12% Didier (R)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: redcommander on August 18, 2010, 01:37:06 AM
Washington briefly had separate party primaries (including the 2004 primaries) but 1998 had an open primary.

Amusingly enough, it resembles this one somewhat... ;D

1998:
46% Murray (D)
32% Smith (R)
15% Bayley (R)

2010:
46% Murray (D)
34% Rossi (R)
12% Didier (R)

Murray isn't getting 58% again. Smith was too extreme to be elected statewide. Rossi is far more electable


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 18, 2010, 01:42:24 AM
And just for fun, Republicans-only map:

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2010&off=3&elect=2&fips=53&f=0

()

Didier strength:

()

Akers strength:

()


As you can probably guess, Franklin is Didier's home county, and Whatcom is Akers' home county.

Lewis County being Rossi's 2nd best is very interesting to me, and not something I would have expected. It definitely strikes me as a Tea Party kind of county.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: RI on August 18, 2010, 02:06:40 AM
Senate by Candidate and House Results for every seat:
() (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/GALLERY/2947_18_08_10_2_05_47.png)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 18, 2010, 02:41:30 AM
And just for fun, some of the competitive primaries... And yes I know they're top 2 primaries, but I maintain that the maps are more interesting when the parties are separate!

()

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Eraserhead on August 18, 2010, 05:57:40 AM
Washington briefly had separate party primaries (including the 2004 primaries) but 1998 had an open primary.

Amusingly enough, it resembles this one somewhat... ;D

1998:
46% Murray (D)
32% Smith (R)
15% Bayley (R)

2010:
46% Murray (D)
34% Rossi (R)
12% Didier (R)

Murray isn't getting 58% again. Smith was too extreme to be elected statewide. Rossi is far more electable

So why does he keep epic failing then?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 18, 2010, 06:43:55 AM
Total party vote for the House races:

WA-01: 56.85 D, 38.39 R, 4.27 I
WA-02: 53.39 D, 46.61 R
WA-03: 52.91 R, 42.95 D, 4.15 I
WA-04: 64.90 R, 22.89 D, 7.02 "Tea", 2.93 C, 2.25 I
WA-05: 62.51 R, 31.72 D, 5.76 C
WA-06: 57.60 D, 42.40 R
WA-07: 93.10 D, 6.90 I
WA-08: 58.42 R, 39.27 D, 2.31 I
WA-09: 52.16 D, 44.46 R, 3.38 I

Looks like bad news for the Dems' chances in WA-03 and WA-08. Heck and DelBene performed pretty poorly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on August 18, 2010, 08:34:19 AM
What's going on with WA-02? The results were far closer there than I'd have expected.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Brittain33 on August 18, 2010, 08:37:18 AM
What's going on with WA-02? The results were far closer there than I'd have expected.

Relative to Dem-held seats in WA-1, -6, and -9, it looks par for the course. That district isn't solidly Democratic.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: RI on August 18, 2010, 11:38:13 AM
What's going on with WA-02? The results were far closer there than I'd have expected.

Koster managed to pull off a victory in Snohomish County, which significantly helped narrow the results. He did so mostly because that is where his County Council seat is, and the portion of the county he won is excluding Everett, so its mostly suburban and rural, and therefore most likely to be swinging Republican this year.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: CatoMinor on August 18, 2010, 12:25:05 PM
Why are there still so many precincts that haven't been counted yet? According to politico only 59% are in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 18, 2010, 01:01:05 PM
More than 1/3 of the votes haven't been counted yet and the margins will fluctuate. No conclusions that are based on margins or combined party performance in various seats should be made at this point. The only thing we know for sure is the order.

ETA: I should clarify that the margins won't fluctuate massively but they'll move around enough that I'd wait until Thursday or Friday to do any sort of real analysis.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 18, 2010, 01:04:29 PM
As an example, the combined WA-03 percentage for the Democrats is now up to 43.77%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 18, 2010, 01:46:42 PM
What's going on with WA-02? The results were far closer there than I'd have expected.

Koster has run against Larsen before when the seat was open in 2000, and came close to beating him. Furthermore, Larsen had two challenges from the left that nabbed about 10%. The race is where I expected it, really--still lean Larsen but definitely one to keep an eye on.

Edit: For comparison, the 2000 results:

2000 Primary:
49.06% Koster (R)
46.40% Larsen (D)
2.90% Stuart Andrews (R)
1.64% Glen S. Johnson (R)

2000 General:
50.01% Larsen (D)
45.93% Koster (R)
2.62% Stuart Andrews (R)
1.44% Glen S. Johnson (R)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 18, 2010, 01:50:24 PM
WA ballot counters = major fail.

;D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: bgwah on August 18, 2010, 02:17:40 PM
I've heard a lot of 1994 comparisons for Washington. I've already addressed this, but in 1994 the primary was a very big indicator that the Democrats were in big trouble. For example, Tom Foley is probably remembered as the biggest loss here, losing with 49% of the vote. Well he got 35% in the primary. I haven't really seen anything like that with this primary.

I don't want to sound too optimistic, things could change of course. I think Herrera will win WA-3, Reichert will be comfortably re-elected in WA-8, WA-2 and the Senate race will be closer than I would like (but I still think the Democrats will win both), the Democrats will lose some state legislature seats... But I do not see anything resembling 1994 in these primary results.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 18, 2010, 02:44:46 PM

The "issue" isn't with the counters. They've counted basically everything they have on hand. The "issue" is with the fact that ballots can legally arrive anytime for the next week and a half or so.

Personally I don't think it's a problem at all but I guess I'm just more patient than most folks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Brittain33 on August 18, 2010, 02:48:46 PM
2000 General:
50.01% Larsen (D)
45.93% Koster (R)
2.62% Stuart Andrews (R)
1.44% Glen S. Johnson (R)

As I recall, that race finished more closely for Larsen than expected. He was predicted to win by more. I recall this because 2000 was one of those years when Democrats felt like we could have won back the House and had ample opportunity in open seats like this, but Republicans won too many of the competitive open seats like MI-8 and IL-10.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Tender Branson on August 18, 2010, 02:49:03 PM

The "issue" isn't with the counters. They've counted basically everything they have on hand. The "issue" is with the fact that ballots can legally arrive anytime for the next week and a half or so.

Personally I don't think it's a problem at all but I guess I'm just more patient than most folks.

Ah, ok. I thought they had to arrive until yesterday.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 18, 2010, 03:53:03 PM
Oklahoma's runoff primary is this coming Tuesday, August 24.  The biggest runoff will be in CD-5, the seat that Mary Fallin is vacating to run for governor.  The Republicans in the race are Kevin Calvey and James Lankford.  Both men, I really like.  Calvey is a conservative voice in the state legislature and is an Iraq War Veteran.  Lankford is the director of the largest Christian youth camp in the world, Falls Creek in Davis, Oklahoma.  Both men are good, conservative Christian men and I think either would do a fabulous job in Washington.  Given that this is Oklahoma, the runoff on Tuesday is going to determine who will take the seat come January, not just who will face the Democrat.  Unfortunately, I am not in the 5th district so I cannot vote for either man, rather I am in the 4th district under Tom Cole who is unopposed in November.  The good thing is neither Lankford nor Calvey are hardcore senile conservatives, like Sally Kern.  They are knowledgeable and sane conservatives.  Of course they are very conservative, but they are not idiots in their ideologies.  Kern, while she is my good friend, is a nutcase in the State House.  I don't think either of the men will be nutcases.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 18, 2010, 05:08:45 PM
What else is next week?  Which state should I focus mapping on?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: Meeker on August 18, 2010, 05:11:38 PM
What else is next week?  Which state should I focus mapping on?

Florida


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/17 - WA, WY) - See OP for info
Post by: cinyc on August 18, 2010, 05:15:14 PM
What else is next week?  Which state should I focus mapping on?

Florida

And Arizona and Vermont.  Arizona has McCain-Hayworth and the Democratic Senate primary, as well as governor, I think.  Vermont's races are pretty boring (I guess there's the governor's race), but detail could be Connecticut-level or greater because results are reported by town, most towns only have one precinct and those who have more sometimes report even precinct-level results.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 18, 2010, 05:42:47 PM
Geez, guys, keep your pants on. I've updated the OP.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 18, 2010, 05:51:57 PM
What else is next week?  Which state should I focus mapping on?

Florida

And Arizona and Vermont.  Arizona has McCain-Hayworth and the Democratic Senate primary, as well as governor, I think.  Vermont's races are pretty boring (I guess there's the governor's race), but detail could be Connecticut-level or greater because results are reported by town, most towns only have one precinct and those who have more sometimes report even precinct-level results.


Cue the jamespol meister in 3... 2... 1...

He's an Arizonan now and can tell you all about Arizona politics, lol.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: nhmagic on August 18, 2010, 07:20:59 PM
A little primer for AZ:

McCain wins comfortably - which isnt surprising
Brewer wins in a blowout - also not surprising - more interestingly, once her first elected term is over in 2014, there will have been a female governor in Arizona with Jan in the name for 18 years. (Jane Hull, Janet Napolitano, Jan Brewer - how weird huh?)

Competitive CDs 1,5,8
CD1 (Tossup/Tilt D)-Rusty Bowers will win the primary and go on to face Kirkpatrick, who is the least vulnerable of the vulnerable AZ dems.  This race should have been much easier considering the big conservative tilt of the district, but Bowers is old and doesn't present that fresh face aura that would help him this year. At the same time, immigration politics and a large Brewer win should sweep her out.  (R+6 PVI)

CD5 (Pure Tossup)-There are a bunch of republicans running in this Scottsdale/Tempe district and they are continuing to practice the art of self destruction.  David Schweikert and Susan Bitter Smith continue to snipe, while former Lucasarts bigwig Jim Ward is quietly fundraising and building friends in Scottsdale.  If Ward wins, this goes to tossup/lean R.  If Bitter Smith or Schweikert win its tossup/lean d with an emphasis on the lean d.  Harry Mitchell is lucky that hes in a district that is mainly made up of white collar employees, wealthy people and college students.  That makeup may end up saving him in November.  Democrats in working class/blue collar districts are having a much harder time.

CD8 (Tossup/Lean R)-Jonathan Paton will win the R primary and go on to face Giffords in the general.  Giffords has damaged herself bigtime with votes on healthcare and by being a high profile Pelosi acolyte.  That is a much harder sell in a working class/rural district.  Paton's opponent Jesse Kelly has had some damaging news come out about his family's construction company having actively sought stimulus money for projects.  Kelly also has went negative on Palin, who will likely endorse and provide some serious fundraising power to Paton (who is already a decent fundraiser).  Paton has a top tier ad campaign about to come out (I know because one of my best friends creates the ads and you have certainly seen them in national media) and is going to give Giffords one hell of a fight.  Interestingly, Paton and Giffords dated in high school.  Giffords will need a huge hispanic turnout to save her.

*A note about all the three competitive dem cds-Brewers impending win this fall and the immigration debate could sweep them all out.

Slightly Competitive Seat But Not Really CD3 (Likely Republican)-Its probably going to come down to Ben Quayle or Vernon Parker.  Ben Quayle is dumb for running an ad that most republicans agree with, but was executed in an idiotic way.  Vernon Parker is the black mayor of Paradise Valley and has a lot of monetary support.  Quayle has the name ID.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 18, 2010, 10:19:36 PM
With this odd election system in Washington, I must say Washingtonian political junkies must be having the time of their life, and the thing is, is that the fun lasts for a week or more. I am just so jealous.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 18, 2010, 10:37:09 PM
With this odd election system in Washington, I must say Washingtonian political junkies must be having the time of their life, and the thing is, is that the fun lasts for a week or more. I am just so jealous.

You're jealous of the terrible and undemocratic all-absentee system?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 18, 2010, 10:43:41 PM
A little primer for AZ:

McCain wins comfortably - which isnt surprising
Brewer wins in a blowout - also not surprising - more interestingly, once her first elected term is over in 2014, there will have been a female governor in Arizona with Jan in the name for 18 years. (Jane Hull, Janet Napolitano, Jan Brewer - how weird huh?)

Competitive CDs 1,5,8
CD1 (Tossup/Tilt D)-Rusty Bowers will win the primary and go on to face Kirkpatrick, who is the least vulnerable of the vulnerable AZ dems.  This race should have been much easier considering the big conservative tilt of the district, but Bowers is old and doesn't present that fresh face aura that would help him this year. At the same time, immigration politics and a large Brewer win should sweep her out.  (R+6 PVI)

CD5 (Pure Tossup)-There are a bunch of republicans running in this Scottsdale/Tempe district and they are continuing to practice the art of self destruction.  David Schweikert and Susan Bitter Smith continue to snipe, while former Lucasarts bigwig Jim Ward is quietly fundraising and building friends in Scottsdale.  If Ward wins, this goes to tossup/lean R.  If Bitter Smith or Schweikert win its tossup/lean d with an emphasis on the lean d.  Harry Mitchell is lucky that hes in a district that is mainly made up of white collar employees, wealthy people and college students.  That makeup may end up saving him in November.  Democrats in working class/blue collar districts are having a much harder time.

CD8 (Tossup/Lean R)-Jonathan Paton will win the R primary and go on to face Giffords in the general.  Giffords has damaged herself bigtime with votes on healthcare and by being a high profile Pelosi acolyte.  That is a much harder sell in a working class/rural district.  Paton's opponent Jesse Kelly has had some damaging news come out about his family's construction company having actively sought stimulus money for projects.  Kelly also has went negative on Palin, who will likely endorse and provide some serious fundraising power to Paton (who is already a decent fundraiser).  Paton has a top tier ad campaign about to come out (I know because one of my best friends creates the ads and you have certainly seen them in national media) and is going to give Giffords one hell of a fight.  Interestingly, Paton and Giffords dated in high school.  Giffords will need a huge hispanic turnout to save her.

*A note about all the three competitive dem cds-Brewers impending win this fall and the immigration debate could sweep them all out.

Slightly Competitive Seat But Not Really CD3 (Likely Republican)-Its probably going to come down to Ben Quayle or Vernon Parker.  Ben Quayle is dumb for running an ad that most republicans agree with, but was executed in an idiotic way.  Vernon Parker is the black mayor of Paradise Valley and has a lot of monetary support.  Quayle has the name ID.

I think Gorman will probably be the nominee in CD3.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 18, 2010, 10:51:13 PM
With this odd election system in Washington, I must say Washingtonian political junkies must be having the time of their life, and the thing is, is that the fun lasts for a week or more. I am just so jealous.

You're jealous of the terrible and undemocratic all-absentee system?

I was focusing on the fun of the extended orgasm of wondering over a couple of weeks, just how the numbers will evolve, and who is up and down, and so forth. Most of us just get a hard on for one night. And then there are the provisional ballots, which of course are counted last, and always lean Dem, because more Dems don't know how to vote properly than Pubbies. That is what I meant.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 21, 2010, 01:18:41 PM
Washington Senate primary update:

Dem candidates: 49.93%      
GOP candidates: 49.05%
Others:                1.02%

From what remains out (http://vote.wa.gov/Elections/WEI/VoterTurnout.aspx?ElectionID=36), it appears that team GOP might just about even the score when all the votes are counted. For some reason, the late ballots are not King County heavy this time (with only about a 10% share of the outstanding total).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 21, 2010, 04:41:59 PM
Washington Senate primary update:

Dem candidates: 49.93%      
GOP candidates: 49.05%
Others:                1.02%

From what remains out (http://vote.wa.gov/Elections/WEI/VoterTurnout.aspx?ElectionID=36), it appears that team GOP might just about even the score when all the votes are counted. For some reason, the late ballots are not King County heavy this time (with only about a 10% share of the outstanding total).

Your maths are wrong, fwiw...

DEM candidates (5) - 672,215 (48.76%)
GOP candidates (6) - 684,964 (49.68%)
Others (4) - 21,498 (1.56%)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 21, 2010, 04:49:56 PM
And gosh, I actually put the little percentages on an excel spreadsheet. Oh well. What would I do without you Sam?  :P


Addendum: Actually Sam, since I put up my numbers, some more votes have been counted, so F you!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Tender Branson on August 22, 2010, 12:10:41 AM
Final (I guess) Mason-Dixon poll for the FL primaries:

DEM Senate Primary:

42% Meek
30% Greene
  4% Ferré
  1% Burkett
23% Undecided

GOP Governor Primary:

45% McCollum
36% Scott
  4% McAlister
15% Undecided

Poll period: August 17 through 19. Subjects: 500 likely Democratic primary voters and 500 likely Republican primary voters. Margin for error: 4.5 percentage points.

http://www.wesh.com/download/2010/0821/24714650.pdf


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 22, 2010, 12:21:52 AM
Quite a recovery by McCollum there. Meek winning will be good news for Rubio.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 22, 2010, 12:24:01 AM
I think Greene is probably done. That'll complicate things for Crist greatly, I suspect.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 22, 2010, 12:44:22 AM
I think Greene is probably done. That'll complicate things for Crist greatly, I suspect.

Not really, Meek only polls 1 point higher than Greene.

And Crist doesn't want Greene in saturate the market with anti-Crist ads. Greene can afford those, Meek can't. Meek is going to be short of money now thanks to the primary, and he only averages $1 mil per quarter, so...

Crist is still in decent shape.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 22, 2010, 12:55:20 AM
I think Greene is probably done. That'll complicate things for Crist greatly, I suspect.

Not really, Meek only polls 1 point higher than Greene.

And Crist doesn't want Greene in saturate the market with anti-Crist ads. Greene can afford those, Meek can't. Meek is going to be short of money now thanks to the primary, and he only averages $1 mil per quarter, so...

Crist is still in decent shape.

This has nothing to do with the current polling. If Greene is nominated, the entire Democratic establishment will abandon him almost instantly and Crist will become the de facto nominee. Also, if Greene is nominated, Crist gets the blacks in the general.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 22, 2010, 06:20:59 AM
Eraserhead is correct, a Greene win makes it easier for Crist to be come the de facto Democratic nominee


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 22, 2010, 10:16:25 AM
Just fyi - Mason-Dixon is historically not that good in primaries.

However, I suspect Greene is a dead duck and has been for a while now.  FL Gov I'm less sure about, but McCollum will probably win it slightly - it would be the first time McCollum has run a successful campaign against a real opponent ever, actually.  Maybe he's learned something - the going really, really negative was the correct call in this case.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 22, 2010, 10:47:03 AM
Team GOP "surges" (http://vote.wa.gov/Elections/WEI/Results.aspx?RaceTypeCode=O&JurisdictionTypeID=1&ElectionID=36&ViewMode=Results) into the lead in the Washington Senate race:

GOP          Dems      Others
49.71%   48.73%   1.56%

By the way, a guy has an article up at RCP (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/08/18/as_goes_washington_so_goes_the_nation_106799.html) where he posits that Pattycakes is in deep trouble for the general. The thesis is that when the Dems get less than 46% of the vote, they lose in the general:

"As a general rule, when the Democratic share of the vote rises above 52 percent, the Democratic nominee can feel pretty safe that he or she will win. When it falls below 46 percent, the Republican will almost certainly win."

Patty has 46.42% at the moment, and it looks like it will sink another 20 basis points or so maybe before we are done. The author calls the race a toss-up, but that the tennis shoe lady should be very worried. When 52% is a win, and less than 46% is a loss, and you are at maybe 46.2%, that just isn't very comforting is it? Sure the Dem share total is more in the lower end of the mid-range of 48.73% (maybe 48.25%-48.5% when we are all done, but it may even fall below 48% now that I notice the slug of votes still out in Spokane, which are twice as many as in King County), but the other Dem candidates were flakes, and I suspect more of a protest vote. Those folks may not even bother to vote in November, and if they do, I suspect a lot of them won't be voting for Patty.

Nate at 538 (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/08/late-night-returns-from-west.html) notes the article, and wonders if the data that generated the regression analysis should have been split between August primaries and September ones, with the latter having a lower standard deviation of variance between the primary numbers and the general election numbers. Maybe.

By the way, in California, a Republican won a special state senate election on August 17 by 5%, that Obama probably carried by about 20% or more, in a district (http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/senplan/SENMAPS/MAP15_300.JPG) running from a bit of the north end of Santa Barbara county (i.e, the most conservative part up in Santa Maria), through SLO County, and then taking in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties (albeit not the counterculture precincts in Santa Cruz itself), and then a bit of Santa Clara County.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 22, 2010, 03:19:46 PM
One of the candidates for FL-17 got robbed over the weekend (http://content.usatoday.com/dist/custom/gci/InsidePage.aspx?cId=wzzm13&sParam=39789946.story):

Quote
Authorities say Marleine Bastien, an advocate and candidate for Congress, was robbed at gunpoint while waiting to make a campaign appearance at a church in North Miami.

Lt. Neal Cuevas with the North Miami Police Department says Bastien was in a car with her sister outside the Church of the Living God Saturday when another car pulled up along side them.

A man got out of the vehicle, opened the driver's door, where Bastien was sitting, and demanded that the women give him their purses and threatened to kill them.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 22, 2010, 04:14:12 PM
I'm really relieved McCain will most likely win his primary. A few months ago I was starting to get worried Hayworth may beat him. Thankfully not! :P It's been a joy following McCain on Facebook - his photographers are very talented.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 22, 2010, 05:30:18 PM
Team GOP "surges" (http://vote.wa.gov/Elections/WEI/Results.aspx?RaceTypeCode=O&JurisdictionTypeID=1&ElectionID=36&ViewMode=Results) into the lead in the Washington Senate race:

GOP          Dems      Others
49.71%   48.73%   1.56%

By the way, a guy has an article up at RCP (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/08/18/as_goes_washington_so_goes_the_nation_106799.html) where he posits that Pattycakes is in deep trouble for the general. The thesis is that when the Dems get less than 46% of the vote, they lose in the general:

"As a general rule, when the Democratic share of the vote rises above 52 percent, the Democratic nominee can feel pretty safe that he or she will win. When it falls below 46 percent, the Republican will almost certainly win."

Patty has 46.42% at the moment, and it looks like it will sink another 20 basis points or so maybe before we are done. The author calls the race a toss-up, but that the tennis shoe lady should be very worried. When 52% is a win, and less than 46% is a loss, and you are at maybe 46.2%, that just isn't very comforting is it? Sure the Dem share total is more in the lower end of the mid-range of 48.73% (maybe 48.25%-48.5% when we are all done, but it may even fall below 48% now that I notice the slug of votes still out in Spokane, which are twice as many as in King County), but the other Dem candidates were flakes, and I suspect more of a protest vote. Those folks may not even bother to vote in November, and if they do, I suspect a lot of them won't be voting for Patty.

Nate at 538 (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/08/late-night-returns-from-west.html) notes the article, and wonders if the data that generated the regression analysis should have been split between August primaries and September ones, with the latter having a lower standard deviation of variance between the primary numbers and the general election numbers. Maybe.

By the way, in California, a Republican won a special state senate election on August 17 by 5%, that Obama probably carried by about 20% or more, in a district (http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/senplan/SENMAPS/MAP15_300.JPG) running from a bit of the north end of Santa Barbara county (i.e, the most conservative part up in Santa Maria), through SLO County, and then taking in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties (albeit not the counterculture precincts in Santa Cruz itself), and then a bit of Santa Clara County.

It's nice that Maldanado's district remains in Republican hands. Blakeslee will be an excellent state senator.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dgov on August 22, 2010, 05:56:25 PM

It's nice that Maldanado's district remains in Republican hands. Blakeslee will be an excellent state senator.

His challenger was a perfect example of the phrase "Too Liberal for this district".  The 15th Senate District is only a point or two more Conservative than the state as a whole, which suggests that the Statewide races are going to be competitive. Obama won 60% here in 2008 compared to 61% Statewide.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 22, 2010, 06:03:00 PM
The problem with California's 15th district is that the southern parts of it have nothing in common with the northern parts and they should be in separate districts. I'm sure Blakeslee will be as much of a creep as Maldonado. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 22, 2010, 06:15:16 PM

It's nice that Maldanado's district remains in Republican hands. Blakeslee will be an excellent state senator.

His challenger was a perfect example of the phrase "Too Liberal for this district".  The 15th Senate District is only a point or two more Conservative than the state as a whole, which suggests that the Statewide races are going to be competitive. Obama won 60% here in 2008 compared to 61% Statewide.

Where did you find the data for POTUS vote breakdowns for state senate seats, Dgov? I would like to know where that is!  Thanks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 22, 2010, 06:18:38 PM
The problem with California's 15th district is that the southern parts of it have nothing in common with the northern parts and they should be in separate districts. I'm sure Blakeslee will be as much of a creep as Maldonado. :)

Nobody can be a bigger creep than Maldonado.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 22, 2010, 06:40:55 PM
The problem with California's 15th district is that the southern parts of it have nothing in common with the northern parts and they should be in separate districts. I'm sure Blakeslee will be as much of a creep as Maldonado. :)

Well remember the state senate seats have more population than Congressional Districts, so sometimes they need to take in quite a bit of territory. Once you get outside the LA, SF, SD and Sacto metro areas, California does spread out a bit.  It isn't just one housing tract after another, until you hit the sea or mountains or the Mojave Desert. But then, since you live in the area (or did, didn't you?), I guess you already knew that. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 22, 2010, 06:50:53 PM

It's nice that Maldanado's district remains in Republican hands. Blakeslee will be an excellent state senator.

His challenger was a perfect example of the phrase "Too Liberal for this district".  The 15th Senate District is only a point or two more Conservative than the state as a whole, which suggests that the Statewide races are going to be competitive. Obama won 60% here in 2008 compared to 61% Statewide.

Where did you find the data for POTUS vote breakdowns for state senate seats, Dgov? I would like to know where that is!  Thanks.


The California SoS releases the presidential vote by county by political district.  They even have it available in spreadsheet form:

Senate District 15   
                              Obama   McCain   Keyes McKinney Barr Nader            
   Monterey                53,432   25,992   257   218   430   671
   San Luis Obispo   68,176   61,055   502   355   713   1,317
   Santa Barbara        16,086   18,047   151   61   127   261
   Santa Clara           63,413   36,912   283   204   589   633
   Santa Cruz           35,046   12,884   141   112   278   432
District Totals            236,153   154,890   1,334 950 2,137 3,314
   Percent                  59.1%   38.8%   0.3%   0.2%   0.5%   0.8%

Links to California SOS results page (http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_elections.htm);  2008 results (http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2008_general/).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 22, 2010, 07:13:54 PM
Thanks cinyc.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 22, 2010, 11:10:39 PM
The problem with California's 15th district is that the southern parts of it have nothing in common with the northern parts and they should be in separate districts. I'm sure Blakeslee will be as much of a creep as Maldonado. :)

Yeah, basically. It's the worst district in California, I think.

Obviously I'm not happy about the result, but the district will be gone come next election, and I got a free shirt out of it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Tender Branson on August 22, 2010, 11:47:35 PM
Final PPP Florida poll:

DEM Senate Primary:

Meek: 51%
Greene: 27%
Burkett: 5%
Ferre: 4%
Undecided: 13%

GOP Governor Primary:

Scott: 47%
McCollum: 40%
Undecided: 13%

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_FL_8221025.pdf


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 23, 2010, 12:27:02 AM
As to McCollum, one poll has it wrong. Interesting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 23, 2010, 03:32:04 AM
It seems like the polling has been all over the place in GOP gubernatorial race for a while now but I really haven't paid that much attention to it, so what do I know...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 23, 2010, 07:57:25 AM
McCollum!!!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 23, 2010, 08:38:57 AM
A Laird shirt? :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Tender Branson on August 23, 2010, 08:46:11 AM
Quinnipiac weighs in a last time:

GOP Primary: 39% McCollum, 35% Scott, 4% Someone else, 22% Undecided
DEM Primary: 39% Meek, 29% Greene, 3% Ferre, 2% Someone else, 28% Undecided

From August 21 - 22, Quinnipiac University surveyed 771 Republican likely primary voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points and 757 Democratic likely primary voters with a margin of error of +/- 3.6 percentage points. These likely voters were selected from lists of people who have voted in past elections.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1297.xml?ReleaseID=1491


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 23, 2010, 08:48:06 AM
Yeah, so basically nobody really knows what the hell is going in McCollum-Scott...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Tender Branson on August 23, 2010, 08:52:46 AM
Yeah, so basically nobody really knows what the hell is going in McCollum-Scott...

I only know that 1 of them will have a 20-point lead over Sink in the next Rasmussen poll ... :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 23, 2010, 09:04:33 AM
Yeah, so basically nobody really knows what the hell is going in McCollum-Scott...

I only know that 1 of them will have a 20-point lead over Sink in the next Rasmussen poll ... :P

What a rebound! The Republicans are united! The Republicans are united!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 23, 2010, 04:39:23 PM
King County, Washington results so far by Legislative (House) District (King County Part of LD ONLY):

Murray vs. Rossi winner:
()

All Dems vs. All Republicans winner:

()

Typical Atlas Republican vs. Democrat colors; King County water features in light cyan.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Rowan on August 23, 2010, 05:01:15 PM
The MOE in the PPP poll is pretty high, making it almost useless.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 23, 2010, 06:59:51 PM
Poll closing times for tomorrow:

7 ET - Florida, Vermont
8 ET - Oklahoma
10 ET - Arizona
12 ET - Alaska

Results pages for tomorrow's primaries, also added to OP:

AP results pages: AK (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/AK_US_Senate_0824.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | AZ (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/AZ_US_Senate_0824.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | FL (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/FL_Governor_0824.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | OK (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/OK_Page_0824.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | VT (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/VT_Governor_0824.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)

State results pages: AK (http://elect.alaska.net/data/results.html) | AZ (http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/AZ/19539/31658/en/summary.html) | FL (http://election.dos.state.fl.us/) | OK (http://www.ok.gov/elections/support/10run.html)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 23, 2010, 08:05:07 PM
It is odd that the GOP can't carry Mercer Island and Bellevue anymore (both upper middle class). Maybe the  Microsoft folks are all commie libs or something. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 23, 2010, 09:25:28 PM
I'm watching Vermont the closest tomorrow.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 23, 2010, 09:35:21 PM
I'm watching Vermont the closest tomorrow.

Care to share any of your thoughts on the Democratic gubernatorial contest? I was reading about it earlier today but I'm still pretty clueless as to what the differences are between the candidates (if there are any) and as to who is in lead (if anyone is).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 23, 2010, 09:43:07 PM
I'm watching Vermont the closest tomorrow.

Care to share any of your thoughts on the Democratic gubernatorial contest? I was reading about it earlier today but I'm still pretty clueless as to what the differences are between the candidates (if there are any) and as to who is in lead (if anyone is).

Eh, I'm most interested in it because it's a jump ball (kinda like the NY AG race), a couple frontrunners but the money really hasn't coalesced behind anyone while the primary's so undecided.  if I tried to predict the race, I'd just be a jackass because who can predict a five-way jump ball in a state as small and as retail politicking as a Vermont primary?

The race is basically three State Senators, one former State Senator, and the Secretary of State.  Only the latter is running as a moderate, while all of the others are running as progressive lions.  I've listened to like 1 hour long radio interviews with all the Democrats, and they all sound like they'll be solid.  Dubie's argument seems to be "Hey, even if I'm out of touch with Vermont, a supermajority in the legislature will just override my vetoes!" which sounds kind of like a lazy theme for a  campaign.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 23, 2010, 09:49:23 PM
Who are you backing in the NY AG race?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 23, 2010, 09:50:12 PM
Who are you backing in the NY AG race?

Dinallo

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/08/22/2010-08-22_go_with_dinallo.html

I've met Eric and he's a fantastic person, hyper smart, but with enough eccentric quirks that he's a human being (he's a big comic book nerd).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 23, 2010, 09:58:03 PM
Who are you backing in the NY AG race?

Dinallo

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/08/22/2010-08-22_go_with_dinallo.html

I've met Eric and he's a fantastic person, hyper smart, but with enough eccentric quirks that he's a human being (he's a big comic book nerd).

Comic book nerd?!? That might secure my vote right there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 23, 2010, 09:59:09 PM
Yup, mega comic book nerd is what I hear.  Especially Spider Man


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Hash on August 23, 2010, 11:10:51 PM
I'm watching Vermont the closest tomorrow.

Care to share any of your thoughts on the Democratic gubernatorial contest? I was reading about it earlier today but I'm still pretty clueless as to what the differences are between the candidates (if there are any) and as to who is in lead (if anyone is).

Yeah, VT being my favourite state, I'm kinda curious as to the differences in ideology and support between the massive overloaded field on the Dem side.

What kind of sacrificial lamb have the GOP managed to pick out to run against Leahy and Welch? A crazy-nutjob-who-should-live-in-Alabama loon or a sane rather moderate nobody?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Tender Branson on August 24, 2010, 12:31:40 AM
My predictions:

AK DEM GOV: Berkowitz 63%, French 37%
AK GOP GOV: Parnell with 90%+

AK DEM SEN: McAdams 38%, Vondersaar 34%, Kern 28%
AK GOP SEN: Murkowski 78%, Miller 22%

...

AZ DEM GOV: Terry Goddard with 90%+
AZ GOP GOV: Jan Brewer with 90%+

AZ DEM SEN: Glassman 46%, Parraz 25%, Eden 15%, Dougherty 14%
AZ GOP SEN: McCain 61%, Hayworth 37%, Deakin 2%

...

FL DEM GOV: Sink 91%, Moore 9%
FL GOP GOV: Scott 50.3%, McCollum 48.9%, McCalister 0.8%

FL DEM SEN: Meek 49%, Greene 39%, Ferre 6%, Burkett 6%
FL GOP SEN: Rubio with 90%+

...

VT DEM GOV: Markowitz 31%, Racine 21%, Shumlin 18%, Dunne 16%, Bartlett 14%
VT GOP GOV: Dubie with 90%+

VT DEM SEN: Leahy with 90%+
VT GOP SEN: Britton with 90%+


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 24, 2010, 12:53:19 AM
If Scott wins I am totally going to root for Sink. No way he should touch the governor's mansion.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Tender Branson on August 24, 2010, 01:01:48 AM
Already more than 930,000 people have cast ballots via absentee or early voting  – or roughly 8 percent of the state's 11.1 million registered voters. And perhaps because of the $70-million blitz of attack ads in their gubernatorial primary, Republicans were voting early in higher numbers than in 2006.

Just over 524,600 GOP voters had cast ballots heading into today – about 13 percent of total registered Republicans. Some 350,000 Democrats, or just under 8 percent, also have voted.

Scott's campaign is banking on a wave of new or casual GOP voters, claiming the anti-incumbent mood will push turnout to 40 percent or more – the highest level since 1966. The campaign predicted 1.7 million Republicans would ultimately cast ballots.

But election officials said the number would likely be smaller, predicting perhaps 1.1 million or so. A rise in early voting, they said, doesn't guarantee higher turnout overall.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-primary-day-arrives-20100823,0,1075100.story


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 24, 2010, 02:29:38 AM
Ok I will go ahead and make some predictions for winners in tomorrow's races

Alaska
Senate
Republican Lisa Murkowsi
Democrat Scott McAdams

Governor
Republican Sean Parnell
Democrat Hollis French

At-Large House Seat
Republican Don Young

Arizona
Senate
Republican John McCain
Democrat Rodney Glassman

Governor
Republican Jan Brewer
Democrat Terry Goddard

Arizona 1
Republican Paul Gosar

Arizona 3
Republican Pamela Gorman

Arizona 4
Republican Jose Penalosa

Arizona 5
Republican Susan Bitter Smith

Arizona 7
Republican Ruth McClung


Arizona 8 Jonathan Patton

Florida
Senate
Democrat Kendrick Meek

Governor
Republican Bill McCollum

Attorney General Pam Bondi

Florida 2
Republican Steve Southerland

Florida 8
Republican Daniel Webster

Florida 22
Republican Allen West

Florida 24
Republican Karen Diebel

Florida 25
Republican Marili Cancio

Oklahoma
Oklahoma 2
Republican Daniel Edmonds

Oklahoma 5
Republican Kevin Calvey

Vermont

Governor
Democrat Deb Markowitz








Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:17:26 AM
I'm watching Vermont the closest tomorrow.

Care to share any of your thoughts on the Democratic gubernatorial contest? I was reading about it earlier today but I'm still pretty clueless as to what the differences are between the candidates (if there are any) and as to who is in lead (if anyone is).

Yeah, VT being my favourite state, I'm kinda curious as to the differences in ideology and support between the massive overloaded field on the Dem side.

What kind of sacrificial lamb have the GOP managed to pick out to run against Leahy and Welch? A crazy-nutjob-who-should-live-in-Alabama loon or a sane rather moderate nobody?

The guy they've got for Senate seems fairly non-crazy (http://www.lenbritton.com/) (at least, on paper, I didn't bother to look at any of his videos). He looks to be running as a fiscal conservative, ignoring social issues. Of course, he's only raised about $100k.

The candidates (ugly website (http://www.vermontgetstern.org/), ugly website (http://www.beaudryforcongress.org/), less-ugly website (http://www.mitchell4congress.org/)) running for Congress, on the other hand, are more on the crazy nutjob end of things.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Niemeyerite on August 24, 2010, 09:54:58 AM
My predictions:

Vermont:

Governor (D): Markowitz 35% Racine 26% Dunne 15% Bartlett 12% Shumlin 12%
Governor (R): Dubie

Senate (D): Leahy 93% Frielich 7%
Senate (R): Britton

House (D): Welch
House (R): Beaudry 45% Stern 30% Mitchell 25%

Alaska:

Governor (D): Berkowitz 56% French 44%
Governor (R): Parnell 76% Samuels 10% Walker 5% Little 4% Hlatcu 3% Heikes 2%

Senate (D): McAdams 67% Vondersaar 21% Kern 12%
Senate (R): Murkowski 63% Miller 37%

House (D): Crawford
House (R): Young 79% Fisher 21%

Oklahoma:

House-2 (R): Thompson 54% Edmonds 46%
House-5 (R): Lankford 61% Calvey 39%

Arizona:

Governor (D): Goddard
Governor (R): Brewer 89% Jette 11%

Senate (D): Parraz 35% Glassman 32% Eden 23% Dougherty 10%
Senate (R) McCain 57% Hayworth 38% Deakin 5%

House-1 (D): Kirkpatrick
House-1 (R): Gosar 37% Others (7 candidates) 63%
House-2 (D): Thrasher
House-2 (R): Franks 92% Black 8%
House-3 (D): Hulburd
House-3 (R): Gorman 22% Moak 21% Parker 19% Waring 17% Quayle 15% Winkler 4% Vazquez 2%
House-4 (D): Pator
House-4 (R): Contreras 58% Penalosa 42%
House-5 (D): Mitchell
House-5 (R): Schweikert 50% Others (5 candidates) 50%
House-6 (D): Schneider
House-6 (R): Flake 85% Smith 15%
House-7 (D): Grijalva
House-7 (R): I don't know
House-8 (D): Giffords
House-8 (R): Paton 38% Kelly 30% Goss 13% Miller 13% Quick 6%

Florida:

Governor (D): Sink 95% Moore 5%
Governor (R): Scott 52% McCollum 48%

Senate (D): Meek 50% Greene 35% Ferre 12% Burkett 3%
Senate (R): Rubio 79% Escoffery 15% Thorpe 5% Kogut 1%

House: too long xD


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 24, 2010, 10:53:34 AM
I'm thinking Lankford will win the runoff for CD-5 in Oklahoma simply because he's a newbie to politics.  I think Oklahoma voters want someone who hasn't been permeated with the Washington aroma.  Calvey, though, could win as he has just served in the State House and is also an Iraq War Veteran as recently as 2007.  Personally, I'd be fine with either one of them.  I just wish I could vote for them, but two things preclude me, 1) I'm a Democrat and this is a Republican primary and 2) I'm in CD-4, not CD-5.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 06:08:05 PM
Florida is holding their results until 8 because those lame-os on the panhandle are in a different time zone.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 24, 2010, 06:21:05 PM
So... anyone here vote?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: East Coast Republican on August 24, 2010, 06:28:15 PM
Oh yeah


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 24, 2010, 06:45:04 PM
7% of the vote in:

Meek leading 51%-36%

Scott leading 48%-42%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 24, 2010, 06:46:35 PM
What happened to holding the votes?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 06:47:10 PM
Or not. Florida is releasing results, at least to the AP. Meek is up 51-36. Scott up 48-42. Some early precincts have Boyd up 59-41 in FL-02. Rich Nugent is at an unimpressive 62-38 in FL-05. Webster up 40-25 over Long in FL-08. Adams is winning 34-29-27 over Diebel and Miller with a few precincts in. Some early votes in FL-25 have Rivera at 57-33 over Crespo.

Vermont will probably take forever; I believe they still use paper ballots there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 06:48:15 PM
who cares about Florida?  I'm watching VT.

Racine & Markowitz are leading, followed by Shumlin and Dunne


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 06:48:33 PM
Oh no, one town in Vermont has reported, Derby. 31% for Markowitz, 29% Racine, 21% Shumlin, 15% Dunne, 4% Bartlett.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 06:56:23 PM
Three towns have reported, exciting! Markowitz leads Racine by 1 vote.

I wonder if Boyd might actually be in danger of losing; he's only getting about 58% of the vote, and none of Tallahassee (where presumably Lawson would do best) has reported yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 24, 2010, 06:57:29 PM
McCollum within in two points now. Still 11,000 votes behind.


Edit: Still 46-44 but 13,000 votes now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 06:59:15 PM
McCollum won the Miami-Dade early vote by a huge margin -- 66-28. The only other place where he has a significant lead is Orange and Seminole counties.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:01:05 PM
It looks like Greene is doing well on the panhandle... wonder why. He's getting crushed otherwise, Meek is winning 54-33.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 07:01:39 PM
I'm going to post the Vermont map with labels once, then remove them for clarity most of the time:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Hash on August 24, 2010, 07:02:26 PM
It looks like Greene is doing well on the panhandle...

haha

Is he going to win all the counties which voted for Edwards in 2008?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:04:03 PM
Downballot, Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp is currently losing the Attorney General primary 40-35 to someone named Bondi. State Sen. Dan Gelber (who briefly ran for Governor, I think?) is winning 59-41 on the Dem side.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 07:07:50 PM
Vermont Gov D, by town so far.  Most of the state isn't in (that's in Dark Grey).  

()

Colors:
Dunne - Blue
Markowitz - Green
Racine - Red
Shumlin - Yellowscale
Bartlett - Orange
Tie - Light Gray

The tan towns don't have precincts.  (They vote in neighboring towns, I think - I'll double check to make sure some aren't just differences in town spelling).  That color will be changed to white in the next map to avoid confusion with yellowscale.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 07:08:51 PM
Downballot, Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp is currently losing the Attorney General primary 40-35 to someone named Bondi. State Sen. Dan Gelber (who briefly ran for Governor, I think?) is winning 59-41 on the Dem side.

Senator


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 24, 2010, 07:13:20 PM
I hope we know the Dem nominee for governor in Vermont before election day.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:16:50 PM
Hey, nine towns have reported! Markowitz by 21 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:17:38 PM
Lankford has the early lead in the OK-05 runoff. 54-46 with 4 precincts in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: memphis on August 24, 2010, 07:18:49 PM
Called for Meek


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:21:59 PM
Boyd is down to a 51-49 lead in FL-02, but that was with a big reporting from Leon County, so he should probably win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 07:25:29 PM

Lol


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:28:27 PM
Whigs ride again in FL-08: Daniel Webster is on the cusp of victory there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 07:29:21 PM
Whigs ride again in FL-08: Daniel Webster is on the cusp of victory there.

Good, I wanted him to win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 07:30:10 PM
Florida Senate D Map:

()

Meek Yellow; Greene Red

AP called it for Meek - as they should.  Greene basically won just the most conservative parts of the state - the Naples-Ft. Myers area and (it appears) the Panhandle.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:30:33 PM
Sandy Adams is just a few hundred votes ahead of Karen Diebel in FL-24. NRCC recruit Craig Miller is in third.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 24, 2010, 07:31:00 PM
Boyd is down to a 51-49 lead in FL-02, but that was with a big reporting from Leon County, so he should probably win.
Wow, I was expecting him to do better because of his vote for HCR.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 24, 2010, 07:31:42 PM

Mr. Crist's reaction:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:33:55 PM
It's now Markowitz 27%, Racine 25%, Dunne 22%, Shumlin 21% with 19 towns reporting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 24, 2010, 07:34:58 PM
Rivera is winning in FL-25. I see a rare Democratic opportunity for a pickup.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 07:36:32 PM
Florida Gov R:

()

McCollum is in Green; Scott in Red.  McCollum is leading in some urban counties; Scott pretty much the rest of the state.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 07:43:17 PM
VT Gov D map with 24/260 in.  

()

Still a horserace.  Markowitz seems to be doing well in the Bennington area; Racine the Burlington area.

(Dunne - Blue; Markowitz - Green; Racine - Red; Shumlin - Yellowscale; Bartlett - Orange)
(Tie - Light Gray; Not reporting - Dark Gray; No Polls - White)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 24, 2010, 07:43:36 PM
Scott is going to win.


Thats the only thing I can think of to stop it, curse him with my bad luck.  :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:44:17 PM
Boyd may not be out of the woods yet. He's at 52-48, there's still a chunk of Tallahassee to go, and three counties where the early vote went for Lawson.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 24, 2010, 07:44:26 PM
Dixiecrats still exist! Democrats have three times the amount of primary voters than the Republicans have in Lafayette County.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 07:44:44 PM
Boyd may not be out of the woods yet. He's at 52-48, there's still a chunk of Tallahassee to go, and three counties where the early vote went for Lawson.

I smell an upset and a GOP pickup.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 07:46:57 PM
Scott is going to win.


Thats the only thing I can think of to stop it, curse him with my bad luck.  :P

McCollum better hope the rest of Miami-Dade comes in like the one precinct that's already in.  If not, he's probably toast.

Edit:  I think that precinct was the early vote - so there's a chance.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 07:50:48 PM
Future billionaire candidates, great do's and don'ts tonight so payh attention


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:51:54 PM
I guess the Snelling name isn't what it used to be in Vermont. Mark Snelling, son of the late governor, is losing the Republican Lt. Gov. primary 60-40, currently.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 07:53:16 PM
Oh, and it was called for Pat Leahy. His challenger did tie in Searsburg (4 votes each).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Thomas D on August 24, 2010, 07:57:17 PM
Oh, and it was called for Pat Leahy. His challenger did tie in Searsburg (4 votes each).

I guess we know what town his challenger's family lives in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 08:01:12 PM
FL-05 called for the Nuge, FL-08 for Webster, FL-12 for Ross and Edwards.

FL-24 mostly in, Adams leads Diebel by about 600 votes.

FL-17 might as well be called for Frederica Wilson, she won in Broward and is leading Miami-Dade (early voting, at least).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 08:02:59 PM
Lankford might as well start packing for Washington, he's winning in OK-05 by 61-39 with 1/3rd in.

Edit: aaand it's called for him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 08:05:23 PM
Wow, Vermont is now almost a three-way tie. Markowitz, Shumlin, and Racine are separated by 121 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 08:07:38 PM
Wow, Vermont is now almost a three-way tie. Markowitz, Shumlin, and Racine are separated by 121 votes.

Fun!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 24, 2010, 08:12:17 PM
What is taking Miami-Dade so long?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 08:16:12 PM

Do you really need to ask that?  It's like asking what's taking Chicago so long?

AP's tally is behind Miami-Dade's website.  They're at about 25% reporting.  McCollum's lead remains, but there weren't many votes there compared to the early votes.

Scott wins this, in my estimation.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 08:17:26 PM
Boyd is down to a 1,500 vote lead, but that's because Gadsden (62-38 Lawson) came in. Judging on what's left, I'd say Boyd holds on.

Racine surges into a 50-vote lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 24, 2010, 08:18:14 PM
Bad, I don't care too much about Racine.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 24, 2010, 08:22:04 PM

Do you really need to ask that?  It's like asking what's taking Chicago so long?

AP's tally is behind Miami-Dade's website.  They're at about 25% reporting.  McCollum's lead remains, but there weren't many votes there compared to the early votes.

Scott wins this, in my estimation.
How is Rivera doing in FL-25?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 08:24:05 PM
Vermont Gov with 64 precincts in:
()

We're starting to see a little bit of a pattern, but it's not strong.  Compare, for example, the close Republican VT-AL House Primary:

()

There's a much more definite pattern there - following county lines and everything.

(Beaudry - Blue - leading 48-39; Mitchell - Green; Stern - Red)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 08:25:26 PM

Do you really need to ask that?  It's like asking what's taking Chicago so long?

AP's tally is behind Miami-Dade's website.  They're at about 25% reporting.  McCollum's lead remains, but there weren't many votes there compared to the early votes.

Scott wins this, in my estimation.
How is Rivera doing in FL-25?

Winning 67-23 with 48/187 Miami-Dade precincts reporting:

http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/FL/Dade/20347/31879/en/summary.html


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 08:30:27 PM
Markowitz is back in the lead by 39 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 08:39:40 PM
Miami-Dade's half in on their website.  McCollum might net another 15,000 votes there when all is said and done (and that's being generous).  But he's down by 36,000 votes.  

You do the math.  It adds up to a Scott victory for me.  



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 08:44:48 PM
Looks like Boyd will eke out a 52-48 win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 08:45:28 PM
Future billionaire candidates, great do's and don'ts tonight so payh attention

Greene got in to late, Scott has been running longer.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 08:48:37 PM
Future billionaire candidates, great do's and don'ts tonight so payh attention

Greene got in to late, Scott has been running longer.

McCollum was also better funded than Meek too.  Greene was also a lazy campaigner, working a few hours a day


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 08:50:57 PM
Future billionaire candidates, great do's and don'ts tonight so payh attention

Greene got in to late, Scott has been running longer.

McCollum was also better funded than Meek too.  Greene was also a lazy campaigner, working a few hours a day

And he was a complete failure of a human being. Don't forget that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: perdedor on August 24, 2010, 08:52:04 PM
Hey guys, where are you finding the results? I've been scouring the internet for like 30 minutes and couldn't find any live results, just news articles. Help please.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 08:54:14 PM
Also, cinyc, where did you get the precinct data for Vermont?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Thomas D on August 24, 2010, 08:54:59 PM
Hey guys, where are you finding the results? I've been scouring the internet for like 30 minutes and couldn't find any live results, just news articles. Help please.

Go to the first page of this theread and at the bottom of the first post there are links to result pages.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 08:55:39 PM
Hey guys, where are you finding the results? I've been scouring the internet for like 30 minutes and couldn't find any live results, just news articles. Help please.

Look at the first post of this thread.

Also, cinyc, where did you get the precinct data for Vermont?

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/VT_Governor_0824.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS

More or less precinct-level, as there are only five localities with more than one precinct.

Oh, and Shumlin pulled ahead now. (WTF Vermont Dems?)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 08:58:17 PM
Markowitz and Racine are Vermont's Democratic heavy-hitters, I think it would be shocking-and disastrous-if Shumlin wins. He's from the Democratic bastion of Windham County and doesn't have a statewide following. Racine and Markowitz do.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:02:13 PM
Markowitz and Racine are Vermont's Democratic heavy-hitters, I think it would be shocking-and disastrous-if Shumlin wins. He's from the Democratic bastion of Windham County and doesn't have a statewide following. Racine and Markowitz do.

Yeah, that's the one definite pattern - Shumlin leading in Windham County (Bratleboro).  Markowitz is doing his best in Bennington County, and Racine in the Burlington Area - though Burlington proper hadn't reported, last I checked.

The Republican House race is a real North-South divide.

JohnnyLongtorso gave you the link.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 09:04:40 PM
Markowitz and Racine are Vermont's Democratic heavy-hitters, I think it would be shocking-and disastrous-if Shumlin wins. He's from the Democratic bastion of Windham County and doesn't have a statewide following. Racine and Markowitz do.

He's served as President pro-tempore and has run statewide before, what do you mean?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 24, 2010, 09:06:00 PM
Lankford winning 2-1 is a major embarrassment for the Club for Growth, which poured a lot of money into the race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:07:28 PM
With 127/260 in:
Shumlin 7,682 (Yellow)
Markowitz 7,623 (Green)
Racine 7,538 (Red)

(Dunne is in blue; Bartlett in orange (he won Johnson town); Light Gray =tie; Dark Gray=Not Reporting; White=No polls in town)

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:09:50 PM
And now it's all tied up. Racine in the lead, Markowitz 34 votes behind him, and Shumlin 7 votes behind her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 24, 2010, 09:14:41 PM
Racine and Shumlin tied. Burlington's coming in for Racine.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:15:16 PM
It looks like Greene is doing well on the panhandle...

haha

Is he going to win all the counties which voted for Edwards in 2008?

There are very few blacks in the Panhandle.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:18:31 PM
Looks like the hapless Sue Bartlett did win one town: Johnson, by 1 vote over Shumlin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 09:21:04 PM
With 127/260 in:
Shumlin 7,682 (Yellow)
Markowitz 7,623 (Green)
Racine 7,538 (Red)

(Dunne is in blue; Bartlett in orange (he won Johnson town); Light Gray =tie; Dark Gray=Not Reporting; White=No polls in town)

()


Why does Enosburg have no poll?

Markowitz and Racine are Vermont's Democratic heavy-hitters, I think it would be shocking-and disastrous-if Shumlin wins. He's from the Democratic bastion of Windham County and doesn't have a statewide following. Racine and Markowitz do.

He's served as President pro-tempore and has run statewide before, what do you mean?

Markowitz has won six statewide elections, Racine has been lieutenant governor and ran for governor before, while, of the three, Shumlin seems the most provincial, despite his run for lieutenant governor.
Looks like the hapless Sue Bartlett did win one town: Johnson, by 1 vote over Shumlin.

Bartlett's a senator in that county (Lamoille), she might win Hyde Park, Cambridge Eden or Wolcott.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:22:57 PM
It looks like Greene is doing well on the panhandle...

haha

Is he going to win all the counties which voted for Edwards in 2008?

There are very few blacks in the Panhandle.

Meek is leading in Escambia (Pensacola).  It's been a while for Florida maps:

Senate D (Meek yellow; Greene red):
()

Governor R (McCollum green; Scott red):
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:23:40 PM
Boyd is hanging on to a 51-49 margin. What's left is certainly not enough to threaten his lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:24:50 PM

Because the AP has an h on the end of the name of the town and the names don't match when I sort.  I'll fix it - which will show up on the next map.

Good catch!

It hasn't reported yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 24, 2010, 09:26:05 PM
Wow, PPP went out on a limb here and seems to have been right on the Governors race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 09:27:23 PM
Hey guys, where are you finding the results? I've been scouring the internet for like 30 minutes and couldn't find any live results, just news articles. Help please.

http://enight.elections.myflorida.com/Default.aspx


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:27:38 PM
Markowitz up again, 13 votes over Shumlin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:27:48 PM
Wow, PPP went out on a limb here and seems to have been right on the Governors race.

I'm surprised the AP hasn't called it for Scott yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:29:46 PM
McCollum is apparently conceding, so there's no reason for them not to at this point.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 09:30:56 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

McCollum is apparently conceding, so there's no reason for them not to at this point.

Hopefully we never have to hear from that political loser ever again. He was actually a good AG though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:31:05 PM
My glancing at the vote in the counties per the link here, suggests that Scott may beat McCollum by about 5 to 10 thousand votes, assuming the extrapolations replicate what went before, including the number of votes per precinct. But I think absentee votes are not counted as precincts so there is less vote there, which if true might push Scott's margin up to a much as 20 thousand.  So anyway, it might not be quite over.

Another thing is whether half the Cuban precincts are in in Dade, replicating the half for the county at large. That is where the bulk of the GOP voters live.



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: rbt48 on August 24, 2010, 09:32:33 PM
I still think that Bartlett can pull this one out (VT Democratic governorship nomination).









:-)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:33:55 PM
Vermont Gov D (170/260 in) - Markowitz +13 votes.  Same colors as before.
()

Vermont House R (170/260 in) - Beaudry (in blue) up by 2 points over Mitchell (in green).  Stern in red:
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:34:54 PM
Nothing from Arizona yet. Maybe an illegal immigrant stole the ballot boxes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:34:54 PM
Oh a bunch more precincts came in, in Dade, and McCollum's margin there only went up by 1,000 votes. So I think it is over, and time to call it for Scott.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:35:48 PM
Oh a bunch more precincts came in, in Dade, and McCollum's margin there only went up by 1,000 votes. So I think it is over, and time to call it for Scott.

I called it about an hour ago.  Miami-Dade's website has been ahead of the AP's and SoS.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:38:18 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

Eh - not really.  McCollum generally won the big cities plus Tallahassee and Gainesville, except for Jacksonville.  Scott won the rest.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:38:31 PM
Oh a bunch more precincts came in, in Dade, and McCollum's margin there only went up by 1,000 votes. So I think it is over, and time to call it for Scott.

I called it about an hour ago.  Miami-Dade's website has been ahead of the AP's and SoS.

Well at least we reacted the same way to the same data. I just got it an hour later. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:40:18 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

Eh - not really.  McCollum generally won the big cities plus Tallahassee and Gainesville, except for Jacksonville.  Scott won the rest.

It is odd however that McCollum got trashed in Collier County (Naples).  Why were the well to do geezers down on McCollum I wonder?  Or is Scott from there?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 24, 2010, 09:41:11 PM
The Boyd-Lawson race is fascinating, but not necessarily for the usual reasons.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:42:02 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

Eh - not really.  McCollum generally won the big cities plus Tallahassee and Gainesville, except for Jacksonville.  Scott won the rest.

It is odd however that McCollum got trashed in Collier County (Naples).  Why were the well to do geezers down on McCollum I wonder?  Or is Scott from there?

Collier County is one of the most conservative in the state, up there with the Panhandle.  It voted for Scott and Greene - big time.  I'm not surprised at all.

Racine's back in the lead in Vermont, this time by 96.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 09:42:37 PM
Ties in VT:
Sutton M/R
Norton M/R
Waterville R/S
Berlin M/R
Waltham D/R
Middletown Springs D/R
West Rutland M/R
Ludlow D/M
Andover M/S
Jamaica M/S

Shumlin will get a big boost when his hometown of Putney comes in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 24, 2010, 09:45:13 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

Eh - not really.  McCollum generally won the big cities plus Tallahassee and Gainesville, except for Jacksonville.  Scott won the rest.

It is odd however that McCollum got trashed in Collier County (Naples).  Why were the well to do geezers down on McCollum I wonder?  Or is Scott from there?

Scott is from Naples.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:45:59 PM
GOP turnout in Florida is just swamping the Dem turnout, something like 1,250,000 GOP to 870,000 Dem. With more registered Dems, that is pretty shocking.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:46:33 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

Eh - not really.  McCollum generally won the big cities plus Tallahassee and Gainesville, except for Jacksonville.  Scott won the rest.

It is odd however that McCollum got trashed in Collier County (Naples).  Why were the well to do geezers down on McCollum I wonder?  Or is Scott from there?

Scott is from Naples.

Well that explains that. That was the only real "oddity" that I noticed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 24, 2010, 09:47:42 PM
Did anyone here seriously think that the Miami-Dade GOP Hispanic machine would let David Rivera even get close to losing?  I thought I saw some post earlier hinting at that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: rbt48 on August 24, 2010, 09:48:02 PM
This interesting site shows predictions for the final vote count in the Governorship race.  It has Racine winning by about 170 votes now:
http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=495689 (http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=495689)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 09:48:06 PM
McCollum not conceding yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 24, 2010, 09:48:16 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 09:49:23 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

Eh - not really.  McCollum generally won the big cities plus Tallahassee and Gainesville, except for Jacksonville.  Scott won the rest.

It is odd however that McCollum got trashed in Collier County (Naples).  Why were the well to do geezers down on McCollum I wonder?  Or is Scott from there?

Collier County is one of the most conservative in the state, up there with the Panhandle.  It voted for Scott and Greene - big time.  I'm not surprised at all.

Racine's back in the lead in Vermont, this time by 96.

Actually Collier is more "swingy" than the Panhandle, not surprising since it is packed with rich to rather rich old gentile Yankees. I think the swing to Obama there was pretty big, although I guess I should check that. I would have thought it would be a pretty good fit for McCollum anyway, absent Scott being the home town boy.

Addendum: While the swing to Obama in Collier matched the state swing overall. Whatever. I still remember it swinging other times, but when and where I am not sure.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:49:57 PM
FL-17 called for Frederica Wilson.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 09:50:52 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm sure you wear that blue avatar as a "conservative". How much do you think McCollum paid Huckabee to get his endorsement?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 24, 2010, 09:53:17 PM
GOP turnout in Florida is just swamping the Dem turnout, something like 1,250,000 GOP to 870,000 Dem. With more registered Dems, that is pretty shocking.

Without the FL-2 contest (where whites came out to register their opinion on Allen Boyd - not necessarily positive btw) and blacks came out to vote for Al Lawson), it would be even worse.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:53:23 PM
McCollum did good in some odd places. At least he won his home county (Hernando).

Eh - not really.  McCollum generally won the big cities plus Tallahassee and Gainesville, except for Jacksonville.  Scott won the rest.

It is odd however that McCollum got trashed in Collier County (Naples).  Why were the well to do geezers down on McCollum I wonder?  Or is Scott from there?

Collier County is one of the most conservative in the state, up there with the Panhandle.  It voted for Scott and Greene - big time.  I'm not surprised at all.

Racine's back in the lead in Vermont, this time by 96.

Actually Collier is more "swingy" than the Panhandle, not surprising since it is packed with rich to rather rich old gentile Yankees. I think the swing to Obama there was pretty big, although I guess I should check that. I would have thought it would be a pretty good fit for McCollum anyway, absent Scott being the home town boy.

Swingy, perhaps - but McCain won it 61-38.  Bush took it 65-34.  

Gulf Coast Floridians tend to be more Midwestern Yankee than East Coast Yankee, which shows up in their voting patterns.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:55:24 PM
AP finally called FL-Gov-R for Scott.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 09:55:29 PM
Pinellas County is NY/Philly central cynic.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 09:55:43 PM
GOP turnout in Florida is just swamping the Dem turnout, something like 1,250,000 GOP to 870,000 Dem. With more registered Dems, that is pretty shocking.

McCollum and Scott have spent far more money in total and conservative Dixiecrats had little reason to turn out for Greene/Meek.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 09:56:15 PM
Pinellas County is NY/Philly central cynic.

The Tampa area is an exception - but it's still not Miami.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 09:56:37 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 09:56:50 PM
Here's a map of the FL-02 primary:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 09:57:01 PM
Big towns to go in Vermont:

St Albans (tossup M/R)
Springfield (tossup D/S)
Barre (lean R)
Putney (huge, huge S)
Williamstown (lean R)
Middlebury (who knows)
Ferrisburgh, Charlotte, Shelburne


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 09:57:52 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.

"conservative"* T


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 24, 2010, 09:59:20 PM
GOP turnout in Florida is just swamping the Dem turnout, something like 1,250,000 GOP to 870,000 Dem. With more registered Dems, that is pretty shocking.

McCollum and Scott have spent far more money in total and conservative Dixiecrats had little reason to turn out for Greene/Meek.

You might be amused to find out that FL-2 Dem turnout was not that far off 2008 Dem Prez primary turnout.  In some places, it was higher.  Especially in the white rural areas.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 09:59:31 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.

"conservative"* T

extremist.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 10:01:01 PM
203/260 in.  Racine has increased his lead to 186 votes:

()

Bartlett won a second town - Morristown.

It's looking good for Racine, given what's out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 10:01:17 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.

"conservative"* T

extremist.

Where?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 10:04:39 PM
Racine leads Shumlin by 32. Looks like Markowitz is out of it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 24, 2010, 10:06:12 PM
GOP turnout in Florida is just swamping the Dem turnout, something like 1,250,000 GOP to 870,000 Dem. With more registered Dems, that is pretty shocking.

McCollum and Scott have spent far more money in total and conservative Dixiecrats had little reason to turn out for Greene/Meek.

You might be amused to find out that FL-2 Dem turnout was not that far off 2008 Dem Prez primary turnout.  In some places, it was higher.  Especially in the white rural areas.

Of course that primary had issues which kept turnout down.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: East Coast Republican on August 24, 2010, 10:06:20 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.

"conservative"* T

extremist.

Where?

StatesRights,

Why do you let him bother you so much?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 10:06:22 PM
GOP turnout in Florida is just swamping the Dem turnout, something like 1,250,000 GOP to 870,000 Dem. With more registered Dems, that is pretty shocking.

McCollum and Scott have spent far more money in total and conservative Dixiecrats had little reason to turn out for Greene/Meek.

You might be amused to find out that FL-2 Dem turnout was not that far off 2008 Dem Prez primary turnout.  In some places, it was higher.  Especially in the white rural areas.

Fair enough, not that the 2008 Democratic presidential primary is good baseline though, not being openly contested at the presidential level and all


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 10:09:02 PM
Racine leads Shumlin by 32. Looks like Markowitz is out of it.

That was Westminster coming in for Shumlin (next to Putney).

If patterns hold, it may come down to Putney versus Shelburne, Charlotte and Huntington - what's still out in Chittenden County near Burlington, where Racine is leading.  Plus who comes in second in what's left from Windsor County - Dunne is killing there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 10:09:10 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.

"conservative"* T

extremist.

Where?

You.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 24, 2010, 10:11:07 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.

Me too. Alex Sink 2010!!!! A fiscally responsible Democrat without the shady ties and baggage of Scott.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 10:11:35 PM
Can you please keep your little fight out of this thread please?

Arizona's started reporting on the SOS website:

http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/AZ/19539/31936/en/summary.html

Glassman is barely ahead of Eden, McCain trouncing Hayworth 2-1, Gosar, Quayle (!), Schweikert, and Kelly ahead in the House races.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 10:12:59 PM
WTF!!!! That's it, another democrat I'm supporting if Scott wins. I'm sick and tired of republicans nominating crappy candidates. Scott is a joke.

I'm not supporting Scott in the general.

Me too. Alex Sink 2010!!!!

Nah, independent Bud Chiles is fisically conservative
http://walkwithbud.com/

and he polls about 15%, so if enough people jump onboard...

but MAYBE Alex Sink, she really is pretty moderate


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 10:14:53 PM
Vote Scott! We can't Sink!

The two blue turds above me is the reason we can't get conservatives elected.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 10:16:05 PM
Vote Scott! We can't Sink!

The two blue turds above me is the reason we can't get conservatives elected.

You truly are a work of art.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 10:17:36 PM
Racine leads Shumlin by 32. Looks like Markowitz is out of it.

That was Westminster coming in for Shumlin (next to Putney).

If patterns hold, it may come down to Putney versus Shelburne, Charlotte and Huntington - what's still out in Chittenden County near Burlington, where Racine is leading.  Plus who comes in second in what's left from Windsor County - Dunne is killing there.

Huntington is too small to make a difference, but Shelburne (and especially St Albans) will be crucial. It looks like Racine will just barely pull it off-he's ahead by 77 now. 2nd place in Windsor can go either way-it was R in Hartland and S in Norwich. All eyes on Hartford-and Putney-now.

Also, Newfane and Guilford will help out Shumlin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 10:18:40 PM
Racine's pulling ahead! He's up to a 203 vote lead!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 24, 2010, 10:19:16 PM
Vote Scott! We can't Sink!

The two blue turds above me is the reason we can't get conservatives elected.

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2010/08/rick-scott-attacks-bill-mccollum-on-immigration.html

Looks like that won't play well with conservatives. Especially considering Florida has a large illegal immigration problem from the Caribbean. And who are you calling blue turds? Just because we don't toe the party line doesn't mean we aren't conservative. Sink has had a fantastic record as the chief financial executive for Florida. Bud Chiles would also be a fantastic independent voice in government.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: King on August 24, 2010, 10:20:11 PM
CNN just confirmed the obvious and called it for McCain.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 10:22:19 PM
Racine's pulling ahead! He's up to a 203 vote lead!

What just came in? It wasn't Shelburne or Middlebury or St Albans...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: East Coast Republican on August 24, 2010, 10:22:32 PM
Vote Scott! We can't Sink!

The two blue turds above me is the reason we can't get conservatives elected.

You truly are a work of art.

Actually statesrights, I wouldn't put any of your blame on them considering one cannot vote and the other doesn't live in FL.

Now, I do not disclose who I vote for except to family and close friends (it's just my habit :)) but I will say that I am undecided for the race in November.  Both McCollum and Scott disgusted me but I did choose one of them.  That doesn't mean I'll be voting for Scott in November.  It's not because of the bitter primary battle.  I treally is because they both disgusted me to a certain extent.  I'm open to Alex Sink but I have to hear more about her over the course of the campaign.

I'm not hyper or rushing to judgement like redcommander and ajc by loudly proclaiming 'Oh that's it!  I'MM VOTING FOR XYZ!!!!!!!!!!!!'


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 24, 2010, 10:23:40 PM
Can you please keep your little fight out of this thread please?

Arizona's started reporting on the SOS website:

http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/AZ/19539/31936/en/summary.html

Glassman is barely ahead of Eden, McCain trouncing Hayworth 2-1, Gosar, Quayle (!), Schweikert, and Kelly ahead in the House races.

It looks like all absentee ballots to me, so it may not be totally representative.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 10:25:47 PM
Can you please keep your little fight out of this thread please?

Arizona's started reporting on the SOS website:

http://results.enr.clarityelections.com/AZ/19539/31936/en/summary.html

Glassman is barely ahead of Eden, McCain trouncing Hayworth 2-1, Gosar, Quayle (!), Schweikert, and Kelly ahead in the House races.

It looks like all absentee ballots to me, so it may not be totally representative.

More likely early votes.  The website will tell you exactly, if you click enough times on the right thing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 24, 2010, 10:26:37 PM
Only JD Hayworth is such an idiot and a-hole that he could lose votes to the 3rd candidate he should get by being the anti-McCain default.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 24, 2010, 10:27:32 PM
Maricopa and Pima have yet to count anything other than absentees. Most of the other counties have gotten a significant chunk in (the AP site has kicked in, finally).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 10:27:43 PM
Now in: Putney, Chittenden, Hartford. Shumlin pulls ahead by 160.

Net gain of 15 for Racine in Hartford
Gain of 4 for Shumlin in Chittenden
Gain of 359 for Shumlin in Putney


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 24, 2010, 10:34:37 PM
Paton losing to Kelly in AZ-08. If it wasn't for the Brewer/Immigration thing that would probably move the seat to likely Democrat, but even a normally unelectable nut like Kelly can probably make it a race in this environment.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 10:35:26 PM
Vote Scott! We can't Sink!

The two blue turds above me is the reason we can't get conservatives elected.

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2010/08/rick-scott-attacks-bill-mccollum-on-immigration.html

Looks like that won't play well with conservatives. Especially considering Florida has a large illegal immigration problem from the Caribbean. And who are you calling blue turds? Just because we don't toe the party line doesn't mean we aren't conservative. Sink has had a fantastic record as the chief financial executive for Florida. Bud Chiles would also be a fantastic independent voice in government.

What? The "party line" fought tooth and nail against Scott. Don't believe me? FB State Senator Paula Dockery and ask her personally!

Vote Scott! We can't Sink!

The two blue turds above me is the reason we can't get conservatives elected.

You truly are a work of art.

Yes! I'm like a Monet! Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 24, 2010, 10:38:44 PM
Republicans should prefer all Republican governors to Democratic this year, for the simple fact that governors control redistricting and have a bully pulpit to promote and organize their party for presidential elections.  Florida, as one of the states with the highest number of congressional districts, and probably the most important swing state, is absolutely crucial to Republican success.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 24, 2010, 10:39:12 PM
I'm suprised at how bad James Lankford crushed Kevin Calvey for the GOP nod in the 5th CD in Oklahoma.  I was expecting a closer result no more than 55-45, but it turned out 65-35.  Lankford should easily beat his Democratic opponent Billy Coyle and become the next Congressman of Central Oklahoma.  When this race started and Lankford entered, I thought he would be a quick campaign and then be laughed right off the ballot.  I was wrong, though!  He will make a fine Congressman.  He is very conservative, no doubt about it, but he's not insanely so like my good friend Sally Kern.  I've met James Lankford in person and he's a decent, honest, and genuine man who will be great for Oklahoma and bring the change to Washington that is desperately needed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Franzl on August 24, 2010, 10:40:27 PM
and genuine man who will be great for Oklahoma and bring the change to Washington that is desperately needed.

lol, you really are the kind of person that believes political propaganda.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 10:41:22 PM
and genuine man who will be great for Oklahoma and bring the change to Washington that is desperately needed.

lol, you really are the kind of person that believes political propaganda.

He certainly wouldn't scam you with his beliefs, lol.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 24, 2010, 10:41:59 PM
It's all that McCalister's fault for being a spoiler to McCollum. I won't support a Republican if they are shady, discriminatory, or extremist i.e. Deal and Scott.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 24, 2010, 10:43:46 PM
and genuine man who will be great for Oklahoma and bring the change to Washington that is desperately needed.

lol, you really are the kind of person that believes political propaganda.

Only because I know this guy personally.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 24, 2010, 10:44:34 PM
Wow great job Arizona 3rd. Another Quayle might be closer to congress after tonight. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 24, 2010, 10:45:36 PM
It's all that McCalister's fault for being a spoiler to McCollum. I won't support a Republican if they are shady, discriminatory, or extremist i.e. Deal and Scott.

Who's the one that paid for a political endorsement?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 24, 2010, 10:46:18 PM
Shumlin's lead cut to 90. Calais, Hyde Park and Charlotte all gave net votes to Racine. Shumlin should be praying for a miracle in St Albans.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 24, 2010, 10:46:38 PM
Republicans should prefer all Republican governors to Democratic this year, for the simple fact that governors control redistricting and have a bully pulpit to promote and organize their party for presidential elections.  Florida, as one of the states with the highest number of congressional districts, and probably the most important swing state, is absolutely crucial to Republican success.

 Some people also consider governing in their prefs


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Franzl on August 24, 2010, 10:47:33 PM
and genuine man who will be great for Oklahoma and bring the change to Washington that is desperately needed.

lol, you really are the kind of person that believes political propaganda.

Only because I know this guy personally.

I haven't seen many mainstream politicians you don't like, to be honest. No matter how far left or right.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: nhmagic on August 24, 2010, 10:56:32 PM
Each of the three competitive AZ dems are going to lose their seats.  That is as clear as ever from the republican turnout so far in the primary. 

AZ1-30725 DEM / 55314 REP
AZ5-18230 DEM / 39687 REP
AZ8-33979 DEM / 47590 REP


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 24, 2010, 11:09:34 PM
Some people also consider governing in their prefs

They shouldn't if they're out-of-state.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Mr.Phips on August 24, 2010, 11:11:02 PM
Each of the three competitive AZ dems are going to lose their seats.  That is as clear as ever from the republican turnout so far in the primary. 

AZ1-30725 DEM / 55314 REP
AZ5-18230 DEM / 39687 REP
AZ8-33979 DEM / 47590 REP


A little presumptious, considering that Democrats had no primary and no reason to show up.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 11:12:53 PM
Each of the three competitive AZ dems are going to lose their seats.  That is as clear as ever from the republican turnout so far in the primary. 

AZ1-30725 DEM / 55314 REP
AZ5-18230 DEM / 39687 REP
AZ8-33979 DEM / 47590 REP


A little presumptious, considering that Democrats had no primary and no reason to show up.

Huh?  They have a contested Senate primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ajc0918 on August 24, 2010, 11:15:02 PM
Florida Senate Turnout
Democrats: 898,032
Republicans: 1,242,959

Florida Governor:
Democrats: 852,028
Republicans: 1,272,707

Not very good news for the democrats if this is seen in November. Especially since democrats outnumber republicans in Florida by 600,000.

Oh and for FL-25 since some of you are talking about the chances of a democrat pick up:
FL-25 Turnout:
Democrats: 15,663
Republicans: 29,059

Another interesting one:
FL-13 Turnout:
Democrats: 32,291
Republicans: 73,662


Oh and Rubio is the only GOP Senate candidate to get over 1,000,000 votes in the primary. Fiorina got like 980,000 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 24, 2010, 11:15:39 PM
and genuine man who will be great for Oklahoma and bring the change to Washington that is desperately needed.

lol, you really are the kind of person that believes political propaganda.

Only because I know this guy personally.

I haven't seen many mainstream politicians you don't like, to be honest. No matter how far left or right.

Probably because I try to see the good in people, and don't look for the bad.  I've had this mindset my entire life, and it's served me well most of the time.  I like far left individuals like the late Ted Kennedy and John Murtha and Nancy Pelosi, but i also like the far right individuals like Sally Kern and Strom Thurmond.  I even like Jim Inhofe as a person, just not as a politician.  Now, liking a person doesn't mean I care for their politics too well, but I even like to find one thing with them I do agree on rather than trying to find the one thing where I don't agree with them.

As far as James Lankford, I've met this guy personally and he has a really soft and caring heart.  He will be a good Congressman and he will make a lot of friends on both sides of the aisle because of his charm and his charisma.  If he weren't in the US House, I'd almost ask the powers that be to consider him as the chaplain for the House or the Senate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Kevinstat on August 24, 2010, 11:21:03 PM
Vermont's been at 226 of 260 precincts in according to the AP for almost (if not over) 10 minutes now.  Shumlin leads Racine by 245 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: nhmagic on August 24, 2010, 11:22:15 PM
Each of the three competitive AZ dems are going to lose their seats.  That is as clear as ever from the republican turnout so far in the primary. 

AZ1-30725 DEM / 55314 REP
AZ5-18230 DEM / 39687 REP
AZ8-33979 DEM / 47590 REP


A little presumptious, considering that Democrats had no primary and no reason to show up.

If you knew the democrats had even a 50/50 shot you would have blasted my comment - the fact that you only call it a little presumptious is almost evidence enough you agree.  I know that you cant interpret primary results and apply it to the general, but there is enough of a turnout gap to show an obvious wave incoming.  You have to also remember that dems rarely if ever have a contentious primary in AZ, they just solidify around a candidate and hope into the wind that they get lucky - its just the way AZ works.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 24, 2010, 11:22:56 PM

I haven't seen many mainstream politicians you don't like, to be honest. No matter how far left or right.

Probably because I try to see the good in people, and don't look for the bad.  I've had this mindset my entire life, and it's served me well most of the time.

Except for when it leads to you repeatedly falling for scams.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Mr.Phips on August 24, 2010, 11:26:05 PM
Each of the three competitive AZ dems are going to lose their seats.  That is as clear as ever from the republican turnout so far in the primary. 

AZ1-30725 DEM / 55314 REP
AZ5-18230 DEM / 39687 REP
AZ8-33979 DEM / 47590 REP



A little presumptious, considering that Democrats had no primary and no reason to show up.

Huh?  They have a contested Senate primary.

A Senate primary with a couple of joke candidates that everyone knows have no chance of beating McCain.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Kevinstat on August 24, 2010, 11:27:33 PM
Northern Vermont's preferred candidate, Paul Beaudry, won out in the battle for the Republican sacrificial lamb against Peter Welch in November.  Or is Welch seen as vulnerable for some reason?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 24, 2010, 11:32:27 PM
Each of the three competitive AZ dems are going to lose their seats.  That is as clear as ever from the republican turnout so far in the primary. 

AZ1-30725 DEM / 55314 REP
AZ5-18230 DEM / 39687 REP
AZ8-33979 DEM / 47590 REP
There aren't many registered Democrats in AZ-5, just many swing voters that vote for Mitchell. In AZ-1, the Democratic base is composed of Natives and Hispanics. If there is going to be low turnout in November, their turnout is going to be bottoming out for a primary that little care about. In AZ-8 the gap isn't too severe.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 11:32:51 PM
Vermont's been at 226 of 260 precincts in according to the AP for almost (if not over) 10 minutes now.  Shumlin leads Racine by 245 votes.

Two precincts came in and Shumlin's lead is down to 30.  Shelburne (near Burlington) was one of the two towns.  Still nothing from St. Albans city or town.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Kevinstat on August 24, 2010, 11:33:30 PM
Rather useless information now, but Shumlin's lead was down to 75 votes after the 227th precint came in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Kevinstat on August 24, 2010, 11:34:58 PM
One more precinct in and Shumlin adds a vote to his lead.  You gotta love New England elections.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 11:37:31 PM
This was before the last precinct came in:

()

Bartlett took another town, Hyde Park.  An island of orange.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Kevinstat on August 24, 2010, 11:51:15 PM
Still 229 precincts in, but now Shumlin is up by 35 votes.  The town results page had gone back to 228 earlier, and perhaps that withdrawn town isn't in the APs results now while the other town is.  Wierd.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 24, 2010, 11:52:17 PM
Still 229 precincts in, but now Shumlin is up by 35 votes.  The town results page had gone back to 228 earlier, and perhaps that withdrawn town isn't in the APs results now while the other town is.  Wierd.

230 came in - and Racine's up by 13 votes.  I'm not sure what it was - it wasn't St. Albans.

Edit: Fairfield, next to St. Albans.  Shumlin got slaughtered in a two way race between Racine and Markowitz.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Kevinstat on August 24, 2010, 11:57:16 PM
Still 229 precincts in, but now Shumlin is up by 35 votes.  The town results page had gone back to 228 earlier, and perhaps that withdrawn town isn't in the APs results now while the other town is.  Wierd.

230 came in - and Racine's up by 13 votes.  I'm not sure what it was - it wasn't St. Albans.

Edit: Fairfield, next to St. Albans.  Shumlin got slaughtered in a two way race between Racine and Markowitz.

I had just figured out it was Fairfield myself.  I have to go to bed, but this has been fun.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:10:34 AM
Precinct 231 puts Racine up by 86.  I think it was Springfield, where he came in second to Dunne.

..and 232 puts Shumlin back in the lead by 121.  Middlebury - in a two-way fight with Dunne with Racine trailing badly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:16:27 AM
Alaska's started coming in.

1/4 precincts reporting, Miller up by 2%. Holy crap.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:17:02 AM
Alaska's started coming in.

1/4 precincts reporting, Miller up by 2%. Holy crap.

Wouldn't shock me.

There's no way of knowing from whence these votes have come - yet.  Results by HD may or may not be available tonight in pdf form on the AK SoS' website.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:19:44 AM
Alaska's started coming in.

1/4 precincts reporting, Miller up by 2%. Holy crap.

Wouldn't shock me.

Well, I do suppose Palin's endorsement actually, finally, remotely means something up there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Tender Branson on August 25, 2010, 12:22:06 AM
Alaska's started coming in.

1/4 precincts reporting, Miller up by 2%. Holy crap.

That ... would be interesting !


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:22:13 AM
Alaska's started coming in.

1/4 precincts reporting, Miller up by 2%. Holy crap.

Wouldn't shock me.

Well, I do suppose Palin's endorsement actually, finally, remotely means something up there.

Palin really, really, really hates Murkowski.  Plus, there's infighting in the Alaskan Republican party to begin with.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 25, 2010, 12:23:20 AM
Parnell not doing so hot either.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: xavier110 on August 25, 2010, 12:23:54 AM
LOL never trust Alaskan polling!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:24:49 AM

He's up by 12 points.  He should win it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:26:14 AM

He's up by 12 points.  He should win it.

While Murkowski may or may not be screwed already, trailing by 2% within thirty minutes of the first precincts being reported.

EDIT: More precincts in, Murkowski trailing even more - about 550 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:27:21 AM
By the way, if all that's been released is the early vote, nothing should be read into it.  The early vote has been kind of screwy in past Alaska elections.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:32:42 AM
...and now the HTML tally on the elections.alaska.gov page is back to 0.  The mirror sites still have the AP's numbers, as does the pdf file.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:35:14 AM
Just putting it out there, but I'd find it supremely hilarious if an incumbent, senior Senator loses in a primary to a challenger that she outfunds 10 to 1.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 12:36:14 AM
If Murkowski loses, I think it will be time to change from blue to green.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:38:01 AM
If Murkowski loses, I think it will be time to change from blue to green.

That's a bit extreme.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:38:08 AM
Just putting it out there, but I'd find it supremely hilarious if an incumbent, senior Senator loses in a primary to a challenger that she outfunds 10 to 1.

Miller is a good candidate.  He ran for a state office in a heavily Democratic district and almost won - or so rumor has it.

Lead's steady with more votes in (146/438):
Senate (R)
Miller, Joe    REP    21364    51.20%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    20362    48.80%

Governor (ADL)
Berkowitz, Ethan A.    DEM    8039    48.47%
French, Hollis S.    DEM    6748    40.68%
Toien, William S.    LIB    577    3.48%
Wright, Donald R.    AI    1222    7.37%

GOVERNOR (R)    REP    
Total Votes       41065    
Heikes, Gerald L.    REP    158    0.38%
Hlatcu, Merica    REP    222    0.54%
Little, Sam    REP    693    1.69%
Parnell, Sean R.    REP    19860    48.36%
Samuels, Ralph    REP    5665    13.80%
Walker, Bill    REP    14467    35.23%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 12:40:05 AM
If Murkowski loses, I think it will be time to change from blue to green.

That's a bit extreme.

No it's not, she is a very valuable voice in senate, and throwing her out because she doesn't live up to tea party and Wasilla Sarah's standards would be a sign of how much Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:43:22 AM
If Murkowski loses, I think it will be time to change from blue to green.

That's a bit extreme.

No it's not, she is a very valuable voice in senate, and throwing her out because she doesn't live up to tea party and Wasilla Sarah's standards would be a sign of how much Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot.

Well, I'm all for independents, but these are hardly decisions on behalf of the entire party. These are decisions made by state citizens who honestly want another candidate, and vote knowing that. Wyoming chose Mead over Meyer, Georgia(for some reason) chose Deal over Handel, Connecticut chose McMahon over Schiff, etc etc.

It's hardly the Republican Party to hold responsible. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:47:21 AM
Aaaaaand Miller continues to pull away. Up by 1000 votes now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 12:49:27 AM
Yup - with 159 in:

Miller, Joe    REP    23251    51.24%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    22124    48.76%

The main problem is we have no idea what's in and what's out.  If the Mat-Su Valley has been overrepresented, Murkowski will come back.  If not, maybe not.

Berkowitz' lead remains steady.  Parnell's up by 14 now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: fezzyfestoon on August 25, 2010, 12:56:47 AM
Good for Alaska, Murkowski was terrible.  At least she's gone.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:00:28 AM
Good for Alaska, Murkowski was terrible.  At least she's gone.

She's not gone quite yet, but if Miller's trend continues, he'll be at a good 54% by the end of the night.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 25, 2010, 01:03:09 AM
Yay, I hope Miller's lead holds, this is unexpectedly great news. Quite an upset compared to polling I've seen.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: fezzyfestoon on August 25, 2010, 01:04:05 AM
Good for Alaska, Murkowski was terrible.  At least she's gone.
She's not gone quite yet, but if Miller's trend continues, he'll be at a good 54% by the end of the night.

True, true, I suppose we shouldn't count our chickens yet. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:04:34 AM
Yay, I hope Miller's lead holds, this is unexpectedly great news. Quite an upset compared to polling I've seen.

I know, it's so rare that Palin endorses a candidate that's actually a good fit for their state. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 25, 2010, 01:04:58 AM
Good for Alaska, Murkowski was terrible.  At least she's gone.
She might be corrupt and has horrible positions on energy issues, but at least she was pro-choice, and supported stem cell research, plus she voted for SCHIP. Miller will be just as bad on energy issues, and has a good chance of being just as corrupt. Alaska is trading one evil for something much worse.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 01:09:13 AM
Good for Alaska, Murkowski was terrible.  At least she's gone.
She might be corrupt and has horrible positions on energy issues, but at least she was pro-choice, and supported stem cell research, plus she voted for SCHIP. Miller will be just as bad on energy issues, and has a good chance of being just as corrupt. Alaska is trading one evil for something much worse.

Well said, that is why she needs to win. She is not perfect by no means, but I don't want Palin's candidate representing Alaska in congress. It's only 36% in and its about a 1,000 vote difference. If the major cities haven't come in yet, she can make up the deficit by doing well in Juneau, Fairbanks, and Anchorage.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:10:26 AM

I don't mean to be rude, but...Rita Meyer was Palin's candidate, too. ???


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on August 25, 2010, 01:10:51 AM
Good for Alaska, Murkowski was terrible.  At least she's gone.
She might be corrupt and has horrible positions on energy issues, but at least she was pro-choice, and supported stem cell research, plus she voted for SCHIP. Miller will be just as bad on energy issues, and has a good chance of being just as corrupt. Alaska is trading one evil for something much worse.

S-CHIP is a well known fascist program, of course.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 01:12:35 AM

I don't mean to be rude, but...Rita Meyer was Palin's candidate, too. ???

Yes but I supported her because Romney liked her. No other major politician beside Applebees Huckabee has endorsed Joe Miller which is a bad sign there. Plus it's Palin candidate in Alaska. That can cause real political damage right there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 25, 2010, 01:13:06 AM
Good for Alaska, Murkowski was terrible.  At least she's gone.
She might be corrupt and has horrible positions on energy issues, but at least she was pro-choice, and supported stem cell research, plus she voted for SCHIP. Miller will be just as bad on energy issues, and has a good chance of being just as corrupt. Alaska is trading one evil for something much worse.

Well said, that is why she needs to win. She is not perfect by no means, but I don't want Palin's candidate representing Alaska in congress. It's only 36% in and its about a 1,000 vote difference. If the major cities haven't come in yet, she can make up the deficit by doing well in Juneau, Fairbanks, and Anchorage.

If there's any state where "Palin's candidate" would actually fit the state, Alaska would certainly be it...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:15:48 AM
Wow, Miller wasn't kidding when he mentioned in an interview that polling is always wildly inaccurate in Alaska. Almost half the precincts are in...and his lead is increasing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 25, 2010, 01:19:17 AM
Wow, Miller wasn't kidding when he mentioned in an interview that polling is always wildly inaccurate in Alaska. Almost half the precincts are in...and his lead is increasing.

It's still too close for comfort though. I'm trying not to get my hopes up too high in the event that horrible woman makes a comeback.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:21:57 AM
Wow, Miller wasn't kidding when he mentioned in an interview that polling is always wildly inaccurate in Alaska. Almost half the precincts are in...and his lead is increasing.

It's still too close for comfort though. I'm trying not to get my hopes up too high in the event that horrible woman makes a comeback.

I'm giving Murkowski until halfway through to pull a comeback, myself. If she doesn't manage that, as far as I'm concerned, she's done.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 01:22:33 AM
Wow, Miller wasn't kidding when he mentioned in an interview that polling is always wildly inaccurate in Alaska. Almost half the precincts are in...and his lead is increasing.

I can guestimate where the precincts are in from based on the House District primary precincts reporting:

Overall   41.78%

Fairbanks   67.27%
SE AK   64.00%
Anchorage   60.17%
Mat-Su   50.00%
Kenai/Kodiak   44.74%
Bush             6.29%

Note that the House District primary precinct count is going slightly faster than the Governor count - at least in the downloadable text results.

Watch out for the Bush.  It's put establishment candidates back in the lead before.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:26:00 AM
You know, in hindsight, I really wish Alaska had more than one county.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 01:28:47 AM
Yesss! Murkowski is making a comeback in votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:29:56 AM
Yesss! Murkowski is making a comeback in votes.

Not that much of one, though. She still hasn't gone past the gap they started with(550).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 01:33:02 AM
You know, in hindsight, I really wish Alaska had more than one county.

It has boroughs and Census designated places.  And many more than one.  Alaska elections are reported by House District, though, not borough or CDP.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 01:34:03 AM
Yesss! Murkowski is making a comeback in votes.

Not that much of one, though. She still hasn't gone past the gap they started with(550).

Not on the most recent dump, which came in part from the Mat-Su Valley:

With 218/438:
Miller, Joe             32275   51.43%   Miller +2296
Murkowski, Lisa   29979   47.77%   


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:38:46 AM
Yesss! Murkowski is making a comeback in votes.

Not that much of one, though. She still hasn't gone past the gap they started with(550).

Not on the most recent dump, which came in part from the Mat-Su Valley:

With 218/438:
Miller, Joe             32275   51.43%   Miller +2296
Murkowski, Lisa   29979   47.77%   


I'm calling it prematurely. She's done.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 01:40:25 AM
Yesss! Murkowski is making a comeback in votes.

Not that much of one, though. She still hasn't gone past the gap they started with(550).

Not on the most recent dump, which came in part from the Mat-Su Valley:

With 218/438:
Miller, Joe             32275   51.43%   Miller +2296
Murkowski, Lisa   29979   47.77%   


I'm calling it prematurely. She's done.

I'd never call a close Alaska race without significant numbers from the Bush.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:41:27 AM
Yesss! Murkowski is making a comeback in votes.

Not that much of one, though. She still hasn't gone past the gap they started with(550).

Not on the most recent dump, which came in part from the Mat-Su Valley:

With 218/438:
Miller, Joe             32275   51.43%   Miller +2296
Murkowski, Lisa   29979   47.77%   


I'm calling it prematurely. She's done.

I'd never call a close Alaska race without significant numbers from the Bush.

First one I've ever paid attention to, so I'm learning.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 25, 2010, 01:45:55 AM
I'm glad to see Svensson has dropped the rather comical facade and adopted the correct avatar.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:47:26 AM
I'm glad to see Svensson has dropped the rather comical facade and adopted the correct avatar.

...you are a pathetic individual if you dropped into this thread just to say that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 25, 2010, 01:49:16 AM
No it's just something I noticed while browsing the results.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:52:05 AM
No it's just something I noticed while browsing the results.

So, you just now noticed that I'm anti-establishment. That took you a while, Red.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 25, 2010, 01:53:45 AM
LOL, protest the establishment by joining the party of George W. Bush! The sad thing is that appears to be a common belief among teabaggers.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 01:55:41 AM
LOL, protest the establishment by joining the party of George W. Bush! The sad thing is that appears to be a common belief among teabaggers.

Oh how I long for the days of the Republican party of Teddy Roosevelt. :(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:58:31 AM
LOL, protest the establishment by joining the party of George W. Bush! The sad thing is that appears to be a common belief among teabaggers.

I protest the establishment by supporting candidates that aren't of the establishment. End of. Now leave me alone.

Oh, and George Bush isn't president any more. Just thought I'd put that out there, since you don't seem to know.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 02:02:48 AM
221/438 in now:

Miller, Joe                   32507   51.48%   Miller +2372
Murkowski, Lisa   30135   47.72%   

Where from?
Overall                   50.91% of Precincts Reporting

SE AK                   72.00%
Fairbanks/Interior   83.64%
Mat-Su                   64.71%
Anchorage           74.58%
Kenai/Kodiak           57.89%
Bush                     6.29%

I also just got our first cards cast report about 10 minutes ago.  It's in sucky PDF format and is going to take some time to put into something digestable.  I can tell you what precincts are in and out, and what percentage of the voters voted in those that are in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 02:04:58 AM
Yesss! Murkowski is making a comeback in votes.

Not that much of one, though. She still hasn't gone past the gap they started with(550).

Not on the most recent dump, which came in part from the Mat-Su Valley:

With 218/438:
Miller, Joe             32275   51.43%   Miller +2296
Murkowski, Lisa   29979   47.77%   


I'm calling it prematurely. She's done.

I'd never call a close Alaska race without significant numbers from the Bush.

First one I've ever paid attention to, so I'm learning.

There probably won't be many Republican votes there, but they may be skewed toward the incumbent.  Precinct-level data would help.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 02:19:57 AM
Well, I shall sit here and whistle patiently while waiting for the next vote dump.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 02:35:46 AM
268/438:
Miller, Joe                   40813   51.07%   Miller +2329
Murkowski, Lisa   38484   48.16%   

Precincts Reporting Percent (Big races have caught up to House District Races):

Overall                   61.19%

SE AK                   86.00%
Fairbanks/Interior   90.91%
Mat-Su                   88.24%
Anchorage           92.37%
Kenai/Kodiak           71.05%
Bush                             6.29%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 02:39:52 AM
The last (and only) cards counted report came out about an hour ago.  At that time, there were about 33,000 RV in the Bush precincts yet to be counted - about 17% of the total.  The overall number of RV in the Bush precincts that have yet to be counted hasn't changed much (Bush precincts haven't reported much at all) - but the percentage is no doubt higher given that much of the rest has come in a bit since then.

Not all of those RVs will vote, much less vote in the Republican primary.  But if even 10% do,
that's 3,300 potential votes right there.

For the record, I lump HD-6, which includes some Interior Alaska towns that are on the road network in with HDs 37, 38, 39 and 40 in the Bush category.  I put HDs 1-5 in the Southeast Alaska category, 7-12 in Fairbanks/Interior (includes Valdez), 13-16 in the Mat-Su Valley, 17-32 in Anchorage and 33-36 in Kenai Peninsula and Kodiak.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 02:44:21 AM
According to the Anchorage Daily News, 7,600 of the approximately 16,000 absentee ballots were returned by Monday night - and they won't be counted until August 31.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 02:53:10 AM
In other races, Ben Quayle will be the Republican nominee in AZ-03.  

AP called AZ-Senate-D for Glassman.

There's been no update to the Vermont numbers for hours.  Still stuck at 232/260, missing St. Albans.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 03:02:39 AM
A more recent CARDS report was released by Alaska.  As of about 11:30 AK time, the precincts that are out are made up of 13.76% of registered voters.  Almost half of those voters are in the Bush.  20% are in the very conservative Mat-Su Valley, and 14% are in Anchorage.

We still don't have precinct or Alaska-HD level Republican primary vote data, but I think it's looking very good for Miller.  Even in the unlikely event that Murkowski wins the Bush by 3,000 votes, Miller could easily make part of the gap up in the Mat-Su.

The CARDS report was with 281/288 in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 03:05:52 AM
New Alaska Dump (288/438):

Miller, Joe              43458   51.32%   Miller +2880
Murkowski, Lisa   40578   47.92%   

Looks like more of the Mat-Su came in since the last CARDS report, as well as some more of the Bush:

Overall                   65.75% of Precincts In

SE AK                   86.00%
Fairbanks/Interior   90.91%
Mat-Su                   94.12%
Anchorage           97.46%
Kenai/Kodiak           73.68%
Bush                          13.99%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 03:10:53 AM
New Alaska Dump (288/438):

Miller, Joe              43458   51.32%   Miller +2880
Murkowski, Lisa   40578   47.92%   

Looks like more of the Mat-Su came in since the last CARDS report, as well as some more of the Bush:

Overall                   65.75% of Precincts In

SE AK                   86.00%
Fairbanks/Interior   90.91%
Mat-Su                   94.12%
Anchorage           97.46%
Kenai/Kodiak           73.68%
Bush                          13.99%


Looks like Bush is steadily failing to change the race. I still call Murkowski done for.

And I'm probably leaving in 20 minutes, so this is going to have to wait until tomorrow for me.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on August 25, 2010, 03:14:33 AM
Wow, the Florida GOP epic failed with Scott. I'm sure that a Venture Capitalist who has a history of Medicare Fraud will go over REAL WELL in Florida.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 03:30:55 AM
Looks like Bush is steadily failing to change the race. I still call Murkowski done for.

And I'm probably leaving in 20 minutes, so this is going to have to wait until tomorrow for me.

Yeah - here's the deal.  I estimate that if turnout in the regions was the same in the precincts in and out, then, as of the last CARDS report, there were about 10,800 votes left to be tallied, going into the absentees.  Murkowski would have to win them about 70-30.  Very unlikely.  And that's based on the current tally with even more votes in than the CARDS reported and fewer to be tallied.

She's screwed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 03:34:29 AM
314/438:

More Mat-Su, more Anchorage,  more Kenai, more Bush.... More of a lead for Miller.

Miller, Joe               44481   51.46%   Miller +3174
Murkowski, Lisa   41307   47.79%   

Overall - 71.69% of Precincts Reporting

SE AK                   88.00%
Fairbanks/Interior   90.91%
Mat-Su                   97.06%
Anchorage           99.15%
Kenai/Kodiak           94.74%
Bush                           23.78%

Adios, Murkowski.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 03:38:28 AM
Well, that was a thrilling night. I bid adieu to Murkowski, and bid myself to bed.

A good night, Cinyc. ;)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 03:40:17 AM
Well, that was a thrilling night. I bid adieu to Murkowski, and bid myself to bed.

A good night, Cinyc. ;)


According to the Anchorage Daily News, the Alaska election officials stopped counting at 12:30AM Alaska time.  These are probably the final numbers until the morning, anyway.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 03:44:33 AM
And I am now Green. :( Oh well, maybe it would be best if Republicans don't win back congress. Anyway good night.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 03:46:34 AM
I spoke a little bit too soon - one more dump, all Bush votes (now about 38% reporting).

334/438:
Miller, Joe                44,570   51.36%   Miller +3023
Murkowski, Lisa   41,547   47.88%   

Murkowski netted 151 votes in those 20 Bush precincts.  At this rate she'll need to win about 400 more Bush precincts at that margin.  There are only 143 total.

Murkowski's only hope is that the less-Alaskan Native, partially non-Bush HD-6 is a lot more in than the other Bush districts, especially the Aleutian and Bethel ones.  But it likely shouldn't matter.  They tend to vote Democratic.

The ADN now tweets the Alaksan Election officials are still up and counting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 04:04:42 AM
Last update for the night:

New CARDS report to match the last update.  Now, 73% of potential RVs whose votes haven't been counted are out in the Bush.    Assuming uniform Republican turnout of what's in and out in each region, there should be about 4,750 votes remaining.  Controlling for Republican turnout thus far, 61% of the expected 4,750 voters are in the Bush - though both numbers will likely be lower.
 
Murkowski needs to win the remaining votes just north of 80-20 to pull even.  Not going to happen, even with the absentees.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 25, 2010, 06:26:05 AM
Wow, okay. I wasn't expecting to wake up to Murkowski trailing.

Also, Ben Quayle? Really, AZ-03?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 25, 2010, 06:51:14 AM
Here's the Arizona Dem primary map (McCain won every county, so no point in making a Republican one):

()

Parraz's one county, Santa Cruz, is 80% Hispanic. And he still didn't even break 30% there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 25, 2010, 07:09:09 AM
Well, we're now at 429/438 precincts - it's tightened up a certain bit:

Miller - 45,909 (51.09%)
Murkowski - 43,949 (48.91%)

Anyone have any idea how many absentees, etc. are left.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 25, 2010, 07:20:43 AM
16,000 absentees requested, 7,600 returned as of Monday. Those will be counted next Tuesday, and any that come in will be counted in September. Doesn't seem like it's enough to save Murkowski.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 07:32:35 AM
Wow, okay. I wasn't expecting to wake up to Murkowski trailing.

Also, Ben Quayle? Really, AZ-03?



Same reaction here.  Young came back from a situation like this in 08 fwiw, as ssp noted


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 25, 2010, 07:35:05 AM
Meek managed to get a bigger margin over Greene than McCain had over Hayworth.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Brittain33 on August 25, 2010, 07:48:59 AM
Each of the three competitive AZ dems are going to lose their seats.  That is as clear as ever from the republican turnout so far in the primary.  

AZ1-30725 DEM / 55314 REP
AZ5-18230 DEM / 39687 REP
AZ8-33979 DEM / 47590 REP


A little presumptious, considering that Democrats had no primary and no reason to show up.

Huh?  They have a contested Senate primary.

Do you think it's salient that each of those seats had competitive HOUSE primaries on the Republican side, with each candidate getting out the vote, and the Democrats didn't? How much advertising did Glassman's opponent buy in each of these markets?



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 25, 2010, 07:50:14 AM
Wow, okay. I wasn't expecting to wake up to Murkowski trailing.

Also, Ben Quayle? Really, AZ-03?



Same reaction here.  Young came back from a situation like this in 08 fwiw, as ssp noted

Biggest difference is though that Young was leading after the non-absentee count by 150 votes and won after the absentees by 300.  Murkowski being down 2,000 would require a bigger shift in absentees than even Begich-Stevens, I suspect (though I haven't done the numbers).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 07:57:00 AM
Amazing, I thought it'd be a murkowsklandslide


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 25, 2010, 08:05:02 AM
I actually was predicting a narrow Miller victory - should have posted it here!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 25, 2010, 08:28:26 AM
232 out of 260 precincts in from Vermont. This one could take weeks to decide.

Peter SHUMLIN 16960
Doug RACINE 16839 (-121)
Deb MARKOWITZ 16039 (-921) Markowitz has surely lost.
Matt DUNNE 14165
Susan BARTLETT 3507

Precincts remaining:

Alburg
Brighton
Brookfield
Burke
Cabot
Canaan
Dover
Enosburg
Granville
Guildhall
Hancock
Lemington
Middlesex
New Haven
Newfane
Pawlet
Plymouth
Reading
Rochester
Shaftsbury
St Albans
Tunbridge
Wells
Westfield
Weston
Whiting
Williamstown



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 25, 2010, 08:57:19 AM
I actually was predicting a narrow Miller victory - should have posted it here!

I'm sure you were...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Hash on August 25, 2010, 09:08:18 AM
and genuine man who will be great for Oklahoma and bring the change to Washington that is desperately needed.

lol, you really are the kind of person that believes political propaganda.

I don't see why that's surprising. He's dense enough to buy into every scam possible already.

so, this Bartlett dude won Stowe, VT? Nice.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 25, 2010, 09:29:48 AM
Good job Alaska. Send her packing along with her disgusting father four years ago.

If his lead holds, Miller will make a great Senator.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tmthforu94 on August 25, 2010, 09:40:50 AM
This is too bad. :( Murkowski was one of my favorite Senators.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 25, 2010, 09:45:57 AM
This is too bad. :( Murkowski was one of my favorite Senators.

The only shame in this result is, she didn't bring Don Young down with her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 25, 2010, 09:46:59 AM
so, this Bartlett dude won Stowe, VT? Nice.

Actually, Matt Dunne won Stowe. Bartlett came in last there but won in neighboring Morristown.

Lol, Bartlett's a she.

Up to 241 precincts now. Shumlin leads Racine by 245. Still no St Albans.

Edit: St Albans city netted 15 for Racine. St Albans town not in yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 25, 2010, 09:50:57 AM
This is too bad. :( Murkowski was one of my favorite Senators.

The only shame in this result is, she didn't bring Don Young down with her.

QFT.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 25, 2010, 09:55:36 AM
Wow, the Florida GOP epic failed with Scott. I'm sure that a Venture Capitalist who has a history of Medicare Fraud will go over REAL WELL in Florida.

Dude, you live in California.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: East Coast Republican on August 25, 2010, 09:57:46 AM
Wow, the Florida GOP epic failed with Scott. I'm sure that a Venture Capitalist who has a history of Medicare Fraud will go over REAL WELL in Florida.

Dude, you live in California.

Exactly.  He lives in California-even more of a reason for him not to have any idea how this race will turn out.  I live here and I don't even know what's going to happen.  Edge goes to Sink...for now....


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ?????????? on August 25, 2010, 10:01:21 AM
Wow, the Florida GOP epic failed with Scott. I'm sure that a Venture Capitalist who has a history of Medicare Fraud will go over REAL WELL in Florida.

Dude, you live in California.

Exactly.  He lives in California-even more of a reason for him not to have any idea how this race will turn out.  I live here and I don't even know what's going to happen.  Edge goes to Sink...for now....

They are already blasting Sink. LOL Day one after the primaries.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on August 25, 2010, 10:01:43 AM
I wish McCain would have lost.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 25, 2010, 10:06:09 AM
Does anyone think that if Hayworth had not done those infomercials, he would have won?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: East Coast Republican on August 25, 2010, 10:09:12 AM
Wow, the Florida GOP epic failed with Scott. I'm sure that a Venture Capitalist who has a history of Medicare Fraud will go over REAL WELL in Florida.

Dude, you live in California.

Exactly.  He lives in California-even more of a reason for him not to have any idea how this race will turn out.  I live here and I don't even know what's going to happen.  Edge goes to Sink...for now....

They are already blasting Sink. LOL Day one after the primaries.

haha yeah I already saw that one ad about Sink laying off 'thousand of workers' done by that special interest group.  I do not know if this would be the best approach for Scott though-it could make Sink come off as a responsbile grown up/getting down to business and she could indirectly make Scott look childish and only concerned with a smear campaign.

I say Scott should spend the next 3 weeks doing a combination of playing nice/getting mccollum people back on board AND attacking Sink for whatever he can find.  After that, unleash the 50-70 million in negative and positive ads of him driving a truck.  

We're really going to see what Scott is made of in the next two months.  This whole thing seems like political fiction  It's definitely going to be an exciting AND hilarious race!!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SPC on August 25, 2010, 10:22:29 AM
Sorry to brag, but:
I suspect that Ron Johnson, Dino Rossi, Joe Miller, and Sharron Angle will also be in the Senate, and Marco Rubio will be there instead of Charlie Crist.

Intuition actually prevails for once.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 12:24:27 PM
Doesn't look like nine precincts and the absentees are going to save Murkowski. Best she can hope for is a recount, and with the gaps there's consistently been between her and Miller, I don't see that having much of an effect.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 12:29:12 PM
Does anyone think that if Hayworth had not done those infomercials, he would have won?

Of course not.  He got buried under $20,000,000


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Oakvale on August 25, 2010, 12:30:23 PM
Sad to see the Republican party is continuing its march into far-right* lunacy. Even one-time FF John McCain has had to transform into a race-baiting partisan hack.

* I mean, genuinely far right. As in, the GOP would be a fringe party in most other countries.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Badger on August 25, 2010, 12:35:51 PM
I know this question gets beaten to death after an incumbent loses a primary, but I'll ask anyway:

Is there anything prohibiting Murkowski from running as an independent? She could probably still get a large share of her personal vote, and I could easily see Democrats abandoning their official nominee, Scott McAdams, the Mayor of Sitka (pop. > 9000), to make a pro-choice, SCHIP supporting relative moderate like Murkowski the de facto Democratic nominee. Picture McAdams--who as of last month raised just under $10k---as Kendrick Meek without the core African-American support.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Oakvale on August 25, 2010, 12:37:19 PM
I know this question gets beaten to death after an incumbent loses a primary, but I'll ask anyway:

Is there anything prohibiting Murkowski from running as an independent? She could probably still get a large share of her personal vote, and I could easily see Democrats abandoning their official nominee, Scott McAdams, the Mayor of Sitka (pop. > 9000), to make a pro-choice, SCHIP supporting relative moderate like Murkowski the de facto Democratic nominee. Picture McAdams--who as of last month raised just under $10k---as Kendrick Meek without the core African-American support.

Apparently there's nothing stopping her doing so. I doubt she will, but it would make things a bit more entertaining.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on August 25, 2010, 12:49:43 PM
Hopefully Murkowski runs as an independent. She was one of the few not terrible Republican Senators.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 25, 2010, 01:01:12 PM
Unfortunately for you, yucky Murkowski cannot run as an independent, due to the fact that Alaska's independent filing deadline is long since past.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 01:02:08 PM
Unfortunately for you, yucky Murkowski cannot run as an independent, due to the fact that Alaska's independent filing deadline is long since past.

Good. That's one less Liebermanned candidacy to ruin another election.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 01:18:59 PM
Well, we're now at 429/438 precincts - it's tightened up a certain bit:

Miller - 45,909 (51.09%)
Murkowski - 43,949 (48.91%)

Anyone have any idea how many absentees, etc. are left.

About 16,000 requested, 7,600 of which have come in so far.  Of course, some of those will be for the Democratic primary.  There will be 3 counts - the first on the 31st, and two subsequent counts of absentees that come in after then in early September.

Looking at the last Cards Cast report together with the most recent update of precincts reporting by House District, what's left is:

One big precinct in the Mat-Su Valley, Snowshoe in HD-16 (2522 RV).  It's near Wasilla. 

And Eight precincts in the Bush:
One in HD-6 - either Marshall (19 RV) or Stevens Village (83 RV);
Two in HD-37 - Ekwok (78 RV) and St. Paul Island (332 RV);
One in HD-38 - Bethel #3 (1214 RV); and
Four in HD-40 - Barrow (1018 RV), Browerville (1541 RV), Atqasuk (136 RV) and Point Hope (373 RV).

Also, Republican turnout in the Fairbanks-area military districts was extremely low, suggesting there may be a lot of absentees from there.

Supposing Murkowski comes out of the precinct count down by 1,500, if 10,000 absentees are returned, 7,500 of them Republican absentees, she'd have to win them 60-40.  Possible, but not terribly likely.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 25, 2010, 01:29:21 PM
Honestly, the Miller upset of Murkowski, if it does happen, will be one of the most surprising primary results that I can recall in recent memory.  imho


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 01:33:35 PM
Vermont D-Gov is fully in.  Shumlin won by 190.

The maps.  First, VT-Gov D:
()

Dunne: Blue   
Markowitz: Green   
Racine: Red   
Shumlin: Yellow   
Bartlett: Orange
Tie: Gray
No town polls: White


Next, VT-House R:
()

Beaudry: Blue
Mitchell: Green
Stern: Red
Tie: Gray
No town polls: White


Beaudry won by almost 600 votes, with a handful of precincts still uncounted or no Republican votes (in dark gray; they were counted in the governor's race).  A definite North-South pattern here.

Town name map, for reference:
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on August 25, 2010, 01:37:28 PM
I presume that the people who are the most motivated to pull an absentee ballot are precisely the type of people who would be voting Miller than Murkowski, so I don't think the Senator is going to get much love on that front.

This result here should be a serious wake-up call to anyone following the November 2010 elections -- voters are pissed, and they're doing crazy things at the ballot box to show it. Don't think that "oh, x is safe because his district is too Democratic," or "y would never flip, the incumbent is just too entrenched."

I kinda wish the tea party would have tried taking out Don Young. Now there's someone who deserves to lose.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 01:44:08 PM
I presume that the people who are the most motivated to pull an absentee ballot are precisely the type of people who would be voting Miller than Murkowski, so I don't think the Senator is going to get much love on that front.

This result here should be a serious wake-up call to anyone following the November 2010 elections -- voters are pissed, and they're doing crazy things at the ballot box to show it. Don't think that "oh, x is safe because his district is too Democratic," or "y would never flip, the incumbent is just too entrenched."

I kinda wish the tea party would have tried taking out Don Young. Now there's someone who deserves to lose.

Alaska is especially karazee tho


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on August 25, 2010, 01:54:05 PM
I presume that the people who are the most motivated to pull an absentee ballot are precisely the type of people who would be voting Miller than Murkowski, so I don't think the Senator is going to get much love on that front.

This result here should be a serious wake-up call to anyone following the November 2010 elections -- voters are pissed, and they're doing crazy things at the ballot box to show it. Don't think that "oh, x is safe because his district is too Democratic," or "y would never flip, the incumbent is just too entrenched."

I kinda wish the tea party would have tried taking out Don Young. Now there's someone who deserves to lose.

Alaska is especially karazee tho

Especially true, considering they were acting on the advice of Ms. Palin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 25, 2010, 01:57:27 PM
I presume that the people who are the most motivated to pull an absentee ballot are precisely the type of people who would be voting Miller than Murkowski, so I don't think the Senator is going to get much love on that front.

This result here should be a serious wake-up call to anyone following the November 2010 elections -- voters are pissed, and they're doing crazy things at the ballot box to show it. Don't think that "oh, x is safe because his district is too Democratic," or "y would never flip, the incumbent is just too entrenched."

I kinda wish the tea party would have tried taking out Don Young. Now there's someone who deserves to lose.

Alaska is especially karazee tho

You know, I looked through Joe Miller's qualifications earlier today - it's not like he's a bad candidate at all - Yale Law School grad, West Point grad, US magistrate judge.

Usually people like that are quite well-spoken, not to mention very smart (like Mike Lee in Utah).  I should really watch the debate between him and Murkowski if I can find it.  Wouldn't be surprised if he beat her badly.  She's never been very smart.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 01:59:08 PM
I presume that the people who are the most motivated to pull an absentee ballot are precisely the type of people who would be voting Miller than Murkowski, so I don't think the Senator is going to get much love on that front.

This result here should be a serious wake-up call to anyone following the November 2010 elections -- voters are pissed, and they're doing crazy things at the ballot box to show it. Don't think that "oh, x is safe because his district is too Democratic," or "y would never flip, the incumbent is just too entrenched."

I kinda wish the tea party would have tried taking out Don Young. Now there's someone who deserves to lose.

Alaska is especially karazee tho

You know, I looked through Joe Miller's qualifications earlier today - it's not like he's a bad candidate at all - Yale Law School grad, West Point grad, US magistrate judge.

Usually people like that are quite well-spoken, not to mention very smart (like Mike Lee in Utah).  I should really watch the debate between him and Murkowski if I can find it.  Wouldn't be surprised if he beat her badly.  She's never been very smart.

I mean, yeah, it speaks for itself.  watch the 15 minute debate here: http://joemiller.us/index.php


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 25, 2010, 02:03:10 PM
Can Miller win a general election or is he crazy like Angle?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 02:04:07 PM
Can Miller win a general election or is he crazy like Angle?

He'll win.  He's articulate and not insane.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 02:05:18 PM
Can Miller win a general election or is he crazy like Angle?

He's basically Alaska's Mike Lee. He's far to the right, but intelligent enough that you'd never be able to tell. I can tell he's nowhere near as gaffe-prone as Angle - he's just not dumb enough to keep running his mouth like a maniac.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: xavier110 on August 25, 2010, 02:08:57 PM
He even uses the world ostensibly on his website. Endorsed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on August 25, 2010, 02:11:25 PM
Can Miller win a general election or is he crazy like Angle?

A better question: Can you even name his Democratic opponent?

If the answer is "no," then the answer to your questions are "yes" and "it doesn't matter" respectively.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dgov on August 25, 2010, 02:13:37 PM
Can Miller win a general election or is he crazy like Angle?

No, he's actually turning out to be a pretty good candidate.  Also, this is Alaska--Dems barely won against a convicted felon in here in 2008.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 25, 2010, 02:47:48 PM
Will Rasmussen be out with a poll of the race within the next few days?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 02:58:25 PM
Alaska finally released their precinct-level data.  Here are the current maps by House District.  Miller is in blue, Murkowski green, water features in light cyan.

Statewide:
()

Anchorage area:
()

Fairbanks area (Fairbanks-North Star Borough Boundary in Yellow [Yellow+Black when HD line follows it]):
()

Basically, Murkowski won the Bush big, except for HD-6 which arguably should be classified in the Fairbanks-Interior category.  She also carried most of Anchorage and Southeast Alaska.  Miller crushed Murkowski in the Mat-Su Valley and won Kenai/Kodiak and the Fairbanks-Interior region.    Turnout (which I can map, upon request) was much higher in the Mat-Su than much of the rest of the state.  So Miller won.



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 25, 2010, 02:59:15 PM
Here's the VT Dem primary map again, with stripes for the tied towns.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 03:41:29 PM
And Alaska-Senate-R by precinct in Anchorage, Fairbanks-North Star Borough and the Mat-Su Valley:

Anchorage:
()

Western Fairbanks-North Star Borough:
()

Southern Mat-Su Valley:
()


I have to put some disclaimer about how I got the Mat-Su shapefile from the Mat-Su's website and they're not responsible for errors and stuff.

In both Fairbanks and the Mat-Su, the precincts at the edge of the inset map extend to the borough boundaries.  

The Fairbanks districts won by Murkowski are generally downtown or near the University.  The Mat-Su Valley Murkowski won is City of Palmer No. 1.

I didn't try to allocate the early votes by precinct.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 25, 2010, 05:06:07 PM
Miller's lead is down to 1500 with two precincts left.  Unless I'm wrong on the two precincts left in my memory, one is in Mat-Su valley, one is in the Bush.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 25, 2010, 05:55:42 PM
Miller's lead is down to 1500 with two precincts left.  Unless I'm wrong on the two precincts left in my memory, one is in Mat-Su valley, one is in the Bush.

There is something ironic and odd and funny about the notion that the most pro establishment voters in Alaska live in the bush. One would have thought that bushies living 800 miles and a long and dangerous small private plane trip to anywhere that is actually somewhere,  were drug crazed, anti-establishment, anti social, loner curmudgeonly misfits, but no, they are the next best think to K Street types. Who knew?  :)

Anyway, that is my thought for the day. Thanks for listening.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 25, 2010, 06:16:42 PM
Miller's lead is down to 1500 with two precincts left.  Unless I'm wrong on the two precincts left in my memory, one is in Mat-Su valley, one is in the Bush.

There is something ironic and odd and funny about the notion that the most pro establishment voters in Alaska live in the bush. One would have thought that bushies living 800 miles and a long and dangerous small private plane trip to anywhere that is actually somewhere,  were drug crazed, anti-establishment, anti social, loner curmudgeonly misfits, but no, they are the next best think to K Street types. Who knew?  :)

Anyway, that is my thought for the day. Thanks for listening.

Ya, that always seems to be rule for that place - don't endanger the gravy train.  Not the only place in America where that seems wrong of course.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dgov on August 25, 2010, 06:44:34 PM
Miller's lead is down to 1500 with two precincts left.  Unless I'm wrong on the two precincts left in my memory, one is in Mat-Su valley, one is in the Bush.

There is something ironic and odd and funny about the notion that the most pro establishment voters in Alaska live in the bush. One would have thought that bushies living 800 miles and a long and dangerous small private plane trip to anywhere that is actually somewhere,  were drug crazed, anti-establishment, anti social, loner curmudgeonly misfits, but no, they are the next best think to K Street types. Who knew?  :)

Anyway, that is my thought for the day. Thanks for listening.

Well, they are the "Nowhere" in the "Bridge to nowhere" after all.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 06:44:48 PM
Miller's lead is down to 1500 with two precincts left.  Unless I'm wrong on the two precincts left in my memory, one is in Mat-Su valley, one is in the Bush.

Yes.  By my count, Snowshoe, Mat-Su, with 973 Republicans and 1245 non-party members in HD-16 and Marshall, Alaska Interior, with 15 Republicans and 102 non-party members in HD-6.

If Snowshoe and Marshall break like the rest of their HDs, Miller should gain a net 115 votes or so when all precincts report.

There is something ironic and odd and funny about the notion that the most pro establishment voters in Alaska live in the bush. One would have thought that bushies living 800 miles and a long and dangerous small private plane trip to anywhere that is actually somewhere,  were drug crazed, anti-establishment, anti social, loner curmudgeonly misfits, but no, they are the next best think to K Street types. Who knew?  :)

Anyway, that is my thought for the day. Thanks for listening.

Many of the bushies in the interior (arguably) bush HD-6 probably fit your description to a T (though a good portion of the district is on the road network and not really all that bush).  The bushies in the coastal bush HDs tend to be more Alaska Native and vote like their Indian brethren do in the Lower 48 - for Democrats and incumbents.

Marshall is an Eskimo village, though.

Edit:  Looking at the new precinct-level data, it's Stevens Village that's still out in the Bush, not Marshall.  14 Republicans, 45 non-party members.  It's also heavily Eskimo.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 07:02:37 PM
Is Vermont set in stone for a Shumlin win?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 07:04:26 PM
Is Vermont set in stone for a Shumlin win?

Good question.  Shumlin won the precinct count.  I'm sure it's close enough for a recount, but I don't know the Vermont laws.   I'll try to look at the Burlington Free Press and TV station websites to see what they say about absentees and the like.

Edited to add: The Burlington Free Press says that Markowitz or Racine can ask for a recount, since both are within 2 points of Shumlin.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20100824/NEWS03/100824023/1095/Shumlin-Looks-like-we-ve-won

I've found nothing about absentees as of yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 07:16:03 PM
They held a unity rally today, I did some Google news searches & blog checks a few hours ago, didn't see anything that contained any drama


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 07:30:23 PM
Why don't the AP just call Alaska?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 25, 2010, 07:35:43 PM
Because, as has been discussed on the past five or six pages, there are still thousands of absentee ballots yet to be counted.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 07:47:50 PM
Because, as has been discussed on the past five or six pages, there are still thousands of absentee ballots yet to be counted.

There may be some questioned votes, too - but likely not many.

AP hasn't called VT-Gov-D yet, either, for the same reasons.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 25, 2010, 07:48:10 PM
Is Vermont set in stone for a Shumlin win?

Good question.  Shumlin won the precinct count.  I'm sure it's close enough for a recount, but I don't know the Vermont laws.   I'll try to look at the Burlington Free Press and TV station websites to see what they say about absentees and the like.

Edited to add: The Burlington Free Press says that Markowitz or Racine can ask for a recount, since both are within 2 points of Shumlin.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20100824/NEWS03/100824023/1095/Shumlin-Looks-like-we-ve-won

I've found nothing about absentees as of yet.

The secretary of state's website says the canvassing board will meet next Tuesday to finalize the results.

As far as absentee voting is concerned, Vermont seems to be full-service. (http://vermont-elections.org/elections1/absentee_overview.html) Seriously, Ken Blackwell's head would explode if he read that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 07:59:53 PM
The secretary of state's website says the canvassing board will meet next Tuesday to finalize the results.

As far as absentee voting is concerned, Vermont seems to be full-service. (http://vermont-elections.org/elections1/absentee_overview.html) Seriously, Ken Blackwell's head would explode if he read that.

Full service, but absentees had to be returned by election day to be counted.  So Racine and Markowitz are hoping transcribing errors will put them over the top.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 25, 2010, 08:22:39 PM
Yes, Cinyc, I note the crazies in Eagle went 2-1 for the insurgent. If you want to read about Eagle, read John McPhee's superb book, Coming into the Country (http://www.amazon.com/Coming-into-Country-John-McPhee/dp/0374522871/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1282785659&sr=8-4). Man that man knows how to write. It is almost prose poetry - spare and eloquent, with every word carrying its weight, with exactly the right word used, time after time. He has a gift.

You know, if you really want to learn how to write well, read books by folks who really know how to write. Just a thought.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: 🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸 on August 25, 2010, 08:23:14 PM
This is too bad. :( Murkowski was one of my favorite Senators.
that's odd, i thought you'd prefer Indiana pork to Alaskan.
anyway I do hope Miller keeps his lead. If elected, he will bring back the representation of facial hair to the Senate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 08:40:30 PM
With 438 of 438 in:

Joe Miller (R)   47,027   50.90%
Lisa Murkowski (R)   45,359   49.10%

Miller +1,668. 

And now, the absentees, (possible) questioned votes, and the question of whether the Libertarian candidate jumps out of the race to let Murkowski run on the Libertarian line should she decide that's the course she wants to take....


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 25, 2010, 08:43:24 PM
With 438 of 438 in:

Joe Miller (R)   47,027   50.90%
Lisa Murkowski (R)   45,359   49.10%

Miller +1,668. 

And now, the absentees, (possible) questioned votes, and the question of whether the Libertarian candidate jumps out of the race to let Murkowski run on the Libertarian line should she decide that's the course she wants to take....

Murkowski running as a Libertarian? LOL.  I mean, does she have any more libertarian instincts than I do (to wit, not much on the issues in play out there)? 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 25, 2010, 08:48:43 PM
This is too bad. :( Murkowski was one of my favorite Senators.
that's odd, i thought you'd prefer Indiana pork to Alaskan.
anyway I do hope Miller keeps his lead. If elected, he will bring back the representation of facial hair to the Senate.

Yeah, that's an important constituency.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 25, 2010, 09:12:08 PM
This is too bad. :( Murkowski was one of my favorite Senators.
that's odd, i thought you'd prefer Indiana pork to Alaskan.
anyway I do hope Miller keeps his lead. If elected, he will bring back the representation of facial hair to the Senate.

Yeah, that's an important constituency.

As someone with facial hair, I approve.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 09:21:14 PM
With 438 of 438 in:

Joe Miller (R)   47,027   50.90%
Lisa Murkowski (R)   45,359   49.10%

Miller +1,668. 

And now, the absentees, (possible) questioned votes, and the question of whether the Libertarian candidate jumps out of the race to let Murkowski run on the Libertarian line should she decide that's the course she wants to take....

Murkowski running as a Libertarian? LOL.  I mean, does she have any more libertarian instincts than I do (to wit, not much on the issues in play out there)? 

Yeah, she'd be a big government Libertarian.  Kind of an oxymoron.  But, as I understand it, it's her only way on the November ballot.  Murkowski is too late to run on her own independent line.  The Alaskan Independence Party didn't run a candidate, which means she can't do an AIP switcheroo.   So it's either get the Libertarian to back out and run on that line, wage a write-in campaign, or fold.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on August 25, 2010, 09:27:49 PM
I assume that Miller doesn't want to cut Alaskan pork. So by smaller government, I assume he means that California just sends money directly to Alaska?

Anyways, the electorate seems to be in a bit of an anti-incumbent mood. I would have much rather McCain lost instead of Murkowski, of course.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 25, 2010, 09:30:25 PM
I didn't catch this last night, but Vermont Democrats nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor. There was also a gay candidate for Auditor, but he lost the primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 09:38:28 PM
FWIW, the residents of Stevens Village cast 6 total votes, all in the combined Democrat-AIP-Libertarian primary.  0 votes were supposedly cast in the Republican primary.  All of Miller's gains came from Snoeshoe, which he won by 193.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 25, 2010, 09:39:34 PM
I didn't catch this last night, but Vermont Democrats nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor. There was also a gay candidate for Auditor, but he lost the primary.

CA back when elected a gay man to the worthless Lt Governor spot: Mike Curb. Of course we also elected a gay governor, until I guess he decided to marry a beard.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 25, 2010, 09:41:25 PM
Lisa Murkowski is about as libertarian as Generalissimo Franco, so that's not going to happen.

I didn't catch this last night, but Vermont Democrats nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor. There was also a gay candidate for Auditor, but he lost the primary.

Massachusetts Republicans nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor . . .

(Well, at the party convention, but I think he's unopposed in the primary).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 25, 2010, 09:42:40 PM
I used to be on Joe Miller's email list.  It was really boring and painful to read so it was one of the few  I'm unsubscribed from.  Maybe  I shouldn't  have.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Thomas D on August 25, 2010, 09:49:46 PM
I didn't catch this last night, but Vermont Democrats nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor. There was also a gay candidate for Auditor, but he lost the primary.

CA back when elected a gay man to the worthless Lt Governor spot: Mike Curb. Of course we also elected a gay governor, until I guess he decided to marry a beard.

Reagan ???


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 25, 2010, 09:51:09 PM
I didn't catch this last night, but Vermont Democrats nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor. There was also a gay candidate for Auditor, but he lost the primary.

CA back when elected a gay man to the worthless Lt Governor spot: Mike Curb. Of course we also elected a gay governor, until I guess he decided to marry a beard.

Reagan ???

Nope.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 25, 2010, 09:54:25 PM
I always like to see where the absentees come from before saying too much, but Murkowski is toast imo.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Kevinstat on August 25, 2010, 10:00:08 PM
Might the absentee votes in Vermont have been counted within the municipalities and the totals added to the election day at polling place totals within that municipality before the municipality reported results?

The way people talk about absentee votes on this site makes me wonder if they are counted very differently in much of the country than they are in Maine.  In Maine, when a town reports results, those results include the absentee votes.  Perhaps the "regular" votes are counted first but the absentee and early ballots that aren't challenged (and challenges can happen when people go to vote in person; I remember reading that in 2000 Republicans in Brunswick challenged a bunch of voters from Bowdoin College who may have owed their residency to their dorm room, which Maine's constitution makes clear does not give people the right to suffrage but it may be interpreted as allowing state or local law (and constitutional state laws trump local laws) to allow college students living in the dorms to vote in the municipality where their dorm is)... anyway, I think combined unofficial (but becoming official in races where recounts are not requested) totals including absentee, early and regular ballots are arrived at in the single precinct municipalities and there's no distinguishing the different kinds of ballots if someone views the results after they are official.  Most (if not all now, the one exeption I recall from past elections closed its second polling place a couple years ago or more) of the municipalities with multiple precincts have a separate "central voting" precinct which presumably covers absentees and early voting.  (In 2008, Maine had early voting for some municipalities where I assume voters actually put the ballots directly in the ballot box rather than an absentee ballot which they sealed and put in the ballot box.  My municipality didin't have early voting but I've voted absentee at the town office before election day multiple times and the clerk or assistant clerk fills out most of the absentee ballot envelope for you and you have to do little more than sign, probably date (I don't remember) and seal it before giving it to the clerk or assistant clerk who reviews the envolope and tells you you're all set (the first time I voted that way, when the clerk didn't fill out as much, there was one thing that I'd missed that the clerk pointed out gave the envelope back to me to fill out).)

So when all the precincts are in and people ask, "what about the absentees," I think to myself, "aren't they included within the municipal results?"  To those who know, how does counting different kind of ballots work in states where you know how it works?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 10:12:35 PM
Wow, okay. I wasn't expecting to wake up to Murkowski trailing.

Also, Ben Quayle? Really, AZ-03?

I know likely a Democrat hold on the seat. I was expecting Gorman to have won actually with all her buzz.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: homelycooking on August 25, 2010, 10:14:28 PM
I have counted absentee votes myself as a pollworker in Granby, Connecticut, and you are, I think, correct, Kevinstat, in saying that the absentee ballots are counted along with the normal municipal results. I'm sure that Vermont does the same, since 90% of the towns in Vermont are smaller than my hometown.

In Connecticut, all absentee votes must be recieved by the town clerk by 9:00 on Election Day in order to be counted. These votes are then counted separately from the other votes and are simply added in with the others to produce a total that is then reported to the Secretary of the State.

I'm sure absentee ballots are counted differently in New England than in, say, Maricopa County, Arizona.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 10:22:46 PM
With 438 of 438 in:

Joe Miller (R)   47,027   50.90%
Lisa Murkowski (R)   45,359   49.10%

Miller +1,668. 

And now, the absentees, (possible) questioned votes, and the question of whether the Libertarian candidate jumps out of the race to let Murkowski run on the Libertarian line should she decide that's the course she wants to take....

Murkowski running as a Libertarian? LOL.  I mean, does she have any more libertarian instincts than I do (to wit, not much on the issues in play out there)? 

I would love to see Murkowski as the first Libertarian senator.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 10:23:50 PM
I have counted absentee votes myself as a pollworker in Granby, Connecticut, and you are, I think, correct, Kevinstat, in saying that the absentee ballots are counted along with the normal municipal results. I'm sure that Vermont does the same, since 90% of the towns in Vermont are smaller than my hometown.

In Connecticut, all absentee votes must be recieved by the town clerk by 9:00 on Election Day in order to be counted. These votes are then counted separately from the other votes and are simply added in with the others to produce a total that is then reported to the Secretary of the State.

I'm sure absentee ballots are counted differently in New England than in, say, Maricopa County, Arizona.

Alaska and many other states allow absentees to trickle in well past election day as long as it's postmarked on or before election day.  Those states separate out absentees, and many don't even start counting them until a week or two after election day.  New York is like that; Alaska is even more like that.  Plus, because the absentee and early votes in Alaska are only sorted by House District, they aren't included in the precinct tally, but separated out in the precinct report.

For what it's worth, not all HDs are reporting early votes in the pdfs at the Alaska Elections website.  Anchorage, in particular, seems to be missing (which would favor Murkowski). (Edit: It's since been added - I need to redownload). But the overall tally of the votes from the 40 pdfs I used to make my maps is lower than the total reported by the Alaska Elections website, and shows Miller leading by a larger margin - over 2,000.  Part of that may be one Anchorage precinct not reporting in the precinct-level pdfs.  But I don't think that precinct has enough votes to explain the overall difference.  The Anchorage early votes might be included in the overall tally.

Lewis Trondheim knows a lot about Alaska absentee and early votes, and may be able to explain who usually votes in them.  I'm going to try to go back to the last contested primary to see if they came in more heavily from one region or another.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 10:24:11 PM
I didn't catch this last night, but Vermont Democrats nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor. There was also a gay candidate for Auditor, but he lost the primary.

CA back when elected a gay man to the worthless Lt Governor spot: Mike Curb. Of course we also elected a gay governor, until I guess he decided to marry a beard.

Reagan ???

LOL I love it. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Mr. Morden on August 25, 2010, 10:31:35 PM
With 438 of 438 in:

Joe Miller (R)   47,027   50.90%
Lisa Murkowski (R)   45,359   49.10%

Miller +1,668. 

And now, the absentees, (possible) questioned votes, and the question of whether the Libertarian candidate jumps out of the race to let Murkowski run on the Libertarian line should she decide that's the course she wants to take....

Murkowski running as a Libertarian? LOL.  I mean, does she have any more libertarian instincts than I do (to wit, not much on the issues in play out there)? 

Yeah, she'd be a big government Libertarian.  Kind of an oxymoron.  But, as I understand it, it's her only way on the November ballot.  Murkowski is too late to run on her own independent line.  The Alaskan Independence Party didn't run a candidate, which means she can't do an AIP switcheroo.   So it's either get the Libertarian to back out and run on that line, wage a write-in campaign, or fold.

Why wouldn't she fold?  The vast majority of people who lose a primary simply end their campaigns.  Why would Murkowski be any different?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 25, 2010, 10:39:49 PM
Lisa Murkowski is about as libertarian as Generalissimo Franco, so that's not going to happen

Well the Libertarian Party did nominate Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root in 2008, though I would hope the Alaska state party has a little more principle than that. Lisa Murkowski would really be a new low for a "Libertarian" candidate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 25, 2010, 10:42:51 PM
If she gets the ballot line through a legitimate method, I'm going green avatar.  Not that I think that's likely.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dgov on August 25, 2010, 10:58:25 PM
Why wouldn't she fold?  The vast majority of people who lose a primary simply end their campaigns.  Why would Murkowski be any different?


Because she feels entitled to the seat.  It was given to her by her father after all, and people like that are generally extremely sore losers.  See Specter, Crist, Davis, etc.

It wouldn't be the first time something like this happened either.  Wally Hickel did something similar in 1990 with the AIP.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 11:10:34 PM
I think it would be a good move. It could help the Libertarians to break through the electoral barrier if she became the first elected Libertarian senator.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 25, 2010, 11:15:47 PM
I think it would be a good move. It could help the Libertarians to break through the electoral barrier if she became the first elected Libertarian senator.

I honestly doubt we'll see much more of Murkowski if the absentees sink her. It's a bit late to be running a campaign like that, and there are very, very, VERY few moderates in Alaska anyway, so she wouldn't have much a vote base.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 25, 2010, 11:16:22 PM
I think it would be a good move. It could help the Libertarians to break through the electoral barrier if she became the first elected Libertarian senator.

I honestly doubt we'll see much more of Murkowski if the absentees sink her. It's a bit late to be running a campaign like that, and there are very, very, VERY few moderates in Alaska anyway, so she wouldn't have much a vote base.

Not every conservative minded person votes in a primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 25, 2010, 11:24:46 PM
It isn't happening, among other things, because she would lose anyway. I mean, what is her base?  Are the Dems all going to vote for her (and abandon their nominee?), because they will need to - all of them effectively. It is not as if Miller is not a competent candidate. He is

As I said, it isn't happening. I don't view Murkowski as a kamikaze type, nor one totally oblivious to any sense of dignity.


Miller I hope can get used to the heat in DC in the summer.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 25, 2010, 11:26:03 PM
I think it would be a good move. It could help the Libertarians to break through the electoral barrier if she became the first elected Libertarian senator.

If the Libertarian Party wanted to give up any semblance of libertarianism and just become the Electoral Whore Party, sure.

Murkowski is truly awful, probably one of the worst people in the Senate. She's bad on just about every issue I can think of. Since being appointed to office by her father she has had a consistent record of supporting war, abortion, corporatism, bailouts, pork, the police state, big government, etc., etc.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 25, 2010, 11:30:56 PM
What I said on another forum:

Quote from: wormyguy
If Murkowski gets the Libertarian ballot line by legitimate means then that's the death of the LP. Libertarian activists would probably either try to take over the Constitution Party (which they basically already have), or what's left of the Reform Party, or start an entirely new party.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 25, 2010, 11:39:53 PM
Why wouldn't she fold?  The vast majority of people who lose a primary simply end their campaigns.  Why would Murkowski be any different?


Because she feels entitled to the seat.  It was given to her by her father after all, and people like that are generally extremely sore losers.  See Specter, Crist, Davis, etc.

It wouldn't be the first time something like this happened either.  Wally Hickel did something similar in 1990 with the AIP.

What Torie said plus the fact that Alaska Republicans are splintered along old-guard, new-guard lines.  Old-guard Murkowski absolutely hates new-guard Palin, who backed new-guard Miller.  The old-guard wing of the party might rather see Murkowski run and a Democrat win than Miller win.

FYI- the Democratic nominee is the mayor of Seward.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on August 25, 2010, 11:58:57 PM
If she gets the ballot line through a legitimate method, I'm going green avatar.  Not that I think that's likely.

I'm sure all 26 members of the Libertarian Party will be crushed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 26, 2010, 12:17:06 AM
I've gone through all of the recent precinct reports:

-Despite 438 of 438 precincts supposedly being in, one Anchorage precinct, Laurel/Dowling, reports no results in any primary.  That precinct is in HD 30, which went 53.4-46.5 Murkowski.  It has around 1600 eligible voters, 500 Republicans and 1100 non-enrolled types.  Murkowski could get a slight bump when they find those votes - perhaps 35 votes, if it votes at the HD-30 margin and turnout.

-There are no early votes reported at all from the Kenai Peninsula region.  This may be because, according to the Alaska elections website (http://www.elections.alaska.gov/vi_ea_ev_ip_about.php), early voting needed to be done at the regional election office for the jurisdiction where a voter is registered, and Kenai's regional office is in Juneau, a plane ride away.  Thus, "early" votes from the Kenai Peninsula would be treated as in-person absentees, which haven't been counted.  Given how the Kenai Peninsula and Kodiak broke for Miller, that should favor him.  The same is true for the coastal Bush districts and Southeast Alaska outside Juneau - their regional offices are in Nome and Juneau, and there weren't many early votes outside the Nome and Juneau districts.  That might favor Murkowski.

-Murkowksi DID win the early vote reported so far, 54.1%-45.9%.  She lost the in-precinct vote 51.1%-48.9% - a 5.2 point swing.   Miller won the precincts with a significant (>10) early vote by an even higher percentage 52.5%-47.5%.

-There weren't many early votes to begin with - just 2,968 on the Republican side, or 3.2% of the total tally.  

-Roughly 70% of voters took the Republican ballot, 30% the ADL ballot.  Something to keep in mind when the total number of absentees received is reported.   70% of the 7,600 reportedly in as of yesterday is  about 5,300.  70% of the 16,000 absentees reportedly requested is 11,200.  In the best case scenario, if all 16,000 absentees come in and are Republican ballots, Murkowski would have to win them by roughly 55-45.    If only 5,300 absentees come in, Murkowski would have to win them roughly 65-35.  The real number needed will likely be somewhere in between.   But all possible percentages are higher than her early vote percentage.

Miller should still win this.  Murkowski would have to do about 10-points better in the absentees than in the early votes to pull it out.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 26, 2010, 12:44:32 AM
I didn't catch this last night, but Vermont Democrats nominated a gay man for Lt. Governor. There was also a gay candidate for Auditor, but he lost the primary.

CA back when elected a gay man to the worthless Lt Governor spot: Mike Curb. Of course we also elected a gay governor, until I guess he decided to marry a beard.

Damn, that makes me want to listen to the theme song from Kelly's Heroes but its far to late at night.
:(

I think it would be a good move. It could help the Libertarians to break through the electoral barrier if she became the first elected Libertarian senator.

Why cling to someone like Murkowski? Its like Conservatives clinging to Vitter simply because he is a conservative. Murkowski respresents the absolute worst in Alaska politics. There is a reason Palin had an 80% approval rating at one point and that is because she broke the stranglehold of the three Republican dynasties and their minions. Murkowski's appointment was the height of Nepotisms. "Here Lisa, take daddy's senate seat", is basically what Frank Murkowski said to her. She almost lost in the 2004 GOP primary. He not only lost in 2006, but came in third, somewhat because of that, somewhat because of ethics, scandals, incompetence etc, and the mostly the combined effect of a power hungry beast acting like he thinks he is above the law.

The only reason Murkowski had any sympathy was because she was a bullwork against Palin and as such non-Palin Presidential candidate supporters and cheerleaders in DC hyped her as the anti-Palin, female Alaskan. She is the "culture of corruption" which the Dems railed against in 2006 (mostly just to get votes and win power, as we now see). Yet it is the very same liberals and even many moderate Republicans pounding the same drum against the GOP b/c her projected loss, that they pounded in 2006 against the very behavior within the GOP THAT MURKOWSKI REPRESENTS!!!!!!!!!!



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 26, 2010, 02:11:34 AM
Well, look at that. Fun fact: the guy Murkowski was nearly embarrassed by in 2004 was also named Miller.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 26, 2010, 02:34:39 AM
I presume that the people who are the most motivated to pull an absentee ballot are precisely the type of people who would be voting Miller than Murkowski, so I don't think the Senator is going to get much love on that front.

This result here should be a serious wake-up call to anyone following the November 2010 elections -- voters are pissed, and they're doing crazy things at the ballot box to show it. Don't think that "oh, x is safe because his district is too Democratic," or "y would never flip, the incumbent is just too entrenched."

I kinda wish the tea party would have tried taking out Don Young. Now there's someone who deserves to lose.

Alaska Republican primary voters = electorate at large? Not exactly.

It is a shame that Young was spared. BTW Blanche Lincoln should really hope Murkowski finds some other ballot line since it would mean she would not be the incumbent Senator losing by the most this year. Murkowski would probably pull around 12%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 26, 2010, 02:40:47 AM
You know, Miller will probably be the most "Democratic-looking" Republican Senators. He looks like a liberal college professor or something.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: King on August 26, 2010, 02:42:20 AM
He looks like he might be related to Dennis Miller.

But yeah, the folsky Alaskan nature walker outfits he wears does add a hint of exterior liberalism.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 26, 2010, 02:46:49 AM
I see guys that look like him in Minneapolis strip clubs all the time. Actually he basically looks like those bearded orgcore punk guys my neighborhood is full of only 15-20 years older, so I guess it makes sense.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 26, 2010, 07:09:09 AM
He's a Stinson away from being the first hipster Senator.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on August 26, 2010, 07:54:12 AM
Alaska Republican primary voters = electorate at large? Not exactly.

Oh, please don't make the mistake that I'm talking about Alaska alone. We've already seen a near unprecedented number of frontrunners lose their primaries, including numerous incumbent Senators. This goes far deeper than just one seat.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 26, 2010, 08:20:42 AM
Just FYI - early voting is not normally a big deal in Alaska (only the Democrats emphasized it in 2008 general) and I don't think the real Bush (HD 37-40) even has early voting in primaries (they didn't in 2008).  The big deal is absentees (and whatever questionable votes are out there).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 26, 2010, 12:53:13 PM
Just FYI - early voting is not normally a big deal in Alaska (only the Democrats emphasized it in 2008 general) and I don't think the real Bush (HD 37-40) even has early voting in primaries (they didn't in 2008).  The big deal is absentees (and whatever questionable votes are out there).

As I understand it, the real Bush has early voting, but you have to go to the Alaska elections regional office in Nome to register an early vote that's counted as an early vote.  So it works just fine if you live in Nome - but not so well if you live in the rest of the Bush.  Same thing with Southeast Alaska outside Juneau (HDs 1,2 & 5), the Kenai Peninsula (HDs 33-35) and Kodiak (HD 36) - their regional office early voting center is in Juneau - which works fine if you live in Juneau (HDs 3-4), but you have to take a boat or plane to get there if you don't.   There are no or single-digit early votes registered in almost all of those HDs.

The early votes in those areas (or at other walk-in centers that stock ballots, including some major airports) are considered in-person absentees, and will be counted as such.

The absentees are probably going to have to break at least 60-40 Murkowski for her to win.  Possible?  I guess.  Likely?  No.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Badger on August 26, 2010, 03:28:32 PM
FWIW, Murkowski needs only a 56-44 split in absentees to win. Old guard organization GOP or the Palin faction---which will make up more of the numbers?

I'm no expert on Alaska politics, but the intense Old Guard/New Guard civil war in the state GOP is absolutely true. Heck, half the GOP state senators run that chamber in a coalition with the Democrats against the rest of the Republican caucus.

And this is why Murkowski could win. I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.

But it all assumes Murkowski can get the Libertarian Party to replace their nominee for her. Even if the Alaska Dems were willing to give her the nomination over McAdams, joining The Party Of Obama would be the one thing Murkowski could do to alienate mainstream Republicans who might back her as a "Libertarian" <wink wink>, and would be the kiss of death in this year's political climate. Running a write-in campaign on top of everything else would be a bridge too far to pull off.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 26, 2010, 03:45:08 PM
FWIW, Murkowski needs only a 56-44 split in absentees to win. Old guard organization GOP or the Palin faction---which will make up more of the numbers?

That 56% number assumes all 16,000 absentees come in and most were cast in the Republican primary.  The actual percentage of absentees Murkowski needs to pull even is a sliding scale from about 55-65% depending on the number of Republican absentees actually returned.  

The only thing I've heard about the absentees is that 7,600 absentees were returned by Monday out of 16,000 requested.  More can trickle in over the next two weeks.  I haven't seen any partisan or Alaska House District breakdown of the absentees yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 26, 2010, 03:47:43 PM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Funnily enough, Wikipedia lists "Conservatism" and "Right-libertarianism" as ideologies of the Alaska Democratic Party...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 26, 2010, 04:16:34 PM
Giving Murkowski an even 5% chance of winning at this point, would be generous. I put it a next to zero, or whatever odds there are some significant arithmetic errors. What comes in now, is just not going to be all that different than what came in before.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Beet on August 26, 2010, 05:33:18 PM
It isn't happening, among other things, because she would lose anyway. I mean, what is her base?  Are the Dems all going to vote for her (and abandon their nominee?), because they will need to - all of them effectively. It is not as if Miller is not a competent candidate. He is

As I said, it isn't happening. I don't view Murkowski as a kamikaze type, nor one totally oblivious to any sense of dignity.


Miller I hope can get used to the heat in DC in the summer.

Dignity, Torie, would be going down fighting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 26, 2010, 05:50:35 PM
The ADL Senate primary brought in 30,855 voters, while the Republican primary had 92,386. Conveniently, that's exactly a 1:3 ratio. Assuming that the absentees broke down equally to the election-day turnout, only 5,700 of the 7,600 absentees currently outstanding will be Republican. So Murkowski would have to win 3,700 or so of them, or about 65%. If you assume that all 16,000 come in, 12,000 would be Republican, and she'd have to win 6,900 of them, or 57.5%. That's just my half-assed statistical analysis, but it seems highly unlikely that she could make up the deficit.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Niemeyerite on August 26, 2010, 06:10:20 PM
Believe or not, but my GREAT CRAZY friend, joao queiroz moneteiro (a crazy communist from manaus, amazonas) predicted that there would be a libertarian senator after 2010 elections, and probably from a state like vermont, alaska or utah (could bennett run as a libertarian?). I answered that it woul NEVER happen hahahahahaha...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 26, 2010, 06:13:50 PM
Believe or not, but my GREAT CRAZY friend, joao queiroz moneteiro (a crazy communist from manaus, amazonas) predicted that there would be a libertarian senator after 2010 elections, and probably from a state like vermont, alaska or utah (could bennett run as a libertarian?). I answered that it woul NEVER happen hahahahahaha...

And it still won't. Alaska voted Murkowski out fair and square; if she runs as a third party candidate, she'll just look like another Lieberman, and I can tell you the country's had enough of those.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 26, 2010, 09:59:36 PM
Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 26, 2010, 10:00:05 PM
You know Murkowski's defeat is not really all that surprising considering what happened to her father.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 26, 2010, 10:04:27 PM
I think the GOP should nominate Imelda Marcos for the Senate.  You know, so they have more gender and racial equality.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 26, 2010, 10:10:40 PM
Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.

What? The GOP has been nominating an unprecedented number of women for many different races. The party claims to be for individual achievement and against affirmative action, so why would they establish quotas to force the nomination of more sub-par female candidates over better qualified males, such as Lisa Murkowski, Linda McMahon, Carly Fiorina, etc.?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Dgov on August 26, 2010, 10:12:45 PM
Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.

. . .  You do realize that the vast majority of Conservatives don't give a rats ass about what a candidate's gender, race, etc. are?  The Same voters that took out Murkowski two days ago helped vote in a little someone called Sarah Palin in 2006.  They are also similar to the ones who nominated Sharron Angle in Nevada, Niki Haley in South Carolina, Susannah Martinez in New Mexico, among others, against white Men.  Conservatives will support any candidate if they are Conservative and promise to support Conservative ideals.

Focus on candidate's genetics rather than their ideas is one of the biggest things wrong with this country.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 26, 2010, 11:17:07 PM
Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.

. . .  You do realize that the vast majority of Conservatives don't give a rats ass about what a candidate's gender, race, etc. are?  The Same voters that took out Murkowski two days ago helped vote in a little someone called Sarah Palin in 2006.  They are also similar to the ones who nominated Sharron Angle in Nevada, Niki Haley in South Carolina, Susannah Martinez in New Mexico, among others, against white Men.  Conservatives will support any candidate if they are Conservative and promise to support Conservative ideals.

Focus on candidate's genetics rather than their ideas is one of the biggest things wrong with this country.

And the women I listed were perfectly acceptable conservatives, but were past over. Look at the numbers. The numbers of women being nominated by Republicans is stagnantly low. It is important for Republican success to have more women win their primaries. I'm not focused on genetics, but with dozens of women whose conservatism fit the districts and states they were running in losing this season, it just seems like many primary voters are unwilling to vote for women. Take Pamela Gorman for example who was by far the most conservative candidate running for her race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 26, 2010, 11:19:55 PM
And the Libertarian candidate, who is apparently borderline retarded, is willing to give the ballot line to Murkowski (http://ace.mu.nu/archives/305030.php).  Sweet Jesus.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 26, 2010, 11:21:59 PM
You know Murkowski's defeat is not really all that surprising considering what happened to her father.

Indeed.

Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.

Look up Alaska 2004 Senate GOP primary, 2006 GOP Gubernatorial primary, and Frank Murkowski's appointment of Lisa to the Senate. And it will all make sense. It ain't gender or ideological extremism. Its elitism, losing touch with the base (hence their anger and sometimes overreaction), lack of ethics, and nepotism. Nothing anyone should want to associate with. Miller shows promise a "fresh" face, limited record in elective politics, but his short record has produced some record of strength of character and campaign skills. What does Murkowski really offer except being the next in line in a corrupt, power hungry dynasty?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 26, 2010, 11:23:09 PM
You know Murkowski's defeat is not really all that surprising considering what happened to her father.

Indeed.

Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.

Look up Alaska 2004 Senate GOP primary, 2006 GOP Gubernatorial primary, and Frank Murkowski's appointment of Lisa to the Senate. And it will all make sense. It ain't gender or ideological extremism. Its elitism, losing touch with the base (hence their anger and sometimes overreaction), lack of ethics, and nepotism. Nothing anyone should want to associate with. Miller shows promise a "fresh" face, limited record in elective politics, but his short record has produced some record of strength of character and campaign skills. What does Murkowski really offer except being the next in line in a corrupt, power hungry dynasty?

She offers a willingness to work for the best interests of her state without being obsessed with ideological purity.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 27, 2010, 03:03:18 AM
Update on Absentees:

The Anchorage Daily News reports (http://reports):

-11,266 out of the over 16,000 requested have been returned;
-8,972 questioned ballots have not yet been counted or thrown out; and
-658 early votes have not yet been counted.

That's 20,896 votes - in both primaries.  It probably doesn't include the missing Anchorage precinct.

-The first batch of absentees received by August 31 will be counted on Tuesday, August 31.
-Valid Questioned ballots will likely be added to the tally on Friday, September 3.
-A final count of absentees and remaining ballots will occur on Wednesday, September 8.

If 75% of the 20,896 votes were cast in the Republican primary, Murkowski would need to take almost 56% of them.   If all 16,000 absentees come in, that number falls to around 54% - which was her early vote percentage.

Murkowski's path to victory is still remote, but looking a bit more possible.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 27, 2010, 03:15:25 AM
Update on Absentees:

The Anchorage Daily News reports (http://reports):

-11,266 out of the over 16,000 requested have been returned;
-8,972 questioned ballots have not yet been counted or thrown out; and
-658 early votes have not yet been counted.

That's 20,896 votes - in both primaries.  It probably doesn't include the missing Anchorage precinct.

-The first batch of absentees received by August 31 will be counted on Tuesday, August 31.
-Valid Questioned ballots will likely be added to the tally on Friday, September 3.
-A final count of absentees and remaining ballots will occur on Wednesday, September 8.

If 75% of the 20,896 votes were cast in the Republican primary, Murkowski would need to take almost 56% of them.   If all 16,000 absentees come in, that number falls to around 54% - which was her early vote percentage.

Murkowski's path to victory is still remote, but looking a bit more possible.

:D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 27, 2010, 07:18:09 AM
Historically, at least, questioned votes tend to lean more Democratic and more pro-incumbent, fwiw.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 27, 2010, 07:44:40 AM
And the Libertarian candidate, who is apparently borderline retarded, is willing to give the ballot line to Murkowski (http://ace.mu.nu/archives/305030.php).  Sweet Jesus.

Isn't borderline retarded the general rule for most Libertarian candidates?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 27, 2010, 07:48:52 AM
I'd love to see Murkowski traveling around Alaska, bitching about The Peoples Bail Out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 27, 2010, 10:13:18 AM
Quote
If all 16,000 absentees come in,

Almost no additional absentee ballots will come in at this late date. So the number is 11,000 plus.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Badger on August 27, 2010, 10:53:57 AM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Because this is Alaska, not Connecticut. So given the choice between an electable relative moderate like Murkowski, an unelectable sacrificial lamb Democrat, and a tea party apostle like Miller, most Alaskan Democrats and progressive independents would likely choose the former as the best alternative to Miller.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Grumpier Than Uncle Joe on August 27, 2010, 10:58:42 AM
Quote
If all 16,000 absentees come in,

Almost no additional absentee ballots will come in at this late date. So the number is 11,000 plus.

The consensus this morning was, it won't matter......the absentees won't go for her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Badger on August 27, 2010, 11:28:51 AM
And the Libertarian candidate, who is apparently borderline retarded, is willing to give the ballot line to Murkowski (http://ace.mu.nu/archives/305030.php).  Sweet Jesus.

Interesting, but I doubt it's solely his decision. I'm guessing Alaskan election law leaves that choice up to the party apparatus. While Lisa's hardly the ideal representative of the Libertarian Party (especially in Alaska), the benefit of having an honest to goodness L.P. U.S. Senator, when the party can't otherwise seem to elect a single state representative nationwide, is too good an opportunity to miss. Rationally, that is. While a promise not to switch to Independent or back to Republican for her full term (even if she caucuses with the GOP) plus concessions on a few issues should be enough. But for the folks who make up the Alaska L.P.---who knows?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 27, 2010, 11:29:48 AM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Because this is Alaska, not Connecticut. So given the choice between an electable relative moderate like Murkowski, an unelectable sacrificial lamb Democrat, and a tea party apostle like Miller, most Alaskan Democrats and progressive independents would likely choose the former as the best alternative to Miller.

Right, this is Alaska, a state that once gave Sarah Palin a 93% approval rating.

The guy the Democrats in Alaska actually nominated for the seat has headings on his web page for "Fiscal Responsibility" and "Individual Liberty" while attacking bank bailouts and No Child Left Behind.

Yet somehow you're claiming that the Democrats who nominated him, along with some mythical "moderate Republican" base in Alaska, would unite behind a woman who is in fact a better fit for an authoritarian state that would elect Joe Lieberman, like Connecticut.


Come to think of it, if Murkowski manages to steal this primary, I'll definitely be supporting McAdams in the general election.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 27, 2010, 11:52:22 AM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Because this is Alaska, not Connecticut. So given the choice between an electable relative moderate like Murkowski, an unelectable sacrificial lamb Democrat, and a tea party apostle like Miller, most Alaskan Democrats and progressive independents would likely choose the former as the best alternative to Miller.

Right, this is Alaska, a state that once gave Sarah Palin a 93% approval rating.

The guy the Democrats in Alaska actually nominated for the seat has headings on his web page for "Fiscal Responsibility" and "Individual Liberty" while attacking bank bailouts and No Child Left Behind.

Yet somehow you're claiming that the Democrats who nominated him, along with some mythical "moderate Republican" base in Alaska, would unite behind a woman who is in fact a better fit for an authoritarian state that would elect Joe Lieberman, like Connecticut.


Come to think of it, if Murkowski manages to steal this primary, I'll definitely be supporting McAdams in the general election.


Is the AIP not fielding a candidate?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 27, 2010, 12:01:59 PM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Because this is Alaska, not Connecticut. So given the choice between an electable relative moderate like Murkowski, an unelectable sacrificial lamb Democrat, and a tea party apostle like Miller, most Alaskan Democrats and progressive independents would likely choose the former as the best alternative to Miller.

Right, this is Alaska, a state that once gave Sarah Palin a 93% approval rating.

The guy the Democrats in Alaska actually nominated for the seat has headings on his web page for "Fiscal Responsibility" and "Individual Liberty" while attacking bank bailouts and No Child Left Behind.

Yet somehow you're claiming that the Democrats who nominated him, along with some mythical "moderate Republican" base in Alaska, would unite behind a woman who is in fact a better fit for an authoritarian state that would elect Joe Lieberman, like Connecticut.


Come to think of it, if Murkowski manages to steal this primary, I'll definitely be supporting McAdams in the general election.


Is the AIP not fielding a candidate?

I don't believe so, no. The whole reason people are talking about Murkowski running as a Libertarian is because that's the only other party that will have ballot access in November.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: RIP Robert H Bork on August 27, 2010, 12:04:21 PM
Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.

::)

We don't need any affirmative action in the Republican party, and I'm not going to blindly support female candidates without looking at their merits. I'm against Murkowski because she's a liberal Republican--though I understand now why you're supporting her. I also understand why you're defending her as a victim of sexism. Now, we could use some more female Republicans, but not if they're "moderates"/moderate heroes, such as Murkowski.

Also, what Dgov said:

. . .  You do realize that the vast majority of Conservatives don't give a rats ass about what a candidate's gender, race, etc. are?  The Same voters that took out Murkowski two days ago helped vote in a little someone called Sarah Palin in 2006.  They are also similar to the ones who nominated Sharron Angle in Nevada, Niki Haley in South Carolina, Susannah Martinez in New Mexico, among others, against white Men.  Conservatives will support any candidate if they are Conservative and promise to support Conservative ideals.

Focus on candidate's genetics rather than their ideas is one of the biggest things wrong with this country.

^^^^

I'm not buying into your thesis in the first place. There are plenty of female Republicans running in November.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Badger on August 27, 2010, 12:17:35 PM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Because this is Alaska, not Connecticut. So given the choice between an electable relative moderate like Murkowski, an unelectable sacrificial lamb Democrat, and a tea party apostle like Miller, most Alaskan Democrats and progressive independents would likely choose the former as the best alternative to Miller.

Right, this is Alaska, a state that once gave Sarah Palin a 93% approval rating.

The guy the Democrats in Alaska actually nominated for the seat has headings on his web page for "Fiscal Responsibility" and "Individual Liberty" while attacking bank bailouts and No Child Left Behind.

Yet somehow you're claiming that the Democrats who nominated him, along with some mythical "moderate Republican" base in Alaska, would unite behind a woman who is in fact a better fit for an authoritarian state that would elect Joe Lieberman, like Connecticut.


Come to think of it, if Murkowski manages to steal this primary, I'll definitely be supporting McAdams in the general election.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Democrats would likely abandon their sacrificial lamb, McAdams, for the same reason most (white) Democrats in Florida are currently backing Crist over Meek: The moderateish exile from the GOP can win, and the Dem can't. And Meek is far better known and funded then McAdams, not to mention having a strong base among African-Americans McAdams obviously lacks.

In a one-on-one election between Murkowski and McAdams, from what little I've learned about the guy on his website I'd likely vote for McAdams too. But in a 3 way race with Murkowski and Miller, McAdams and his $4500 on-hand will readily be swept aside.

The deep split in the Alaska GOP between the Murkowski/Stevens wing and the Palinistas is hardly new news. The coalition control of the state senate and constant primary wars going back to Wally Hickel being elected Governor in 1990 shows Alaska Republicans will support personalities over the party line. Call the former faction "moderates", "old guard", "mainstream", whatever. They undeniably exist and would provide a strong base in a general election.

Don't forget Murkowski's money advantage either. Yes, Miller's fundraising will pick up when he's the official nominee, and some of Murkowski's sources will dry up. But she still has about a 20-1 cash on hand advantage, and quiet assurance to the RNC and RNSC that she'll continue caucusing with the GOP as a "Libertarian" will keep Washington from giving Miller more than bare minimum financial support as the "official" Republican nominee, so the aforementioned committees can put more money into states like Illinois, Colorado, Pennsylvania, etc.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 27, 2010, 01:17:28 PM
Quote
If all 16,000 absentees come in,

Almost no additional absentee ballots will come in at this late date. So the number is 11,000 plus.

Probably not many more, but it's Alaska. Mail delivery probably isn't as reliable as it is in parts of the Lower 48.   Bad weather in some bush villages can stop the planes from flying and keep the mail there for days.  11,000 was significantly up from the 7,600 on Monday.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 27, 2010, 01:57:31 PM
Quote
Libertarian Haase is the only third party candidate in the race, so that would be the only option for Murkowski to join a new party for a run. Haase would surely press Murkowski on the Federal Reserve, which is his focus. "Let's take the Federal Reserve, nationalize it and take that income earning capacity and turn it over to the people to finance Social Security and Medicare," Haase said. (http://www.adn.com/2010/08/25/1425363/millers-lead-slims-murkowski-awaits.html#ixzz0xpmazWhW)

Where the hell do they find these people?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on August 27, 2010, 02:05:01 PM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Because this is Alaska, not Connecticut. So given the choice between an electable relative moderate like Murkowski, an unelectable sacrificial lamb Democrat, and a tea party apostle like Miller, most Alaskan Democrats and progressive independents would likely choose the former as the best alternative to Miller.

Right, this is Alaska, a state that once gave Sarah Palin a 93% approval rating.

The guy the Democrats in Alaska actually nominated for the seat has headings on his web page for "Fiscal Responsibility" and "Individual Liberty" while attacking bank bailouts and No Child Left Behind.

Yet somehow you're claiming that the Democrats who nominated him, along with some mythical "moderate Republican" base in Alaska, would unite behind a woman who is in fact a better fit for an authoritarian state that would elect Joe Lieberman, like Connecticut.


Come to think of it, if Murkowski manages to steal this primary, I'll definitely be supporting McAdams in the general election.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Democrats would likely abandon their sacrificial lamb, McAdams, for the same reason most (white) Democrats in Florida are currently backing Crist over Meek: The moderateish exile from the GOP can win, and the Dem can't. And Meek is far better known and funded then McAdams, not to mention having a strong base among African-Americans McAdams obviously lacks.

You're still missing the point. Alaska is not comparable to Florida. Alaska Democrats just nominated by a 30-point margin a guy who could probably pass for a tea party candidate in many states. I dare say that McAdams is probably more similar to Miller than to Murkowski. Lisa is the odd woman out here; the only reason she's even in power is due to the shameless nepotism of her father. Why would the people who nominated small-town anti-establishment McAdams suddenly decide they prefer elitist beltway queen Murkowski?

Quote
The deep split in the Alaska GOP between the Murkowski/Stevens wing and the Palinistas is hardly new news. The coalition control of the state senate and constant primary wars going back to Wally Hickel being elected Governor in 1990 shows Alaska Republicans will support personalities over the party line. Call the former faction "moderates", "old guard", "mainstream", whatever. They undeniably exist and would provide a strong base in a general election.
No matter who the GOP nominates, (s)he will start off with a a pronounced advantage in the polls, especially in a political climate like this one.

Alaska barely managed to vote out a Republican convicted felon in the middle of a Democratic wave year. The GOP doesn't need to moderate itself to win races in that state. Sharron Angle would probably be sweeping up if she were their nominee.

Quote
Don't forget Murkowski's money advantage either. Yes, Miller's fundraising will pick up when he's the official nominee, and some of Murkowski's sources will dry up. But she still has about a 20-1 cash on hand advantage, and quiet assurance to the RNC and RNSC that she'll continue caucusing with the GOP as a "Libertarian" will keep Washington from giving Miller more than bare minimum financial support as the "official" Republican nominee, so the aforementioned committees can put more money into states like Illinois, Colorado, Pennsylvania, etc.

Palin and the tea parties have plenty of money to throw around too.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 27, 2010, 02:48:03 PM
Historically, at least, questioned votes tend to lean more Democratic and more pro-incumbent, fwiw.

The Alaskan questioned votes more or less followed the precinct-level breakdown in AK-AL incumbent Don Young's hotly contested 2008 Republican primary.  Young received 45.6% of the precinct vote and 45.7% of the questioned vote in a three-way race.   In fact, Young performed slightly WORSE in the Absentee+Questioned vote than he did in the Precinct+Early vote (45.3% vs. 45.5%).  But unlike Murkowski, he ran 2.5 points behind in the early vote compared to the precinct-level tally.  Murkowski is running 5 points ahead.

As you'd expect, in 2008, the absentees came in more heavily from the places that don't have easy early voting - the Bush, Southeast Alaska and especially Kenai-Kodiak.  They also came in more heavily from two HDs with huge military bases - HD-12 near Fairbanks, home to Eielson AFB, and HD-18 in Anchorage, which is dominated by Elmendorf AFB and Ft. Richardson.  They came in least heavily from the rest of Anchorage.  The questioned votes were from all over the place, but more Mat-Su, Fairbanks and Bush dominated than anywhere else, especially Anchorage.

The number of absentees in the 2008 AK-AL Republican primary was 11,506.  We might just get there yet.  

Edited to add: FWIW - we saw the same pattern in the Stevens '08 primary.  Unlike Young, Stevens performed about as well in the early vote as the precinct vote.  But like in the Young race, Stevens' absentee percentage was almost identical to the precinct tally - within a tenth of a point.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 27, 2010, 03:20:55 PM
Lovely.
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 27, 2010, 05:30:04 PM
FWIW, the official Alaska numbers don't show any early votes for Murkowski's 2004 primary.  But she too actually performed a little bit worse in the absentees than precinct level vote - about half a point.  She performed about 4 points worse than the precinct vote in the questioned vote, making the overall total -1.5 points.

I also wonder where the missing early votes are supposed to come in from.  Perhaps they are from Miller-friendly areas, which would push Murkowski's early vote percentage closer to the precinct vote.

Edited to add: The 600 or so "Early Votes" not yet counted were probably cast on election day.  The Alaska elections website (http://www.elections.alaska.gov/ei_cp_bcs.php) says that's when those votes are counted.

Why would someone cast an Early Vote on election day?  I suppose if they're away from their home precinct but in the big city that's home to the district HQ of their precinct, they can cast their vote there.  Or if they work near the election office and might not get home in time to vote.  There's no way of knowing if those early votes traditionally break differently than regular early votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Badger on August 27, 2010, 05:58:28 PM
And I believe many of the old guard GOP plus more mainstream and moderate Republicans would likely back a "Libertarian" Murkowski over Miller. Given a choice between a de facto nominee who could win and a broke sacrificial lamb like Scott McAdams, most Alaska Dems would likely abandon their official nominee for Murkowski too. Think Republicans supporting Lieberman in 2006.
I though Democrats didn't like Lieberman? Why would they like a female Republican clone of Lieberman from Alaska?

Because this is Alaska, not Connecticut. So given the choice between an electable relative moderate like Murkowski, an unelectable sacrificial lamb Democrat, and a tea party apostle like Miller, most Alaskan Democrats and progressive independents would likely choose the former as the best alternative to Miller.

Right, this is Alaska, a state that once gave Sarah Palin a 93% approval rating.

The guy the Democrats in Alaska actually nominated for the seat has headings on his web page for "Fiscal Responsibility" and "Individual Liberty" while attacking bank bailouts and No Child Left Behind.

Yet somehow you're claiming that the Democrats who nominated him, along with some mythical "moderate Republican" base in Alaska, would unite behind a woman who is in fact a better fit for an authoritarian state that would elect Joe Lieberman, like Connecticut.


Come to think of it, if Murkowski manages to steal this primary, I'll definitely be supporting McAdams in the general election.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Democrats would likely abandon their sacrificial lamb, McAdams, for the same reason most (white) Democrats in Florida are currently backing Crist over Meek: The moderateish exile from the GOP can win, and the Dem can't. And Meek is far better known and funded then McAdams, not to mention having a strong base among African-Americans McAdams obviously lacks.

You're still missing the point. Alaska is not comparable to Florida. Alaska Democrats just nominated by a 30-point margin a guy who could probably pass for a tea party candidate in many states. I dare say that McAdams is probably more similar to Miller than to Murkowski. Lisa is the odd woman out here; the only reason she's even in power is due to the shameless nepotism of her father. Why would the people who nominated small-town anti-establishment McAdams suddenly decide they prefer elitist beltway queen Murkowski?

Quote
The deep split in the Alaska GOP between the Murkowski/Stevens wing and the Palinistas is hardly new news. The coalition control of the state senate and constant primary wars going back to Wally Hickel being elected Governor in 1990 shows Alaska Republicans will support personalities over the party line. Call the former faction "moderates", "old guard", "mainstream", whatever. They undeniably exist and would provide a strong base in a general election.
No matter who the GOP nominates, (s)he will start off with a a pronounced advantage in the polls, especially in a political climate like this one.

Alaska barely managed to vote out a Republican convicted felon in the middle of a Democratic wave year. The GOP doesn't need to moderate itself to win races in that state. Sharron Angle would probably be sweeping up if she were their nominee.

Quote
Don't forget Murkowski's money advantage either. Yes, Miller's fundraising will pick up when he's the official nominee, and some of Murkowski's sources will dry up. But she still has about a 20-1 cash on hand advantage, and quiet assurance to the RNC and RNSC that she'll continue caucusing with the GOP as a "Libertarian" will keep Washington from giving Miller more than bare minimum financial support as the "official" Republican nominee, so the aforementioned committees can put more money into states like Illinois, Colorado, Pennsylvania, etc.

Palin and the tea parties have plenty of money to throw around too.

Alaska Democrats gave McAdams less than 50% of the vote against this guy, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loLm7HklJ3I) this guy, (http://sites.google.com/site/vondersaar/) and the Libertarian Party candidate. (Some quirk of Alaska election law where Democrats, Libertarians and Independence Party members apparently all appear on the same primary ballot? ???). I would dispute his description as "a tea partier" in any other state. His statements and website reflect a basically progressive Alaska Democrat. But even IF you were accurate, doesn't the supposed similarity between Murkowski and McAdams support my point that Murkowski would have a gap to exploit?

The money resources of Palin's organization and the tea party is true, but looking at their current bank accounts even then Miller will at best be only competitive (and still likely outspent) with Murkowski.

Your point about Sharon Angle likely winning up there is also true---which also reinforces my point. Scott McAdams can't win. Any Alaska Democrat running for Congress this year couldn't, least of all a grossly underfunded sacrificial lamb like McAdams. Democrats and progrssive independents up there will realize this and support Murkowski if she maintains at least half a chance of beating Miller.

I realize you dislike Murkowski intensely, but don't let that blind you to the reality that the combination of: money, incumbency, support from the Stevens wing of the Alaska GOP organization, and competing only with an unknown small town mayor with less than $5k in the bank to become the de facto Democratic candidate, MONEY, all combined could give Murkowski a viable (albeit less than even) chance of reelection.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 27, 2010, 07:51:44 PM
The official canvass of the votes in Vermont got done early; it's Shumlin by 197 votes. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41537.html) Racine is requesting a recount.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Niemeyerite on August 27, 2010, 09:00:06 PM
Well, murkowsi could run as a democrat. that would be funny =)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 28, 2010, 12:13:16 AM
Murkowski's possible loss in the Republican primary just shows a trend for Republicans to not being willing to nominating more women for political office. They had a real chance of breaking the gender barrier this year with the most number of women ever running in Republican primaries. Now what? The Democrats have maintained a stable number of female nominees, whereas the Republicans have seen to blow their chance for bringing a more gender equal congress this year. High profile candidates like Bledsoe, Lightner, Gorman, Emken, and Norton couldn't win their primaries. If Murkowski is out of senate in 2011, the Republican caucus will be guaranteed a paltry 3 women in senate, and at most will only have about 7 if they are lucky. Perhaps it is time they established quotas requiring a certain amount of women to win primaries. The Tea Party take over is creating a step backward and not forward for racial and gender equality in Republican politics.

::)

We don't need any affirmative action in the Republican party, and I'm not going to blindly support female candidates without looking at their merits. I'm against Murkowski because she's a liberal Republican--though I understand now why you're supporting her. I also understand why you're defending her as a victim of sexism. Now, we could use some more female Republicans, but not if they're "moderates"/moderate heroes, such as Murkowski.

Also, what Dgov said:

. . .  You do realize that the vast majority of Conservatives don't give a rats ass about what a candidate's gender, race, etc. are?  The Same voters that took out Murkowski two days ago helped vote in a little someone called Sarah Palin in 2006.  They are also similar to the ones who nominated Sharron Angle in Nevada, Niki Haley in South Carolina, Susannah Martinez in New Mexico, among others, against white Men.  Conservatives will support any candidate if they are Conservative and promise to support Conservative ideals.

Focus on candidate's genetics rather than their ideas is one of the biggest things wrong with this country.

^^^^

I'm not buying into your thesis in the first place. There are plenty of female Republicans running in November.

I'm supporting her because she is a productive senator, not because she is a woman.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 28, 2010, 12:15:38 AM
I reiterate my position that Imelda Marcos would no doubt be a very productive senator - and she's an Asian woman!  In fact, she was born when the Philippines were US territory - the GOP should nominate her for President!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 28, 2010, 12:17:58 AM
I reiterate my position that Imelda Marcos would no doubt be a very productive senator - and she's an Asian woman!  In fact, she was born when the Philippines were US territory - the GOP should nominate her for President!

That's not what I meant and you know it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 28, 2010, 01:16:57 AM
<3 Libertarian Party


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on August 28, 2010, 01:27:21 AM
You don't support Crist but would vote for Murkowski? I doubt even I would vote for her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: redcommander on August 28, 2010, 03:28:26 AM
You don't support Crist but would vote for Murkowski? I doubt even I would vote for her.

Crist doesn't have the experience with energy issues that Murkowski has. Plus he is a little too cuddly with Obama. At least Murkowski has kept her distance from him somewhat.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 07:01:28 AM
Tonight, we have exciting primaries in Louisiana and West Virginia. Polls close at 7:30 eastern in WV, 9 eastern in LA.

Results pages: LA (SOS) (http://staticresults.sos.louisiana.gov/8282010_Congressional.html) | LA (AP) (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/LA_Page_0828.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | WV (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/WV_Page_0828.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Eraserhead on August 28, 2010, 12:43:47 PM
Exciting (?)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 28, 2010, 12:46:46 PM
Could anyone besides whatshisface win in WV?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 28, 2010, 12:49:41 PM
Could Vitter lose in LA?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 01:05:03 PM
Could anyone besides whatshisface win in WV?

Raese. No.


No.

The only interesting primaries are the ones in LA-02 and LA-03.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Meeker on August 28, 2010, 01:33:40 PM
Do we have a legitimate nominee in LA-03?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 01:40:59 PM
An Indian-American lawyer fellow named Ravi Sangisetty who has raised nearly half a million dollars. In other words, kind of.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 28, 2010, 02:43:52 PM
Isn't there an Indian-American lawyer running in one of those Kansas seats that's raised a boatload of money too?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Meeker on August 28, 2010, 02:46:34 PM
Isn't there an Indian-American lawyer running in one of those Kansas seats that's raised a boatload of money too?

Raj Goyle. He's a State Representative though he may be a lawyer by trade. SUSA also only has him down by 7 (42-49).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 28, 2010, 03:26:17 PM
Isn't there an Indian-American lawyer running in one of those Kansas seats that's raised a boatload of money too?

Raj Goyle. He's a State Representative though he may be a lawyer by trade. SUSA also only has him down by 7 (42-49).

Wikipedia confirms that he's an attorney!  Some joke law degree from this place called "Havard" though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 28, 2010, 03:31:19 PM
Isn't there an Indian-American lawyer running in one of those Kansas seats that's raised a boatload of money too?

Raj Goyle. He's a State Representative though he may be a lawyer by trade. SUSA also only has him down by 7 (42-49).

Wikipedia confirms that he's an attorney!  Some joke law degree from this place called "Havard" though.

Ah, you pronounced that particular law degree mill with an East Anglia accent. Well done!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Brandon H on August 28, 2010, 03:43:04 PM

I doubt it.
Do we have a legitimate nominee in LA-03?

Ravi Sangisetty (D), Hunt Downer (R), Jeff Landry (R), Kristian Mager (R). R's will most likely have a run-off and will most like pick up the seat.

Of note, I just voted and in my prescient, only 34 people have voted so far and that's for all parties. It's been raining all day, so a lot of people stayed home.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 07:37:52 PM
So Manchin and Raese are winning, surprise surprise. Manchin is at 73%, while Raese is hovering around 70%. Dem turnout is currently about 1.7 times that of Republican turnout, which is about even with voter registration. Good luck divining anything about the general from that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 28, 2010, 08:06:13 PM
So Manchin and Raese are winning, surprise surprise. Manchin is at 73%, while Raese is hovering around 70%. Dem turnout is currently about 1.7 times that of Republican turnout, which is about even with voter registration. Good luck divining anything about the general from that.

Manchin is getting but 48% (30357/63262=48%) of all the votes cast. He's in trouble baby! Moving right along, it is a mistake to assume this seat is not in play, because it is.

Addendum: Down to 45% now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 08:08:11 PM
Jesus Christ.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 08:27:25 PM
Early LA results: Vitter's at 89%, Melancon at 66%. Landry at 64% in LA-03. Nothing from LA-02, of course.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Lunar on August 28, 2010, 08:31:59 PM
So Manchin and Raese are winning, surprise surprise. Manchin is at 73%, while Raese is hovering around 70%. Dem turnout is currently about 1.7 times that of Republican turnout, which is about even with voter registration. Good luck divining anything about the general from that.

Manchin is getting but 48% (30357/63262=48%) of all the votes cast. He's in trouble baby! Moving right along, it is a mistake to assume this seat is not in play, because it is.

Addendum: Down to 45% now.

shoo shoo.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: cinyc on August 28, 2010, 08:33:30 PM
So Manchin and Raese are winning, surprise surprise. Manchin is at 73%, while Raese is hovering around 70%. Dem turnout is currently about 1.7 times that of Republican turnout, which is about even with voter registration. Good luck divining anything about the general from that.

Manchin is getting but 48% (30357/63262=48%) of all the votes cast. He's in trouble baby! Moving right along, it is a mistake to assume this seat is not in play, because it is.

Addendum: Down to 45% now.

shoo shoo.

For whatever bizarre reason, that's actually how the WV SoS is reporting the results - all candidates together as if it were a jungle primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 08:34:20 PM
OMG Raese is only getting 27% of all the votes! He's doomed!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 08:36:22 PM
LA-03 has tightened quite a bit, it's now 48-44 Landry. Magar may siphon off just enough of the vote to push that one into a runoff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on August 28, 2010, 08:38:16 PM
Who is Chauvin?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 08:39:27 PM
Ah, here we go, LA-02 results: http://www.wwltv.com/news/election-results/Election-Results---Congress-Democratic-primary-2nd-District-101730073.html

Richmond at 58%, LaFonta at 20%.


Just some dude.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 28, 2010, 08:49:12 PM
For all the hype this Chet Traylor guy got, he sure seems like a winner...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 08:56:48 PM
Richmond's at 63%. About 1/4 in for LA-03 and Landry is just short of avoiding a runoff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Holmes on August 28, 2010, 08:56:57 PM
Uh oh, Team GOP only has 51% of the primary vote in Louisiana to Team Dems' 49%. Vitter in trouble!?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Torie on August 28, 2010, 09:01:47 PM
Uh oh, Team GOP only has 51% of the primary vote in Louisiana to Team Dems' 49%. Vitter in trouble!?

:P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 09:09:42 PM
52-33 Landry with 43% in. Richmond at 63% with 11% in. The SOS site is starting to report LA-02 results as well, they have him at 62% with 5% in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 09:19:26 PM
Richmond is crushing in Jefferson County -- he's getting 2/3rds of the vote there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 09:26:55 PM
80% in for LA-03, and Landry is 62 votes ahead of a runoff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 28, 2010, 09:28:25 PM
Richmond will win easily.

I respect Louisiana for their fast counting system.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 09:30:25 PM
The local TV station (whose results I linked to upthread) has called it for him, apparently.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 28, 2010, 09:32:41 PM
I'm almost certain you can't play around in the primaries of LA and WV and I'm pretty sure Indies can't disrupt.

WV Party Registration
DEM 54.31% (only DEM/GOP 65.36%) 656,792
GOP 28.79% (only DEM/GOP 34.64%) 348,098
IND/OTH 16.90% 204,362

Tonight (1839/1881)
DEM 89,747 (63.01%)
GOP 52,677 (36.99%)

LA Party Registration
DEM 51.03% (only DEM/GOP 66.28%) 1,488,463
GOP 25.96% (only DEM/GOP 33.72%) 757,212
IND/OTH 23.01% 671,262

Tonight (2513/3877)
DEM 68,511 (50.05%)
GOP 68,371 (49.95%)

LA is probably skewed a bit Republican for now given Orleans ain't in much.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 28, 2010, 09:35:27 PM
20 precincts left in LA-03, and Landry is ahead of runoff territory by 115 votes. 11 precincts are in Terrebonne, Downer's home turf, and the only parish he's won. Landry might be dragged into a runoff, but just barely.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Brandon H on August 28, 2010, 09:48:25 PM
Richmond is crushing in Jefferson County -- he's getting 2/3rds of the vote there.

Where is Jefferson County? ;)

I was pulling for Magar in 3. Oh well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 28, 2010, 09:52:14 PM
Melancon's primary breakdown is amusingly predictable.

Landry's gonna have to go into the runoff.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Brandon H on August 28, 2010, 09:56:17 PM
Randall Hayes is leading Tony Gentile for the Libertarian Primary in the Senate (the first and last Libertarian primary in the state history). Gentile had been campaigning for close to a year, while Hayes jumped in at the last minute.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 28, 2010, 10:23:46 PM
I really need to keep Vitter in Likely R after this primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 8/24 - AK/AZ/FL/OK runoffs/VT; 8/28 - LA/WV)
Post by: rbt48 on August 29, 2010, 11:24:30 AM
Might it hurt Republicans chances in LA-3 to have to wait until the early Oct (runoff date)to know the eventual nominee.  Checking the websites of the finalists, the race seems to have turned negative.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on August 29, 2010, 01:18:55 PM
Here's a map of the LA-03 primary. Three guesses where Mr. Downer lives.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 29, 2010, 04:38:27 PM
Here's a map of the LA-03 primary. Three guesses where Mr. Downer lives.

()

I'm guessing the first two don't count?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 30, 2010, 01:46:38 AM
The Anchorage Daily News is now reporting (http://www.adn.com/2010/08/28/1429399/absentee-ballots.html):

-13,740 absentee votes out of the 16,000 requested have come in;
-9,069 questioned ballots exist (though some will be disqualified; and
-663 early votes have yet to be counted.

Total number of votes to be counted as of Saturday: 23,472.  

As always, these are for both the Republican and Democratic primaries - so not all will be counted toward the Miller-Murkowski race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on August 31, 2010, 06:01:45 AM
I'd LOL if O'Donnell pulled an upset in Delaware.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 01:31:41 PM
FYI - We should be getting our first Alaska absentee count today.  The first count will be released around 11:00 AM Alaska time (3:00 PM Eastern/Noon Pacific).  They may update throughout the day.  

According to the Anchorage newspaper, the "missing" Anchorage precinct was found.  It has 496 votes - in both primaries, I guess.  I assume that will also be included in the first count.  Based on the vote in the rest of that precinct's House district, I expect Murkowski to gain about 30 votes or so.

15,272 of about 25,500 absentee, questioned and early votes may be counted today (in both primaries).

Results will be posted here (http://www.elections.alaska.gov/results/10PRIM/).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:07:44 PM
2,841 additonal votes counted:

Miller, Joe    REP    48051    50.70%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    46726    49.30%

Miller +1,775 1,325

Miller's lead actually grew a bit.  He took the votes counted thus far 1,474-1,367 (roughly 52%-48%).

Edit: I transposed a digit when copying to Excel.  Sam is correct.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 02:09:37 PM
2,841 additonal votes counted:

Miller, Joe    REP    48051    50.70%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    46726    49.30%

Miller +1,775

Miller's lead actually grew a bit.  He took the votes counted thus far 1,474-1,367 (roughly 52%-48%).

Huh.  I thought his lead was 1,668 and it is now 1,325.  Impossible though to know anything about the extent of the ballots without knowing where they're coming from.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 31, 2010, 02:11:07 PM
I think thats off. Going by Swingstate's numbers, he went from 47,027 to 48,051 which means Murkowski won 1367-1024.  

Out of the first 2391 votes, Murkowski won 1367 or a bit over 57%, which if it continues will bring her into the lead by around 150 votes or so. That of course is a big if.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:12:46 PM
2,841 additonal votes counted:

Miller, Joe    REP    48051    50.70%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    46726    49.30%

Miller +1,775

Miller's lead actually grew a bit.  He took the votes counted thus far 1,474-1,367 (roughly 52%-48%).

Huh.  I thought his lead was 1,668 and it is now 1,325.  Impossible though to know anything about the extent of the ballots without knowing where they're coming from.

Whoops.  I transposed the digits when copying to Excel (moved the 5).  You're correct.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:19:46 PM
2,841 additonal votes counted:

Miller, Joe    REP    48051    50.70%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    46726    49.30%

Miller +1,775

Miller's lead actually grew a bit.  He took the votes counted thus far 1,474-1,367 (roughly 52%-48%).

Huh.  I thought his lead was 1,668 and it is now 1,325.  Impossible though to know anything about the extent of the ballots without knowing where they're coming from.

We may eventually know if Alaska reposts the card count or precinct-level report.  They updated them very late on election night, but before all the votes came in.  

The real question is whether they are randomly feeding the absentees into the counting machines or counting by HD.  If by HD and they started in numerical order, Southeast Alaska would be first - and it went to Murkowski by about 57-43.  Interior District 6, Fairbanks and the Mat-Su would be next, which Miller won (HD6 and Fairbanks, by a little and the Mat-Su by a lot).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:25:08 PM
ADN (http://community.adn.com/adn/node/152974):

These absentees are from Districts 17 through 26, all Anchorage.

Districts 17-26 went 53-47 Murkowski.  The absentees ran about 4 points more toward her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 02:26:36 PM
How did Anchorage vote on primary night?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:27:45 PM
How did Anchorage vote on primary night?

Anchorage districts 17-26 went 53-47 Murkowski.  The absentees ran about 4 points more toward her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 02:29:25 PM
If there's a uniform swing of 4 percent among the absentees, Miller holds on to his victory by a couple hundred votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:31:05 PM
If there's a uniform swing of 4 percent among the absentees, Miller holds on to his victory by a couple hundred votes.

Yeah, we really need to measure the swing in Miller's strongholds, though.  That will ultimately decide if he wins.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 02:31:32 PM
If there's a uniform swing of 4 percent among the absentees, Miller holds on to his victory by a couple hundred votes.

Also depends on how many votes come from where.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:34:52 PM
If there's a uniform swing of 4 percent among the absentees, Miller holds on to his victory by a couple hundred votes.

Also depends on how many votes come from where.

True.  I'd expect more absentees from the Kenai Peninsula, Southeast outside of Juneau and (mildly) the Bush, where there isn't any reasonable way to early vote unless you happen to live in Juneau or Nome.  Kenai went to Miller, the other two areas to Murkowski.


I also expect more absentees from the two military-heavy HDs, 12 and 18.  18 came in this dump, and didn't seem to help Miller much.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 02:42:29 PM
When do we get more ballot?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 02:44:56 PM

Periodically throughout the day, according to the Alaska Elections website.

FWIW, Alaska provides results in html, pdf and text format.   The html version of their results seems to be the most up-to-date.  The text/CSV and pdf versions are a bit behind the HTML tally, for whatever reason.  The text/CSV version was also a bit behind on elections night, too.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 03:11:20 PM
2895 more votes have come in - Miller is leading by 1440, 49566 to 48106.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 03:12:53 PM
Rumor is Fairbanks will report at 1PM Alaska time (5PM Eastern/2PM Pacific).

Miller won Fairbanks with around 57% of the election day vote (including earlies).  He only took 51% of the early votes.  In the Anchorage House Districts that reported, HDs 17-26, Miller won 47% of the overall election day vote, but only took 40% of the early votes.

So Murkowski ran 3 points behind her early vote tally in HDs 17-26.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 03:15:50 PM
2895 more votes have come in - Miller is leading by 1440, 49566 to 48106.

So Miller won that batch 52-48%, wherever it came from.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 03:27:58 PM
According to the ADN, those votes came from precincts 13 through 16 in the Mat Su.  Miller won the Mat-Su with 62% of the vote.  He won 59% of the early vote.  That's not good news for Miller at all - running 10 points down in his strongholds.  

As for turnout, the HD-17-26 votes were about 13% of the election day total vote (including earlies) for those districts.  The HD 13-16 votes were 19% of the election day total for those districts.  So absentee and other turnout was heavier in the Mat-Su, even if Miller didn't perform quite as well there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 03:36:36 PM
Let's go Murkowski :D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 03:37:27 PM
According to the ADN, those votes came from precincts 13 through 16 in the Mat Su.  Miller won the Mat-Su with 62% of the vote.  He won 59% of the early vote.  That's not good news for Miller at all - running 10 points down in his strongholds.  

As for turnout, the HD-17-26 votes were about 13% of the election day total vote (including earlies) for those districts.  The HD 13-16 votes were 19% of the election day total for those districts.  So absentee turnout was heavier in the Mat-Su, even if Miller didn't perform quite as well there.

What are you assuming the share is, of the absentees?  25%?

Are they going to do the absentees first, and then the questioned ballots?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on August 31, 2010, 03:41:41 PM
If the Murk does pull this off, do the Libertarians bin their candidate for Miller? That'd be fun.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 03:43:27 PM
According to the ADN, those votes came from precincts 13 through 16 in the Mat Su.  Miller won the Mat-Su with 62% of the vote.  He won 59% of the early vote.  That's not good news for Miller at all - running 10 points down in his strongholds.  

As for turnout, the HD-17-26 votes were about 13% of the election day total vote (including earlies) for those districts.  The HD 13-16 votes were 19% of the election day total for those districts.  So absentee turnout was heavier in the Mat-Su, even if Miller didn't perform quite as well there.

What are you assuming the share is, of the absentees?  25%?

Are they going to do the absentees first, and then the questioned ballots?

Well, we don't know.  For my calculation, I just divided the numbers reported today by the number of election day votes in the house districts the ADN claims the votes came from.

FWIW - projecting Miller's lost Mat-Su margin and turnout to Miller strongholds (Fairbanks/Kenai) and Miller's lost part Anchorage margin and turnout to Murkowski's strongholds (rest of Anchorage/Bush/Southeast), Murkowski would win by 206 Miller would win by 91.   Now, that's a straight line calculation that likely won't hold - but an interesting first cut.

Edited to add:  A second cut, using the actual margins of each region  + the lost Anchorage/Mat-Su margins would lead to a MILLER win by about 263.  The model assumes about 14,150 absentee and other votes - which might be a bit low.

Edited after spreadsheet audit.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 03:43:53 PM
If the Murk does pull this off, do the Libertarians bin their candidate for Miller? That'd be fun.

Well that would be hypocritical on their part since they denied Murkowski the option.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on August 31, 2010, 03:50:02 PM
If the Murk does pull this off, do the Libertarians bin their candidate for Miller? That'd be fun.

Well that would be hypocritical on their part since they denied Murkowski the option.

What reasoning did they give? As some people have noted, Murkowski is pretty much the opposite of a Libertarian... Miller would be closer to their philosophy. Although it's still unlikely.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 03:50:53 PM
If the Murk does pull this off, do the Libertarians bin their candidate for Miller? That'd be fun.

Well that would be hypocritical on their part since they denied Murkowski the option.

What reasoning did they give? As some people have noted, Murkowski is pretty much the opposite of a Libertarian... Miller would be closer to their philosophy. Although it's still unlikely.

Miller's not running as a libertarian.  He said he wouldn't go third party if he lost.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 04:04:23 PM
What are you assuming the share is, of the absentees?  25%?

Are they going to do the absentees first, and then the questioned ballots?

Based on an article I posted last week, today should just be of absentees, plus any leftover early and the missing Anchorage precinct, I assume.  Valid questioned ballots are supposed to be counted on Friday.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 04:13:39 PM
The missing Anchorage precinct (Laurel/Dowling) went 176-151 Murkowski.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 04:26:27 PM
Apparently (http://theothermccain.com/2010/08/31/alaska-countdown-today/), the regional elections offices are counting the absentees.  There are regional election offices in Anchorage, the Mat-Su Valley (satellite), Juneau, Fairbanks and Nome.  According to a conservative blogger who's in Anchorage, Anchorage started counting at 9AM, Mat-Su 10AM, Juneau at 1PM and Faribanks is to start at 3PM.  Add 4 hours for Eastern; 1 for Pacific.  I don't know about Nome - or if they even validated the absentees (to make sure no one who cast a precinct or early vote can also vote absentee).  As of this morning, absentees in 4 HDs hadn't been vaildated, according to the Anchorage paper.  Perhaps not coincidentally, there are 4 bush HDs in Nome's district.

IIRC, the Juneau office is responsible for Southeast Alaska (HDs 1-5), and the Kenai Peninsula and Kodiak (HDs 33-36).  Anchorage is responsible for the Anchorage and Mat-Su HDs (HDs 13-32; Mat-Su's office is a satellite).  Fairbanks is responsible for HDs 6-12; Nome for HDs 37-40. I'll double check if I have time.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 04:30:22 PM
New numbers:

Miller                49888    50.66%
Murkowski   48594    49.34%

By my math, there were 810 votes in that dump; Murkowski picked up about 60% of them to net 166.

No info on from whence the votes came - yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 04:35:00 PM
Looks like HD 27 to 32 to me.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 04:35:41 PM
New numbers:

Miller                49888    50.66%
Murkowski   48594    49.34%

By my math, there were 810 votes in that dump; Murkowski picked up about 60% of them to net 166.

No info on from whence the votes came - yet.

Doesn't this mean about half the absentees have been counted now on the GOP side?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 04:38:27 PM
Will all the absentees be counted today?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 04:54:53 PM

 It looks from eyeballing it, that Murk won those in the first round by about 55-45, so that is a 5 point swing in her favor, if she is getting 60% now. But the number of absentees seems very low as compared to what was counted before, which looks like 20,000 votes or something on the GOP side, with less than 1,000 additional.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 05:02:01 PM

 It looks from eyeballing it, that Murk won those in the first round by about 55-45, so that is a 5 point swing in her favor, if she is getting 60% now. But the number of absentees seems very low as compared to what was counted before, which looks like 20,000 votes or something on the GOP side, with less than 1,000 additional.

Hard to figure.  Of course, turnout in 27 to 32 was pretty high to begin with - highest in the state to begin with.  21 to 26 are Dem-leaning areas.  33 and 34 are hyper-GOP suburbs.  35 and 36 are more working-class areas, but the only areas Miller won in Anchorage in the first place.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 05:05:11 PM
Will all the absentees be counted today?

No.  Most absentees today.  Most questioned ballots on Friday.  Everything that's left - next week.

Yes, Sam is correct - those came from South Anchorage, (presumably HDs 27-32).  Those Anchorage HDs went about 55-45 Murkowski on election day.  She performed about 5.5 points better in today's absentee votes.  The absentees were an anemic 4.1% of the election day total, though.  Not many absentees there.  They voted precinct and early.

Note that one of the dumps had to be affected by the "found" votes in the missing Anchorage precinct.  That precinct was in HD-30, but that doesn't mean the elections officials included it in this update.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 05:09:10 PM
Hard to figure.  Of course, turnout in 27 to 32 was pretty high to begin with - highest in the state to begin with.  21 to 26 are Dem-leaning areas.  33 and 34 are hyper-GOP suburbs.  35 and 36 are more working-class areas, but the only areas Miller won in Anchorage in the first place.

HDs 33-35 are on the Kenai Peninsula, not Anchorage.  Unlike the Mat-Su, most of the population is pretty far from Anchorage (and the parts of the Kenai Peninsula that are closer to Anchorage are in HD 32, anyway).  HD 35 includes hippie-ish Homer - far from Anchorage.  HD 36 is Kodiak Island and environs. 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 05:11:09 PM
Hard to figure.  Of course, turnout in 27 to 32 was pretty high to begin with - highest in the state to begin with.  21 to 26 are Dem-leaning areas.  33 and 34 are hyper-GOP suburbs.  35 and 36 are more working-class areas, but the only areas Miller won in Anchorage in the first place.

HDs 33-35 are on the Kenai Peninsula, not Anchorage.  Unlike the Mat-Su, most of the population is pretty far from Anchorage (and the parts of the Kenai Peninsula that are closer to Anchorage are in HD 32, anyway).  HD 35 includes hippie-ish Homer - far from Anchorage.  HD 36 is Kodiak Island and environs. 

Ya, you're right.  Anyway, not many absentees.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 05:17:30 PM
ADN reports there are about 3,000 questioned votes from Anchorage and 1,200 from the Mat-Su to be counted (or, one assumes, rejected) on Friday.  I also assume not all questioned votes were cast in the Republican primary, especially in Anchorage.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 05:19:46 PM
ADN reports there are about 3,000 questioned votes from Anchorage and 1,200 from the Mat-Su to be counted (or, one assumes, rejected) on Friday.  I also assume not all questioned votes were cast in the Republican primary, especially in Anchorage.

Questioned votes always tend to lean pro-Dem, pro-incumbent.  Depends on where they are w/r/t Anchorage.  If in 21-26, they'll definitely have a strong Dem lean.

Question - does this mean all Anchorage/Mat-su absentees are counted (at least in their possession)?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 05:31:47 PM
ADN reports there are about 3,000 questioned votes from Anchorage and 1,200 from the Mat-Su to be counted (or, one assumes, rejected) on Friday.  I also assume not all questioned votes were cast in the Republican primary, especially in Anchorage.

Questioned votes always tend to lean pro-Dem, pro-incumbent.  Depends on where they are w/r/t Anchorage.  If in 21-26, they'll definitely have a strong Dem lean.

Question - does this mean all Anchorage/Mat-su absentees are counted (at least in their possession)?

No and no.  I think those areas are done for the day, though.  The ADN reported that "most" Mat-Su absentees were counted and there were "a small number" of Anchorage absentees remaining to be counted next week.  Plus, absentees can still trickle in this week.  Military absentees have a slightly longer deadline.

FWIW, the questioned votes only broke slightly more toward incumbents Young (by less than .15 points) and Stevens (by 1.25 points) than the precinct vote in the 2008 Republican primary.   Murkowski actually did about 4 points worse in the questioned votes than the precinct percent in her 2004 primary.  There were a little over 5,300 questioned Republican votes in 2008 and 3,600 in 2004.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 06:00:45 PM
From the ADN of what's left to be counted today:

Juneau region absentees: roughly 2,000 from Southeast and 2,300 or so from the Kenai.
Fairbanks region:  1,768 absentees.

Questioned ballots outstanding (likely counted Friday, based on prior info, but ADN says Fairbanks and Southeast-Kenai will count them today):
Southeast: 1,013
Fairbanks: 996
Mat-Su: about 1,200
Anchorage: about 3,000
Kenai: 502

Bush (HDs 37-40): Not specified.

There's also some confusion from the Miller campaign via a conservative blogger about what was counted in the Mat-Su today, early and questioned votes or absentees - which contradicts the ADN.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 06:08:26 PM
The Juneau-Kenai dump will be key.  If Murkowski doesn't win it by a fairly large margin, it's over.    Big Government.com is reporting (http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/08/31/joe-miller-set-to-win-alaska-senate-primary/) that Miller will prevail.

Edited to add: Southeast+Kenai was marginal in the total vote so far - 50.4% Miller, 49.6% Murkowski.  The two regions were divergent, with the Southeast backing Murkowski and Kenai Miller.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 06:11:34 PM
We just got some from HDs 1, 3-5 and maybe somewhere else? (800 votes)

No change basically. (Murkowski gained 2 votes)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 06:15:22 PM
We just got some from HDs 1, 3-5 and maybe somewhere else? (800 votes)

No change basically. (Murkowski gained 2 votes)

Well, if it's HDs 1, 3-5, Murkowski's toast.  She needs to do much better there.  How can you tell from whence they came?  Comparing House votes - (that's what I should be doing)?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 06:22:35 PM
We just got some from HDs 1, 3-5 and maybe somewhere else? (800 votes)

No change basically. (Murkowski gained 2 votes)

Based on the House primaries with additional votes, it looks like 33 and 34 may have been in that count, too.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 06:28:43 PM
We just got some from HDs 1, 3-5 and maybe somewhere else? (800 votes)

No change basically. (Murkowski gained 2 votes)

Well, if it's HDs 1, 3-5, Murkowski's toast.  She needs to do much better there.  How can you tell from whence they came?  Comparing House votes - (that's what I should be doing)?

Higher numbers than on the cards in the HDs.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on August 31, 2010, 06:29:30 PM
We just got some from HDs 1, 3-5 and maybe somewhere else? (800 votes)

No change basically. (Murkowski gained 2 votes)

Based on the House primaries with additional votes, it looks like 33 and 34 may have been in that count, too.


Those were the questioned ballots according to the ADN


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 06:29:39 PM
If that was HDs 1, 3-5 and 33-34, the Murkowski swing was very small - less than a point.  It's only 5.3% of the election day vote, though.

This could be that area's questioned vote.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 06:32:36 PM
We just got some from HDs 1, 3-5 and maybe somewhere else? (800 votes)

No change basically. (Murkowski gained 2 votes)

Based on the House primaries with additional votes, it looks like 33 and 34 may have been in that count, too.


Those were the questioned ballots according to the ADN

Thanks.  

That's the next important piece of the puzzle for areas that don't report questioned votes today (Anchorage and the Mat-Su reportedly won't).  The HD 1, 3-5, and 33-34 questioned votes aren't far off from their election day total.  That would likely sink Murkowski.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 06:48:05 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:03:12 PM
Another 2,196 votes in:

Miller, Joe    REP    51298    50.60%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    50088    49.40%

Miller lost 82 votes.  (52-48 Murkowski)

Now, to figure out where from...

Edit:  Looks like it might be Fairbanks (7-12) plus bush-lite district 6.

IF it's Fairbanks, Miller ran about 8 points worse than election day, and these votes were 13% of the total Republican votes cast on election day.

IF it's the absentees from SE/Kenai, it's undoubtedly over.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 07:10:27 PM
That was a pretty large dump - over 2,000 right?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:12:37 PM

2,196. 

The Fairbanks HD primary votes are now higher than on election day night, which makes me think this was from there - though I hadn't checked them earlier.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 07:14:07 PM
I'm unfamiliar with the particulars of Alaskan electoral geography.  Who are we favoring to win now?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:16:37 PM
I'm unfamiliar with the particulars of Alaskan electoral geography.  Who are we favoring to win now?

Miller.

If those were the Fairbanks absentees, Murkowski needs to win the only large group of absentees outstanding - SE/Kenai by 70-30 to pull even tonight.  That area was marginal on election day - almost 50-50 (SE - for Murkowski; Kenai for Miller).   I don't think that's going to happen.

Rumor has it Murkowski will concede tonight.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 07:16:59 PM
So far today Murkowski 4,729 (from 45,359 to 50,088), Miller 4,271 (47,027 to 51,298). 

Exactly 9,000 more ballots.  Murkowski ahead 52.54% to 47.46%.

How much more do you think is left today because not all of the roughly 25,000 outstanding are GOP obviously.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on August 31, 2010, 07:17:43 PM
I'm unfamiliar with the particulars of Alaskan electoral geography.  Who are we favoring to win now?

I think Miller will still win (though its likely going to get a bit closer).  The fact he lost ground with the Fairbanks dump is a bad thing for him.  A telling sign will be Murkowski's margin among the absentees in the SE.  Also the amount of the questioned ballots in Anchorage that are Democratic will be important.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on August 31, 2010, 07:19:49 PM
So far today Murkowski 4,729 (from 45,359 to 50,088), Miller 4,271 (47,027 to 51,298).  

Exactly 9,000 more ballots.  Murkowski ahead 52.54% to 47.46%.

How much more do you think is left today because not all of the roughly 25,000 outstanding are GOP obviously.

I would say the 2,000 absentees from Juneau, and the 2,300 from the Kenai are left for today, some of those obviously being GOP.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:20:11 PM
So far today Murkowski 4,729 (from 45,359 to 50,088), Miller 4,271 (47,027 to 51,298).  

Exactly 9,000 more ballots.  Murkowski ahead 52.54% to 47.46%.

How much more do you think is left today because not all of the roughly 25,000 outstanding are GOP obviously.

About 16,000 votes were to be counted today.  My guess is just the SE/Kenai absentees are left to count today (and perhaps the Fairbanks questioned).   There should be about 4,300 SE/Kenai absentees in both parties.  ADN says the SE/Kenai questioned votes broke about evenly between Republicans and Democrats.  So figure another 2,200 or so votes, plus 1,000 or so Fairbanks questioned if they weren't included in this dump - perhaps 750 of those Republican.  So 2,200-3,000.

Edited to add: if the most recent dump was from Fairbanks, they had to be absentee+questioned, since there were less than 1,800 Fairbanks absentees.  So 2,200 or thereabouts.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on August 31, 2010, 07:29:15 PM
Anyone else note the nearly 10,000 vote gap between the Democratic primary for Governor and Senate in terms of votes cast? I know people tend to leave uncontested races blank, but thats nearly a 25% abstention rate on top of whatever the original one was.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:29:25 PM
If there are 2,200 Republican primary votes remaining to be counted tonight, Murkowski would need 77.5% to pull even today.  That's not going to happen.

There will be some missing HDs, though - 2 in the SE (Petersburg/Wrangell/Sitka), 35 on Kenai, 36 on Kodiak and the 4 bush districts counted by Nome (37-40).  35 and 36 were marginal Miller.  2 was mildly Murkowski.  The 4 bush districts were heavily Murkowski.

There probably were a lot more independents voting in the Democratic primary than usual in 2 since the Sitka mayor was on the Democratic ballot.  There rarely are many Republican absentees from the bush.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:33:10 PM
Anyone else note the nearly 10,000 vote gap between the Democratic primary for Governor and Senate in terms of votes cast? I know people tend to leave uncontested races blank, but thats nearly a 25% abstention rate on top of whatever the original one was.

The Democratic Governor's race was between two famous Anchorageites.  The Democratic Senator's race was chock full of nobodies.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:36:14 PM
ADN reports the last batch of votes were absentees from "Southeast Alaska, the Kenai Peninsula and Fairbanks."  The paper reports that about 3,000 more votes are expected to be counted today from Southeast Alaska, the Kenai Peninsula and the Fairbanks area.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:45:27 PM
Best I can tell, that last dump also included at least the missing HD 2 in the Southeast and HD 35 on the Kenai Peninsula.  We're seemingly only missing votes from HD 36 in the Southeast/Kenai elections region.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 07:48:53 PM
Best I can tell, that last dump also included at least the missing HD 2 in the Southeast and HD 35 on the Kenai Peninsula.  We're seemingly only missing votes from HD 36 in the Southeast/Kenai elections region.

There had to be at least 2200 votes in the Dem primary for today - probably closer to 2500 given blanks?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on August 31, 2010, 07:49:22 PM
Best I can tell, that last dump also included at least the missing HD 2 in the Southeast and HD 35 on the Kenai Peninsula.  We're seemingly only missing votes from HD 36 in the Southeast/Kenai elections region.

What about 1,3,5?  The ones from there earlier were the questioned ballots, not the Absentees.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on August 31, 2010, 07:52:37 PM
Best I can tell, that last dump also included at least the missing HD 2 in the Southeast and HD 35 on the Kenai Peninsula.  We're seemingly only missing votes from HD 36 in the Southeast/Kenai elections region.

There had to be at least 2200 votes in the Dem primary for today - probably closer to 2500 given blanks?

2,325 for the Senate race, including blanks 3,155.   On the GOP side its exactly 9,000 in the Senate race, 9,088 including blanks


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:54:30 PM
Best I can tell, that last dump also included at least the missing HD 2 in the Southeast and HD 35 on the Kenai Peninsula.  We're seemingly only missing votes from HD 36 in the Southeast/Kenai elections region.

There had to be at least 2200 votes in the Dem primary for today - probably closer to 2500 given blanks?

There were an additional 2,996 votes for a candidate in the Democratic Governor's race and 2,325 in the Democratic Senate race, based on the last dump and final election day tally.  Some of those votes were from the missing Anchorage precinct.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 07:56:28 PM
Best I can tell, that last dump also included at least the missing HD 2 in the Southeast and HD 35 on the Kenai Peninsula.  We're seemingly only missing votes from HD 36 in the Southeast/Kenai elections region.

What about 1,3,5?  The ones from there earlier were the questioned ballots, not the Absentees.

I can't tell you because I didn't copy down the numbers in the House primaries from any of the dumps today.  I can only tell you that the number of votes in the HD 2 and 35 House primaries matched election day after the first SE/Kenai dump, but not the latest dump.  So some of the HD 2 and 35 vote finally came in.

The House primary tallies for HDs 36-40 (Kodiak + Bush) haven't budged since election day, suggesting those HDs haven't reported absentees or questioned ballots today.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 08:04:41 PM
Murkowski's done imo.  Miller gained 259 votes in the last batch of roughly 2,000.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 08:05:59 PM
Murkowski's done imo.  Miller gained 259 votes in the last batch of roughly 2,000.

Yup.  Miller took about 57% of that 1,865 votes - wherever they're from.

Time for her to concede.  The Bush isn't going to save her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on August 31, 2010, 08:09:01 PM
Murkowski's done imo.  Miller gained 259 votes in the last batch of roughly 2,000.

Yup.  Miller took about 57% of that 1,865 votes - wherever they're from.

Time for her to concede.  The Bush isn't going to save her.

Still looking but seems like 33 and 36, also the 6th.  A handful of others as well, though primarily 6th, 33rd and 36th


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 08:14:13 PM
If my math is right, today's count so far:
Milller         5333  (49%)
Murkowski 5532  (51%)

Murkowski +199


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 08:18:09 PM
Murkowski's done imo.  Miller gained 259 votes in the last batch of roughly 2,000.

Yup.  Miller took about 57% of that 1,865 votes - wherever they're from.

Time for her to concede.  The Bush isn't going to save her.

Still looking but seems like 33 and 36

ADN says it was 2,760 ballots from Fairbanks, SE and Kenai.  They also say some Kenai absentees remain to be counted - and nothing from the Southeast.

Murkowski's done.  She didn't get a big enough bump from the Southeast.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on August 31, 2010, 08:50:30 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 08:51:03 PM
According to Politico, Murkowski will hold press conference in the next few minutes (6PM Alaska/10PM Eastern).

Rumor is she will concede.  We'll see.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 08:54:21 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 08:55:31 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on August 31, 2010, 08:58:42 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

True, he is a far right bat s*** crazy extremist.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 08:59:45 PM
You are pretty passionate about your problems with the Tea Party Redcommander. I disdain them too, but not nearly with your intensity. I think you have lapped me. In any event, Miller is a highly intelligent man.  He doesn't bother me, in the same way a Rand Paul does.

And I have seen nothing that suggests to me that Miller is a nutter. But I don't know everything he has said. He did come out of nowhere. But if there were some really juicy stuff, you think the press would have Angled or Randed him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 09:03:48 PM
You are pretty passionate about your problems with the Tea Party Redcommander. I disdain them too, but not nearly with your intensity. I think you have lapped me. In any event, Miller is a highly intelligent man.  He doesn't bother me, in the same way a Rand Paul does.

And I have seen nothing that suggest to me that Miller is a nutter. But I don't know everything he has said. He did come out of nowhere. But if there were some really juicy stuff, you think the press would have Angled or Randed him.

I don't think the press took him seriously.  Of course, it doesn't really matter now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 09:03:57 PM
Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning.

The handwriting is on the wall.  If there are 9,000 votes left to count and 75% are Republican, she'd need to win them 60-40.  She won the almost 11,000 Republican votes counted so far today by only 51-49.

Granted, some of whats out is from the bush HDs that she won big, but they are likely to be few (500, if she's lucky).  The rest are questioned votes from Anchorage and the Mat-Su, plus whatever trickles in this week.  The questioned votes in SE/Kenai pretty much followed the precinct vote.    I don't see her getting 60% of what's out.  And if she concedes, nor does she.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 09:04:31 PM
According to Politico, Murkowski will hold press conference in the next few minutes (6PM Alaska/10PM Eastern).

Rumor is she will concede.  We'll see.

Is my impression right, that what sank Murk was not so much the size of the swing HD by HD from what went before vis a vis the this absentee count, but the turnout differentials, with areas Miller is relatively strong in, having a much higher absentee turnout?  If so, that is relatively unusual, that late ballot turnout differentials were the key variable.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 09:05:45 PM
You are pretty passionate about your problems with the Tea Party Redcommander. I disdain them too, but not nearly with your intensity. I think you have lapped me. In any event, Miller is a highly intelligent man.  He doesn't bother me, in the same way a Rand Paul does.

And I have seen nothing that suggest to me that Miller is a nutter. But I don't know everything he has said. He did come out of nowhere. But if there were some really juicy stuff, you think the press would have Angled or Randed him.

I don't think the press took him seriously.  Of course, it doesn't really matter now.

Well some folks are suggesting that he is a nutter. What is it based on?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 09:06:13 PM
Miller opposes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and presumably the PATRIOT act, which is more than enough to transport him out of the realm of "generic Republican" in my book.  Meanwhile Murkowski represents the absolute worst of neoconism and fiscal flagrancy, both of which must be totally purged, discredited, and destroyed as a force in the Republican Party.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 09:07:38 PM
Miller opposes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and presumably the PATRIOT act, which is more than enough to transport him out of the realm of "generic Republican" in my book.  Meanwhile Murkowski represents the absolute worst of neoconism and fiscal flagrancy, both of which must be totally purged, discredited, and destroyed as a force in the Republican Party.

Miller wants to just get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, lock, stock and barrel, right now?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 09:08:27 PM
According to Politico, Murkowski will hold press conference in the next few minutes (6PM Alaska/10PM Eastern).

Rumor is she will concede.  We'll see.

Is my impression right, that what sank Murk was not so much the size of the swing HD by HD from what went before vis a vis the this absentee count, but the turnout differentials, with areas Miller is relatively strong in, having a much higher absentee turnout?  If so, that is relatively unusual, that late ballot turnout differentials were the key variable.

Yes - but it's not that unusual for Alaska.  Military areas and those without reasonable early voting (Southeast outside Juneau, Kenai, to a lesser exent, the bush) tend to be overrepresented in the absentee count.  The Anchorage absentee count as a percentage of election day vote was really, really low - and that plus reportedly not doing well enough in the Southeast absentee/questioned votes seems to be what killed her (though everything's just a guess until we get actual HD-level numbers).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on August 31, 2010, 09:14:03 PM
Miller opposes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and presumably the PATRIOT act, which is more than enough to transport him out of the realm of "generic Republican" in my book.  Meanwhile Murkowski represents the absolute worst of neoconism and fiscal flagrancy, both of which must be totally purged, discredited, and destroyed as a force in the Republican Party.

Miller wants to just get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, lock, stock and barrel, right now?

Here's what he says:

http://www.ktva.com/oldlocal/ci_15367911?source=rss (http://www.ktva.com/oldlocal/ci_15367911?source=rss)

Quote
As for foreign affairs, Miller served in Operation Desert Storm and says although the terror threat to the country is high, he's less certain about the effort in Afghanistan. "I did not sign up for the military to go out and be a Peace Corps representative. Or to impose democracy in a country that for decades, or for centuries or millennia, have never had democracy. That's not our role."

He also suggests an across-the-board spending cut, including to defense.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on August 31, 2010, 09:18:42 PM
CNN says she's gonna concede.  I'm not surprised.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 09:20:03 PM

On now...  And Murkowski concedes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 09:23:33 PM
The goal of transforming Afghanistan into some sort of civil society with some sort of democratic norms, was abandoned some time ago, and that abandonment was not only sensible, but dictated by the course of events. The mission now is to create reasonable odds, that as we draw down over time, Afghanistan will have created some sort of structure that denies its real estate to terrorists who whose job one is to export their "product." In addition, underwriting the venture without some conditions, is not the way to get those in power to focus, on how they can become more self sufficient. It is a very different place from Iraq, and cannot be analogized. That is how I see it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 09:24:18 PM

Is she going to go nutter, and run as a write in?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 09:25:21 PM

Is she going to go nutter, and run as a write in?

Doesn't sound like it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 31, 2010, 09:30:51 PM
And so it ends. Let the irony be known: Frank got taken down by Palin, Lisa got taken down by Palin's endorsee.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on August 31, 2010, 09:31:35 PM

Is she going to go nutter, and run as a write in?

Doesn't sound like it.

THis would be a victory for Sarah Palin who endorsed Miller, right?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on August 31, 2010, 09:31:50 PM

Is she going to go nutter, and run as a write in?

Doesn't sound like it.

Good. I would have been amazed if that happened, or the Libertarian chit, chat, even if they had decided to take her. This way, she might have some future in politics.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on August 31, 2010, 09:34:20 PM
Not too surprising but she didn't endorse Miller.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 09:39:43 PM
Not too surprising but she didn't endorse Miller.

There's plenty of time for her to do that later.  She conceded "for the good of the State of Alaska."  I don't think that's because she wants McAdams to win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on August 31, 2010, 09:42:43 PM
Not too surprising but she didn't endorse Miller.

There's plenty of time for her to do that later.  She conceded "for the good of the State of Alaska."  I don't think that's because she wants McAdams to win.

Oh I don't think she'll endorse McAdams by any means. But I would be pretty surprised to see her appearing together with Joe Miller or praising him in any way any time in the next two months. A press release saying "we need to elect a Republican" is probably the most she's going to do.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 09:46:59 PM
There was just another dump of 1,095 votes.  Miller won them 57-43.  That puts Murkowski's net gain today at 38 votes after 11,960 were counted.

It's pretty easy to see why Murkowski conceded.

Edit: Transposed another digit.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on August 31, 2010, 09:53:25 PM
Could someone remind me again why the Republicans have their own primary but the Democrats are bunched in with the Libertarians and the AIP?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on August 31, 2010, 09:56:21 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: rbt48 on August 31, 2010, 09:59:54 PM
Maybe Murkowski will run for the Senate in 2014.  Or perhaps for Young's house seat if he retires in 2012.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 31, 2010, 10:08:04 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 10:08:37 PM
Could someone remind me again why the Republicans have their own primary but the Democrats are bunched in with the Libertarians and the AIP?

Because those parties agreed to hold primaries on a combined ballot and exclude Republicans from voting that ballot.  Republicans did not (and their primaries are closed to all but Republicans and those not enrolled in a party).  I guess it saves the state the cost of printing and stocking minor party absentees and other paper ballots.  I don't think it's winner takes all - the winner of each party's contest in each race  goes on the ballot in November.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 10:54:04 PM
Well apparently the Hill thinks the Libertarians might reconsider their decision which would be great for this country if Murkowski wwas their candidate.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/116705-libertarian-option-still-alive-for-murkowski


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 10:57:49 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.

It won't sound illogical when the Republicans end up blowing their chances of winning back congress this fall because of the small group of billionaires and special interest groups that they are encouraging to fund the tea party. BTW if you are such a big fan of Miller, why aren't you singing the praises of O'Donnell who is just as much wacky and gaffey? Heck she even has more baggage than him. Lying about how many counties she won in 08 against Biden and claiming she didn't try to run as a third partier when she did.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 31, 2010, 11:02:06 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.

It won't sound illogical when the Republicans end up blowing their chances of winning back congress this fall because of the small group of billionaires and special interest groups that they are encouraging to fund the tea party. BTW if you are such a big fan of Miller, why aren't you singing the praises of O'Donnell who is just as much wacky and gaffey?

Sorry, when did we bring Sharron Angle into this? Miller is actually a respectable man - one of maybe two or three Tea Partiers this cycle who I can say that about. He will be a better senator than Murkowski ever was in the course of six years. She had that seat handed to her by her father and proceeded to use it to become one of the icons of everything terrible about the Republican Party - neoconservatism, whoring out to big oil, political selfishness, etc. The Murkowski family is a plague on Alaska and the Senate, and it's well done that their influence over the state is dead forever.

One candidate lost, Red. It's politics. sh**t happens.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 11:10:38 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.

It won't sound illogical when the Republicans end up blowing their chances of winning back congress this fall because of the small group of billionaires and special interest groups that they are encouraging to fund the tea party. BTW if you are such a big fan of Miller, why aren't you singing the praises of O'Donnell who is just as much wacky and gaffey?

Sorry, when did we bring Sharron Angle into this? Miller is actually a respectable man - one of maybe two or three Tea Partiers this cycle who I can say that about. He will be a better senator than Murkowski ever was in the course of six years. She had that seat handed to her by her father and proceeded to use it to become one of the icons of everything terrible about the Republican Party - neoconservatism, whoring out to big oil, political selfishness, etc. The Murkowski family is a plague on Alaska and the Senate, and it's well done that their influence over the state is dead forever.

One candidate lost, Red. It's politics. sh**t happens.

Right so America loses a valuable voice in the senate that has actually worked to solve important issues such as giving health care coverage to uninsured children and putting us on a path to energy independence, and will likely be replaced by a hyper partisan Palin clone that will be unwilling to get anything done the last two years of Obama's term. Sorry sounds like the country will be in a worse off place unless Murkowski endorses McAdams, runs a write-in, or meets with the Libertarians and agrees to make concessions to them if she is their nominee. This isn't turning out to be another 1994. In 1994 Moderates, Neo-Cons, Paleo-Cons, and Libertarian Conservatives actually worked together to accomplish a common goal of ousting Democratic control of congress. The Republicans are plagued by infighting, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., that is severely compromising their chances this fall.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 31, 2010, 11:18:40 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.

It won't sound illogical when the Republicans end up blowing their chances of winning back congress this fall because of the small group of billionaires and special interest groups that they are encouraging to fund the tea party. BTW if you are such a big fan of Miller, why aren't you singing the praises of O'Donnell who is just as much wacky and gaffey?

Sorry, when did we bring Sharron Angle into this? Miller is actually a respectable man - one of maybe two or three Tea Partiers this cycle who I can say that about. He will be a better senator than Murkowski ever was in the course of six years. She had that seat handed to her by her father and proceeded to use it to become one of the icons of everything terrible about the Republican Party - neoconservatism, whoring out to big oil, political selfishness, etc. The Murkowski family is a plague on Alaska and the Senate, and it's well done that their influence over the state is dead forever.

One candidate lost, Red. It's politics. sh**t happens.

Right so America loses a valuable voice in the senate that has actually worked to solve important issues such as giving health care coverage to uninsured children and putting us on a path to energy independence, and will likely be replaced by a hyper partisan Palin clone that will be unwilling to get anything done the last two years of Obama's term. Sorry sounds like the country will be in a worse off place unless Murkowski endorses McAdams, runs a write-in, or meets with the Libertarians and agrees to make concessions to them if she is their nominee. This isn't turning out to be another 1994. In 1994 Moderates, Neo-Cons, Paleo-Cons, and Libertarian Conservatives actually worked together to accomplish a common goal of ousting Democratic control of congress. The Republicans are plagued by infighting, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., that is severely compromising their chances this fall.

I find the idea that the Republicans are failing a bit hard to believe, Red, I'm sorry. Have you paid attention to polling in the last three months? It's almost a straight flood of blue numbers. It's a well done thing that the Tea Party is winning only in the states where they can actually win a general election, isn't it? Where have they won this year? Utah, Kentucky, Nevada, Alaska, Colorado, some assorted house districts in which they can easily win anyway...why are you even complaining about that? The only reason they they even exist in New York is because that state's GOP has been effectively KIA for years now, and I suspect it is going to remain that way for a long time.

Honestly, I think you're seeing a different Murkowski to the one I am. She was a consistent warmonger, was pathetically weak on the disaster of an HCR bill, had terrible environmental policies...how are we losing a good voice in the Senate? Honestly, tell me how? Miller, at least, wants us out of the joke-frigging-tastic wars we're in. I'd call that one hell of an improvement.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on August 31, 2010, 11:23:37 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.

It won't sound illogical when the Republicans end up blowing their chances of winning back congress this fall because of the small group of billionaires and special interest groups that they are encouraging to fund the tea party. BTW if you are such a big fan of Miller, why aren't you singing the praises of O'Donnell who is just as much wacky and gaffey?

Sorry, when did we bring Sharron Angle into this? Miller is actually a respectable man - one of maybe two or three Tea Partiers this cycle who I can say that about. He will be a better senator than Murkowski ever was in the course of six years. She had that seat handed to her by her father and proceeded to use it to become one of the icons of everything terrible about the Republican Party - neoconservatism, whoring out to big oil, political selfishness, etc. The Murkowski family is a plague on Alaska and the Senate, and it's well done that their influence over the state is dead forever.

One candidate lost, Red. It's politics. sh**t happens.

Right so America loses a valuable voice in the senate that has actually worked to solve important issues such as giving health care coverage to uninsured children and putting us on a path to energy independence, and will likely be replaced by a hyper partisan Palin clone that will be unwilling to get anything done the last two years of Obama's term. Sorry sounds like the country will be in a worse off place unless Murkowski endorses McAdams, runs a write-in, or meets with the Libertarians and agrees to make concessions to them if she is their nominee. This isn't turning out to be another 1994. In 1994 Moderates, Neo-Cons, Paleo-Cons, and Libertarian Conservatives actually worked together to accomplish a common goal of ousting Democratic control of congress. The Republicans are plagued by infighting, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., that is severely compromising their chances this fall.

I find the idea that the Republicans are failing a bit hard to believe, Red, I'm sorry. Have you paid attention to polling in the last three months? It's almost a straight flood of blue numbers. It's a well done thing that the Tea Party is winning only in the states where they can actually win a general election, isn't it? Where have they won this year? Utah, Kentucky, Nevada, Alaska, Colorado, some assorted house districts in which they can easily win anyway...why are you even complaining about that? The only reason they they even exist in New York is because that state's GOP has been effectively KIA for years now, and I suspect it is going to remain that way for a long time.

Honestly, I think you're seeing a different Murkowski to the one I am. She was a consistent warmonger, was pathetically weak on the disaster of an HCR bill, had terrible environmental policies...how are we losing a good voice in the Senate? Honestly, tell me how? Miller, at least, wants us out of the joke-frigging-tastic wars we're in. I'd call that one hell of an improvement.

Republicans should have been stronger on creating their own viable healthcare bill, and you didn't answer my question about O'Donnell challenging Castle.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on August 31, 2010, 11:39:33 PM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.

It won't sound illogical when the Republicans end up blowing their chances of winning back congress this fall because of the small group of billionaires and special interest groups that they are encouraging to fund the tea party. BTW if you are such a big fan of Miller, why aren't you singing the praises of O'Donnell who is just as much wacky and gaffey?

Sorry, when did we bring Sharron Angle into this? Miller is actually a respectable man - one of maybe two or three Tea Partiers this cycle who I can say that about. He will be a better senator than Murkowski ever was in the course of six years. She had that seat handed to her by her father and proceeded to use it to become one of the icons of everything terrible about the Republican Party - neoconservatism, whoring out to big oil, political selfishness, etc. The Murkowski family is a plague on Alaska and the Senate, and it's well done that their influence over the state is dead forever.

One candidate lost, Red. It's politics. sh**t happens.

Right so America loses a valuable voice in the senate that has actually worked to solve important issues such as giving health care coverage to uninsured children and putting us on a path to energy independence, and will likely be replaced by a hyper partisan Palin clone that will be unwilling to get anything done the last two years of Obama's term. Sorry sounds like the country will be in a worse off place unless Murkowski endorses McAdams, runs a write-in, or meets with the Libertarians and agrees to make concessions to them if she is their nominee. This isn't turning out to be another 1994. In 1994 Moderates, Neo-Cons, Paleo-Cons, and Libertarian Conservatives actually worked together to accomplish a common goal of ousting Democratic control of congress. The Republicans are plagued by infighting, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., that is severely compromising their chances this fall.

I find the idea that the Republicans are failing a bit hard to believe, Red, I'm sorry. Have you paid attention to polling in the last three months? It's almost a straight flood of blue numbers. It's a well done thing that the Tea Party is winning only in the states where they can actually win a general election, isn't it? Where have they won this year? Utah, Kentucky, Nevada, Alaska, Colorado, some assorted house districts in which they can easily win anyway...why are you even complaining about that? The only reason they they even exist in New York is because that state's GOP has been effectively KIA for years now, and I suspect it is going to remain that way for a long time.

Honestly, I think you're seeing a different Murkowski to the one I am. She was a consistent warmonger, was pathetically weak on the disaster of an HCR bill, had terrible environmental policies...how are we losing a good voice in the Senate? Honestly, tell me how? Miller, at least, wants us out of the joke-frigging-tastic wars we're in. I'd call that one hell of an improvement.

Republicans should have been stronger on creating their own viable healthcare bill, and you didn't answer my question about O'Donnell challenging Castle.

Because it held no water in this argument. There's a difference between crazies like O'Donnell and Angle and respectable men like Miller.

Also, Red? Paul Ryan's roadmap.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on August 31, 2010, 11:41:31 PM
Is my impression right, that what sank Murk was not so much the size of the swing HD by HD from what went before vis a vis the this absentee count, but the turnout differentials, with areas Miller is relatively strong in, having a much higher absentee turnout?  If so, that is relatively unusual, that late ballot turnout differentials were the key variable.

Well, the precinct pdfs are up.  Based on that, we know this:

Unless I made a cut-and-paste mistake (unlikely, since everything but one thing adds up), today's 11,960 votes can be broken down as follows:

-9,591 Absentees  

They broke 51-49 Murkowski.  Only the bush districts 37-40 are missing an absentee count.  Excluding the bush districts (including HD 6 from both the absentee and election day count, for simplicity), Miller won the election day tally in the reporting districts 52-48.  Murkowski performed 3 points better in the absentee than the election day precinct+early vote count, but 2 points worse than the election day early vote count - a margin she needed to keep up to win.  In particular, she didn't improve much on her election day percentages in the Southeast or Kenai, which did her in.

As a percentage of the election day precinct+early vote count, absentees were above average (10.3%)  in Kenai (18.6%) and the Mat-Su (10.6%).  They were about average in the Southeast and Anchorage (10.0%), and way below average in Fairbanks (7.53%).

-1,356 Question votes.  

They broke 57-43 Miller.  They are largely from Miller-friendly areas (SOME Fairbanks HDs, SOME Kenai HDs) plus Southeast Alaska.  Miller took 57% of the Question votes - but won only 53% of the election day precinct+early vote count in the reporting HDs  - a 4 point swing to Miller, largely due to Fairbanks.

-407 new Early votes.

These were probably cast on election day.  They also broke 57-43 Miller.  A direct comparison is difficult because not every HD has ready access to early voting.  But Miller significantly ourperformed his early vote percent reported on election day (46-54) AND the overall election day precinct+early vote for the regions that have some meaningful early voting (51% or 52% Miller, depending on what you exclude).  Almost half of these were from the Mat-Su, a Miller stronghold (and way out of proportion with the Mat-Su's usual statewide percentage).

-327 votes from the missing Anchorage precinct.

These were split 176-151 Murkowski, in line with the rest of HD 30.

-279 votes unaccounted for by me.

I have no idea from whence these additional votes came (recanvass? foul up on my spreadsheet?), but they broke 60-40 Murkowski.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 02, 2010, 12:17:23 AM
I'm really, really hoping that Miller pulls through.  This is IMO the second most important Senatorial primary this year for the future of our country, after Kentucky GOP.

Why do you care if a generic Republican wins?

Miller isn't a generic Republican.

Yes he is, but anyways she shouldn't concede yet when there are spoiled ballots to count still. If she does, she better do everything she can to ruin Miller's chances of winning. That might be endorsing McAdams or running a write-in campaign, but if this country is to have a future, the Tea Party needs to be destroyed.

I can just slightly understand Sink, but this is just ridiculous. Miller is the type of Tea Partyier you would encourage. You can't "Suppress" a movement like the Tea Party. You try they will consume you. The best way is to tame and incorporate them. That means accepting Lee and Miller into the party. If you can't accept them, then there will be no ground to argue that Hatch, Snowe, Collins, Lugar or Castle belong either. Big tent cuts both ways.

My advice: don't bother reasoning with Redco. His logic makes no sense whatsoever.

It won't sound illogical when the Republicans end up blowing their chances of winning back congress this fall because of the small group of billionaires and special interest groups that they are encouraging to fund the tea party. BTW if you are such a big fan of Miller, why aren't you singing the praises of O'Donnell who is just as much wacky and gaffey?

Sorry, when did we bring Sharron Angle into this? Miller is actually a respectable man - one of maybe two or three Tea Partiers this cycle who I can say that about. He will be a better senator than Murkowski ever was in the course of six years. She had that seat handed to her by her father and proceeded to use it to become one of the icons of everything terrible about the Republican Party - neoconservatism, whoring out to big oil, political selfishness, etc. The Murkowski family is a plague on Alaska and the Senate, and it's well done that their influence over the state is dead forever.

One candidate lost, Red. It's politics. sh**t happens.

Right so America loses a valuable voice in the senate that has actually worked to solve important issues such as giving health care coverage to uninsured children and putting us on a path to energy independence, and will likely be replaced by a hyper partisan Palin clone that will be unwilling to get anything done the last two years of Obama's term. Sorry sounds like the country will be in a worse off place unless Murkowski endorses McAdams, runs a write-in, or meets with the Libertarians and agrees to make concessions to them if she is their nominee. This isn't turning out to be another 1994. In 1994 Moderates, Neo-Cons, Paleo-Cons, and Libertarian Conservatives actually worked together to accomplish a common goal of ousting Democratic control of congress. The Republicans are plagued by infighting, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, New York, etc., that is severely compromising their chances this fall.

I find the idea that the Republicans are failing a bit hard to believe, Red, I'm sorry. Have you paid attention to polling in the last three months? It's almost a straight flood of blue numbers. It's a well done thing that the Tea Party is winning only in the states where they can actually win a general election, isn't it? Where have they won this year? Utah, Kentucky, Nevada, Alaska, Colorado, some assorted house districts in which they can easily win anyway...why are you even complaining about that? The only reason they they even exist in New York is because that state's GOP has been effectively KIA for years now, and I suspect it is going to remain that way for a long time.

Honestly, I think you're seeing a different Murkowski to the one I am. She was a consistent warmonger, was pathetically weak on the disaster of an HCR bill, had terrible environmental policies...how are we losing a good voice in the Senate? Honestly, tell me how? Miller, at least, wants us out of the joke-frigging-tastic wars we're in. I'd call that one hell of an improvement.

Republicans should have been stronger on creating their own viable healthcare bill, and you didn't answer my question about O'Donnell challenging Castle.

Delaware is a different state, a blue state. And O'Donnell is a nutcase.

And Castle isn't that bad on a lot of issues, certainly not bad enough on the mix of issues I care about.



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 03, 2010, 12:37:30 PM
Final Washington primary numbers can be found over here (https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=76921.msg2635959#msg2635959).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 05, 2010, 10:25:22 AM
Updated OP with upcoming primary info for the last time.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 05, 2010, 11:45:44 AM
The New York Times is backing one of Rangel's primary challengers, Joyce Johnson. They also recommend keeping Carolyn Maloney.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/opinion/04sat1.html?ref=opinion


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 05, 2010, 11:47:24 AM
The New York Times is backing one of Rangel's primary challengers, Joyce Johnson. They also recommend keeping Carolyn Maloney.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/opinion/04sat1.html?ref=opinion

I wonder how many voters change their vote based on what the NY Times thinks. When it comes to the LA Times, I think the answer is asymptotically close to zero.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on September 05, 2010, 12:25:31 PM
The New York Times is backing one of Rangel's primary challengers, Joyce Johnson. They also recommend keeping Carolyn Maloney.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/opinion/04sat1.html?ref=opinion

I wonder how many voters change their vote based on what the NY Times thinks. When it comes to the LA Times, I think the answer is asymptotically close to zero.

Really? I think newspaper endorsements are most important in low turnout, low information elections like primaries. Maybe not when one of the candidates is an important Congressman, but I generally base at least some of my primary vote on who my newspaper of choice endorsed, and I'm probably an above average informed voter.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 05, 2010, 12:36:45 PM
The New York Times is backing one of Rangel's primary challengers, Joyce Johnson. They also recommend keeping Carolyn Maloney.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/opinion/04sat1.html?ref=opinion

I wonder how many voters change their vote based on what the NY Times thinks. When it comes to the LA Times, I think the answer is asymptotically close to zero.

Really? I think newspaper endorsements are most important in low turnout, low information elections like primaries. Maybe not when one of the candidates is an important Congressman, but I generally base at least some of my primary vote on who my newspaper of choice endorsed, and I'm probably an above average informed voter.

Well for down ballot races, maybe, and in particular for judges. But for Governor or federal offices?  When it comes to school board races, I find out who the teachers' union is supporting, and vote against those candidates. So outside endorsements can matter, I admit.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 05, 2010, 12:47:18 PM
She's run twice before, for Assembly and City Council. Maybe next she'll run for Senator.

I'd vote for Tasini (admittedly, I usually favor the candidate willing to put gay rights prominently on their issues page), but he's probably too white to win a primary in NY-15.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 05, 2010, 02:04:01 PM
She's run twice before, for Assembly and City Council. Maybe next she'll run for Senator.

I'd vote for Tasini (admittedly, I usually favor the candidate willing to put gay rights prominently on their issues page), but he's probably too white to win a primary in NY-15.

Harlem is changing.  NY-15 is much more white than it used to be.  In a crowded primary, a white could win.

But Rangel will probably pull it out.  If he doesn't, I hope he loses to Adam Clayton Powell IV just for the irony of it all.  The circle will have become complete.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 08, 2010, 11:23:09 PM
Alaska updated their numbers today.  If I'm not mistaken, this should be the final unofficial tally:

Miller, Joe              REP    55847    50.92%
Murkowski, Lisa    REP    53834    49.08%

Miller +2,013

The votes counted after election day favored Miller, not Murkowski.  She was right to concede.

Someone asked upthread why there was such a dropoff from the number of people who voted in the Democratic Governor's Race versus the Democratic US Senate race.  No doubt this was in part due to candidates with better name recognition running for Governor.  But one thing we all overlooked after election day is that there was an AIP candidate running in the combined Democratic-Libertarian-AIP Governor's primary, but not the Senate primary.  Perhaps many AIP members who took that ballot decided to vote for their Gubernatorial candidate and abstain from voting for anyone for Senate.  That could have been worth about 4,000 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 08, 2010, 11:56:02 PM
What is expected to happen in NY-01, NY-13, and NY-23 GOP primaries?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 10, 2010, 06:59:58 PM
The Vermont recount confirmed Shumlin's win. (http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20100910/NEWS03/100910020/Shumlin-wins-again) He increased his margin by 6 votes. It was also one of the most genteel recounts ever (in true Vermont fashion); Shumlin and Racine spent the last couple weeks campaigning together across the state.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 10, 2010, 08:12:36 PM

I'm in NY-01, and it's a complete toss-up.

Altschuler has tons of money, but he has taken a beating from both Demos & Cox for being a Green Party voter, a carpetbagger, and an outsourcer. Cox has the party machine backing him (thanks dad!); some of his volunteers visited my parents earlier this week. Demos (my father's choice) is the one with actual ties to the district, and he's gained a lot of momentum over the past week, earning endorsements from Limbaugh and National Review.

Altschuler already has the Conservative line, although Cox is running a write-in campaign in the Conservative primary. It would be rather disastrous if the GOP candidate were not the recipient of the Conservative line.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 11, 2010, 10:50:57 AM
A couple polls of next week's primaries...

In New York, Siena has Lazio in a tie with Paladino (http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/31554/siena-paladino-draws-even-with-lazio/), ahead by only 1 point (43-42). Upstate Republicans favor Paladino, while Lazio is ahead with downstate Republicans.

Schneiderman and Rice are the top two Dems for Attorney General, at 25-23 respectively. Sean Coffey is a distant third with 13%.

For Senate, Joseph DioGuardi is leading with 29%, to 14% for Malpass and 11% for Blakeman. Kirsten Gillibrand is crushing Gail Goode, unsurprisingly, by a 63-12 margin. In the Republican primary for Schumer's seat, Jay Townsend leads Gary Berntsen 25-17.

In Hawaii (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=13136144) (insert standard disclaimer about Hawaii polling here), Abercrombie is beating Hanneman 48-31.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Tender Branson on September 11, 2010, 11:21:46 AM
The Vermont recount confirmed Shumlin's win. (http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20100910/NEWS03/100910020/Shumlin-wins-again) He increased his margin by 6 votes. It was also one of the most genteel recounts ever (in true Vermont fashion); Shumlin and Racine spent the last couple weeks campaigning together across the state.

Time for a General Election poll there then.

(Currently I'd rate it as "Lean GOP")


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 11, 2010, 11:24:25 AM

From the week I was there, Dubie was clearly owning in the sign war and on the airwaves. Even in uber-Democratic Lamoille and Chittenden Counties.

He seems to be going on a low-taxes, create-jobs moderate line, unlike Welch's opponent for the House.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 11, 2010, 11:54:27 AM
I think New York Republicans should be hoping at this point that the gubernatorial candidates split the Republican and Conservative ballot lines, then that the Conservative candidate comes in second, meaning that the NY Conservative Party would replace the NYGOP as a "major party."


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on September 11, 2010, 01:44:46 PM
I think New York Republicans should be hoping at this point that the gubernatorial candidates split the Republican and Conservative ballot lines, then that the Conservative candidate comes in second, meaning that the NY Conservative Party would replace the NYGOP as a "major party."

which almost happened to the Democrats in 2002 :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 11, 2010, 02:48:42 PM
PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 11, 2010, 03:24:34 PM
PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Uh oh that means O'Donnell probably has momentum now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 11, 2010, 06:02:59 PM
Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint and the NRA are to be saluted.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 06:05:24 PM
PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Good, Ayotte is much worthier of winning her primary than Castle is his.

PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Uh oh that means O'Donnell probably has momentum now.

I thought you wanted more Republican women candidates? ???


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 11, 2010, 06:10:39 PM
PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Good, Ayotte is much worthier of winning her primary than Castle is his.

PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Uh oh that means O'Donnell probably has momentum now.

I thought you wanted more Republican women candidates? ???

Yes, but not crazy ones like O'Donnell. She wouldn't even become a better candidate after the primary like Angle has. Her baggage is too devastating for her to be electable in a state like Delaware.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 11, 2010, 06:14:14 PM
PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Good, Ayotte is much worthier of winning her primary than Castle is his.

PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Uh oh that means O'Donnell probably has momentum now.

I thought you wanted more Republican women candidates? ???

Yes, but not crazy ones like O'Donnell. She wouldn't even become a better candidate after the primary like Angle has. Her baggage is too devastating for her to be electable in a state like Delaware.

HAHAhAHAHAHA. Thanks, I needed a laugh.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SPC on September 11, 2010, 06:23:56 PM
As of right now, I would guess that Castle and Ayotte are both slight favorites to win their primaries, but not by much. Magellan Strategies showed Lamontagne with momentum two weeks ago, which seems to be a similar position to how Angle was two weeks before her primary. However, Ayotte hasn't made any major gaffes and is apparently doing well in the PPP poll (although Magellan did better than PPP in Kentucky, and PPP was off in Colorado). I would guess Ayotte wins by two points over Lamontagne, with Bender and Binnie in the high teens.

For Delaware, I initially compared Castle's ratings among conservatives to Murkowski's ratings among conservatives and concluded that he was safe (60-40 over O'Donnell). However, O'Donnell's campaigning may have lowered Castle's ratings, and the fact that Palin and DeMint are now getting involved probably means that they know something that we don't. Plus, PPP's hints probably show that Castle is only narrowly ahead of O'Donnell. Here, I would also put it at Castle 51-O'Donnell 49, although I have little confidence in either prediction. Both are complete tossups in my mind, which might be a relief for Democratic chances in the Senate (before the primaries, I put it at 63%, that's bound to go up in Delaware and New Hampshire if Lamontagne wins).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 11, 2010, 07:32:44 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 11, 2010, 08:11:46 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 11, 2010, 08:59:05 PM
PPP teases everyone with a tweet about their NH/DE polls:

"Looking like a better chance of an upset in Delaware than New Hampshire"

Probably means Castle ahead by single digits or under 50%, with Ayotte being ahead by double-digits in the multi-candidate race.

IMO, Castle is the more likely to be upset by far, (I don't see how Ayotte loses - but NH voters are sometimes a bit strange, so hard to 100% call) but I need to recheck where the Republican registered voters are in Delaware.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 09:12:08 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 11, 2010, 09:17:39 PM
Indeed.  Mike Castle votes with the Democrats on everything (http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michael_Castle.htm) substantive except taxes and school choice, and even on those issues he's hardly a sure thing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 09:23:30 PM
Indeed.  Mike Castle votes with the Democrats on everything (http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michael_Castle.htm) substantive except taxes and school choice, and even on those issues he's hardly a sure thing.

So basically, Castle sucks. What took so long for the tea parties to unite and mobilize for his defeat?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 11, 2010, 09:47:49 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 11, 2010, 09:49:33 PM
BTW, Libby, I think you might be better served using your sig to promote Dave Westlake (http://www.davewestlake.org/) over neocon Ron Johnson (http://ronjohnsonforsenate.com/home/).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 11, 2010, 09:52:22 PM
Also, I'm 95% positive both Palin and DeMint have stated that they want the Republicans to take over Congress this year. How the hell is nominating Christine O'Donnell going to accomplish that?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 11, 2010, 09:58:28 PM
Also, I'm 95% positive both Palin and DeMint have stated that they want the Republicans to take over Congress this year. How the hell is nominating Christine O'Donnell going to accomplish that?

We are currently trying to figure that out.

BTW, Libby, I think you might be better served using your sig to promote Dave Westlake (http://www.davewestlake.org/) over neocon Ron Johnson (http://ronjohnsonforsenate.com/home/).

Yep, HARRY REID FOR TWO MORE YEARS AS MAJORITY LEADER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 09:59:33 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better.  

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

BTW, Libby, I think you might be better served using your sig to promote Dave Westlake (http://www.davewestlake.org/) over neocon Ron Johnson (http://ronjohnsonforsenate.com/home/).

That race hasn't really gotten much attention and I haven't been following it. I only really find out about these things on here.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 11, 2010, 10:03:11 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 11, 2010, 10:05:19 PM
BTW, Libby, I think you might be better served using your sig to promote Dave Westlake (http://www.davewestlake.org/) over neocon Ron Johnson (http://ronjohnsonforsenate.com/home/).

Yep, HARRY REID FOR TWO MORE YEARS AS MAJORITY LEADER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If Johnson wins, I'm supporting Feingold, as the only senator to vote against the PATRIOT Act (Johnson is for it).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 11, 2010, 10:12:59 PM
I can explain it easily. They have a niche and that is the GOP abandoned their principles for electability and lost, and too an extent that is true. But once you make a fuss over it to rally the base, it is tough to redirect the sheep based on electability in cases like this. They might just turn on DeMint and Palin, you know.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 10:21:42 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 11, 2010, 10:34:46 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

OK, but the Democrats are "spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government" much more so than the Republicans did during the Bush administration. Plus, keep in mind that if the Republicans take over Congress, they will do more to limit government if it means going up against Obama. When the Republicans take over the White House, you might have a point, but the Republicans will push for more limited government out of partisanship.

Also, if the GOP was successful in getting rid of the "big government moderates, don't you think that might push voters away?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 11, 2010, 10:35:40 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

Castle, Grayson, Snowe and Collins have nothing to do with what destroyed the GOP majority. The majority was lost because of situation in iraq (Not the fact we were in Iraq) and incompetetance by Republicans of all the ideological strands. Punishing all moderates for the stupidity of Republicans all across the spectrum is counter-productive and dangerous?

Who uses only one criteria, Libertas? You do.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 11, 2010, 10:39:31 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

Castle, Grayson, Snowe and Collins have nothing to do with what destroyed the GOP majority. The majority was lost because of situation in iraq (Not the fact we were in Iraq) and incompetetance by Republicans of all the ideological strands. Punishing all moderates for the stupidity of Republicans all across the spectrum is counter-productive and dangerous?

Who uses only one criteria, Libertas? You do.

Also I think voter fatigue had something to do with it. The GOP had been in control of Congress for 12 years. It doesn't surprise me voters wanted a change after that time.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 10:43:12 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

OK, but the Democrats are "spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government" much more so than the Republicans did during the Bush administration.

I don't know about that; I see the current regime as more of a continuation of the last one.

Quote
Plus, keep in mind that if the Republicans take over Congress, they will do more to limit government if it means going up against Obama. When the Republicans take over the White House, you might have a point, but the Republicans will push for more limited government out of partisanship.

Also, if the GOP was successful in getting rid of the "big government moderates, don't you think that might push voters away?

I'd rather see Obama defeated in 2012 than see a bunch of moderate losers take over Congress in 2010.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 11, 2010, 10:43:24 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

Castle, Grayson, Snowe and Collins have nothing to do with what destroyed the GOP majority. The majority was lost because of situation in iraq (Not the fact we were in Iraq) and incompetetance by Republicans of all the ideological strands. Punishing all moderates for the stupidity of Republicans all across the spectrum is counter-productive and dangerous?

Who uses only one criteria, Libertas? You do.

Also I think voter fatigue had something to do with it. The GOP had been in control of Congress for 12 years. It doesn't surprise me voters wanted a change after that time.

I don't think so. The Democrats had the House for 40 years. People nead a reason to vote people out of office. A war going badly, corruption, and anger of certain ideas pushed for the majority account for about 99% of the reason for the change in controll in 2006.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 10:50:37 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

Castle, Grayson, Snowe and Collins have nothing to do with what destroyed the GOP majority. The majority was lost because of situation in iraq (Not the fact we were in Iraq) and incompetetance by Republicans of all the ideological strands. Punishing all moderates for the stupidity of Republicans all across the spectrum is counter-productive and dangerous?

Sounds like you're still in the same fantasyland the rest of the GOP was stuck in in both 2006 and 2008.

Sorry, but Americans don't want to just turn back the clock to those glorious Bush years when big government Republicans ran the show. And no, Americans didn't vote out the Republicans because they wanted Congress to assault Iraq even more aggressively, despite the claims of McCain & Co with regard to their heroic "surge".

Quote
Who uses only one criteria, Libertas? You do.

No, I use multiple criteria, as I implicitly indicated in the thread you started asking that very question.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 11, 2010, 11:02:09 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

Castle, Grayson, Snowe and Collins have nothing to do with what destroyed the GOP majority. The majority was lost because of situation in iraq (Not the fact we were in Iraq) and incompetetance by Republicans of all the ideological strands. Punishing all moderates for the stupidity of Republicans all across the spectrum is counter-productive and dangerous?

Sounds like you're still in the same fantasyland the rest of the GOP was stuck in in both 2006 and 2008.

Sorry, but Americans don't want to just turn back the clock to those glorious Bush years when big government Republicans ran the show. And no, Americans didn't vote out the Republicans because they wanted Congress to assault Iraq even more aggressively, despite the claims of McCain & Co with regard to their heroic "surge".

Quote
Who uses only one criteria, Libertas? You do.

No, I use multiple criteria, as I implicitly indicated in the thread you started asking that very question.

Oh Libertas, fighting with you is so much fun, as you resort to the same talking points and generic arguements you throw out at everyone who disagrees with you in even the slightest way, despite the fact that you know far better then that when it comes to me.

I have no desire whatsoever to return to the days or Delay, Hastert and Frist. I have stated so repeatedly. Of course you don't care, as long as you can scream "Neocon" at someone.

Actually the polls showed that people's opinions of Iraq started to change and the GOP's numbers on that issue did as well. The Problem was the same time people began to realize that, the economy began unraveling and Iraq fell from 45% importance to 20% and Economy went up above 50%. So the overall effect was zero in terms of the Republican's overall ratings. The people wanted a change in strategy, whether pulling out or putting more in, they saw that the current strategy wasn't working and they either wanted something that did or they wanted out.

Americans were all for the War before it began to decline, and success appeared impossible.

Actually this has proved that you don't. You refuse to recognize competence as a factor aside from ideology. In your mind, if someone is more in line with what you want, they are more competent. That is not so. The same way moderation is no guarrentee of competence. 



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 11, 2010, 11:11:00 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

Castle, Grayson, Snowe and Collins have nothing to do with what destroyed the GOP majority. The majority was lost because of situation in iraq (Not the fact we were in Iraq) and incompetetance by Republicans of all the ideological strands. Punishing all moderates for the stupidity of Republicans all across the spectrum is counter-productive and dangerous?

Sounds like you're still in the same fantasyland the rest of the GOP was stuck in in both 2006 and 2008.

Sorry, but Americans don't want to just turn back the clock to those glorious Bush years when big government Republicans ran the show. And no, Americans didn't vote out the Republicans because they wanted Congress to assault Iraq even more aggressively, despite the claims of McCain & Co with regard to their heroic "surge".

Quote
Who uses only one criteria, Libertas? You do.

No, I use multiple criteria, as I implicitly indicated in the thread you started asking that very question.

Oh Libertas, fighting with you is so much fun, as you resort to the same talking points and generic arguements you throw out at everyone who disagrees with you in even the slightest way, despite the fact that you know far better then that when it comes to me.

I have no desire whatsoever to return to the days or Delay, Hastert and Frist. I have stated so repeatedly. Of course you don't care, as long as you can scream "Neocon" at someone.

Actually the polls showed that people's opinions of Iraq started to change and the GOP's numbers on that issue did as well. The Problem was the same time people began to realize that, the economy began unraveling and Iraq fell from 45% importance to 20% and Economy went up above 50%. So the overall effect was zero in terms of the Republican's overall ratings. The people wanted a change in strategy, whether pulling out or putting more in, they saw that the current strategy wasn't working and they either wanted something that did or they wanted out.

Americans were all for the War before it began to decline, and success appeared impossible.

Yeah, alright, I'm not interested in hearing stale old Iraq war apologetics. Even Republicans are starting to admit that the whole war was one big mistake.
 
If Republicans take power and make war the centerpiece of their agenda again, they'll be kicked right out on their asses before they even knew what hit them.

Quote
Actually this has proved that you don't. You refuse to recognize competence as a factor aside from ideology. In your mind, if someone is more in line with what you want, they are more competent. That is not so. The same way moderation is no guarrentee of competence. 

I highly value competence. That's why I won't support incompetent candidates, like that buffoonish clown you supported, J.D. Hayworth.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 11, 2010, 11:23:16 PM
The NRA is to be expected - Castle is one of the most consistent opponents of gun rights in Congress.

This. I'm more fine with the NRA endorsing O'Donnell than I am Palin. After all, the NRA's just supposed to fight for gun rights, not make their partisan endorsements based on who is the most electable. Palin and DeMint however, should know better. 

Don't Palin and DeMint claim to support gun rights, be pro-life, and favor free markets? Why would they do endorse Castle, who is against all three?

Because at this time, they should be pushing for what is best for the Republican Party and what is best for conservatives. They both know that Christine O'Donnell is unelectable in Delaware (I'd LOVE to be proven wrong on this by the way), and that the Democrats will be handed the Delaware seat on a silver platter if O'Donnell is to win the nomination. I know Castle isn't very conservative, but O'Donnell won't win, and if Castle makes the difference between a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled Senate, than Castle is better for conservatism, as a Republican controlled Senate will be much more conservative than a Democratic one. Both DeMint and Palin are Republicans who have praised the GOP in the past (don't ask me to find an exact quote, but I'm almost positive they have both lauded the virtues of the Republican Party), and should be working to advance GOP interests (and therefore conservative interests, at least in comparison to the Democrats).

And if there is a conflict between conservative interests and partisan interests?

Then pick the best way to achieve both, which, if you ask me, is to get as many Republican seats in both houses of Congress as much as we can so that we can stop Obama's push for big government, and plant the seeds of conservative reform. You don't honestly believe that keeping Democratic majorities in Congress will be at all beneficial for conservative interests, do you?

Could certainly be better than having a "big tent" GOP majority like we had until 2006: spending recklessly, adding trillions to the national debt, wrecking the economy, expanding government. Essentially doing all the same things the Democrats do until the people inevitably decide to vote the real Democrats back in.

Really it's best not just from an ideological standpoint, but also for the future of the Republican Party, to get rid of the sort of big government "moderates" who wrecked their party's credibility during the Bush years in the first place.


Nothing positive would get accomplished in a Senate filled with people like Castle, Murkowski, Grayson, Snowe, Collins, etc.

Castle, Grayson, Snowe and Collins have nothing to do with what destroyed the GOP majority. The majority was lost because of situation in iraq (Not the fact we were in Iraq) and incompetetance by Republicans of all the ideological strands. Punishing all moderates for the stupidity of Republicans all across the spectrum is counter-productive and dangerous?

Sounds like you're still in the same fantasyland the rest of the GOP was stuck in in both 2006 and 2008.

Sorry, but Americans don't want to just turn back the clock to those glorious Bush years when big government Republicans ran the show. And no, Americans didn't vote out the Republicans because they wanted Congress to assault Iraq even more aggressively, despite the claims of McCain & Co with regard to their heroic "surge".

Quote
Who uses only one criteria, Libertas? You do.

No, I use multiple criteria, as I implicitly indicated in the thread you started asking that very question.

Oh Libertas, fighting with you is so much fun, as you resort to the same talking points and generic arguements you throw out at everyone who disagrees with you in even the slightest way, despite the fact that you know far better then that when it comes to me.

I have no desire whatsoever to return to the days or Delay, Hastert and Frist. I have stated so repeatedly. Of course you don't care, as long as you can scream "Neocon" at someone.

Actually the polls showed that people's opinions of Iraq started to change and the GOP's numbers on that issue did as well. The Problem was the same time people began to realize that, the economy began unraveling and Iraq fell from 45% importance to 20% and Economy went up above 50%. So the overall effect was zero in terms of the Republican's overall ratings. The people wanted a change in strategy, whether pulling out or putting more in, they saw that the current strategy wasn't working and they either wanted something that did or they wanted out.

Americans were all for the War before it began to decline, and success appeared impossible.

Yeah, alright, I'm not interested in hearing stale old Iraq war apologetics. Even Republicans are starting to admit that the whole war was one big mistake.
 
If Republicans take power and make war the centerpiece of their agenda again, they'll be kicked right out on their asses before they even knew what hit them.

Quote
Actually this has proved that you don't. You refuse to recognize competence as a factor aside from ideology. In your mind, if someone is more in line with what you want, they are more competent. That is not so. The same way moderation is no guarrentee of competence. 

I highly value competence. That's why I won't support incompetent candidates, like that buffoonish clown you supported, J.D. Hayworth.

Hayworth has issues, but not on the level of O'Donnell. He also isn't dumb as he is carcicatured. He is piss poor on the campaign front though and thats what did him in, that and McCain's millions in campaign cash.

Who said anything about Iraq not being a mistake. Hindsight is 20/20. That doesn't mean you should just run for the hills once you realize you made a mistake. That can make a bad situation worse.

I know what you mean, you are boring me to death here you know. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Phony Moderate on September 12, 2010, 02:03:34 AM
It's interesting that Libertas becomes more and more of a neocon as the election gets nearer.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 12, 2010, 09:58:29 AM
More teasing from PPP:

"We're going to have Republican primary numbers out in Delaware and New Hampshire late tonight and based on the first day of polling it's clear both of these races are in single digit territory- there is not likely to be a run away winner in either.

Here are a couple key facts based on the numbers so far:

-53% of primary voters in Delaware think that Mike Castle is too liberal.

-Many of the Republicans who like Sarah Palin in New Hampshire are still ignoring her endorsement- Kelly Ayotte has only a 6 point lead over Ovide Lamontagne with folks who say they would be positively influenced by her support."


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 12, 2010, 10:08:23 AM
Castle is in big trouble, it seems. The NRSC has to be freaking out a little.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 12, 2010, 10:13:28 AM
Castle is in big trouble, it seems. The NRSC has to be freaking out a little.

Given the scorched-earth campaign the Republicans have been running against O'Donnell, they've been freaked out for a couple weeks now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 12, 2010, 10:17:35 AM
I imagine PPP will show Castle still ahead by a sliver, but with the amount of momentum O'Donnell has, it's easy to see which way the undecideds will break. Chris Coons should be very happy on Tuesday night.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 12, 2010, 10:22:00 AM
It'd be amazing to watch a party flush a free Senate seat right down the toilet like that. Can anyone else think of such a clear cut recent example of this? (Don't say Angle, because even that one isn't as drastic.)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 12, 2010, 10:32:51 AM
It'd be amazing to watch a party flush a free Senate seat right down the toilet like that. Can anyone else think of such a clear cut recent example of this? (Don't say Angle, because even that one isn't as drastic.)

It's hard to think of any because there's never really been such years when the title of "frontrunner for nominee" has been so meaningless, even weeks before the primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Tender Branson on September 12, 2010, 11:17:08 AM
It would be great if O'Donnell and Lamont(agne) would win their primaries - and then lose.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SPC on September 12, 2010, 11:27:18 AM
Castle is in big trouble, it seems. The NRSC has to be freaking out a little.

Given the scorched-earth campaign the Republicans have been running against O'Donnell, they've been freaked out for a couple weeks now.

I suspect that Castle would have been better off if national Republicans didn't get involved (see Charlie Crist, Trey Grayson, Bob Bennett, Sue Lowden, Jane Norton, Lisa Murkowski, etc.)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on September 12, 2010, 11:50:12 AM
Beau Biden is probably feeling a little silly for not running right now. He could beat O'Donnell by 20 points and would probably be a slight favorite against a damaged Castle if he wins on Tuesday.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 12, 2010, 12:24:23 PM
The 'plan' was that Coons would lose to Castle, then Biden would get his old seat back in 2016.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SPC on September 12, 2010, 02:04:19 PM
The 'plan' was that Coons would lose to Castle, then Biden would get his old seat back in 2016 2014.

FIFY. I would have to agree with this. Thus, the argument that Republicans should vote for Castle to send a message to Biden doesn't really make sense.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dgov on September 12, 2010, 06:00:21 PM
Well, if you want to hear a different reason from Libertas, it's that Moderating the GOP image didn't really have any lasting effect on voting intentions.  Karl Rove's "Permanent majority" strategy of selling out Fiscal Conservative principles on things like Medicare D and pork spending in order to win over moderate voters failed utterly in the sense that those voters marched right back over to the Democrats once Republican fortunes sunk low.  There was no lasting or permanent change, just window dressing and denial, which makes for a terrible long-term strategy.

There's a similar thing here with Delaware--the GOP can take the easy Senate seat with the Moderate Castle, but odds are that when he decides to retire (probably 2016, given his age), Democrats will pick that seat right back up again, and the only thing that will have changed is that the committee makeup of the Senate will have shifted a seat or two.  Or, the GOP can take the (I'll call it the Reagan risk) that electing someone who actually implement genuine Conservative legislation will have a more significant and potentially lasting impact on the State's long-term voting intentions.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 12, 2010, 10:20:54 PM
The 'plan' was that Coons would lose to Castle, then Biden would get his old seat back in 2016.

It's not a full six year term fwiw


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 12, 2010, 10:43:27 PM
There's a similar thing here with Delaware--the GOP can take the easy Senate seat with the Moderate Castle, but odds are that when he decides to retire (probably 2016, given his age), Democrats will pick that seat right back up again, and the only thing that will have changed is that the committee makeup of the Senate will have shifted a seat or two.  Or, the GOP can take the (I'll call it the Reagan risk) that electing someone who actually implement genuine Conservative legislation will have a more significant and potentially lasting impact on the State's long-term voting intentions.

That'd be the choice if they were considering nominating someone who was simply conservative, not mentally ill.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SPC on September 12, 2010, 11:44:21 PM
Would it be too late for Castle to pull a Charlie Crist?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Tender Branson on September 12, 2010, 11:59:19 PM
My predictions for tomorrow:

Delaware Senate: 52% O'Donnell, 48% Castle
Delaware House: 53% Urquhart, 42% Rollins, 5% Izzo

DC Mayor: 49% Gray, 40% Fenty

Maryland Senate: 32% Wargotz, 24% Rutledge

New Hampshire Governor: 54% Stephen, 30% Kimball, 10% Testerman, 6% Emiro
New Hampshire Senate: 36% Ayotte, 34% Lamontagne, 13% Bender, 12% Binnie

New York Governor: 51% Paladino, 49% Lazio
New York Senate (S): 53% DioGuardi, 27% Malpass, Blakeman 20%
New York Senate (R): 61% Townsend, 39% Berntsen

Rhode Island Governor: 69% Robitaille, 31% Moffitt

Wisconsin Governor: 65% Walker, 30% Neumann, 5% Paterick


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 13, 2010, 06:08:05 AM
Two more last-minute polls from PPP that got ignored because of all the OMGZ O'DONNELL SURGE:

DE-AL (R)

Glen Urquhart - 50
Michele Rollins - 38
Rose Izzo - 3

NH-Gov (R)

John Stephen - 45
Jack Kimball - 24
Karen Testerman - 8
Frank Emiro - 4


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Verily on September 13, 2010, 10:18:46 AM
Would it be too late for Castle to pull a Charlie Crist?

Delaware has a sore loser law, and Castle can't pull out of the ballot this late. (He could drop out, but he'd still be on the primary ballot, so he'd still be precluded from an independent run.)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 13, 2010, 12:44:58 PM
The vast majority of states don't allow for what Lieberman did (including Connecticut now, which was passed not too long after he registered his candidacy). Crist got around it by withdrawing before the deadline for an independent candidacy. It's not going to happen that often.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 13, 2010, 06:11:33 PM
Magellan claims a closer race in NH (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/09/13/ayotte_clings_to_razor_thin_lead.html):

Ayotte - 35
Lamontagne - 31
Binnie - 14
Bender - 10


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 13, 2010, 06:32:55 PM
What are everyone's predictions for tomorrow?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 13, 2010, 06:40:43 PM
For the races I've followed:

DE: O'Donnell 52 / Castle 48
NH: Ayotte 39 / Lamontagne 35

NY:
Lazio 53 / Paladino 47
DioGuardi
Schneiderman 34 / Rice 26 / Coffey 23
Cox 38 / Altschuler 34 / Demos 28
Maloney
Rangel

The ones without percentages will be decisive wins.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 13, 2010, 07:59:43 PM
I'm saying Castle by 3 and Ayotte by about 5.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 13, 2010, 09:31:59 PM
What are everyone's predictions for tomorrow?

DE:

US Senate (GOP):
O'Donnell 54%
Castle 46%

DC:

Mayor (DEM):
Gray 49%
Fenty 40%

NH:

US Senate (GOP):
Ayotte 39%
Lamontagne 35%
Binnie 17%
Bender 9%

NY:

Governor (GOP):
Paladino 52%
Lazio 48%

US Senator Special (DEM):
Gillibrand 76%
Goode 24%

US Senator Special (GOP)
DioGuardi should win. I found out today that he is strongly against the Iraq and Afghanistan blunders. That's pretty interesting.

US Senator (GOP)
No clue who'll win this. Flip a coin.

Attorney General (DEM)
Schneiderman 34%
Rice 33%
Sean Coffey 16%
Dinallo 9%
Brodsky 8%

NY-14 (DEM)
Maloney wins big.

NY-15 (DEM)
Rangel survives. It won't be very close.

NY-23 (GOP)
Doheny over Hoffman. I'm not sure about the margin here.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 13, 2010, 09:57:07 PM
I'm generally voting an anti-incumbent/anti-establishment ticket tomorrow, fyi.  Except for Schniederman, he's a piece of sh!t candidate and I want to make sure Cuomo has him as his little "gift".  I expect him to win very narrowly - the race is essentially between him and Rice.

On the other big races:

DE-Sen (R):  The trick is trying to figure exactly who the Republicans are in Delaware - which are not necessarily the same as those who vote Republican, I suspect.  My guess here is that Castle is underpolling a bit for a number of reasons, so I'll say Castle by a few in the end.

DE-House (R):  PPP is probably right here.

DC Mayor:  I don't know anything about DC voting habits (I do know something about their crack habits).

NH-Sen (R):  Ayotte by more than you think.

NH-House seats:  I should know more about how they'll fall, but I don't.

NY-Gov (R):  Lazio's just a bad enough candidate to lose here.  Being the establishment candidate should be worth a few points in NY, but who knows.

NY-Sen Spec. (D):  I'm voting for Goode (even though she is a NYC attorney - and thus incompetent, so be it).

NY-Sen Spec. (R):  DioGuardi will win.  I like him personally when I've seen him on TV and will vote for him in the general.  He's a little old and nuts, but entertaining.

NY-Sen (R):  No clue.

I'd continue with the House races, but I agree with Eraserhead.

As for the NY-1 primary, it's anyone's ball game.  Suspect it won't be Chris Cox, just my gut feeling.

RI:  The RI-1 D primary should be very interesting - basically an all-out war there.

WI:  Any interesting races there?  Johnson will beat Westlake.

MD:  Anything interesting there either?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 13, 2010, 10:00:58 PM
Here's a bunch of random predictions I just pulled out of my head. I don't know why I assign numbers to them, as they're inevitably wrong.

Democratic primaries

DC-Mayor: Gray 49, Fenty 41, Others 10
MA-09: Lynch 65, D'Alessandro 35
MA-10: Keating 61, O'Leary 39
NH-02: Kuster 57, Swett 43
NY-Sen-S: Gillibrand 80, Goode 20
NY-10: Towns 62, Powell 38
NY-14: Maloney 59, Saujami 41
NY-15: Rangel 43, Powell 22, Tasini 15, Johnson 13, Others 7
RI-01: Cicilline 48, Lynch 19, Gemma 17, Segal 16
RI-02: Langevin 65, Dennigan 30, other guy 5

Republican primaries

DE-Sen: O'Donnell 52, Castle 48
DE-AL: Urquhart 54, Rollins 41, Izzo 5
MD-Gov: Ehrlich 74, Murphy 26
MD-Sen: Wargotz 54, Rutledge 20, Others 26
MD-01: Harris 63, Fisher 37
MA-10: Perry 53, Malone 47
NH-Gov: Stephen 54, Kimball 30, Testerman 11, Emiro 5
NH-Sen: Ayotte 38, Lamontagne 33, Binnie 16, Bender 13
NH-01: Mahoney 45, Guinta 42, Others 13
NH-02: Bass 42, Horn 35, Giuda 17, Others 6
NY-Gov: Paladino 51, Lazio 49
NY-Sen: Townsend 57, Berntsen 43
NY-Sen-S: DioGuardi 49, Malpass 31, Blakeman 20
NY-01: Altschuler 36, Demos 33, Cox 31
NY-13: Grimm 54, Alegretti 46
NY-23: Doheny 52, Hoffman 48
RI-Gov: Robitaille 60, Moffitt 40
WI-Gov: Walker 62, Neumann 34, third dude 4
WI-08: McCormick 33, Ribble 32, Roth 23, Fourth dude 12


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 13, 2010, 10:04:03 PM
MD:  Anything interesting there either?

I'm probably the only person on the entire form that finds the Republican primary for Comptroller interesting, mostly because of the trainwreck quality. The likely winner is William Campbell, some kind of businessman, but he's running against a perennial candidate from Baltimore named Armand Girard and an 18-year-old Paulite blogger named Brendan Madigan. I'm rooting for Madigan, if only for the sheer absurdity of him winning.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 13, 2010, 10:05:35 PM
I thought Lazio would make it up until the last week or so. Paladino is going to brutalize him upstate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 13, 2010, 10:08:07 PM
NY-13 - I agree with Grimm winning too.  He's the better candidate - I watched a bit of the NY1 debate (don't ask me why)

Also on Gillibrand, she'll be closer to 70% than 80% - watch.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Nhoj on September 13, 2010, 10:18:57 PM

WI:  Any interesting races there?  Johnson will beat Westlake.

Republican governors primary has potential to be interesting, of course it also has the potential to be like what johnny is predicting thanks to the absolute lack of polling. Other than that WI-8 primary could be fun. I think my district, WI-07 will probably be something like 60-40 for duffy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 02:24:25 AM
Wow, Richard Brodsky has Pete Seeger's endorsement. Now that's pretty awesome.

http://www.richardbrodsky.com/media/player/seeger_for_brodsky/


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:12:18 AM
Well, here we are once again. Sadly, this will be the last significant election day until the big day in November, in seven weeks.

Poll Closing Times:

8 ET - Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire*
9 ET - New York, Rhode Island, Wisconsin

*Polls close at 7, but the bigger cities can stay open until 8. Some results might come in before 8.

AP Results pages: DE (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/DE_Page_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | DC (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/DC_Page_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | MD (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/MD_Governor_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | MA (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/MA_US_House_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | NH (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/NH_US_Senate_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | NY (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/NY_Governor_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | RI (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/RI_Governor_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | WI (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/WI_Governor_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS)

State Results pages: DE (http://elections.delaware.gov/) | DC (http://www.dcboee.us/) | MD (http://elections.state.md.us/) | RI (http://www.ri.gov/election/results/2010/statewide_primary/) | WI (http://gab.wi.gov/)

(Not sure if all of these will have results on election night, but I know MA, NH, and NY won't.)

Maryland has early voting for the first time this year. Here are some rather detailed numbers if you're so inclined. (http://elections.state.md.us/press_room/2010_stats_primary/EV_Statewide.pdf) Only 2.4% of voters have voted early.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on September 14, 2010, 06:50:04 AM
Johnny, I like Malone and would be supporting him if I was a MA-10 voter, but I'm expecting him to get crushed by Perry.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:55:46 AM
Johnny, I like Malone and would be supporting him if I was a MA-10 voter, but I'm expecting him to get crushed by Perry.

So the stuff about Perry's illustrious career as a cop hasn't hurt him?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on September 14, 2010, 07:14:46 AM
Johnny, I like Malone and would be supporting him if I was a MA-10 voter, but I'm expecting him to get crushed by Perry.

So the stuff about Perry's illustrious career as a cop hasn't hurt him?

I doubt it. Perry is the more conservative "tea party-ish" candidate in the race, he has the excitement, he's kept up in the money race, and he has most of the endorsements despite Malone being an "establishment" candidate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 12:56:51 PM
Well, I voted. There were only two races on my ballot. I voted for Gail Goode over Kirsten Gillibrand and I voted for Eric Schneiderman for Attorney General (really don't like Rice).

Oh yeah, and I'm expecting several issues with the new machines. My first ballot was "spoiled" because the machine didn't accept. it. Bring back the old lever machines, dammit! I loved those things.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 01:00:33 PM
Well, I voted. There were only two races on my ballot. I voted for Gail Goode over Kirsten Gillibrand and I voted for Eric Schneiderman for Attorney General (really don't like Rice).

Oh yeah, and I'm expecting several issues with the new machines. My first ballot was "spoiled" because the machine didn't accept. it. Bring back the old lever machines, dammit! I loved those things.

Good riddance to the old, decrepit lever machines.  We should have gone to touchscreens, though, instead of back to paper ballots, which are so 19th century. 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 01:03:07 PM
Well, I voted. There were only two races on my ballot. I voted for Gail Goode over Kirsten Gillibrand and I voted for Eric Schneiderman for Attorney General (really don't like Rice).

Oh yeah, and I'm expecting several issues with the new machines. My first ballot was "spoiled" because the machine didn't accept. it. Bring back the old lever machines, dammit! I loved those things.

Good riddance to the old, decrepit lever machines.  We should have gone to touchscreens, though, instead of back to paper ballots, which are so 19th century. 

Eh, I'm very attached to those things and I never had any problem with them. I agree that touchscreens would have been better than this system though. Did you vote yet?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 01:03:50 PM
I saw a New York absentee ballot today. Strange looking thing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 01:09:51 PM
I saw a New York absentee ballot today. Strange looking thing.

Still punchcards or something new?

Eh, I'm very attached to those things and I never had any problem with them. I agree that touchscreens would have been better than this system though. Did you vote yet?

Later today.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 01:14:03 PM
I saw a New York absentee ballot today. Strange looking thing.

Still punchcards or something new?

Fill-in-the-bubble. The design of the ballot itself just seemed very counterintuitive and confusing compared to the paper ballots I'm used to.


Also random note if either Rangel or Maloney somehow lose tonight: They both have the Working Families line in the general.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: minionofmidas on September 14, 2010, 01:18:54 PM
Wow, Richard Brodsky has Pete Seeger's endorsement. Now that's pretty awesome.

Pete Seeger is, what, 104?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 01:27:10 PM
Wow, Richard Brodsky has Pete Seeger's endorsement. Now that's pretty awesome.

Pete Seeger is, what, 104?

Only 91! I saw him play a show at the Henry A. Wallace Visitor and Education Center back when I was interning at FDR's library. He's still good!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 01:50:56 PM
Wow, Richard Brodsky has Pete Seeger's endorsement. Now that's pretty awesome.

Pete Seeger is, what, 104?

Coffey was endorsed by Batman.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 03:18:16 PM
Well, I voted. There were only two races on my ballot. I voted for Gail Goode over Kirsten Gillibrand and I voted for Eric Schneiderman for Attorney General (really don't like Rice).

Oh yeah, and I'm expecting several issues with the new machines. My first ballot was "spoiled" because the machine didn't accept. it. Bring back the old lever machines, dammit! I loved those things.

Strange that we voted the same ticket.  :P  Of course, I voted Schneiderman for different reasons.

Yes, the new machines suck, even though I had no problems with them.  I want a receipt, dammit.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 14, 2010, 03:18:55 PM
Just voted. Was unsure which ballot to take, but the downballot stuff on the D side got toe me.

Governor
Write in(voting Baker)

AG
Coakley

Auditor
Mike Lake(will vote Connaughton in the general)(Was split between Glodis who I think is weaker in the general, and of the two candidates who would not be a complete disgrace)

Treasurer
Murphy(opposite reasoning as Auditor)

Congress/Legislature
No Opponents

Executive Council
Whoever is challenging the incumbent, usually a good bet




Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 03:23:04 PM
I voted Bump for Auditor because I happened to have met her and I'm more likely to vote for the experienced candidate and the woman when given a choice between two acceptable options. (Glodis was not acceptable.) Unfortunately this led me to supporting Coakley last fall, but what can you do.

Grossman for Auditor because he was the only competent one running.

I skipped Governor's Council. I don't think we had an incumbent.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 14, 2010, 03:49:52 PM
Just got back from voted.

I voted for Schneiderman for AG, Gillibrand for Senate, and Carlow in the 6th Senate District.

The new system isn't bad, but I wish it was either completely electronic or at least showed who your ballot was cast for when it says it was accepted.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 04:02:43 PM
http://www.politico.com/blogs/maggiehaberman/0910/A_royal_screwup_.html


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 04:09:05 PM
I'm kind of annoyed that I couldn't vote against Schumer, honestly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Nhoj on September 14, 2010, 04:26:51 PM
Just got back from voting aswell. Voted in the republican primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 04:28:04 PM
Just got back from voting aswell. Voted in the republican primary.


Who'd you vote for?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Nhoj on September 14, 2010, 04:43:19 PM
Westlake for senate. Neumann for governor, Robert lorge for LT gov, some guy who wants to abolish the position for treasurer, wrote in Lafollette Sr for AG,  Dan Mielke for WI-07, and Roger Rivard for 75th assembly. A few other state and local spots had people who had no opponents and i just voted for them as i ddnt feel like doing more write ins by that point. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 04:50:25 PM
Is there any chance in hell of Westlake pulling a freak upset? Also is he anti-Afghanistan, anti-Iraq, anti-Patriot Act?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 14, 2010, 05:00:35 PM
Just voted for Gail Goode & Sean Coffey.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 05:06:37 PM
Here (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/14/what_to_watch_for_in_the_delaware_gop_senate_primary.html) is some chatter about the psephology of Delaware, and allegedly what to "look for" as the returns come in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Thomas D on September 14, 2010, 05:06:57 PM
For the first time in my life I had a problem voting.

When the poll workers put my name in the computer it froze. So I had to wait 10 minutes for them to fix it.

Nothing much in Maryland worth watching. Except who gets a higher % of the vote in their primary, Ehrlich or O'Malley.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 05:10:42 PM
I didn't vote.  Does Capuano even have a primary challenger?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Joe Biden 2020 on September 14, 2010, 05:14:37 PM
Again, just like the story throughout the primary season, I have to miss the results tonight.  I have a birthday party to go to here in 45 minutes.  Hmmm, maybe I'll DVR it tonight?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Nhoj on September 14, 2010, 05:28:20 PM
Is there any chance in hell of Westlake pulling a freak upset? Also is anti-Patriot Act, anti-Iraq, anti-Patriot Act?
Not really, I would think Johnson's heavy ad spending would lower significantly any chances of that happening.  Westlake does seem to be against the patriot act, as for the wars this video clip of him probably explains his position better than i can.  http://www.cbs58.com/index.php?aid=13861


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 05:37:57 PM
I'm kind of annoyed that I couldn't vote against Schumer, honestly.

That's because in the last month Schumer employed all sorts of dirty tricks to get Randy Credico thrown off the primary ballot. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randy-credico/congratulations-chuck-you_b_686325.html) Apparently the very idea of a challenger was too much for Schumer's ego to handle.

Credico will still be running in November on the Libertarian and Anti-Prohibition lines.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 05:42:11 PM
Well, I voted. There were only two races on my ballot. I voted for Gail Goode over Kirsten Gillibrand and I voted for Eric Schneiderman for Attorney General (really don't like Rice).

Oh yeah, and I'm expecting several issues with the new machines. My first ballot was "spoiled" because the machine didn't accept. it. Bring back the old lever machines, dammit! I loved those things.

Strange that we voted the same ticket.  :P  Of course, I voted Schneiderman for different reasons.

Yes, the new machines suck, even though I had no problems with them.  I want a receipt, dammit.

Easier to beat?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 05:54:36 PM
I'm kind of annoyed that I couldn't vote against Schumer, honestly.

That's because in the last month Schumer employed all sorts of dirty tricks to get Randy Credico thrown off the primary ballot. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randy-credico/congratulations-chuck-you_b_686325.html) Apparently the very idea of a challenger was too much for Schumer's ego to handle.

Credico will still be running in November on the Libertarian and Anti-Prohibition lines.

Anti-Prohibition line? Is he aware that there's no longer a Prohibition line?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 05:55:13 PM
I assume anti-drug prohibition.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 06:05:45 PM
Well, I voted. There were only two races on my ballot. I voted for Gail Goode over Kirsten Gillibrand and I voted for Eric Schneiderman for Attorney General (really don't like Rice).

Oh yeah, and I'm expecting several issues with the new machines. My first ballot was "spoiled" because the machine didn't accept. it. Bring back the old lever machines, dammit! I loved those things.

Strange that we voted the same ticket.  :P  Of course, I voted Schneiderman for different reasons.

Yes, the new machines suck, even though I had no problems with them.  I want a receipt, dammit.

Easier to beat?

That and I don't like Rice either.  Coffey was the best of all of them, imo, but he won't win.

Plus, he'll give Cuomo hell in the games Cuomo is trying to play.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 06:07:40 PM

Correct, and it's just a name decided upon two months ago for the ballot line a slate of pro-marijuana legalization candidates will be running on . The Anti-Prohibition line will include Randy Credico against Schumer, Vivia Morgan against Gillibrand, and Kristin Davis for governor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 06:11:51 PM
Polls are closed in parts of New Hampshire. No numbers though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:13:23 PM
Here (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/14/what_to_watch_for_in_the_delaware_gop_senate_primary.html) is some chatter about the psephology of Delaware, and allegedly what to "look for" as the returns come in.

There are three counties in Delaware, I would hope it doesn't take a college professor to figure out which ones are going to be stronger for O'Donnell.

Turnout is reportedly light in Delaware, estimated between 8 and 14%. In 2008, with only a low-interest gubernatorial primary on the ballot (Bill Lee crushed perennial loser Mike Protack 71-29), it was 16%. So this primary will be decided by less than 30,000 voters.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 06:14:19 PM
Here (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/14/what_to_watch_for_in_the_delaware_gop_senate_primary.html) is some chatter about the psephology of Delaware, and allegedly what to "look for" as the returns come in.

There are three counties in Delaware, I would hope it doesn't take a college professor to figure out which ones are going to be stronger for O'Donnell.

Turnout is reportedly light in Delaware, estimated between 8 and 14%. In 2008, with only a low-interest gubernatorial primary on the ballot (Bill Lee crushed perennial loser Mike Protack 71-29), it was 16%. So this primary will be decided by less than 30,000 voters.

Fewer than.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 06:31:57 PM
First few NH precincts are in, and Lamontagne leads....but only 1.3% reporting, so it doesn't mean much.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 06:33:04 PM
Those numbers are from 4 of the 12 precincts in Manchester.

Those precincts also, unsurprisingly, break for Guinta 47-28-19.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:34:26 PM
54-31, to be specific. And Manchester is the largest city in New Hampshire.

Edit: And Stephen's getting 74% there, so he's not in any trouble.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 06:35:45 PM
2% reporting now.

The NRSC is having a tough time with its handpicked candidates this year . . .


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 06:35:55 PM
I didn't vote.  Does Capuano even have a primary challenger?

No.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 06:36:37 PM
6/12 now in and Lamontagne's lead holds steady.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 06:36:52 PM
54-31, to be specific. And Manchester is the largest city in New Hampshire.

Edit: And Stephen's getting 74% there, so he's not in any trouble.

Lamontagne is from Manchester. Ayotte lives in Nashua.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 06:37:43 PM
54-31, to be specific. And Manchester is the largest city in New Hampshire.

Edit: And Stephen's getting 74% there, so he's not in any trouble.

Lamontagne is from Manchester. Ayotte lives in Nashua.

Ah, good to know.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:38:14 PM
You'd think Mr. Frenchy-French name would be from the northern end of the state, but no...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:40:04 PM
Dixville went for Binnie, with 3 votes. Bender in second with 2. Ayotte and Lamontagne tied for third with 1 vote each.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 06:42:45 PM
You'd think Mr. Frenchy-French name would be from the northern end of the state, but no...

I thought so too.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 06:43:16 PM
Dixville loves to be contrarian.

Frenchy-French maintains a majority w/ 4.3% reporting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:50:21 PM
The other towns that have reported so far are Candia (46-37 Frenchy-French) and Pittsfield (42-40 Ayotte). Where the hell is cinyc when you need a map of a New England state?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 14, 2010, 06:51:20 PM
Are French-American voters really voting for Lamontagne because of his ethnicity?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 06:51:31 PM
Agreed JL.

Atleast Manchestor is all in now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 06:52:54 PM
Isn't Ayotte a French name? She doesn't have the Frenchier-than-thou first name, though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 14, 2010, 06:53:29 PM
The other towns that have reported so far are Candia (46-37 Frenchy-French) and Pittsfield (42-40 Ayotte). Where the hell is cinyc when you need a map of a New England state?

()

bigger map: http://newhampshirenh.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/population-map-nh-2000.jpg


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 06:54:26 PM
Are French-American voters really voting for Lamontagne because of his ethnicity?

yes.

Isn't Ayotte a French name? She doesn't have the Frenchier-than-thou first name, though.

Its more a case of who has the most French sounding name. I didn't know Ayotte was French. I knew months ago that LaMontagne was.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 06:55:12 PM
Are French-American voters really voting for Lamontagne because of his ethnicity?

yes.

Isn't Ayotte a French name? She doesn't have the Frenchier-than-thou first name, though.

Its more a case of who has the most French sounding name. I didn't know Ayotte was French. I knew months ago that LaMontagne was.

Yeah, but French people are going to know it's French.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 06:55:27 PM
Why are results already coming in from NH?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 06:56:15 PM
Now turnout is reportedly high in Delaware. I don't know who to trust anymore.


They close at 7, but the cities are allowed to stay open until 8. Manchester, obviously, didn't want to wait.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 06:58:01 PM
Ah, okay.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:00:07 PM
Polls now closed in Massachusetts, the rest of New Hampshire, Maryland, Delaware and the District of Columbia.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 14, 2010, 07:00:26 PM
Quote
rich woman Michele Rollins

For some reason, that wording made me LOL...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:01:58 PM
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Phony Moderate on September 14, 2010, 07:03:20 PM
And the fun really starts....


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 14, 2010, 07:03:30 PM
With 5% reporting, Lamontagne leads 53-32. Interesting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 07:07:48 PM
With 5% reporting, Lamontagne leads 53-32. Interesting.

Its mostly from Lamontagne's hometown and suburb of that. The two places not are Dixville Notch (went to Bender, none to be weird), and Pittsfield (went to Ayotte by 2).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 14, 2010, 07:09:06 PM
With 5% reporting, Lamontagne leads 53-32. Interesting.

Its mostly from Lamontagne's hometown and suburb of that. The two places not are Dixville Notch (went to Bender, none to be weird), and Pittsfield (went to Ayotte by 2).

To be fair, 7 people voted in Dixville. Not that wierd. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 07:10:46 PM
With 5% reporting, Lamontagne leads 53-32. Interesting.

Its mostly from Lamontagne's hometown and suburb of that. The two places not are Dixville Notch (went to Bender, none to be weird), and Pittsfield (went to Ayotte by 2).

To be fair, 7 people voted in Dixville. Not that wierd. :P

It should have been "known". lol



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 07:13:57 PM
Another Manchestor Suburb, Auburn LaMontange 50-32.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 14, 2010, 07:14:21 PM
I've got an MSNBC stream on and i've just noticed something.

Why do Democrats adamently call John Boehner "Mr. Boehner" while reeling off their talking points, or is that just me? Does "Mr. Boehner" make him seem more out of touch or something? I noticed it during the Obama economy speech the other day too.

I also notice, Mitch McConnell gets "Mitch McConnell", not "Mr. McConnell".


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 07:14:47 PM
The other towns that have reported so far are Candia (46-37 Frenchy-French) and Pittsfield (42-40 Ayotte). Where the hell is cinyc when you need a map of a New England state?

Working on the mapset.  I thought I'd have until after 8 - but some of NH reported early.

With only 15 precincts in, here's my first map - naturally, it's very grey:
()

Note: I still need to check for errors. 

Hopefully, we'll get Delaware results by Rep District.  I have no idea what the Delaware website will acutually give us.  That's how they report after election day.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Verily on September 14, 2010, 07:15:04 PM
With 5% reporting, Lamontagne leads 53-32. Interesting.

Its mostly from Lamontagne's hometown and suburb of that. The two places not are Dixville Notch (went to Bender, none to be weird), and Pittsfield (went to Ayotte by 2).

Candia is not a suburb, unless you think the below map shows a suburb. It is near Manchester, though.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Candia,+NH&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=31.977057,77.607422&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Candia,+Rockingham,+New+Hampshire&ll=43.089451,-71.27655&spn=0.057541,0.151577&z=13&iwloc=A


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 07:15:17 PM
I've got an MSNBC stream on and i've just noticed something.

Why do Democrats adamently call John Boehner "Mr. Boehner" while reeling off their talking points, or is that just me? Does "Mr. Boehner" make him seem more out of touch or something? I noticed it during the Obama economy speech the other day too.

I also notice, Mitch McConnell gets "Mitch McConnell", not "Mr. McConnell".

Link us up to the stream please.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 14, 2010, 07:15:52 PM
I've got an MSNBC stream on and i've just noticed something.

Why do Democrats adamently call John Boehner "Mr. Boehner" while reeling off their talking points, or is that just me? Does "Mr. Boehner" make him seem more out of touch or something? I noticed it during the Obama economy speech the other day too.

I also notice, Mitch McConnell gets "Mitch McConnell", not "Mr. McConnell".

Link us up to the stream please.

http://www.epctv.com/channels/MSNBC-Online-Watch-4744.htm


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:16:08 PM
I've got an MSNBC stream on and i've just noticed something.

Why do Democrats adamently call John Boehner "Mr. Boehner" while reeling off their talking points, or is that just me? Does "Mr. Boehner" make him seem more out of touch or something? I noticed it during the Obama economy speech the other day too.

For the record, I've always called him John Boner.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:17:44 PM
Very early Massachusetts numbers starting to trickle in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:20:32 PM
2 precincts in from Delaware, 57-43 O'Donnell. Not sure where they're from.

Hopefully, we'll get Delaware results by Rep District.  I have no idea what the Delaware website will acutually give us.  That's how they report after election day.

http://elections.delaware.gov/results/html/stwres.shtml


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:21:51 PM
Up to 8 precincts in from Delaware, now 59-41 O'Donnell.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Phony Moderate on September 14, 2010, 07:23:01 PM
lol


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 07:23:17 PM
YOU GO GIRL!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:24:21 PM
Castle better hope those are from Sussex.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:24:56 PM
14/325, O'Donnell up 56-44. Judging by the sheriff's race, 7 of those precincts are from New Castle County.

Edit: 25 in, O'Donnell 52-48, 14 from NCC.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 14, 2010, 07:25:20 PM
Castle better hope those are from Sussex.

If those are from New Castle he is screwed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Phony Moderate on September 14, 2010, 07:26:16 PM
14/325, O'Donnell up 56-44. Judging by the sheriff's race, 7 of those precincts are from New Castle County.

So can we call this?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Thomas D on September 14, 2010, 07:26:26 PM
Up to 8 precincts in from Delaware, now 59-41 O'Donnell.

Nice. As long as she wins by one vote I'll be happy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 07:27:05 PM
The Delaware election page is hard to read.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Thomas D on September 14, 2010, 07:27:32 PM
14/325, O'Donnell up 56-44. Judging by the sheriff's race, 7 of those precincts are from New Castle County.

So can we call this?

Let's see where we are at the top of the hour.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on September 14, 2010, 07:27:45 PM
The Delaware election page is hard to read.

Incredibly so.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:28:38 PM
Castle needs to be stomping her in New Castle. She'll probably destroy him in the other two.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 07:28:49 PM
Well, I really feel sorry, personally for Mike, if it all comes to be truth. A long and distinguished career may end s**ty way.

But, there are partisian reasons. I'd LOVE to be able to say very soon "hello to Senator-elect Coons".

Thus, go girl!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 07:28:51 PM
With 5% reporting, Lamontagne leads 53-32. Interesting.

Its mostly from Lamontagne's hometown and suburb of that. The two places not are Dixville Notch (went to Bender, none to be weird), and Pittsfield (went to Ayotte by 2).

Candia is not a suburb, unless you think the below map shows a suburb. It is near Manchester, though.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Candia,+NH&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=31.977057,77.607422&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Candia,+Rockingham,+New+Hampshire&ll=43.089451,-71.27655&spn=0.057541,0.151577&z=13&iwloc=A

Following the strict defination, of course not, but its very close. So I use it as point of reference to the city of Manchestor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:29:17 PM
The trick I'm using is doing a search for "Representative" which will take you to just below the Senate toplines.

11% in and crazy women leads 54-46


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 07:30:58 PM
Mike needs just about 60% in New Castle since that's where about 60% of the votes will come from.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 07:31:52 PM
The trick I'm using is doing a search for "Representative" which will take you to just below the Senate toplines.

11% in and crazy women leads 54-46

Looks like tommorow Papa Biden may be very, very pissed off.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:32:28 PM
45/325, O'Donnell 55-45, 28 precincts from NCC.

I think Delaware's election site is getting killed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 07:32:44 PM
     Politico seems intent on not crediting the votes in Delaware so far to any of the three counties. Slightly frustrating.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 07:32:56 PM
It looks like the AP are equally as clueless on where the votes are coming from.


County   Precincts   M. Castle
(GOP)   C. O'Donnell
(GOP)
Total   25/325   1,995
48%   2,186
52%
Kent   0/49   0
0%   0
0%
New Castle   0/213   0
0%   0
0%
Sussex   0/63   0
0%   0
0%



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:33:05 PM
45/325, O'Donnell 55-45, 28 precincts from NCC.

I think Delaware's election site is getting killed.

Yeah, it won't load for me.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:33:19 PM
45/325, O'Donnell 55-45, 28 precincts from NCC.

I think Delaware's election site is getting killed.

It doesn't really even function for me.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 07:33:51 PM
45/325, O'Donnell 55-45, 28 precincts from NCC.

I think Delaware's election site is getting killed.

Yeah, it won't load for me.

Agreed/


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 07:37:02 PM
I have 71/325 in, O'Donnell 6831 (55.9%), Castle 5381 (44.1%).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 07:37:17 PM
The trick I'm using is doing a search for "Representative" which will take you to just below the Senate toplines.

11% in and crazy women leads 54-46

Looks like tommorow Papa Biden may be very, very pissed off.

Well, maybe Carper will only run for one more term, and young Biden can run for his seat in 2018.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 07:37:24 PM
If the votes were coming from New Castle, the race would have been called already since he's trailing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 07:37:36 PM
71 in Christine at 56%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sewer on September 14, 2010, 07:38:11 PM
hee hee hee


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:38:20 PM
71/325 is 22% for those without a calculator handy


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 07:39:40 PM
If the votes were coming from New Castle, the race would have been called already since he's trailing.

     Not necessarily. MSM is very skittish about calling races.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:39:49 PM
86/325

O'Donnell 54.6%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 14, 2010, 07:40:02 PM
I'm putting the kettle on. This calls for some tea. :D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Nhoj on September 14, 2010, 07:40:18 PM
Some results in from Maryland, nothing worth posting though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: homelycooking on September 14, 2010, 07:40:18 PM
Where is the website for NH election results? I will make maps.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:41:35 PM
No updates in the Granite State.

O'Leary and Perry are currently leading in MA-10.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 07:42:00 PM
If the votes were coming from New Castle, the race would have been called already since he's trailing.

     Not necessarily. MSM is very skittish about calling races.
Since that's going to be his county, it would be called.  He's going to lose the two southern counties.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 07:42:26 PM
The trick I'm using is doing a search for "Representative" which will take you to just below the Senate toplines.

11% in and crazy women leads 54-46

Looks like tommorow Papa Biden may be very, very pissed off.

Well, maybe Carper will only run for one more term, and young Biden can run for his seat in 2018.


Guys, we may just witness a freaking history.

What was DE politics for years? A few longtime officeholders serving together, from diffrent parties, but maitaining many alliances between them.

Now it may just end, with Bidens stepping aside to give Castle his term and then take it back without opposition. The gentlemen agreements era ended.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:42:43 PM
119/325, O'Donnell *still* at 55-45. And a majority of this is from NCC.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:42:51 PM
Wargotz is losing in Maryland. Not sure if that's surprising or not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 07:43:08 PM
Over a third in now, Christine still up by 10.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Progressive on September 14, 2010, 07:44:13 PM
Jessica Yellin on CNN just said that O'Donnell leads in NEW CASTLE, where most of these votes are from.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:44:14 PM
The trick I'm using is doing a search for "Representative" which will take you to just below the Senate toplines.

11% in and crazy women leads 54-46

Looks like tommorow Papa Biden may be very, very pissed off.

Well, maybe Carper will only run for one more term, and young Biden can run for his seat in 2018.


Guys, we may just witness a freaking history.

What was DE politics for years? A few longtime officeholders serving together, from diffrent parties, but maitaining many alliances between them.

Now it may just end, with Bidens stepping aside to give Castle his term and then take it back without opposition. The gentlemen agreements era ended.

It started in 2008, when Markell challenged heir apparent John Carney and beat him. Of course, Carney gets a pretty nice consolation prize this year.

Wargotz is losing in Maryland. Not sure if that's surprising or not.

It is, kind of. He put in a bunch of his own money ($600k or so), whereas the guy who's beating him is some random lawyer who only raised like $100k.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:44:33 PM
Over a third in now, Christine still up by 10.

The fat lady is clearing her throat.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 07:45:43 PM
At 119/325 in, O'Donnell 11695 (55.4%), Castle 9369 (44.6%). There is virtually no movement since the 71/325 update. Unless there's an unusual pocket out there it looks like the margin should hold.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:46:29 PM
Andy Harris leads in MD-01 69-31 with early returns. This one's going to be a very regional contest though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 07:46:42 PM
At 119/325 in, O'Donnell 11695 (55.4%), Castle 9369 (44.6%). There is virtually no movement since the 71/325 update. Unless there's an unusual pocket out there it looks like the margin should hold.


I tend to agree.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 07:46:48 PM
How long has it been since the three seats most likely to turn over were Delaware, Nevada, and Connecticut? A year?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 14, 2010, 07:47:07 PM
Congratulations, Senator Coons!!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 07:47:26 PM
I love American politics.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 07:47:56 PM
There are unfortunately, a lot of dumb, uneducated people in America.  This race is proof of that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 07:48:15 PM
O'Donnell has won.

I'm shocked.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 07:48:23 PM
Here's the Delaware map by RD (25 precincts in).  Castle blue, O'Donnell green.  Castle's just winning the immediate Wilmington area so far.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 14, 2010, 07:48:32 PM
F*&k you Republican primary activists. And where the hell are the New Hampshire number updates?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:48:41 PM
Harris winning easily in MD-01, 69-31.

*Still* no updates from NH in like an hour.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:48:47 PM
New Hampshire has apparently decided they have something better to do than count ballots.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 14, 2010, 07:48:54 PM
Perry has won in MA-10. If he is leading in Plymouth, then Malone is in serious trouble. On the Dem a lot closer, as Keating, unlike Malone, is getting good margins out of his base on the south shore. It will come down to turnout in Quincy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 07:49:21 PM
If the Tea Party's center is suburban America, then this result should not be entirely surprising, fwiw.  But I'd like to see it broken down first.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 07:49:35 PM
F*&kBless you Republican primary activists.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 14, 2010, 07:49:51 PM
:'(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 07:49:53 PM
Also,

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 07:50:20 PM
In other news, Barbara Bush will be the Republican nominee for a state senate seat in Boston, Cambridge, and Everett. LOL.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:50:56 PM
Now let's see if Paladino can complete my night.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 07:51:39 PM
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 07:52:15 PM
If the Tea Party's center is suburban America, then this result should not be entirely surprising, fwiw.  But I'd like to see it broken down first.
No.  The Tea Partiers are likely rural America.  Why does not that shock me?  Look for the flags on the back of the pickups as you head further south.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on September 14, 2010, 07:53:09 PM
What is up with New Hampshire? I haven't seen anything new from there in over a half hour.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 07:54:15 PM
With 153/325 in:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 07:55:27 PM
Now 153/325 in, O'Donnell 15145 (55.4%), Castle 12186 (44.6%). Exact same percentages.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: homelycooking on September 14, 2010, 07:55:38 PM
Where is the results page for NH?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 07:56:39 PM
If the Tea Party's center is suburban America, then this result should not be entirely surprising, fwiw.  But I'd like to see it broken down first.
No.  The Tea Partiers are likely rural America.  Why does not that shock me?  Look for the flags on the back of the pickups as you head further south.

Predictable trolling.  lol

Anyway, I'll have to examine things on this race to see whether it fits that dynamic when we have full numbers.  It may well not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 14, 2010, 07:56:42 PM
Unbelievable. I'm almost beside myself right now.  the tea party. This is awful.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 07:57:18 PM
What is up with New Hampshire? I haven't seen anything new from there in over a half hour.

4 more precincts reported.  I'll update the map when I get a chance (it still won't be much).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 07:57:42 PM
215/325 54.6% O'Donnell

It's over folks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 07:57:58 PM
Damnit, why did I waste my free Chris Coons bumper sticker by putting it on my plastic water pitcher

this is my floor right now:

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/3074/chriscoons.jpg

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 07:58:09 PM

hahaha

Too bad there isn't a Coons event going on. I bet they'd have the results up on the screen!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 07:58:25 PM
What is up with New Hampshire? I haven't seen anything new from there in over a half hour.

     I've been seeing a slow influx of results for NH-Sen over the last 10 minutes or so. Lamontagne is ahead 51-32 with 7.0% in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 07:58:34 PM
215/325 54.6% O'Donnell

It's over folks.
Unless it's called, it's not over, although not promising.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Kaine for Senate '18 on September 14, 2010, 07:58:45 PM


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 07:59:17 PM
66% in and the margin holds. Incredible.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 07:59:35 PM
Most of the results left are in New Castle, but considering how O'Donnell's run there, I doubt it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 07:59:40 PM
215/325 in, O'Donnell at 54.6. It looks like the majority outstanding is from NCC, so it's possible it will tighten.

Urquhart has a narrow 50-46 lead for DE-AL.

Perennial candidate Mike Protack is narrowly losing a bid for a seat on the NCC Council. 51-49 with 11/20 in. If he manages to win the primary, he'll actually hold elected office for once (no Democrat is running).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 07:59:51 PM
215/325 54.6% O'Donnell

It's over folks.

22006 to 18313


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: memphis on September 14, 2010, 08:00:09 PM
Delaware's next senator:
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 08:00:18 PM
HELLO FOR SENATOR COONS (D-DE)!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Thomas D on September 14, 2010, 08:00:43 PM
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 08:00:56 PM
What is up with New Hampshire? I haven't seen anything new from there in over a half hour.

     I've been seeing a slow influx of results for NH-Sen over the last 10 minutes or so. Lamontagne is ahead 51-32 with 7.0% in.

     Now 50-33 with 7.3% in. Ayotte is gaining. Almost 16% in for NH-1, 1.6% in for NH-2.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 08:01:15 PM
215/325 54.6% O'Donnell

It's over folks.
Unless it's called, it's not over, although not promising.

252/325 53.9% O'Donnell

Get your tissue box out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 08:01:30 PM
If the Tea Party's center is suburban America, then this result should not be entirely surprising, fwiw.  But I'd like to see it broken down first.
No.  The Tea Partiers are likely rural America.  Why does not that shock me?  Look for the flags on the back of the pickups as you head further south.

Predictable trolling.  lol

Anyway, I'll have to examine things on this race to see whether it fits that dynamic when we have full numbers.  It may well not.

Well, so far, Castle won most of suburban New Castle and O'Donnell the rural parts of the state - in some RDs, heavily.  So maybe not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:01:38 PM
252/325, O'Donnell at 53.9. Amusingly, Castle is winning the absentees by a 683-595 margin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 08:01:53 PM
Most of the results left are in New Castle, but considering how O'Donnell's run there, I doubt it.
That's why there is still hope.  That's where most of the population is.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 08:02:18 PM
More interested right now to see whether Rollins can catch Urquhart.  Don't think so, but who knows.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 08:02:56 PM
This was with 215 in:

()

More of the same.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 08:04:04 PM
If the Tea Party's center is suburban America, then this result should not be entirely surprising, fwiw.  But I'd like to see it broken down first.
No.  The Tea Partiers are likely rural America.  Why does not that shock me?  Look for the flags on the back of the pickups as you head further south.

Predictable trolling.  lol

Anyway, I'll have to examine things on this race to see whether it fits that dynamic when we have full numbers.  It may well not.

Well, so far, Castle won most of suburban New Castle and O'Donnell the rural parts of the state - in some RDs, heavily.  So maybe not.
Another intelligent soul on here. Where do you think the heart of the GOP is today?  It's in the freakin deep south.  You think the well-educated suburbanites are going to vote for this lunatic?  Hell, the GOP couldn't buy votes in suburban America anymore.  NJ, PA, IL, WA, OR, CT...we used to kill the democrats in the burbs and that's why those were our states.  Wondering why we can't win any of them anymore?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Nhoj on September 14, 2010, 08:05:00 PM
Polls are now closed here in Wisconsin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 08:05:12 PM
Damnit, why did I waste my free Chris Coons bumper sticker by putting it on my plastic water pitcher

this is my floor right now:

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/3074/chriscoons.jpg

()

bump for fun


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 08:05:29 PM
With 263/325: O'Donnell 26102 (54.0%), Castle 22210 (46.0%).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 08:06:05 PM

And New York and Rhode Island.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:06:11 PM
263/325, O'Donnell at 54.0. DE-AL tightening, 49.4 - 47.0 for Urquhart. Appointed State Treasurer Velda Jones-Potter is going down 55-45 to Chip Flowers. Protack falls behind, 51.5 - 48.5 with 16/20 in.

Polls are also closed in New York and Rhode Island.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 08:06:50 PM
It's over, imo


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 14, 2010, 08:07:17 PM
I think its going to be Keating v. O'Leary, which is a normal year would be lean Democrat. That said, its a Cape v. the South Shore race, which should help Perry clean up there.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Skill and Chance on September 14, 2010, 08:07:47 PM
Up to 275/325 precincts.  Still 54-46 O'Donnell.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 08:08:08 PM
()
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: The Ex-Factor on September 14, 2010, 08:08:59 PM
AP just called it for O'Donnell


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 08:09:07 PM

With 278/325: O'Donnell 27674 (53.7%), Castle 23874 (46.3%).

 and CNN just called it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 08:09:27 PM
If the Tea Party's center is suburban America, then this result should not be entirely surprising, fwiw.  But I'd like to see it broken down first.
No.  The Tea Partiers are likely rural America.  Why does not that shock me?  Look for the flags on the back of the pickups as you head further south.

lol, no.

The numbers don't show that. Especially the recent numbers.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on September 14, 2010, 08:09:37 PM

Yep!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 14, 2010, 08:09:44 PM
It's over. The GOP loses the chance to pick up DE.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 14, 2010, 08:09:50 PM
Another scalp of a dirty liberal.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Citizen (The) Doctor on September 14, 2010, 08:09:57 PM
It's done.  One seat just became winnable.  Let's see if the other one flips as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 08:10:11 PM
NH with 25 precincts in.  The bulk of the vote is from the Manchester area, it appears.  Lamontagne in green, Ayotte in blue, someone else won Dixville Notch:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 08:10:14 PM
hahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

THEY'VE TAKEN OVER THE ASYLUM


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 14, 2010, 08:10:53 PM
Magnificent work by DE Republicans. Glorious stuff. I had a feeling since the poll came out that O'Donnell would win, but I never thought it'd be by this much.

It'd also be cool if my Francophone brethren Lamontagne won in NH, though more for partisan reasons than ethnic reasons.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 08:11:37 PM
Magnificent work by DE Republicans. Glorious stuff. I had a feeling since the poll came out that O'Donnell would win, but I never thought it'd be by this much.

It'd also be cool if my Francophone brethren Lamontagne won in NH, though more for partisan reasons than ethnic reasons.
Yeah? You just lost us the seat pal (unless that is "sarcasm on").


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 14, 2010, 08:13:17 PM
Hide your cats, folks.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:13:25 PM
Suzanne Bump is beating the execrable Guy Glodis for Massachusetts Auditor, 49-32. Mr. Moderate's BFF Mary Connaughton is at 86%. Grossman is winning big for Treasurer, 63-37.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 14, 2010, 08:13:50 PM
Yeah? You just lost us the seat pal (unless that is "sarcasm on").

us? You're confusing me for a Republican.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 08:14:13 PM
     NH-Sen is now 49-34 with 10.0% in. It remains to be seen whether Ayotte can catch up, though the results are still largely from NH-1.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:14:58 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 08:15:27 PM
321/325 O'Donnell down to 53.1%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 14, 2010, 08:16:11 PM
Suzanne Bump is beating the execrable Guy Glodis for Massachusetts Auditor, 49-32. Mr. Moderate's BFF Mary Connaughton is at 86%. Grossman is winning big for Treasurer, 63-37.

Mixed feelings. Glodis would have lost to Connaughton, but that would have required risking him becoming Auditor. I couldn't bring himself to vote for him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Citizen (The) Doctor on September 14, 2010, 08:16:26 PM
I feel so sorry for John Conryn tonight.  I highly doubt he'll remain the RSNC chair after this ****storm.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 08:16:47 PM
Yeah? You just lost us the seat pal (unless that is "sarcasm on").

us? You're confusing me for a Republican.

Lolz!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:17:49 PM
Republican turnout in DE is at 31%, which is probably record-breaking for a non-Presidential primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 08:18:07 PM
Yeah? You just lost us the seat pal (unless that is "sarcasm on").

us? You're confusing me for a Republican.

Well, when you change your avatar to R-DE, what do you expect people who just quickly glance to think you are?  A Democrat?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 08:18:36 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.

Last precincts were probably from inner Wilmington, which is quite black as I recall.

I'll change my tune here after looking at cinyc's map - looks like more of a rural vs. suburban contest.  Has not been the traditional tea party structure so far, but O'Donnell is not the typical tea party candidate


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 14, 2010, 08:18:56 PM
Yeah? You just lost us the seat pal (unless that is "sarcasm on").

us? You're confusing me for a Republican.

Well, when you change your avatar to R-DE, what do you expect people who just quickly glance to think you are?  A Democrat?

I would expect people actually know me.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Citizen (The) Doctor on September 14, 2010, 08:19:12 PM
Yeah? You just lost us the seat pal (unless that is "sarcasm on").

us? You're confusing me for a Republican.

Well, when you change your avatar to R-DE, what do you expect people who just quickly glance to think you are?  A Democrat?

Yeah, umm...expect that a lot from this forum.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 08:20:00 PM
A handful of votes are now coming out of NY.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 08:20:33 PM
Yeah? You just lost us the seat pal (unless that is "sarcasm on").

us? You're confusing me for a Republican.

Well, when you change your avatar to R-DE, what do you expect people who just quickly glance to think you are?  A Democrat?

I would expect people actually know me.

When you've changed your screen name and state avatar on a thread that's moving so fast that it takes me three times to post a response?  Not worth the effort figuring out who's who.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 08:22:03 PM
And with 0.2% reporting from WI, we have:

Johnson up big on Westlake.
Walker leading Neumann by ~12%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ag on September 14, 2010, 08:22:42 PM
So, it seems in NH the Lamontagne lead has been about 2800 votes for a while (shrinking as % share, of course). When will Ayotte actually start shrinking that?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Iosif on September 14, 2010, 08:22:57 PM
So PPP nail another poll. If I recall correctly they were also the only firm to predict a Scott win in the Republican primary in Florida.

The best pollster this season.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 08:23:29 PM
Langevin is up only 51-39 against his primary challenger in RI-02


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:24:21 PM
A few precincts in from Erie County... Paladino winning 90% there. Damn.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 08:25:13 PM
A few precincts in from Erie County... Paladino winning 90% there. Damn.

Depends on the precincts, really


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 14, 2010, 08:25:52 PM
Should I even be a republican anymore?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ag on September 14, 2010, 08:26:20 PM

An interesting personal question :))


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 08:26:20 PM
Nope.  The party will never see my vote again.  Tonight was the backbreaker. 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 08:26:47 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.

Last precincts were probably from inner Wilmington, which is quite black as I recall.

I'll change my tune here after looking at cinyc's map - looks like more of a rural vs. suburban contest.  Has not been the traditional tea party structure so far, but O'Donnell is not the typical tea party candidate

Here in IL the Tea Party seems to have the most activity in the outer suburbs. Suburban Will County is a particular hotbed.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on September 14, 2010, 08:26:53 PM

We'd love to have you :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: hawkeye59 on September 14, 2010, 08:27:10 PM
NO! Join the Democrat club!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 08:27:27 PM
     In WI-Sen, Johnson now has 80%. Only 0.6% of precincts in so far, though. Walker narrowly leading Neumann for WI-Gov.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:28:13 PM
A few precincts in from RI... Cicilline up 41-27 over Segal, of all people. Langevin at 53-38 over Dennigan.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 08:28:27 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.

Last precincts were probably from inner Wilmington, which is quite black as I recall.

I'll change my tune here after looking at cinyc's map - looks like more of a rural vs. suburban contest.  Has not been the traditional tea party structure so far, but O'Donnell is not the typical tea party candidate

Here in IL the Tea Party seems to have the most activity in the outer suburbs. Suburban Will County is a particular hotbed.

Ya, I know.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on September 14, 2010, 08:28:34 PM

You can be a Tennessee Republican.  I think we're now the only non-insane state in the Union.   Well, as long as we're still a Union, which doesn't look like it will be for long.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 08:28:58 PM
Nope.  The party will never see my vote again.  Tonight was the backbreaker. 

Never is pretty extreme. I survived the 2004 placement of Alan Keyes on the IL ballot for US Sen. Give it 6 years and things will look quite different.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 08:29:28 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.

Last precincts were probably from inner Wilmington, which is quite black as I recall.

I'll change my tune here after looking at cinyc's map - looks like more of a rural vs. suburban contest.  Has not been the traditional tea party structure so far, but O'Donnell is not the typical tea party candidate

Here in IL the Tea Party seems to have the most activity in the outer suburbs. Suburban Will County is a particular hotbed.

Your primaries were so early, like literally five months ago, it's interesting.  Hard to believe Kirk wouldn't have had a slightly harder time (but still won) if his primary were right about now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 14, 2010, 08:30:10 PM
Amazing, really amazing. I'm not sure quite what this means, but it is massive.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Linus Van Pelt on September 14, 2010, 08:31:19 PM
Re: whether the Tea Party is suburban, it may also be relevant that Castle isn't the typical non-Tea Party candidate either. RINO is a bit much, but he is basically an old-style northern Republican, and rural Delaware is fairly southern in some ways.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:31:26 PM
MA-09 called for Lynch.

Keating up 53-47 in MA-10, Perry up 61-30.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 08:31:35 PM

You can be a Tennessee Republican.  I think we're now the only non-insane state in the Union.   Well, as long as we're still a Union, which doesn't look like it will be for long.

LOL.

O'Donnell would probably be electable in Tennessee this year.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 08:32:22 PM
Amazing, really amazing. I'm not sure quite what this means, but it is massive.
The GOP will not be winning anything nationwide for a long, long, long time.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Ronnie on September 14, 2010, 08:32:40 PM
This has been a depressing night to be a Republican.  I shall go in a corner and mope.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on September 14, 2010, 08:33:53 PM
Amazing, really amazing. I'm not sure quite what this means, but it is massive.
The GOP will not be winning anything nationwide for a long, long, long time.

As much as I would love to agree with you, and as much as you would be correct if this was a society that had half a mind to look at candidates and think for a moment, I think you greatly underestimate the stupidity of the average American voter.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 08:34:17 PM
I'm done with most republicans.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ag on September 14, 2010, 08:35:29 PM
Would somebody do a NH map as of now?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 08:36:00 PM
Amazing, really amazing. I'm not sure quite what this means, but it is massive.
The GOP will not be winning anything nationwide for a long, long, long time.

As much as I would love to agree with you, and as much as you would be correct if this was a society that had half a mind to look at candidates and think for a moment, I think you greatly underestimate the stupidity of the average American voter.
That is true.  When you escape the suburbs, it's amazing how many people in America do not have a basic education.  I have friends from school (went to the Univ. of Florida) and it's amazing how many people in the south and everywhere (not that FL is really "southern") have no education, no job, and some have never left their home town.  It's scary what this country is.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 08:36:36 PM
Amazing, really amazing. I'm not sure quite what this means, but it is massive.
The GOP will not be winning anything nationwide for a long, long, long time.

     Yeah, not likely. The tea party will likely be as ephemeral as any other institution. By 2016, I suspect that most people won't even remember them anymore.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on September 14, 2010, 08:37:16 PM
I mourn with my fellow Republicans.

Temporarily changing my avatar in protest.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:38:38 PM
44/301 in for NH, Ovide up 47-35.

Guinta up 40-30 in NH-01 with about 20% in.

It's a good thing nothing important is going on in Maryland, they're being extremely slow. Wargotz did regain the lead for Senate, though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 08:39:39 PM
Nope.  The party will never see my vote again.  Tonight was the backbreaker.  

Never is pretty extreme. I survived the 2004 placement of Alan Keyes on the IL ballot for US Sen. Give it 6 years and things will look quite different.

Is it possible for you provide context on that? I never understood why Alan Keyes was chosen.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Fmr. Pres. Duke on September 14, 2010, 08:39:51 PM
Seriously though, if the GOP wasn't full of crazies, we'd have control of the Senate and the House in 2011. Instead, we are nominating crazies and nut cases. What on earth is wrong with this party?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 08:39:55 PM
Who's running the Tea Party Express?  I know Dick Armey's up in FreedomWorks, but the TPE has two huuge scalps


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 08:39:58 PM
I mourn with my fellow Republicans.

Temporarily changing my avatar in protest.

Mines not temporary.
I'm voting for I mean my parents are voting for Sink now.
and probably vote against Pam Bondi, only because Palin endorsed her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ag on September 14, 2010, 08:40:10 PM
Still about 2800 vote lead for Lamontagne. As if frozen. The percentages get closer, of course. Would be funny if that's what it comes down to: 2800 votes gained in the first few precincts to report.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Thomas D on September 14, 2010, 08:40:38 PM
44/301 in for NH, Ovide up 47-35.

Guinta up 40-30 in NH-01 with about 20% in.

It's a good thing nothing important is going on in Maryland, they're being extremely slow. Wargotz did regain the lead for Senate, though.

That's how we do. ;)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 08:41:11 PM
     Now 46-35 Lamontagne. Interesting that his lead is still holding steady at 2,800 votes. In Wisconsin, Walker has opened up an 8% lead on Neumann.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 08:42:29 PM
NY Attorney General race is extremely tight between Rice and Schneiderman so far. Not surprising.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Ronnie on September 14, 2010, 08:43:00 PM
    Now 46-35 Lamontagne. Interesting that his lead is still holding steady at 2,800 votes. In Wisconsin, Walker has opened up an 8% lead on Neumann.

Can Lamontagne win the general?  I don't see him as a crazy (at least, not significantly more than Ayotte)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 08:44:17 PM
Maloney is dominating in the early returns.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 14, 2010, 08:44:42 PM
325/325 in Delaware gives Sexgoddess 53.1% to Mike Castle's 46.9%.

It must suck to be Mike Castle, and I feel bad for him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 08:44:55 PM
     Now 46-35 Lamontagne. Interesting that his lead is still holding steady at 2,800 votes. In Wisconsin, Walker has opened up an 8% lead on Neumann.

Can Lamontagne win the general?  I don't see him as a crazy (at least, not significantly more than Ayotte)

     It seems he would win, but by a smaller margin & he would also have less of a future in the Senate. Nominating him would be a bit of a misstep for the GOP, but not nearly as bad as nominating O'Donnell was.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 14, 2010, 08:45:27 PM
    Now 46-35 Lamontagne. Interesting that his lead is still holding steady at 2,800 votes. In Wisconsin, Walker has opened up an 8% lead on Neumann.

Can Lamontagne win the general?  I don't see him as a crazy (at least, not significantly more than Ayotte)

afaik, he'd struggle, but he's slightly less mad than Christy (which isn't saying much).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Linus Van Pelt on September 14, 2010, 08:45:45 PM
Who's running the Tea Party Express?  I know Dick Armey's up in FreedomWorks, but the TPE has two huuge scalps

Ultimately, in a lot of ways,

http://www.kochind.com/

But it may have run loose now, not where they wanted to go.



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:45:56 PM
Paladino at 94% in Erie County, 90% in Wyoming, 80% in Cayuga and Livingston. This is going to be one hilariously-shaded map.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on September 14, 2010, 08:46:36 PM
For what it's worth, the teabagger in the NY Governor primary has a massive early lead. Looks like Cuomo will landslide. Oh, wait, he was going to landslide regardless.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Citizen (The) Doctor on September 14, 2010, 08:46:52 PM
    Now 46-35 Lamontagne. Interesting that his lead is still holding steady at 2,800 votes. In Wisconsin, Walker has opened up an 8% lead on Neumann.

Can Lamontagne win the general?  I don't see him as a crazy (at least, not significantly more than Ayotte)

Yes, but Hodes has a lot more of a chance against Lamontagne than Ayotte.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 08:47:19 PM
I'm literally at a lose for words now.
I'm becoming a democrat.

and I'm being serious, at least the accept other peoples views


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Linus Van Pelt on September 14, 2010, 08:47:52 PM
Or, for those who were wondering wtf I mean: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 08:48:06 PM
With NH, you have to wait until Nashua.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Vepres on September 14, 2010, 08:48:14 PM
This has been a depressing night to be a Republican.  I shall go in a corner and mope.

oooosh, ahhhhhh, I love the smell of pessimism in the evening!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:48:31 PM
Oh, and Lazio is winning the Conservative primary at the same time.

Walker only up 50-47 in Wisconsin.

Altschuler at 46% in NY-01, Hoffman up 57-43 in NY-23.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 08:49:19 PM
I'm literally at a lose for words now.
I'm becoming a democrat.

and I'm being serious, at least the accept other peoples views

Well that's true, the Dems had a 59-seat majority and basically did nothing but continue or expand all of Bush's policies.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on September 14, 2010, 08:50:19 PM
    Now 46-35 Lamontagne. Interesting that his lead is still holding steady at 2,800 votes. In Wisconsin, Walker has opened up an 8% lead on Neumann.

Can Lamontagne win the general?  I don't see him as a crazy (at least, not significantly more than Ayotte)

I think he has a pretty good chance, what with not being a frigging crazy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 08:50:59 PM
I'm literally at a lose for words now.
I'm becoming a democrat.

and I'm being serious, at least the accept other peoples views

This is true.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:51:07 PM
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=4972128&fbid=427059728001&id=6584143001


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 08:51:16 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.

Last precincts were probably from inner Wilmington, which is quite black as I recall.

I'll change my tune here after looking at cinyc's map - looks like more of a rural vs. suburban contest.  Has not been the traditional tea party structure so far, but O'Donnell is not the typical tea party candidate

Here in IL the Tea Party seems to have the most activity in the outer suburbs. Suburban Will County is a particular hotbed.

Your primaries were so early, like literally five months ago, it's interesting.  Hard to believe Kirk wouldn't have had a slightly harder time (but still won) if his primary were right about now.

Actually 7 months ago, but who's counting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 08:52:03 PM
Oh, and Lazio is winning the Conservative primary at the same time.

Walker only up 50-47 in Wisconsin.

Altschuler at 46% in NY-01, Hoffman up 57-43 in NY-23.

Now Lazio is behind - lol Lazio


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 08:52:31 PM
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 08:52:58 PM
WI GOP Sen has already been called for Johnson.  He's up by over 70 points (!) with ~7% of the vote in.  Was he expected to win so overwhelmingly, or is it just that Johnson-friendly precincts are reporting?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:52:58 PM
In NH-02, Ann McLane Kuster is beating the pantsuit off Katrina Swett, 76-24. Bass holding steady at 46-32 over Jennifer Horn.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 08:53:39 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.

Last precincts were probably from inner Wilmington, which is quite black as I recall.

I'll change my tune here after looking at cinyc's map - looks like more of a rural vs. suburban contest.  Has not been the traditional tea party structure so far, but O'Donnell is not the typical tea party candidate

Here in IL the Tea Party seems to have the most activity in the outer suburbs. Suburban Will County is a particular hotbed.

Your primaries were so early, like literally five months ago, it's interesting.  Hard to believe Kirk wouldn't have had a slightly harder time (but still won) if his primary were right about now.

Yeah, really a missed opportunity there. Did the tea party put any money or resources or endorsements into taking down Kirk?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 08:54:37 PM
Oh, and Lazio is winning the Conservative primary at the same time.

Walker only up 50-47 in Wisconsin.

Altschuler at 46% in NY-01, Hoffman up 57-43 in NY-23.

Altschuler wins NY-01, move to tossup.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Holmes on September 14, 2010, 08:55:35 PM
I don't have access to the internet for a few days and I come back to an O'Donnell win!?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:55:52 PM
One precinct in from NY-15, Rangel at 39, Johnson (the NYTimes endorsee) 22, Powell 20.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on September 14, 2010, 08:56:23 PM
In NH-02, Vagina Swett (Dick Swett's wife) isn't doing so well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Stranger in a strange land on September 14, 2010, 08:56:37 PM
:D Wow Beau Biden must be kicking himself right now...

...however Lamontagne will probably still win the general in NH.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 08:57:46 PM
Cicilline now at 38-24 over Lynch in RI-01. God knows what's taking them so long. Langevin up 58-33.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 08:58:33 PM
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=4972128&fbid=427059728001&id=6584143001

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

GET OUT OF THE DAMN PARTY ALREADY AND GO JOIN YOUR BACKSTABBING, MOSQUE LOVING, COMMIE BUDDIES OVER THE DNC.

GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Ronnie on September 14, 2010, 08:59:46 PM
I think the silver lining in all of this is that the GOP will learn to never ever ever support the tea party candidate if they are behind in a poll.

At least, I hope.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Citizen (The) Doctor on September 14, 2010, 09:00:10 PM
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=4972128&fbid=427059728001&id=6584143001

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

GET OUT OF THE DAMN PARTY ALREADY AND GO JOIN YOUR BACKSTABBING, MOSQUE LOVING, COMMIE BUDDIES OVER THE DNC.

GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH.

Those people could be a little bit sad that the guy lost.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 14, 2010, 09:00:32 PM
Seeing whats out I am feeling much better about Ayotte.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 09:00:49 PM
Looks like Christine just got the news:

()

DioGuardi up 42-39 over Malpass for the Gillibrand Senate race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on September 14, 2010, 09:01:20 PM
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=4972128&fbid=427059728001&id=6584143001

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

GET OUT OF THE DAMN PARTY ALREADY AND GO JOIN YOUR BACKSTABBING, MOSQUE LOVING, COMMIE BUDDIES OVER THE DNC.

GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH.

It's kind of amazing how much the Republican party is a band of ideologues while the Democratic party is a huge tent filled with random people. No one kicked Ben Nelson out of the party, despite how far right-wing he is.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on September 14, 2010, 09:02:20 PM

OMG I might have a real job this time!  Then I can sue the government for $6.5 million like I did my last/first job!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 09:02:59 PM
     Lamontagne, 45-36. 19.3% of precincts in. Of interest, his absolute vote margin is starting to grow, now clearing 3,000 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nhmagic on September 14, 2010, 09:03:22 PM
You know - Im happy that O'Donnell won.  Im sick of this bull and Im tired of listening to people tell people that conservatism can't win in states like Delaware.  You have countless examples of socialist democrats winning in states they "shouldn't win".  What does that say about democrats - they have to lie and connive and pretend they are moderate just to win?  Is that how you feel about your party?  Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad have won in states where their views are absolutely incompatible with their state's bent.  North Dakota is about equally as conservative as Delaware is liberal.  It's time for the party to change and we need to be more radical if we are ever to repeal Obamacare.  We are going to win the senate in November and it can be done without Castle.  We've got plenty of other states that are on the bubble - Johnson will beat Feingold, Rossi will beat Murray, Angle will defeat Reid and I even have a feeling that Raese might beat Manchin and even that Fiorina will defeat Boxer.  We need a change and we need a mighty conservative power to fight these bastards to kingdom come.  You want to go along and get along, then join them.  If you want the country to succeed you join us.  Democrats need, nay, deserve to pay dearly for what they have done.  We will be a stronger party and we can differentiate ourselves enough from them to give voters a real choice.  They will choose us and reject the democrats.  Democrats are unpatriotic and hate this country.  They call people stupid.  We're tired of it.  We're tired of them making our lives miserable.  We're tired of stagnation caused by the liberal policies of both Bush and Obama.  We're tired of young liberals perverting the constitution and lying about who we are.  We're tired of mushy moderates co-opting the party.  It's time this country decided who we are and we're going to win because our values are right.  Our values are better and extend freedom to the maximum amount of people.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:03:52 PM
This so made my night!

FYI Delaware Senate won by Dem on InTrade just shot up 38.5. It's now trading at 83.5.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 09:03:53 PM
This is NH with 56/301 in and Lamontagne (green) up by 2,900 or so over Ayotte (blue).  Someone else won Dixville (red):

()

Still predominantly Manchester and environs.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 14, 2010, 09:05:21 PM
Don? With... red? What? I... don't... er... wow.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 09:05:28 PM
I think the silver lining in all of this is that the GOP will learn to never ever ever support the tea party candidate if they are behind in a poll.

At least, I hope.

Why? People are sick of being told how to vote by the establishment. All the GOP establishment's intra-partisan attacks accomplished was to weaken her for the general election, though that may ultimately backfire in this anti-establishment cycle.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 09:05:32 PM
RI just reported a crapton of precincts. Cicilline declared the winner, currently at 36% with each of his challengers in the low-20s. Langevin at 56-35. Robitaille is up 68-32 for the chance to be the third-place finisher for Governor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: MASHED POTATOES. VOTE! on September 14, 2010, 09:05:44 PM
()

Go Republicans! :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Vepres on September 14, 2010, 09:05:55 PM
The Republican party is trying to figure out what it is after being slaughtered in 2006 and 2008. Radicals being nominated is a part of this identity struggle, but I expect the Republican party of 2014 to be much more moderate and stable than the one today.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Thomas D on September 14, 2010, 09:06:05 PM
No votes counted in D.C. Yet. ???


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 09:06:32 PM
Gillibrand up 77%-23% over Goode (if anyone cares but me).

Also Rice now has a decent lead in the AG race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on September 14, 2010, 09:06:40 PM
The Republican party is trying to figure out what it is after being slaughtered in 2006 and 2008. Radicals being nominated is a part of this identity struggle, but I expect the Republican party of 2014 to be much more moderate and stable than the one today.

Ever the optimist, aren't you?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:06:45 PM
You know - Im happy that O'Donnell won.  Im sick of this bull and Im tired of listening to people tell people that conservatism can't win in states like Delaware.  You have countless examples of socialist democrats winning in states they "shouldn't win".  What does that say about democrats - they have to lie and connive and pretend they are moderate just to win?  Is that how you feel about your party?  Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad have won in states where their views are absolutely incompatible with their state's bent.  North Dakota is about equally as conservative as Delaware is liberal.  It's time for the party to change and we need to be more radical if we are ever to repeal Obamacare.  We are going to win the senate in November and it can be done without Castle.  We've got plenty of other states that are on the bubble - Johnson will beat Feingold, Rossi will beat Murray, Angle will defeat Reid and I even have a feeling that Raese might beat Manchin and even that Fiorina will defeat Boxer.  We need a change and we need a mighty conservative power to fight these bastards to kingdom come.  You want to go along and get along, then join them.  If you want the country to succeed you join us.  Democrats need, nay, deserve to pay dearly for what they have done.  We will be a stronger party and we can differentiate ourselves enough from them to give voters a real choice.  They will choose us and reject the democrats.  Democrats are unpatriotic and hate this country.  They call people stupid.  We're tired of it.  We're tired of them making our lives miserable.  We're tired of stagnation caused by the liberal policies of both Bush and Obama.  We're tired of young liberals perverting the constitution and lying about who we are.  We're tired of mushy moderates co-opting the party.  It's time this country decided who we are and we're going to win because our values are right.  Our values are better and extend freedom to the maximum amount of people.

You're a hack and you need to go away


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 09:07:21 PM
Tightened up a bit: 320/325, 53.2 O'Donnell. Urquhart narrowly takes the DE-AL nomination, 48.8 to 47.5.

Last precincts were probably from inner Wilmington, which is quite black as I recall.

I'll change my tune here after looking at cinyc's map - looks like more of a rural vs. suburban contest.  Has not been the traditional tea party structure so far, but O'Donnell is not the typical tea party candidate

Here in IL the Tea Party seems to have the most activity in the outer suburbs. Suburban Will County is a particular hotbed.

Your primaries were so early, like literally five months ago, it's interesting.  Hard to believe Kirk wouldn't have had a slightly harder time (but still won) if his primary were right about now.

Yeah, really a missed opportunity there. Did the tea party put any money or resources or endorsements into taking down Kirk?

The word was definitely out in December and January. Here's a post on RedState (http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/01/11/patrick-hughes-v-mark-kirk-illinois-may-be-a-test-case-for-the-effectiveness-of-tea-parties/) form Jan.

Quote
Patrick Hughes  aims to harness the conservatives and tea party activists in Illinois who feel marginalized by Kirk and the Democrats further to the left of him. On Friday, Mark Levin endorsed Patrick Hughes and urged conservatives to rally to Patrick Hughes in this last month before the primary.

It makes a compelling case to see just how rapid a response the tea party activists and conservatives can make in a Republican Primary. Should Patrick Hughes win the GOP primary, it would send shock waves across the nation and severely shake the foundations of the GOP establishment.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 09:07:41 PM
omg, a key anti-marriage Democrat just lost his primary!

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/stachowski-concedes-congratulates-tim-kennedy/



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Vepres on September 14, 2010, 09:08:05 PM
The Republican party is trying to figure out what it is after being slaughtered in 2006 and 2008. Radicals being nominated is a part of this identity struggle, but I expect the Republican party of 2014 to be much more moderate and stable than the one today.

Ever the optimist, aren't you?

Why not? In a two-party system, both parties will ultimately gravitate towards the mainstream.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 09:08:29 PM
Gillibrand up 77%-23% over Goode (if anyone cares but me).

Also Rice now has a decent lead in the AG race.

Upstate's in more than anyplace else, best I can tell.  Too early to tell anything about NY.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 09:10:22 PM
Gunning for an upset in NH-01... Rich Ashooh (who?!) is narrowing the gap with Frank Guinta. Guinta's at 37-34 now.

omg, a key anti-marriage Democrat just lost his primary!

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/stachowski-concedes-congratulates-tim-kennedy/



Excellent. Now, if that douchebag Pedro Espada will lose... *checks* His opponent is at 86% with 3 precincts in. Uh, okay.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on September 14, 2010, 09:10:44 PM
Gillibrand up 77%-23% over Goode (if anyone cares but me).

Also Rice now has a decent lead in the AG race.

Where are you getting your results?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 09:11:25 PM
I go to the gym for my training session, and come back to find ... well . I hope the bitch loses in a landslide. They need to be taught a lesson - now. Or maybe we need a new centrist party. :(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 09:11:50 PM
omg, a key anti-marriage Democrat just lost his primary!

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/stachowski-concedes-congratulates-tim-kennedy/



Need to check the GOP candidate, but that SD will be a problem to retain, especially with Paladino at the top of the ticket.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:11:51 PM
I'm literally at a lose for words now.
I'm becoming a democrat.

and I'm being serious, at least the accept other peoples views

I always knew I liked you much more than most of the Republican hacks here and now I know why. You're a good guy. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 09:12:22 PM
You have countless examples of socialist democrats winning in states they "shouldn't win".

The most prominent socialist Democrat I can think of is Ron Dellums, and Oakland is certainly a place where he should win.

I'm literally at a lose for words now.
I'm becoming a democrat.

and I'm being serious, at least the accept other peoples views

I always knew I liked you much more than most of the Republican hacks here and now I know why. You're a good guy. :)

Also he supports your candidate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 09:12:36 PM
Gillibrand up 77%-23% over Goode (if anyone cares but me).

Also Rice now has a decent lead in the AG race.

Where are you getting your results?

AP


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ on September 14, 2010, 09:13:18 PM
Gillibrand up 77%-23% over Goode (if anyone cares but me).

Also Rice now has a decent lead in the AG race.

Where are you getting your results?

AP

Link?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 09:13:36 PM

First page of this thread.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:14:06 PM
David Cicilline will become the third openly-gay individual to be elected to Congress should he win in November.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:14:32 PM
I'm literally at a lose for words now.
I'm becoming a democrat.

and I'm being serious, at least the accept other peoples views

I always knew I liked you much more than most of the Republican hacks here and now I know why. You're a good guy. :)

You know what they say, if you're not a democrat by 18 you have no heart, if you're not republican by 30 you have no soul.

I turn 17 saturday hahaha


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 09:14:55 PM
lol @ Lazio.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Ronnie on September 14, 2010, 09:15:12 PM
I go to the gym for my training session, and come back to find ... well . I hope the bitch loses in a landslide. They need to be taught a lesson - now. Or maybe we need a new centrist party. :(

Eh, don't be bitter, Torie.  You'll feel much better once you eat one of those post-gym Protein Energy Bars!

psst...every sane republican is in a bad mood now, so don't feel alone.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Vepres on September 14, 2010, 09:15:45 PM
I go to the gym for my training session, and come back to find ... well . I hope the bitch loses in a landslide. They need to be taught a lesson - now. Or maybe we need a new centrist party. :(

Besides Angle and now O'Donnell, I can't think of any major Tea Party upsets that weren't in states where they fit into the mainstream anyway. For the most part, the mainstream GOP has prevailed (or mainstream Tea Party candidates have). You're forgetting that when the establishment pick wins, it is not news.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 09:16:22 PM
omg, a key anti-marriage Democrat just lost his primary!

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/stachowski-concedes-congratulates-tim-kennedy/



Need to check the GOP candidate, but that SD will be a problem to retain, especially with Paladino at the top of the ticket.

should be a tossup still regardless, I'd figure:

http://content.ynn.com/syrcontent/capital_tonight/map/ct-senate-district-map.html


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 09:16:47 PM
David Cicilline will become the third openly-gay individual to be elected to Congress should he win in November.

Of the four openly gay members of the House, two and a half will be Jewish.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 09:17:10 PM
Maloney is absolutely pulverizing Saujani. It's 85-15 with 5% in.

Rangel is up to 57% with 4 precincts in.

Doheny took the lead in NY-23, 56-44.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:17:15 PM
I go to the gym for my training session, and come back to find ... well . I hope the bitch loses in a landslide. They need to be taught a lesson - now. Or maybe we need a new centrist party. :(

Besides Angle and now O'Donnell, I can't think of any major Tea Party upsets that weren't in states where they fit into the mainstream anyway. For the most part, the mainstream GOP has prevailed (or mainstream Tea Party candidates have). You're forgetting that when the establishment pick wins, it is not news.

Angle and O'Donnell were cases though where the GOP basically threw away two free Senate seats. Now they have only at most a 50/50 chance at one and virtually none at the other.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 09:17:19 PM
I go to the gym for my training session, and come back to find ... well . I hope the bitch loses in a landslide. They need to be taught a lesson - now. Or maybe we need a new centrist party. :(

Besides Angle and now O'Donnell, I can't think of any major Tea Party upsets that weren't in states where they fit into the mainstream anyway. For the most part, the mainstream GOP has prevailed (or mainstream Tea Party candidates have). You're forgetting that when the establishment pick wins, it is not news.

Campbell was near to Torie's heart, understandably, as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 09:17:58 PM
Who the hell is counting NH - trained monkeys could do it faster.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 09:18:26 PM
I'm literally at a lose for words now.
I'm becoming a democrat.

and I'm being serious, at least the accept other peoples views

I always knew I liked you much more than most of the Republican hacks here and now I know why. You're a good guy. :)

You know what they say, if you're not a democrat by 18 you have no heart, if you're not republican by 30 you have no soul.

I turn 17 saturday hahaha

Well, François Guizot said that about republicanism and monarchism, but I don't think anyone here would seriously argue that today.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Kevinstat on September 14, 2010, 09:19:24 PM
Gunning for an upset in NH-01... Rich Ashooh (who?!) is narrowing the gap with Frank Guinta. Guinta's at 37-34 now.

omg, a key anti-marriage Democrat just lost his primary!

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/stachowski-concedes-congratulates-tim-kennedy/



Excellent. Now, if that douchebag Pedro Espada will lose... *checks* His opponent is at 86% with 3 precincts in. Uh, okay.

Isn't Espada pro-gay marriage?  I remember reading that, oddly, the two Democratic defectors in 2009 during that whole brouhaha were actually on the liberal side of that issue, and that there was speculation that another pro-gay marriage Democratic Senator might caucus with the GOP out of Malcolm Smith's refusal to release gay marriage for a vote while the Republican Senate leadership was willing to play on that issue.  This was before the Maine same sex marriage bill repeal and the NY Senate vote against same sex marriage that (iirc) happened soon after that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:19:37 PM
Who the hell is counting NH - trained monkeys could do it faster.

Same with D.C., though I guess the latter isn't really a surprise.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 09:22:08 PM
Who the hell is counting NH - trained monkeys could do it faster.

Same with D.C., though I guess the latter isn't really a surprise.

Isn't that all that populates DC anyways?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 09:24:15 PM
Gunning for an upset in NH-01... Rich Ashooh (who?!) is narrowing the gap with Frank Guinta. Guinta's at 37-34 now.

omg, a key anti-marriage Democrat just lost his primary!

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/stachowski-concedes-congratulates-tim-kennedy/



Excellent. Now, if that douchebag Pedro Espada will lose... *checks* His opponent is at 86% with 3 precincts in. Uh, okay.

Isn't Espada pro-gay marriage?  I remember reading that, oddly, the two Democratic defectors in 2009 during that whole brouhaha were actually on the liberal side of that issue, and that there was speculation that another pro-gay marriage Democratic Senator might caucus with the GOP out of Malcolm Smith's refusal to release gay marriage for a vote while the Republican Senate leadership was willing to play on that issue.  This was before the Maine same sex marriage bill repeal and the NY Senate vote against same sex marriage that (iirc) happened soon after that.

You're right, it was Ruben Diaz I was thinking of.

Edit: Monserrate voted against it, but of course, he's long gone.

Who the hell is counting NH - trained monkeys could do it faster.

The problem is these stupid New England states don't report their votes to a central location, so the AP has to track down a couple hundred town clerks and get the results from them.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 09:24:37 PM
     In the NY-19 GOP primary, Nan Hayworth is leading Neil DiCarlo by almost 2-to-1. Of interest, a PPP poll showed Hayworth leading incumbent Representative Hall by 2% while DiCarlo trailed by 3%. On the other hand, only 6.3% of precincts are in so far.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:25:00 PM
Who the hell is counting NH - trained monkeys could do it faster.

Same with D.C., though I guess the latter isn't really a surprise.

Isn't that all that populates DC anyways?

are you referring black people as monkeys?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:25:24 PM
Actually I think that other scumbag who was expelled earlier voted against gay marriage.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 09:26:09 PM
The NY Gov map so far looks pretty much as expected... Well, except for Lazio winning the Watertown area, for some bizarre reason (Lazio blue, Paladino green).

()

Note Nassau and Richmond weren't in at all when I last updated my data (about 9.5% in).  

For those who care, the NY AG race (Rice Yellow, Schneiderman Orange, Coffey Green):

()


Note: I still have to check for data integrity on these maps.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 09:27:50 PM
Fox News just reported that the Republican party campaign committee is not going to spend a dime on the bitch, and is cutting her loose. DeMint should be punished as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:28:33 PM
Fox News just reported that the Republican party campaign committee is not going to spend a dime on the bitch, and is cutting her loose. DeMint should be punished as well.

:)

Would I be correct in assuming you'd be voting for Coons if you lived there?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nhmagic on September 14, 2010, 09:29:16 PM
Who's throwing the temper tantrum now?  ajc, you are exactly the problem in our party.  We can't change anything that they are doing with your views.  Yet, with every weasely defection like yours (like Crist, like Specter, soon Murkowski and soon Castle) we gain new people who were once democrats realizing that we are for what they stand for.  Do you see democrats switching parties because their candidate didn't win?  No, they don't and if you want to know why, it's because even though they have petty rivalries, they are always united on their end goals.  Conservatives are not united on our end goals and we need to be.  Those goals must be different goals from the democratic party.  We have to flush out people like Castle and Crist and Murkowski in order to do that.  All throughout the Bush years we had democrats and republicans joining together in an unholy union to pass spending programs and invasions of privacy.  We had democrats and republicans joining together to increase the power of the executive and weaken the power of the people.  That time is over.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:29:20 PM
Fox News just reported that the Republican party campaign committee is not going to spend a dime on the bitch, and is cutting her loose. DeMint should be punished as well.

At least they have an ounce of sense.
I'd say the same for Angle too, have the tea party completely fund her.

They should start endorsing candidates before the primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 09:29:58 PM
Fox News just reported that the Republican party campaign committee is not going to spend a dime on the bitch, and is cutting her loose. DeMint should be punished as well.

Good, the tea parties will carry her to victory without depending on the support of that evil party.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:30:46 PM
Fox News just reported that the Republican party campaign committee is not going to spend a dime on the bitch, and is cutting her loose. DeMint should be punished as well.

At least they have an ounce of sense.
I'd say the same for Angle too, have the tea party completely fund her.

They should start endorsing candidates before the primary.

Err, I don't think a lack of institutional support was Mike Castle's problem.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:31:13 PM
A majority of Delaware voters are teabaggers? The same state where 50% approves of Obama?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Kevinstat on September 14, 2010, 09:32:34 PM
Gunning for an upset in NH-01... Rich Ashooh (who?!) is narrowing the gap with Frank Guinta. Guinta's at 37-34 now.

omg, a key anti-marriage Democrat just lost his primary!

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/stachowski-concedes-congratulates-tim-kennedy/



Excellent. Now, if that douchebag Pedro Espada will lose... *checks* His opponent is at 86% with 3 precincts in. Uh, okay.

Isn't Espada pro-gay marriage?  I remember reading that, oddly, the two Democratic defectors in 2009 during that whole brouhaha were actually on the liberal side of that issue, and that there was speculation that another pro-gay marriage Democratic Senator might caucus with the GOP out of Malcolm Smith's refusal to release gay marriage for a vote while the Republican Senate leadership was willing to play on that issue.  This was before the Maine same sex marriage bill repeal and the NY Senate vote against same sex marriage that (iirc) happened soon after that.

You're right, it was Ruben Diaz I was thinking of.

Edit: Monserrate voted against it, but of course, he's long gone.

That vote was probably after the Maine result.  But he might have always opposed it or never been clearly supporting it.  Ron Gunzburger at Politics1.com (back when he still did a regular blog on the home page of his website) might have been wrong when he said that both of the Democratic defectors (Espada and Monseratte) supported gay marriage.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:32:45 PM
Bill Keating wins in MA-10


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Vepres on September 14, 2010, 09:33:20 PM
A majority of Delaware voters are teabaggers? The same state where 50% approves of Obama?

Remember that outside the southern portion of the state is like the American south in many ways, and that Republicans would be disproportionately from that area of the state.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 09:33:43 PM
Fox News just reported that the Republican party campaign committee is not going to spend a dime on the bitch, and is cutting her loose. DeMint should be punished as well.

:)

Would I be correct in assuming you'd be voting for Coons if you lived there?

Correct. Not only is she is a nutter loser, but her ethics are a sewer. She is a liar, and siphoned off campaign funds for personal purposes, and I suspect is just in it for the money. She is about as real as Crist, when it comes to really believing anything I suspect. Perhaps one silver lining, is that this might help destroy Palin - who needs to be destroyed - politically. Palin needs to join the Constitution Party, along with some others.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:34:09 PM
Who's throwing the temper tantrum now?  ajc, you are exactly the problem in our party.  We can't change anything that they are doing with your views.  Yet, with every weasely defection like yours (like Crist, like Specter, soon Murkowski and soon Castle) we gain new people who were once democrats realizing that we are for what they stand for.  Do you see democrats switching parties because their candidate didn't win?  No, they don't and if you want to know why, it's because even though they have petty rivalries, they are always united on their end goals.  Conservatives are not united on our end goals and we need to be.  Those goals must be different goals from the democratic party.  We have to flush out people like Castle and Crist and Murkowski in order to do that.  All throughout the Bush years we had democrats and republicans joining together in an unholy union to pass spending programs and invasions of privacy.  We had democrats and republicans joining together to increase the power of the executive and weaken the power of the people.  That time is over.

Just tell me where does the "I'm more conservative" idea stop?
Ultimately how are are you willing to go to have this "conservative" purity that you want?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:34:41 PM
A majority of Delaware voters are teabaggers? The same state where 50% approves of Obama?

Remember that outside the southern portion of the state is like the American south in many ways, and that Republicans would be disproportionately from that area of the state.

I am referring to Libertas' claim that O'Donnell can win the general election with the support of teabaggers alone.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:35:23 PM
From the front page of Coons' site now:

()

You know, I somehow doubt Mike Castle would be up there if he had won...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Vepres on September 14, 2010, 09:36:14 PM
A majority of Delaware voters are teabaggers? The same state where 50% approves of Obama?

Remember that outside the southern portion of the state is like the American south in many ways, and that Republicans would be disproportionately from that area of the state.

I am referring to Libertas' claim that O'Donnell can win the general election with the support of teabaggers alone.

Oh, well then, Coons would have to be caught with a dead girl or a live boy to lose ;)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 09:37:03 PM
Keep the NY AG maps coming cinyc, <3

upset upstate too:

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/del-monte-losing-in-138th-ad-recount-likely/


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 09:37:17 PM
Fox News just reported that the Republican party campaign committee is not going to spend a dime on the bitch, and is cutting her loose. DeMint should be punished as well.

Good, the tea parties will carry her to victory without depending on the support of that evil party.

Go to Delaware Libertas, and kick ass, and prove that my wing of the party are not only excess baggage, but an electoral anchor. Show the world who's boss, and will restore America to some mythical metric concocted in some perfervid delusional rhetorical stew.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:37:52 PM
Is it possible to move the bickering/mourning over the state of the Republican Party to another thread and keep this one focused on the remaining races still to be called tonight? Probably too much to ask but I thought I'd mention it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 09:38:19 PM
Is it possible to move the bickering/mourning over the state of the Republican Party to another thread and keep this one focused on the remaining races still to be called tonight? Probably too much to ask but I thought I'd mention it.

No. I want to vent. Sorry.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 09:38:43 PM
A majority of Delaware voters are teabaggers? The same state where 50% approves of Obama?

Remember that outside the southern portion of the state is like the American south in many ways, and that Republicans would be disproportionately from that area of the state.

Yes, southern Delaware is like the Deep South, but no, New Castle County Republicans outnumber those in southern Delaware - if they bother to show up at the polls.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 09:39:31 PM
County totals were posted for DE-Sen...

New Castle - 57.7 Castle
Kent - 63.6 O'Donnell
Sussex - 64.6 O'Donnell

The breakdowns are pretty similar for the House race...

New Castle - 56.4 Rollins
Kent - 55.3 Urquhart
Sussex - 60.0 Urquhart


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 09:40:06 PM
     In NY-Sen Special, DioGuardi is leading Malpass 41-40. In NY-19, Hayworth is now pulling 71%. In NY-23, Hoffman is losing to Doheny, 53-47.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:40:32 PM
Sean Duffy in WI-07 and Reid Ribble in WI-08 are both in control of their races. Walker is also pulling away in the Governor race.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:41:02 PM
    In NY-Sen Special, DioGuardi is leading Malpass 41-40. In NY-19, Hayworth is now pulling 71%. In NY-23, Hoffman is losing to Doheny, 53-47.

That pleases me.
I hope that elf man also loses, since he cost us a house seat.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 09:41:24 PM
are you referring black people as monkeys?

Yes, he is, and since it gets attention and apparently doesn't run afoul of site policies, it's something we just have to live with.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 09:41:57 PM
NRSC bomb drops:

http://twitter.com/mikeallen/status/24532193918

This is going to be ugly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 14, 2010, 09:42:09 PM
Presumably the nutter polled over 40% in New Castle? Can't see how else she could have won.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:43:55 PM
D.C. results should arrive anytime they say...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on September 14, 2010, 09:44:12 PM
NRSC bomb drops:

http://twitter.com/mikeallen/status/24532193918

This is going to be ugly.

Good for them.  Why waste a dime on the b*tch's salary from her campaign.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 14, 2010, 09:44:22 PM

These primary results are not encouraging for him. He got killed on the Cape, whereas Perry tied on the South Shore. If it is regional, Perry might be in good shape.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:45:23 PM
Presumably the nutter polled over 40% in New Castle? Can't see how else she could have won.

She got about 43% last I saw.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 09:46:30 PM
     Lamontagne is now leading by 43-37. Ayotte is finally cutting into his vote margin, bringing it down to 2,500 votes. 20.9% of precincts are in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 09:47:00 PM
These primary results are not encouraging for him. He got killed on the Cape, whereas Perry tied on the South Shore. If it is regional, Perry might be in good shape.

Can you read intraprimary regional splits onto interparty contests? Why would any Democrat on the cape vote for Keating? I'm asking sincerely. Malone isn't a regional candidate the way Perry, Keating, and O'Leary were and unlike O'Leary he pulled few votes. I guess I'm asking whether O'Leary's strength is being misinterpreted as Keating's weaknesses.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 09:47:17 PM
    In NY-Sen Special, DioGuardi is leading Malpass 41-40. In NY-19, Hayworth is now pulling 71%. In NY-23, Hoffman is losing to Doheny, 53-47.

Eww. :(


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:48:27 PM
    In NY-Sen Special, DioGuardi is leading Malpass 41-40. In NY-19, Hayworth is now pulling 71%. In NY-23, Hoffman is losing to Doheny, 53-47.

Eww. :(

I doubt you're as displeased as I am right now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 09:48:40 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 09:48:52 PM
    Lamontagne is now leading by 43-37. Ayotte is finally cutting into his vote margin, bringing it down to 2,500 votes. 20.9% of precincts are in.

About 2400 vote difference with 21.3% in. The margin in Hillsborough is closing up. Perhaps her home of Nashua is reporting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on September 14, 2010, 09:49:22 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:50:17 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.

Amusingly Beet basically seems to agree with the NRSC.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 09:50:29 PM
PPP is tweeting about their upcoming general election poll in DE. It's going to be a funny election.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:50:46 PM
Grimm is ahead 61-39 in NY-13 while Doheny leads Hoffman 54-46 in NY-23 (though Hoffman has the Conservative line so he'll be around again in November!)

Eric Wargotz seems to have recovered in the race to lose to Barbara Mikulski


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 09:51:14 PM
Nashua is coming in, 47-30 for Ayotte.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 09:51:40 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.
The difference is I don't see Coons as a shoo-in. This is going to be a tough, drag out, point to point, ad to ad, house to house fight. It's not going to be one that feels particularly good, but it's going to require passion and energy. Assuming that O'Donnell can't "possibly" win the general is the best way to guarantee that, that is precisely what happens.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 09:51:49 PM
NY AG with about 33% in (exact numbers are different for each race):

()

Rice Yellow, Schneiderman Orange, Coffey Green.  Dinallo in Red won Orleans County for some bizarre reason (it's 100% in, too).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:52:37 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.
The difference is I don't see Coons as a shoo-in. This is going to be a tough, drag out, point to point, ad to ad, house to house fight. It's not going to be one that feels particularly good, but it's going to require passion and energy. Assuming that O'Donnell can't "possibly" win the general is the best way to guarantee that, that is precisely what happens.

That must be why the NRSC is planning on vigorously funding her campaign so much...oh wait. They're not going to spend a dime on her.

BTW you do realize that in the event of a Coons victory you are opening yourself up to be as mocked by Democrats as J. J. was with his Bradley Effect nonsense in 2008?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 09:52:59 PM
NY AG with about 25% in (exact numbers are different for each race):

()

Rice Yellow, Schneiderman Orange, Coffey Green.  Dinallo in Red won Orleans County for some bizarre reason (it's 100% in, too).

He won the rural caucus and gave some attention to the GLOW counties


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 09:53:14 PM
Oh NOEZ! Some people in another state chose a primary candidate I dislike! I'm so CONCERNED!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 09:53:15 PM
Beet, if Coons isn't a shoo-in, then the voters of this country clear want massive right-wing majorities in the House and Senate with any number of crazies in the mix and there's no point in us losing sleep over it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 09:53:50 PM
Presumably the nutter polled over 40% in New Castle? Can't see how else she could have won.

Yep.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:54:29 PM
Oh NOEZ! Some people in another state chose a primary candidate I dislike! I'm so CONCERNED!

If you're a partisan it is concerning when it means basically throwing away a free seat.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 09:54:48 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.

Amusingly Beet basically seems to agree with the NRSC.

No, the NRSC sees the race as lost. You see it as "funny." I see it as: Stalingrad if Coons is going to have a chance.

brittain: the voters of this country clear want massive right-wing majorities, and that's exactly why we have to fight this. It's our only shot. If there was any other scenario, there would be no point in losing sleep over it. But this is precisely the one scenario that it is worth losing sleep over.

If Coons doesn't wage a spirited campaign, O'Donnell will win. I'd bet my life savings on it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SPC on September 14, 2010, 09:55:43 PM
That must be why the NRSC is planning on vigorously funding her campaign so much...oh wait. They're not going to spend a dime on her.

Out of curiosity, will the DSCC be spending any money on Chris Coons? If so, then that might improve the GOP's odds in the competitive states.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tmthforu94 on September 14, 2010, 09:55:46 PM
If Coons doesn't wage a spirited campaign, O'Donnell will win. I'd bet my life savings on it.
You're really questioning the intelligence of Delaware voters with that statement.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nhmagic on September 14, 2010, 09:56:02 PM
Who's throwing the temper tantrum now?  ajc, you are exactly the problem in our party.  We can't change anything that they are doing with your views.  Yet, with every weasely defection like yours (like Crist, like Specter, soon Murkowski and soon Castle) we gain new people who were once democrats realizing that we are for what they stand for.  Do you see democrats switching parties because their candidate didn't win?  No, they don't and if you want to know why, it's because even though they have petty rivalries, they are always united on their end goals.  Conservatives are not united on our end goals and we need to be.  Those goals must be different goals from the democratic party.  We have to flush out people like Castle and Crist and Murkowski in order to do that.  All throughout the Bush years we had democrats and republicans joining together in an unholy union to pass spending programs and invasions of privacy.  We had democrats and republicans joining together to increase the power of the executive and weaken the power of the people.  That time is over.

Just tell me where does the "I'm more conservative" idea stop?
Ultimately how are are you willing to go to have this "conservative" purity that you want?

We don't have to be pure, but there are things going on in this country right now that we must change if the country is to survive.  This is a year to stand on principle and set a line in the sand that people must cross.  If the democrats win on their ideas then they're going to win, and we all lose.  If the democrats win because we allowed a moderate republican leadership to lead us on the slow path to decline (a moderate republican leadership that even in times of party control joins with democrats), then they still win and we all lose - and that's a damn shame because we could have done something about it like we are now.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 14, 2010, 09:56:24 PM
These primary results are not encouraging for him. He got killed on the Cape, whereas Perry tied on the South Shore. If it is regional, Perry might be in good shape.

Can you read intraprimary regional splits onto interparty contests? Why would any Democrat on the cape vote for Keating? I'm asking sincerely. Malone isn't a regional candidate the way Perry, Keating, and O'Leary were and unlike O'Leary he pulled few votes. I guess I'm asking whether O'Leary's strength is being misinterpreted as Keating's weaknesses.

The regional split will come from the fact that Perry is from the Cape whereas Keating is not. Norfolk County is very different than the rest of the district, and while Keating will clean up there, regionalism should help Perry consolidate what Republican vote there is on the Cape. By contrast, there is limited GOP strength in Norfolk, and in a race between Keating and Norfolk candidate the Cape would have no incentive other than partisan identification.

I still have concerns that Perry is far too right-wing to win the seat. He definitely is to hold it long-term.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 09:57:42 PM
Up until now, I've been reading Norfolk County and yet visualizing Plymouth County as his base. Ugh.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on September 14, 2010, 09:58:08 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.
The difference is I don't see Coons as a shoo-in. This is going to be a tough, drag out, point to point, ad to ad, house to house fight. It's not going to be one that feels particularly good, but it's going to require passion and energy. Assuming that O'Donnell can't "possibly" win the general is the best way to guarantee that, that is precisely what happens.
Look at PPP's twitter right now or wait until their poll comes out tomorrow. I don't even have to waste my time posting a long response to this. It should be obvious to you why O'Donnell can't win in Delaware.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 09:58:16 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.
The difference is I don't see Coons as a shoo-in. This is going to be a tough, drag out, point to point, ad to ad, house to house fight. It's not going to be one that feels particularly good, but it's going to require passion and energy. Assuming that O'Donnell can't "possibly" win the general is the best way to guarantee that, that is precisely what happens.

You're ridiculous, dude. The NRSC has dropped out. PPP says she has a 29/50 approval rating among likely voters in the general and that Castle voters favor Coons by a margin of 44-28. She has no chance.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:58:22 PM
These primary results are not encouraging for him. He got killed on the Cape, whereas Perry tied on the South Shore. If it is regional, Perry might be in good shape.

Can you read intraprimary regional splits onto interparty contests? Why would any Democrat on the cape vote for Keating? I'm asking sincerely. Malone isn't a regional candidate the way Perry, Keating, and O'Leary were and unlike O'Leary he pulled few votes. I guess I'm asking whether O'Leary's strength is being misinterpreted as Keating's weaknesses.

The regional split will come from the fact that Perry is from the Cape whereas Keating is not. Norfolk County is very different than the rest of the district, and while Keating will clean up there, regionalism should help Perry consolidate what Republican vote there is on the Cape. By contrast, there is limited GOP strength in Norfolk, and in a race between Keating and Norfolk candidate the Cape would have no incentive other than partisan identification.

I still have concerns that Perry is far too right-wing to win the seat. He definitely is to hold it long-term.

So if he wins it wouldn't take much tweaking of it to oust him? Even if the seat can't be carved up the carving up of one requires all seats to expand, and you can bet this one will get as much Democratic territory as possible.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 09:58:34 PM
Finally something to chew on in D.C. - Fenty leads Gray 84-15. This is what we call a white neighborhood, children.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 09:58:49 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.
The difference is I don't see Coons as a shoo-in. This is going to be a tough, drag out, point to point, ad to ad, house to house fight. It's not going to be one that feels particularly good, but it's going to require passion and energy. Assuming that O'Donnell can't "possibly" win the general is the best way to guarantee that, that is precisely what happens.
Look at PPP's twitter right now or wait until their poll comes out tomorrow. I don't even have to waste my time posting a long response to this. It should be obvious to you why O'Donnell can't win in Delaware.

Beet believed FL-19 would flip and PA-12 would be a GOP shoo-in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 09:59:17 PM
If Coons doesn't wage a spirited campaign, O'Donnell will win. I'd bet my life savings on it.
You're really questioning the intelligence of Delaware voters with that statement.
Fine. I'm questioning the intelligence of Delaware voters.

Quote
You're ridiculous, dude. The NRSC has dropped out. PPP says she has a 29/50 approval rating among likely voters in the general and that Castle voters favor Coons by a margin of 44-28. She has no chance.

Like she had no chance in the primary? Like Joe Miller had no chance? Like Scott BRown had no chance? When will people like you wake up? Or do you even care?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 09:59:29 PM
Who's throwing the temper tantrum now?  ajc, you are exactly the problem in our party.  We can't change anything that they are doing with your views.  Yet, with every weasely defection like yours (like Crist, like Specter, soon Murkowski and soon Castle) we gain new people who were once democrats realizing that we are for what they stand for.  Do you see democrats switching parties because their candidate didn't win?  No, they don't and if you want to know why, it's because even though they have petty rivalries, they are always united on their end goals.  Conservatives are not united on our end goals and we need to be.  Those goals must be different goals from the democratic party.  We have to flush out people like Castle and Crist and Murkowski in order to do that.  All throughout the Bush years we had democrats and republicans joining together in an unholy union to pass spending programs and invasions of privacy.  We had democrats and republicans joining together to increase the power of the executive and weaken the power of the people.  That time is over.

Just tell me where does the "I'm more conservative" idea stop?
Ultimately how are are you willing to go to have this "conservative" purity that you want?

We don't have to be pure, but there are things going on in this country right now that we must change if the country is to survive.  This is a year to stand on principle and set a line in the sand that people must cross.  If the democrats win on their ideas then they're going to win, and we all lose.  If the democrats win because we allowed a moderate republican leadership to lead us on the slow path to decline (a moderate republican leadership that even in times of party control joins with democrats), then they still win and we all lose - and that's a damn shame because we could have done something about it like we are now.

So would you be happy with Castle in the senate?
If not, explain?

Because he isn't conservative enough?  
the smaller you make the party the less influence you have, therefore it becomes harder to reach your goals. just my opinion




Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 09:59:41 PM
OMFG ESPADA GOES DOWN

http://capitaltonight.com/2010/09/espada-concedes-to-rivera/


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 09:59:45 PM
Damn, NH is slooooow....

A new map with 67 precincts in and Ayotte (blue) down by about 5 points against Lamontaigne (green) doesn't show much new.

()

Bender won Dixville Notch with 3 votes.  That's in red.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Shilly on September 14, 2010, 09:59:52 PM
Good news for freedom, tonight.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:00:29 PM
Andy Harris wins in MD-01


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 10:00:40 PM
BRTD, since you seem to like Intrade so much, she is trading at 25 there. That means chance.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 10:01:10 PM
Oh NOEZ! Some people in another state chose a primary candidate I dislike! I'm so CONCERNED!

If you're a partisan it is concerning when it means basically throwing away a free seat.
Yeah, but it's basically the equivalent of someone like Zell Miller being primaried. Ideological purity is allowed to trump electability when the nominated candidate is essentially worthless to your goals.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:01:22 PM
BRTD, since you seem to like Intrade so much, she is trading at 25 there. That means chance.

Chance to make some cash you mean. Thanks for the tip!

Remember all the people who thought Santorum had a chance?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 10:02:02 PM
WI called for Walker. DioGuardi holding on to a 41-39 lead over Malpass. Townsend is likely the sacrificial lamb for Schumer. He's up 56-44. Doheny's at 53-47. Rangel in no trouble, nor is Towns.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:02:17 PM
In NH-02, Charlie Bass is only barely ahead of 2008 nominee Jennifer Horn 40-39 with 19% in


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:02:23 PM
Castle primary voters supports Coons over O'Donnell 44-28 in general election
34 minutes ago via web

And O'Donnell's fav/unfav is 29/50
about 1 hour ago via web

Only 31% of Delaware voters think Christine O'Donnell is fit to hold public office
about 1 hour ago via web

Delaware general numbers out tomorrow. Here's some appetizers from the poll...
about 1 hour ago via we


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on September 14, 2010, 10:04:34 PM
All of this is very upsetting. Go Coons.
You must be the only Democrat in the country who is thinking this.
The difference is I don't see Coons as a shoo-in. This is going to be a tough, drag out, point to point, ad to ad, house to house fight. It's not going to be one that feels particularly good, but it's going to require passion and energy. Assuming that O'Donnell can't "possibly" win the general is the best way to guarantee that, that is precisely what happens.
Look at PPP's twitter right now or wait until their poll comes out tomorrow. I don't even have to waste my time posting a long response to this. It should be obvious to you why O'Donnell can't win in Delaware.

Beet believed FL-19 would flip and PA-12 would be a GOP shoo-in.
I know, in his defense though I thought PA-12 would go pretty strongly for Burns. Then again the results didn't surprise me much.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 10:04:52 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:05:16 PM

That is the anti tax commuter to Boston area jobs, and was the area Romney was strongest in, FWIW.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 10:05:25 PM
The PPP poll teasing is nice and everything, but isn't it a little out-of-date now (for better or worse).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 10:05:51 PM

That is the anti tax commuter to Boston area jobs, and was the area Romney was strongest in, FWIW.

It is also Ayotte's home.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 10:05:55 PM
Castle primary voters supports Coons over O'Donnell 44-28 in general election
34 minutes ago via web

And O'Donnell's fav/unfav is 29/50
about 1 hour ago via web

Only 31% of Delaware voters think Christine O'Donnell is fit to hold public office
about 1 hour ago via web

Delaware general numbers out tomorrow. Here's some appetizers from the poll...
about 1 hour ago via we

Enjoy the happiest night of the campaign O'Donnell.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 10:06:11 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.
That is true. PPP has another in the bag.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 14, 2010, 10:06:34 PM
Gray is beating Fenty 59-39 in DC currently. No idea how many precincts.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 10:07:14 PM

That is the anti tax commuter to Boston area jobs, and was the area Romney was strongest in, FWIW.

My unscientific read on the numbers is that she doesn't have a strong enough regional base there to offset Monty's lead in Manchester, but there are plenty of other places that might have surprises that help her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:07:29 PM
Paladino wins the Republican line! And Lazio wins the Conservative line! It's a primary day miracle :D


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:08:10 PM
Maybe it will get bad enough, that somehow, O'Donnell will just fade away. What does Castle say he is going to do?  What a crazy primary season.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 14, 2010, 10:08:30 PM
LOLOLOL Paladino.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 10:08:55 PM
Paladino wins the Republican line! And Lazio wins the Conservative line! It's a primary day miracle :D

Paladino wasn't running in the Conservative primary.  A split was inevitable if Paladino won.

Lazio got what he deserved.  He ran a terrible campaign.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:09:22 PM

That is the anti tax commuter to Boston area jobs, and was the area Romney was strongest in, FWIW.

My unscientific read on the numbers is that she doesn't have a strong enough regional base there to offset Monty's lead in Manchester, but there are plenty of other places that might have surprises that help her.

Manchester sometimes is at odds with the state in primaries, assuming that is where the L man is getting his lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:09:36 PM
Paladino wins the Republican line! And Lazio wins the Conservative line! It's a primary day miracle :D

Paladino wasn't running in the Conservative primary.  A split was inevitable if Paladino won.

Lazio got what he deserved.  He ran a terrible campaign.

Lazio could've lost the Conservative line to the random nobody though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on September 14, 2010, 10:09:40 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.
That is true. PPP has another in the bag.
If you can admit that PPP nailed this one, why can't you admit that O'Donnell is going to be defeated in November? It would take a literal miracle for her to turn those Favorable numbers around.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 10:09:44 PM

That is the anti tax commuter to Boston area jobs, and was the area Romney was strongest in, FWIW.

My unscientific read on the numbers is that she doesn't have a strong enough regional base there to offset Monty's lead in Manchester, but there are plenty of other places that might have surprises that help her.

Londonderry is a suburb on I-93 just north of Nashua and it went to Lamontagne by a small margin.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 10:10:15 PM
Maybe it will get bad enough, that somehow, O'Donnell will just fade away. What does Castle say he is going to do?  What a crazy primary season.

Endorsing Coons wouldn't be out of the question, and not endorsing anyone seems quite possible and even likely. Certainly he won't be campaigning for her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:10:45 PM
Castle really doesn't have much to lose by endorsing Coons, it's not like the guy will ever hold office again.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:10:53 PM

That is the anti tax commuter to Boston area jobs, and was the area Romney was strongest in, FWIW.

It is also Ayotte's home.

Oh. That takes the air out of that balloon.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 14, 2010, 10:11:10 PM
Oh NOEZ! Some people in another state chose a primary candidate I dislike! I'm so CONCERNED!

If you're a partisan it is concerning when it means basically throwing away a free seat.
Yeah, but it's basically the equivalent of someone like Zell Miller being primaried. Ideological purity is allowed to trump electability when the nominated candidate is essentially worthless to your goals.

The focus on legislative votes overlooks the first and most important vote. That's the one that organizes the body for the next two years. Committees are a critical and often overlooked part of the legislative process. Party control of the committees makes or breaks bills. Yes, there's a filibuster in the Senate, but tying bad bills up in committee is far more effective than bringing them to a floor fight. Bringing good alternatives out of committee to the floor is far more useful than posting the idea on a web site.

So that first vote by a Senator may set the entire agenda for Congress. That first vote doesn't mean so much if it's between 40 and 41 out of 100, or even 46 and 47. But if it ends up between vote 50 and vote 51, that's huge.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 10:11:29 PM
Paladino wins the Republican line! And Lazio wins the Conservative line! It's a primary day miracle :D

Paladino wasn't running in the Conservative primary.  A split was inevitable if Paladino won.

Lazio got what he deserved.  He ran a terrible campaign.

Lazio could've lost the Conservative line to the random nobody though.

The random nobody was actually a Conservative party member.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:11:33 PM
The NY AG's race has narrowed considerably - Rice only leads Schneiderman 32-30 with 47% in


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:12:09 PM
Paladino wins the Republican line! And Lazio wins the Conservative line! It's a primary day miracle :D

Paladino wasn't running in the Conservative primary.  A split was inevitable if Paladino won.

Lazio got what he deserved.  He ran a terrible campaign.

Lazio could've lost the Conservative line to the random nobody though.

The random nobody was actually a Conservative party member.

Ok, but my point is that he would've won far fewer votes on the line than Lazio will on it in November.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 14, 2010, 10:12:29 PM
The NY AG's race has narrowed considerably - Rice only leads Schneiderman 32-30 with 47% in

NYC is reporting


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nhmagic on September 14, 2010, 10:12:35 PM
Who's throwing the temper tantrum now?  ajc, you are exactly the problem in our party.  We can't change anything that they are doing with your views.  Yet, with every weasely defection like yours (like Crist, like Specter, soon Murkowski and soon Castle) we gain new people who were once democrats realizing that we are for what they stand for.  Do you see democrats switching parties because their candidate didn't win?  No, they don't and if you want to know why, it's because even though they have petty rivalries, they are always united on their end goals.  Conservatives are not united on our end goals and we need to be.  Those goals must be different goals from the democratic party.  We have to flush out people like Castle and Crist and Murkowski in order to do that.  All throughout the Bush years we had democrats and republicans joining together in an unholy union to pass spending programs and invasions of privacy.  We had democrats and republicans joining together to increase the power of the executive and weaken the power of the people.  That time is over.

Just tell me where does the "I'm more conservative" idea stop?
Ultimately how are are you willing to go to have this "conservative" purity that you want?

We don't have to be pure, but there are things going on in this country right now that we must change if the country is to survive.  This is a year to stand on principle and set a line in the sand that people must cross.  If the democrats win on their ideas then they're going to win, and we all lose.  If the democrats win because we allowed a moderate republican leadership to lead us on the slow path to decline (a moderate republican leadership that even in times of party control joins with democrats), then they still win and we all lose - and that's a damn shame because we could have done something about it like we are now.

So would you be happy with Castle in the senate?
If not, explain?

Because he isn't conservative enough?  
the smaller you make the party the less influence you have, therefore it becomes harder to reach your goals. just my opinion



Would I have supported Castle if he won the primary - sure.  Would I be happy with him being there - no.  We are trying to handicap the leadership in the party - our party shouldn't be led by moderates.  Moderates should be part of it, absolutely and even contribute, but they shouldn't lead our party as they have for so long and they certainly do not lead in the democratic party.  The democrats know this and isn't it funny that you don't see anyone debating O'Donnell about the issues?  Instead they call her a bitch, a slut, a hoar, a liar, a thief and an empty suit.  If moderates are leading our party when we get the chance to repeal Obamacare (and we will get one and only one opportunity in the future to do it, which will not come when some dumb congressman simply puts a resolution up) or stop cap n trade, we will surely fail with them in charge.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: President Mitt on September 14, 2010, 10:12:52 PM
O'Donnell is saying she doesn't need the NRSC's money or support to win the GE...



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 10:13:16 PM
The NY AG's race has narrowed considerably - Rice only leads Schneiderman 32-30 with 47% in

NYC must finally be coming in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 10:13:23 PM
Castle really doesn't have much to lose by endorsing Coons, it's not like the guy will ever hold office again.

He could pull a Chafee if he were a bit younger.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 10:13:56 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.
That is true. PPP has another in the bag.
If you can admit that PPP nailed this one, why can't you admit that O'Donnell is going to be defeated in November? It would take a literal miracle for her to turn those Favorable numbers around.
Get back to me with what the polls look like in mid to late October.

I agree that Coons would win today, but all I'm saying is we can't get complacent about this one. The polls have changed really fast this year - usually in favor of tea party nutters.

Beet's 1st law of campaigns: When the numbers say A and the energy says B, A will move towards B.

All I'm saying is that Coons needs some actual energy behind him and not just 'oh, he's a shoo-in, let's laugh it up' to get the win that admittedly he probably can get.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:14:59 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.
That is true. PPP has another in the bag.
If you can admit that PPP nailed this one, why can't you admit that O'Donnell is going to be defeated in November? It would take a literal miracle for her to turn those Favorable numbers around.
Get back to me with what the polls look like in mid to late October.

I agree that Coons Casey would win today, but all I'm saying is we can't get complacent about this one. The polls have changed really fast this year - usually in favor of tea party nutters the glorious Rick Santorum king of last minute comebacks.

Beet's 1st law of campaigns: When the numbers say A and the energy says B, A will move towards B.

All I'm saying is that Coons Casey needs some actual energy behind him and not just 'oh, he's a shoo-in, let's laugh it up' to get the win that admittedly he probably can get.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:15:37 PM
Vincent Gray now ahead in D.C. 59-39 with 5% in


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 10:16:03 PM
Who's throwing the temper tantrum now?  ajc, you are exactly the problem in our party.  We can't change anything that they are doing with your views.  Yet, with every weasely defection like yours (like Crist, like Specter, soon Murkowski and soon Castle) we gain new people who were once democrats realizing that we are for what they stand for.  Do you see democrats switching parties because their candidate didn't win?  No, they don't and if you want to know why, it's because even though they have petty rivalries, they are always united on their end goals.  Conservatives are not united on our end goals and we need to be.  Those goals must be different goals from the democratic party.  We have to flush out people like Castle and Crist and Murkowski in order to do that.  All throughout the Bush years we had democrats and republicans joining together in an unholy union to pass spending programs and invasions of privacy.  We had democrats and republicans joining together to increase the power of the executive and weaken the power of the people.  That time is over.

Just tell me where does the "I'm more conservative" idea stop?
Ultimately how are are you willing to go to have this "conservative" purity that you want?

We don't have to be pure, but there are things going on in this country right now that we must change if the country is to survive.  This is a year to stand on principle and set a line in the sand that people must cross.  If the democrats win on their ideas then they're going to win, and we all lose.  If the democrats win because we allowed a moderate republican leadership to lead us on the slow path to decline (a moderate republican leadership that even in times of party control joins with democrats), then they still win and we all lose - and that's a damn shame because we could have done something about it like we are now.

So would you be happy with Castle in the senate?
If not, explain?

Because he isn't conservative enough?  
the smaller you make the party the less influence you have, therefore it becomes harder to reach your goals. just my opinion



Would I have supported Castle if he won the primary - sure.  Would I be happy with him being there - no.  We are trying to handicap the leadership in the party - our party shouldn't be led by moderates.  Moderates should be part of it, absolutely and even contribute, but they shouldn't lead our party as they have for so long and they certainly do not lead in the democratic party.  The democrats know this and isn't it funny that you don't see anyone debating O'Donnell about the issues?  Instead they call her a bitch, a slut, a hoar, a liar, a thief and an empty suit.  If moderates are leading our party when we get the chance to repeal Obamacare (and we will get one and only one opportunity in the future to do it, which will not come when some dumb congressman simply puts a resolution up) or stop cap n trade, we will surely fail with them in charge.  

Moderates haven't led the GOP since the 1970's. ::)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:16:23 PM
And anyway Beet it's not like Coons is going to shut down his campaign HQ tomorrow or lose all DSCC funding. On the other hand lack of NRSC support not only cuts down on the advertising budget but infrastructure for the whole GOTV thing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 10:18:22 PM
And anyway Beet it's not like Coons is going to shut down his campaign HQ tomorrow or lose all DSCC funding. On the other hand lack of NRSC support not only cuts down on the advertising budget but infrastructure for the whole GOTV thing.

Right, he's going to be the boring establishment white guy running against the underdog hot chick with the hope and change message. Real invincible - especially if his supporters sit and home and do nothing, assuming that legions of Eisenhower Republicans are going to come out to save the day at the last minute.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 10:19:28 PM
Penis voting does not exist. I think it was Al who made that observation.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on September 14, 2010, 10:20:58 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.
That is true. PPP has another in the bag.
If you can admit that PPP nailed this one, why can't you admit that O'Donnell is going to be defeated in November? It would take a literal miracle for her to turn those Favorable numbers around.
Get back to me with what the polls look like in mid to late October.

I agree that Coons Casey would win today, but all I'm saying is we can't get complacent about this one. The polls have changed really fast this year - usually in favor of tea party nutters the glorious Rick Santorum king of last minute comebacks.

Beet's 1st law of campaigns: When the numbers say A and the energy says B, A will move towards B.

All I'm saying is that Coons Casey needs some actual energy behind him and not just 'oh, he's a shoo-in, let's laugh it up' to get the win that admittedly he probably can get.

Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 10:21:27 PM
...and Schneiderman takes the lead in NY-AG-D.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 10:21:36 PM
Concord is in, 10/10, and voted very narrowly for Ayotte. I'm not seeing her closing the gap, there is no big city left to suddenly dump a big margin of votes in her lap.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:21:43 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.
That is true. PPP has another in the bag.
If you can admit that PPP nailed this one, why can't you admit that O'Donnell is going to be defeated in November? It would take a literal miracle for her to turn those Favorable numbers around.
Get back to me with what the polls look like in mid to late October.

I agree that Coons Casey would win today, but all I'm saying is we can't get complacent about this one. The polls have changed really fast this year - usually in favor of tea party nutters the glorious Rick Santorum king of last minute comebacks.

Beet's 1st law of campaigns: When the numbers say A and the energy says B, A will move towards B.

All I'm saying is that Coons Casey needs some actual energy behind him and not just 'oh, he's a shoo-in, let's laugh it up' to get the win that admittedly he probably can get.

Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.

So you are officially predicting an O'Donnell victory?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Holmes on September 14, 2010, 10:22:08 PM
Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.

I think it's O'Donnell who's more easily compared to Coakley, no?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:22:20 PM
Concord is in, 10/10, and voted very narrowly for Ayotte. I'm not seeing her closing the gap, there is no big city left to suddenly dump a big margin of votes in her lap.

Nashua's all in?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 10:22:41 PM
Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.

This is the second time I've seen someone seriously compare Christine O'Donnell to Scott Brown on this board. Get a hold of yourself, man. You don't know what you're saying.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 14, 2010, 10:23:04 PM
With more of NYC coming in Schneiderman has taken the lead in the AG race, though very little of Nassau is in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 10:23:17 PM
Concord is in, 10/10, and voted very narrowly for Ayotte. I'm not seeing her closing the gap, there is no big city left to suddenly dump a big margin of votes in her lap.

Nashua's all in?

Nashua is 2/3 in and the remaining 3 precincts would have to be much more favorable to Ayotte than the previous 6 were.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 10:24:14 PM
schneiderman took the lead


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: SvenssonRS on September 14, 2010, 10:24:31 PM
Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.

This is the second time I've seen someone seriously compare Christine O'Donnell to Scott Brown on this board. Get a hold of yourself, man. You don't know what you're saying.

Yes, I do. I'm saying that if O'Donnell could win a primary against Mike Castle, she can win a general against Chris Coons, who has such pathetic name recognition. What can I say? I'm terrified of seeing O'Donnell actually get elected.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 10:24:52 PM
The Republican Party is about Conservatism.  If they don't nominate conservatives, then what do they stand for? Getting old committee seats back is a decidedly uninspiring platform. That's why the parties are kept accountable by their constituents. Republicans would undoubtedly see themselves as better served in a Senate with 21 DeMints and 19 McCains than 25 McCains, 15 Browns, and 11 Castles.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: sg0508 on September 14, 2010, 10:25:18 PM
Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.
Comparing Brown and O'Donnell?  Is this guy for real?

This is the second time I've seen someone seriously compare Christine O'Donnell to Scott Brown on this board. Get a hold of yourself, man. You don't know what you're saying.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 10:25:26 PM
But the margin in NH is only 2,000 votes (she has a 750-vote lead in Nashua with 6/9 precincts) with 3/4 of the precincts out... so I really shouldn't be making any predictions. Nor is this race worth my staying up. I'll see in the morning.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nhmagic on September 14, 2010, 10:26:25 PM
That's not true NCYank.  Denny f-in Hastert, Trent Lott, Tom Delay, Livingston, Dole, Frist (who supports Obamacare) and porker Mitch McConnell spent our way out of office, added new regulations and FDR-like invasions of freedom like the Patriot Act (which Obama quietly but enthusiastically supports).  The leadership doesn't just consist of those individuals however.  It also consists of entrenched individuals like Snowe, Collins, McCain and now Grahamnesty.  They were all working together not just to simply pass moderate policy (as something like a middle class tax cut would have been), but to add BRAND NEW entitlements and put a very liberal immigration plan together for pete's sake.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:26:40 PM
Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.

This is the second time I've seen someone seriously compare Christine O'Donnell to Scott Brown on this board. Get a hold of yourself, man. You don't know what you're saying.

Yes, I do. I'm saying that if O'Donnell could win a primary against Mike Castle, she can win a general against Chris Coons, who has such pathetic name recognition. What can I say? I'm terrified of seeing O'Donnell actually get elected.

Coons is executive for the county with about 2/3 of the state's population. That actually makes him arguably the second most powerful person in the state after the Governor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 14, 2010, 10:27:19 PM
Yes, I do. I'm saying that if O'Donnell could win a primary against Mike Castle, she can win a general against Chris Coons, who has such pathetic name recognition. What can I say? I'm terrified of seeing O'Donnell actually get elected.

Scott Brown was appealing to all Republicans, most moderates, and some Democrats. They wanted to vote for him.

In your heart of hearts, do you think Christine O'Donnell is going to win over all those groups in Delaware? If so, why? People win primaries all the time who are unelectable in the general precisely because of the strengths that won them the primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 10:27:42 PM
Maloney wins if it hasn't been said


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Chancellor Tanterterg on September 14, 2010, 10:28:03 PM
In other news, Charlie Bass only leads conservative radio host Jennifer Horn by 1% in NH-2.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 14, 2010, 10:28:12 PM
Yeah, sure, laugh. Treat Coons as a shoo-in. Know who else did that? Massachusetts Democrats with Martha Coakley.

The arrogance of people like you will be what gets that crazy bitch elected. We'll see who's laughing then - I guarantee America won't.

This is the second time I've seen someone seriously compare Christine O'Donnell to Scott Brown on this board. Get a hold of yourself, man. You don't know what you're saying.

Clearly Thomas Dewey's going to win the election, Truman might as well give up now and save himself the embarrassment.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:29:41 PM
Can people please at least use valid analogies instead of just pulling up random come from behind victories that are not even remotely comparable?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Progressive on September 14, 2010, 10:32:32 PM
PALADINO WON!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 10:32:46 PM
Yes, I do. I'm saying that if O'Donnell could win a primary against Mike Castle, she can win a general against Chris Coons, who has such pathetic name recognition. What can I say? I'm terrified of seeing O'Donnell actually get elected.

Scott Brown was appealing to all Republicans, most moderates, and some Democrats. They wanted to vote for him.

In your heart of hearts, do you think Christine O'Donnell is going to win over all those groups in Delaware? If so, why? People win primaries all the time who are unelectable in the general precisely because of the strengths that won them the primary.

Not that I disagree, but why did people want to vote for Scott Brown?  And why did the map end up looking like it did?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:32:53 PM
Yes, I do. I'm saying that if O'Donnell could win a primary against Mike Castle, she can win a general against Chris Coons, who has such pathetic name recognition. What can I say? I'm terrified of seeing O'Donnell actually get elected.

Scott Brown was appealing to all Republicans, most moderates, and some Democrats. They wanted to vote for him.

In your heart of hearts, do you think Christine O'Donnell is going to win over all those groups in Delaware? If so, why? People win primaries all the time who are unelectable in the general precisely because of the strengths that won them the primary.

This really isn't worth discussing. She will be destroyed. And comparing her to Brown is ludicrous - just ludicrous.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 10:34:14 PM
You know MD-01 might be a good comparison.

And before everyone screams OMG 2008 DEMOCRAT YEAR please note it was in a district that voted for McCain by almost 20 points.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 10:35:19 PM
Lamontagne lead is now less than 2000 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 10:36:30 PM
Here's the final Delaware RD map (subject to a final data integrity check).  Castle is in blue; O'Donnell green:

()

Basically, Castle won the Wilmington area/Philly suburbs, and O'Donnell the rest of the state - even in New Castle County.

And a turnout map, using the Atlas swing redscale (% of Registered Republicans):

()

Suburban New Castle turnout wasn't terrible - but Castle didn't do much to get out the few Republicans who live in the Wilmington RDs.  Turnout was best in the Sussex County RDs - where O'Donnell killed him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:37:06 PM
Altschuler wins in NY-01

Grimm wins in NY-13


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 14, 2010, 10:37:12 PM

Yay, Lazio lost! :D

Not that I'll be voting for that fascist Paladino either.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home. on September 14, 2010, 10:37:19 PM

I don't understand this result.  The guy is slime.  looks like voters are just overthrowing the establishment and replacing them with random person x


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:38:13 PM
NY-15 called for Rangel. He's got 53%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: TheDeadFlagBlues on September 14, 2010, 10:38:32 PM
PPP are looking like pimps after this one. It must be said.
That is true. PPP has another in the bag.
If you can admit that PPP nailed this one, why can't you admit that O'Donnell is going to be defeated in November? It would take a literal miracle for her to turn those Favorable numbers around.
Get back to me with what the polls look like in mid to late October.

I agree that Coons would win today, but all I'm saying is we can't get complacent about this one. The polls have changed really fast this year - usually in favor of tea party nutters.

Beet's 1st law of campaigns: When the numbers say A and the energy says B, A will move towards B.

All I'm saying is that Coons needs some actual energy behind him and not just 'oh, he's a shoo-in, let's laugh it up' to get the win that admittedly he probably can get.
You're missing the point...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: ajc0918 on September 14, 2010, 10:38:39 PM
Altschuler wins in NY-01

Grimm wins in NY-13

GOOD NEWS for NY-01


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 10:39:19 PM

I don't understand this result.  The guy is slime.  looks like voters are just overthrowing the establishment and replacing them with random person x

Lazio barely ran a campaign, let alone a coherent one.  Paladino at least tried.  Lazio got what he deserved.  Plus, it's an Upstate/Downstate thing, with Upstate voting more heavily than usual, I suspect.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 14, 2010, 10:39:19 PM

I don't understand this result.  The guy is slime.  looks like voters are just overthrowing the establishment and replacing them with random person x

Just like you wanted with Castle.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 10:39:35 PM

I don't understand this result.  The guy is slime.  looks like voters are just overthrowing the establishment and replacing them with random person x

Bingo. This year is not Dem vs. GOP, it's optimism and satisfaction vs. fear and anger, and the latter are in the drivers' seat. That's what's so scary about it. Nothing positive is happening, see? No positive ideas are being endorsed. There's too much pessimism and negative energy - and I know it sounds strange coming from me.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 14, 2010, 10:40:11 PM
Moderates haven't led the GOP since the 1970's. ::)
If someone today were to run on Ford's '76 platform, they would be denounced from all corners as a far-right Fascist teabagger.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:40:22 PM
Why is the turnout so pathetically low in New Hampshire?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 10:43:18 PM
Why is the turnout so pathetically low in New Hampshire?

They haven't counted a third of the precincts yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 14, 2010, 10:43:24 PM
Well it looks like Ehrlich will crush Brian Murphy, 75%-25%, in the GOP Gov primary here. That's good. I'm keeping an open mind about this race. It looks like Ehrlich's regional base is still making a difference for him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 10:45:21 PM
The AP results are lagging considerably for D.C.

Gray currently leads Fenty 56-42 according to the D.C. Board of Elections. I'm trying to determine how much is in/where it's from


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:45:27 PM
Why is the turnout so pathetically low in New Hampshire?

They haven't counted a third of the precincts yet.

It still seems very low. Is this typical?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sewer on September 14, 2010, 10:47:02 PM
Moderates haven't led the GOP since the 1970's. ::)
If someone today were to run on Ford's '76 platform, they would be denounced from all corners as a far-right Fascist teabagger.

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 10:47:19 PM
     41-38 Lamontagne now. Absolute vote lead down to 1,650 votes. 31.6% of precincts are in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 10:48:24 PM
Why is the turnout so pathetically low in New Hampshire?

They haven't counted a third of the precincts yet.

It still seems very low. Is this typical?

Numbers-wise, the Republicans will be close (little bit less) to the Sununu-Smith primary of 2002.  Dems will be right around the 2002 level too.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 10:49:50 PM
schneiderman keeps gaining, 33-31


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Ronnie on September 14, 2010, 10:50:16 PM
Thankfully, things seem to be tightening at a rapid rate in NH.  I suspect Ayotte will win in the end.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 10:52:33 PM
Ayotte is performing decently in the middle-of-nowhere towns.  We'll see if it's enough.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 14, 2010, 10:53:06 PM

Looks like Schneiderman is going to pull it off, but one thing to keep in mind

Precincts in

77% of Manhattan
82% of Brooklyn
26% of Nassau


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 10:53:27 PM
PEDRO ESPADA LOST!!!

Sorry if this has already been said, but it makes me happy. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 10:55:08 PM

Looks like Schneiderman is going to pull it off, but one thing to keep in mind

Precincts in

77% of Manhattan
82% of Brooklyn
26% of Nassau

Not enough votes in Nassau, I suspect.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 10:55:57 PM
Thankfully, things seem to be tightening at a rapid rate in NH.  I suspect Ayotte will win in the end.

At the rate New Hampshire is reporting, we won't know anything until tomorrow morning.  Damn, their sloooowww...

New map, with 101/301 in:

()

(Ayotte blue; Lamontagne green; some random guy who won Dixville by a vote red)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 10:57:24 PM
     NY-19 primary called for Nan Hayworth.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 10:58:31 PM

It is a crazy year. Keep your powder dry. You know what I compare the Tea Party thing to?  Yes, the Perot thing. We had to endure that unfortunate human being, and his movement, and yes, even though the Tea Party makes Perot seems like a paradigm of sanity, they too, will fade away. Why? Because it is all rhetorical BS, with no real policy meaning because the nasty little policy choices about how to deal with medical subsidies, etc., etc., are just not on their radar screen. That is far too much work.  It is just emotional anger. How many of these people have really thought through any policy ideas?  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 10:59:11 PM
So if Ayotte loses is tonight the tea party's greatest accomplishment to date?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 14, 2010, 11:00:36 PM

Looks like Schneiderman is going to pull it off, but one thing to keep in mind

Precincts in

77% of Manhattan
82% of Brooklyn
26% of Nassau

Not enough votes in Nassau, I suspect.


Looks that way.   Looking at the Nassau breakout she could add 10,000 to her margin there, and currently trails by a little under 14,000.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:00:59 PM

She is the strongest GOP candidate. Apparently the virus out there, is not pandemic.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:01:48 PM
Townsend will be the sacrificial lamb against Schumer; DioGuardi looks like he's in very good shape, barring some Nassau/Erie surprise; so far, Paladino's not getting his running mate (which would make it an all-Upstate ticket); Gillibrand might end up with less than 75%.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 11:02:02 PM
Lamontagne lead down to 1052 votes, and dropping fast.

(Er, "fast" if you grade on a curve, given how slowly the vote count is going.)

EDIT: And now it's dropped below 900.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 11:03:06 PM
You mean Paladino/Edwards, weird!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 11:03:48 PM

She is the strongest GOP candidate. Apparently the virus out there, is not pandemic.

     The differences in numbers between her & DiCarlo aren't that big. It's nowhere close to the electability divide between Castle & O'Donnell, at least.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:04:17 PM
So did Lazio get the Conservative party nod? If so, this will be a hilarious election.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 11:06:48 PM
So did Lazio get the Conservative party nod? If so, this will be a hilarious election.

unless he gets nominated for a judgeship, he has to win 50k votes in the GE or potentially doom the Conservative Party


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 11:09:03 PM

It is a crazy year. Keep your powder dry. You know what I compare the Tea Party thing to?  Yes, the Perot thing. We had to endure that unfortunate human being, and his movement, and yes, even though the Tea Party makes Perot seems like a paradigm of sanity, they too, will fade away. Why? Because it is all rhetorical BS, with no real policy meaning because the nasty little policy choices about how to deal with medical subsidies, etc., etc., are just not on their radar screen. That is far too much work.  It is just emotional anger. How many of these people have really thought through any policy ideas?  

Perot was just a bit ahead of his time.  You should give him more credit than you do because he was (and still is) one of the few to actually talk about the nasty little policy choices out there (whether you agree with his solutions or not).

Btw, I do agree that it is a crazy year.  Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately depending on your view), this is probably just the beginning.  Hard to tell how exactly it manifests, however, long-term.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:09:15 PM

Yeah, but it's 51-49 - so it still could flip.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:11:19 PM
NY-23 called for Doheny. Hoffman has the Conservative line though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:11:39 PM
Btw, I do agree that it is a crazy year.  Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately depending on your view), this is probably just the beginning.  Hard to tell how exactly it manifests, however, long-term.
Are you one of the people who sees increasingly wild swings politically/political turmoil because we won't be able to grapple with the magnitude of the problems facing us?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:12:01 PM
NY-23 called for Doheny. Hoffman has the Conservative line though.
That should be a help in keeping the seat in Dem hands hopefully.

again lol


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lunar on September 14, 2010, 11:12:11 PM
NY-23 called for Doheny. Hoffman has the Conservative line though.

Haha.  Is Doug a two-time spoiler?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:12:19 PM
Republican Senate primary in Maryland finally called for Eric Wargotz


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:12:59 PM
Btw, I do agree that it is a crazy year.  Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately depending on your view), this is probably just the beginning.  Hard to tell how exactly it manifests, however, long-term.
Are you one of the people who sees increasingly wild swings politically/political turmoil because we won't be able to grapple with the magnitude of the problems facing us?

Whatever Sam's elaboration, that is a reasonable hypothesis. Americans are spoiled. They are not used to what is coming down.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:14:34 PM
Btw, I do agree that it is a crazy year.  Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately depending on your view), this is probably just the beginning.  Hard to tell how exactly it manifests, however, long-term.
Are you one of the people who sees increasingly wild swings politically/political turmoil because we won't be able to grapple with the magnitude of the problems facing us?

Whatever Sam's elaboration, that is a reasonable hypothesis. Americans are spoiled. They are not used to what is coming down.
Yeah, I'm quickly coming to the point where I feel that we won't have the political will to solve our problems, now and in the future. If I'm right, things are going to get pretty sh**tty.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 11:15:38 PM
Btw, I do agree that it is a crazy year.  Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately depending on your view), this is probably just the beginning.  Hard to tell how exactly it manifests, however, long-term.
Are you one of the people who sees increasingly wild swings politically/political turmoil because we won't be able to grapple with the magnitude of the problems facing us?

Whatever Sam's elaboration, that is a reasonable hypothesis. Americans are spoiled. They are not used to what is coming down.

It is hard to entirely predict the future politically - what is easy to see are the growing and continual problems that lead to great turmoil.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:16:05 PM
NH margin keeps on shrinking.. 38.7% to 38.4% according to Politico.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 11:16:58 PM
btw, Ayotte's gonna catch Frenchy really soon at this rate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:17:52 PM
NY Map update with about 77% in:

NY-AG:
()

Upstate was competitive, with Rice (yellow) eking out wins in most counties, while performing well on Long Island.  Where she didn't win Upstate, Coffey (green) often did - thank Batman.  Schneiderman's strength was in NYC and the Lower Hudson Valley.  And I guess John Leguizamo has some pull in Orleans County - which Dinallo (red) won.  Old rockers had no pull for Brodsky.

NY-Gov-R:

Lazio (blue) got slaughtered Upstate, except Saint Lawrence and Franklin Counties, for some reason.  And so far, Upstate started in the Lower Hudson Valley, with Lazio losing Rockland and Orange Counties.  Not a recipe for a Republican win.  (Paladino green):

()

NY-Senate R (2 Year Term):

()

In general, another Upstate/Downstate divide, with Downstate, the Capital Region and most of the North Country going for DioGuardi and Malpass winning most other Upstate areas (well, at least the more urban ones other than Monroe (Rochester).  Last I checked, this race hadn't been called yet - but it's looking good for DioGuardi.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 11:18:04 PM
Beet, turn on Hardball! You'll love Chris Matthews tonight! He sounds just like you! O'Donnell is now the favorite for the Delaware seat, apparently.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:19:24 PM
Beet, turn on Hardball! You'll love Chris Matthews tonight! He sounds just like you! O'Donnell is now the favorite for the Delaware seat, apparently.
lol

What "logic" is he basing that on?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:19:39 PM
Beet, turn on Hardball! You'll love Chris Matthews tonight! He sounds just like you! O'Donnell is now the favorite for the Delaware seat, apparently.

Chris needs to take up pot like I did. Just a thought. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr. Morden on September 14, 2010, 11:19:57 PM
Ayotte has taken the lead.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Zarn on September 14, 2010, 11:21:19 PM

:)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:21:47 PM

Manchester is an outlier again. Whom did the Manchester Union endorse?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 11:21:53 PM
That's not true NCYank.  Denny f-in Hastert, Trent Lott, Tom Delay, Livingston, Dole, Frist (who supports Obamacare) and porker Mitch McConnell spent our way out of office, added new regulations and FDR-like invasions of freedom like the Patriot Act (which Obama quietly but enthusiastically supports).  The leadership doesn't just consist of those individuals however.  It also consists of entrenched individuals like Snowe, Collins, McCain and now Grahamnesty.  They were all working together not just to simply pass moderate policy (as something like a middle class tax cut would have been), but to add BRAND NEW entitlements and put a very liberal immigration plan together for pete's sake.

Most of them are Conservatives who lost their way.


Its hard to put them in the same group with Castle, Simmons, Kirk, Chafee. They may annoy you on issues but they certainly were not "in charge" at the time either. Quite the opposite.

Plus my defination of conservative differs from yours substantially, especially on defense. Some of the people who lost to the Tea Party like Norton, and Grayson were fine on Immigration and every other issue to be considered Hard Core Conservatives by myself and perfectly adequate ideologically. I am not an anti-war zealot, but I will agree Iraq was a mistake in hindsight, unless you have a time machine though so we could know then what we do now. I supported the Patriot Act, also. This is all the more surprising considering I was firmly opposed to the Iraq war in 2003.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:22:10 PM

Manchester is an outlier again. Whom did the Manchester Union endorse?
They endorsed the french guy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 11:22:27 PM
Lazio won Putnam? Weird.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon on September 14, 2010, 11:22:44 PM
AYOTTE!   AYOTTE!  AYOTTE!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 11:23:53 PM
Stick a fork in Rice - the tool of the public employee unions gets it!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:24:09 PM
NH with 146/301 and Ayotte trailing by about 200:

()

This pattern doesn't look promising for Lamontagne - it appears to be Manchester vs. everywhere else - and the Manchester area is in while much of everything else isn't.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:24:24 PM
MA-10 has narrowed considerably - Keating leads by only 735 votes. The remaining six precincts are the towns of Pembroke and Hanson which should go for Keating though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:26:17 PM
Stick a fork in Rice - the tool of the public employee unions gets it!
I'm not a huge fan of Rice but I do think she would have a much easier road than Schneiderman will in the GE.

He's still going to be the favorite(it's New York!), but I think his Sharpton comments could hurt him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:26:45 PM

52-48.  Just like Westchester (so far - but it's only about 2/3rds in).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:27:28 PM

Manchester is an outlier again. Whom did the Manchester Union endorse?
They endorsed the french guy.

It may be the last paper in America which can actually influence how folks vote for high profile races. It is a tradition.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:28:08 PM
Fenty trails Gray 57-42 with 28% in. Looks like he's done for.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 14, 2010, 11:28:36 PM

Manchester is an outlier again. Whom did the Manchester Union endorse?
They endorsed the french guy.

It may be the last paper in America which can actually influence how folks vote for high profile races. It is a tradition.
If I remember right, getting their endorsement is actually what started his momentum and he became the clear non-Ayotte option.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:28:53 PM

52-48.  Just like Westchester (so far - but it's only about 2/3rds in).

Lazio isn't carrying Long Island? If he is, than isn't just a suburban NYC thing?  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:29:23 PM
NY-Sen B is called for DioGuardi


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:30:17 PM
AP called the NY Republican Senate race (2-year term) for DioGuardi.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:31:02 PM
Fenty trails Gray 57-42 with 28% in. Looks like he's done for.

Unless no votes are in from NW DC and Georgetown.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 11:32:06 PM
I'm actually legitimately glad DioGuardi won. He seems like a decent guy.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 11:35:24 PM
AP called the NY Republican Senate race (2-year term) for DioGuardi.

Knew that would be the end result in June. If only the stupid GOP convention would have realized it months ago, maybe Gillibrand would win by less then a landslide. And King said DioGuardi should get out to avoid having only six weeks to campaign. ::) In NY you are screwed by the establishment, if not then by the Tea Party.


Ayotte by 400 or so with 157 precincts in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:36:48 PM
What is Fox News leading with on their website tonight? Not Christine O'Donnell, but rather Charlie Rangel: http://www.foxnews.com/

Fenty trails Gray 57-42 with 28% in. Looks like he's done for.

Unless no votes are in from NW DC and Georgetown.

They are in, at least partially. There's no real way to tell how much is left though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:38:58 PM

52-48.  Just like Westchester (so far - but it's only about 2/3rds in).

Lazio isn't carrying Long Island? If he is, than isn't just a suburban NYC thing?  

Lazio carried Long Island, NYC and Westchester and Putnam Counties in the NYC Metro and Saint Lawrence and Franklin counties Upstate.  

Lazio won Nassau and Suffolk (LI) by a 2-1 margin.  That's his home base.  He won Franklin, St. Lawrence and NYC by about 55-45 - doing slightly better than that in Manhattan, about that in both Upstate Counties, Queens and Brooklyn, and worse than that (52-48) in Staten Island and the Bronx.  And he won those two Lower Hudson Valley counties by 52-48 (so far).  

Paladino won the rest, cleaning up in Erie County (Buffalo) - he won over there 90% thus far.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 14, 2010, 11:39:58 PM
Oh my goodness what a few hours spending time with the family makes in campaign news. Anyway I am now an enthusiastic Chris Coons supporter. Thank you Delaware Republicans for throwing a winnable seat into the Safe Democrat column (where I hope it remains.) As for New York, great results for house races, absolutely horrible news Paladino is the Republican nominee. Cuomo will be able to win over 70% of the vote now because of his racism, sexism, lack of lucidity, and all his other crap. If anything Cox should get his ass kicked out of political policy decision making forever after his disastrous tenure. Senate races there I don't care so much for since Gillibrand and Schumer are both safe. Thank you New Hampshire for in all likelihood giving Kelly Ayotte a bright national political future. She will be an awesome senator and fantastic voice for practical conservative principles. I'm not going to join the Democrats because O'Donnell won, but you can bet the farm I would have deeply thought about it if Lamontagne held his lead up.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:40:25 PM
I'm actually legitimately glad DioGuardi won. He seems like decent guy.

He is very personally charming (I remember watching him run for the Westchester seat on CSPAN a zillion years ago). However, he is hardly a rocket scientist, and New York is a tough place.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 11:40:38 PM
I'm actually legitimately glad DioGuardi won. He seems like decent guy.

Isn't he anti-interventionist?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 11:41:21 PM
I'm actually legitimately glad DioGuardi won. He seems like decent guy.

He is very personally charming (I remember watching him run for the Westchester seat on CSPAN a zillion years ago. However, he is hardly a rocket scientist, and New York is a tough place.

Oh, I won't be voting for him or anything. I'm just glad he won.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 11:41:45 PM
Didn't do very well tonight, but lol @ chris Cox was well worth it


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:44:12 PM
I'm actually legitimately glad DioGuardi won. He seems like decent guy.

He is very personally charming (I remember watching him run for the Westchester seat on CSPAN a zillion years ago). However, he is hardly a rocket scientist, and New York is a tough place.

DioGuardi isn't a rocket scientist - he's a CPA.  Malpass was the closest thing the race had to a rocket scientist - a well-respected economist.  He would have at least run an interesting race against Gillibrand, who isn't much of a rocket scientist herself.  DioGuardi will run an interesting campaign, too, I think, but for different reasons.  Not a close race - but a colorful one.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:44:26 PM
Oh my goodness what a few hours spending time with the family makes in campaign news. Anyway I am now an enthusiastic Chris Coons supporter. Thank you Delaware Republicans for throwing a winnable seat into the Safe Democrat column (where I hope it remains.) As for New York, great results for house races, absolutely horrible news Paladino is the Republican nominee. Cuomo will be able to win over 70% of the vote now because of his racism, sexism, lack of lucidity, and all his other crap. If anything Cox should get his ass kicked out of political policy decision making forever after his disastrous tenure. Senate races there I don't care so much for since Gillibrand and Schumer are both safe. Thank you New Hampshire for in all likelihood giving Kelly Ayotte a bright national political future. She will be an awesome senator and fantastic voice for practical conservative principles. I'm not going to join the Democrats because O'Donnell won, but you can bet the farm I would have deeply thought about it if Lamontagne held his lead up.

Lamontagne is hardly in the O'Donnell category is he?  My impression is that he is a serious man, and not a nutter. Painting with too broad a brush can blur the details. Having said that, I am pleased that he is apparently losing. Ayotte does have far more potential.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 14, 2010, 11:44:47 PM
I'm actually legitimately glad DioGuardi won. He seems like decent guy.

Isn't he anti-interventionist?

Yes, it seems that way. He says the Iraq War was wrong and has called Afghanistan a "war of choice". It's actually kind of weird that he won a statewide GOP Primary even in NY considering that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 11:45:24 PM
Oh my goodness what a few hours spending time with the family makes in campaign news. Anyway I am now an enthusiastic Chris Coons supporter. Thank you Delaware Republicans for throwing a winnable seat into the Safe Democrat column (where I hope it remains.) As for New York, great results for house races, absolutely horrible news Paladino is the Republican nominee. Cuomo will be able to win over 70% of the vote now because of his racism, sexism, lack of lucidity, and all his other crap. If anything Cox should get his ass kicked out of political policy decision making forever after his disastrous tenure. Senate races there I don't care so much for since Gillibrand and Schumer are both safe. Thank you New Hampshire for in all likelihood giving Kelly Ayotte a bright national political future. She will be an awesome senator and fantastic voice for practical conservative principles. I'm not going to join the Democrats because O'Donnell won, but you can bet the farm I would have deeply thought about it if Lamontagne held his lead up.

Lamontagne is hardly in the O'Donnell category is he?  My impression is that he is a serious man, and not a nutter. Painting with too broad a brush can blur the details. Having said that, I am pleased that he is apparently losing. Ayotte does have far more potential.

LOL. Not sure if that's the best term to describe him if you mean it in a positive way.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Progressive on September 14, 2010, 11:46:43 PM
Can someone post me the AP links for NY :( thanks!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:48:31 PM
Sources within the Castle campaign have indicated that he will not be endorsing O'Donnell. He also says he won't be attempting any sort of write-in campaign.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 11:48:44 PM
Bass is back up 42-36 over Horn
Guinta up 33-30


Ayotte now up by 300, %'s narrowed to 38-38.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 11:49:33 PM
Can someone post me the AP links for NY :( thanks!

On page 1 and 102 of the thread.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 14, 2010, 11:50:02 PM
Can someone post me the AP links for NY :( thanks!

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/NY_Governor_0914.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS

(That's Gov - pull the tab to change races)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 14, 2010, 11:50:13 PM
Sources within the Castle campaign have indicated that he will not be endorsing O'Donnell. He also says he won't be attempting any sort of write-in campaign.

I'll eat a hat if Castle endorses O'Donnell.  And it's not all for the reasons you might think.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 11:51:07 PM
51 precincts left in NH-01 and 66 left in NH-02.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 14, 2010, 11:54:10 PM
The DJ on the radio channell I am listening too, just made a quip about Sarah Palin costing McCain the election. Between that, Ayotte going from -23% to 0% lead, and Hoffman losing, I would say this is quite been quite an interesting night.




Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 11:54:55 PM
Something else I should've pointed out in response to Beet's freaking out earlier, you don't really think Joe Biden won't be doing some visits home on behalf of Coons right? It's not like his current job doesn't allow him any free time.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 14, 2010, 11:55:14 PM
     Charlie Bass has restored his lead over Horn. Guinta's lead is as small as ever, though Mahoney has climbed into a relatively close third.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:56:03 PM
Sources within the Castle campaign have indicated that he will not be endorsing O'Donnell. He also says he won't be attempting any sort of write-in campaign.

One thing I like about Castle is that he has class. He is a fundamentally decent person. So few politicians do these days, including that woman in Alaska (well both of those women, come to think of it).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 14, 2010, 11:57:07 PM
Why are all the biggest Republican nutjobs women? Palin, O'Donnell, Angle, Bachmann, that defeated Musgrave lady. Not really any comparable males as far as the teabaggers go.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 14, 2010, 11:57:57 PM
The D.C. Board of Elections hasn't reporting anything for 45 minutes. C'mon people, I have class in the morning.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 14, 2010, 11:58:50 PM
Why are all the biggest Republican nutjobs women? Palin, O'Donnell, Angle, Bachmann, that defeated Musgrave lady. Not really any comparable males as far as the teabaggers go.

Probably random error, or maybe voters are more fearful of male nutjobs, because they back it up with testosterone. Testosterone is a very powerful hormone. Trust me. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 15, 2010, 12:00:41 AM
Sources within the Castle campaign have indicated that he will not be endorsing O'Donnell. He also says he won't be attempting any sort of write-in campaign.

One thing I like about Castle is that he has class. He is a fundamentally decent person. So few politicians do these days, including that woman in Alaska (well both of those women, come to think of it).

As did Simmons, and Campbell. Shame that out of the group of Moderate recruits in deep blue states only Kirk made it. The only you can least like, because of his embellishments. I was fine with the loss of Crist and Specter for a variety of reasons and the defeats of Murkowski and Bennet but I really wanted Castle, Simmons, and Campbell to win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 15, 2010, 12:02:00 AM
I just found out he was once photographed burning the Serbian flag outside the Serbian embassy and screaming pro-Kosovo slogans. So I hate him now.

Seems like a decent fellow.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Tender Branson on September 15, 2010, 12:03:10 AM
I´m not sure now which candidate is more beatable for Hodes: Ayotte or Mr. French

Because PPP (which will release their GE poll today) says this:

Quote
In New Hampshire though the electability gap has pretty much evaporated. Kelly Ayotte does only one point better against Paul Hodes than Ovide Lamontagne. That's quite a shift from our 2 previous polls in the state this cycle. Ayotte did 12 points better than Lamontagne in April and 8 points better as recently as July. And beyond that Lamontagne's net favorability is actually 15 points higher than Ayotte's, suggesting he might have more room to grow if he was indeed able to pull a last second upset tomorrow night.

So, Ayotte has more money and Mr. French guy has the better favorables.

I think I´d still prefer Mr. French guy because he has no money and his favorables can be damaged with a few last minute ads.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 15, 2010, 12:03:17 AM
2/3s in, Ayotte up by 700 votes 38-38.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 12:03:23 AM
NH with 201 of 301 and Ayotte up by 715:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: muon2 on September 15, 2010, 12:03:41 AM
Ayotte is holding an 800 vote lead with 70% in. This will be hard to call until basically all the vote is counted.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 15, 2010, 12:03:56 AM
Unless something weird is out there, I suspect Ayotte wins.  She's up by 700 now.

Torie is right - turnout on the Republican side seems a little low.  Probably hurt Lamontagne.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nhmagic on September 15, 2010, 12:05:14 AM
That's not true NCYank.  Denny f-in Hastert, Trent Lott, Tom Delay, Livingston, Dole, Frist (who supports Obamacare) and porker Mitch McConnell spent our way out of office, added new regulations and FDR-like invasions of freedom like the Patriot Act (which Obama quietly but enthusiastically supports).  The leadership doesn't just consist of those individuals however.  It also consists of entrenched individuals like Snowe, Collins, McCain and now Grahamnesty.  They were all working together not just to simply pass moderate policy (as something like a middle class tax cut would have been), but to add BRAND NEW entitlements and put a very liberal immigration plan together for pete's sake.

Most of them are Conservatives who lost their way.


Its hard to put them in the same group with Castle, Simmons, Kirk, Chafee. They may annoy you on issues but they certainly were not "in charge" at the time either. Quite the opposite.

Plus my defination of conservative differs from yours substantially, especially on defense. Some of the people who lost to the Tea Party like Norton, and Grayson were fine on Immigration and every other issue to be considered Hard Core Conservatives by myself and perfectly adequate ideologically. I am not an anti-war zealot, but I will agree Iraq was a mistake in hindsight, unless you have a time machine though so we could know then what we do now. I supported the Patriot Act, also. This is all the more surprising considering I was firmly opposed to the Iraq war in 2003.
NCYank what is the difference between a conservative who has lost their way and a liberal?  Those individuals have certainly not found their way back and do not deserve leadership.  That's why O'Donnell's victory was so important as a symbol.  It revealed how much they are against conservatives (whether of my stripe or yours).  They immediately announced that they were dropping financial support for her in the race - I guess that one couldn't wait for a quiet press release a couple of weeks later.  Norton is one of the few establishment endorsed individuals this cycle who has endorsed her winning opponent and held decent views.  Grayson has been such a sore loser that he hasn't even been able to endorse Paul and as he was being groomed by McConnell (who in order to win in 08 campaigned on the virtues of pork), I fully suspect that he would have been sending pork straight back home to KY.

I probably hold closer views to you than you think, but differ on the means.  The Patriot Act in a trustworthy person's hands can be a great tool to fight terrorism, yet in Obama's hands is an opening to an invasion of privacy like none other.  That's why it should not exist.  With that said, I think we need a decent defense structure that can also be offensive (particularly in Israel's case).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 15, 2010, 12:05:32 AM
Something else I should've pointed out in response to Beet's freaking out earlier, you don't really think Joe Biden won't be doing some visits home on behalf of Coons right? It's not like his current job doesn't allow him any free time.

I'm not freaking out man. The older republicans here, jmfcst, torie, and sam see things that none of us see, and they are saying we're in deep trouble.

Honestly Brtd, your posts are just bizzare. What's your point about Biden supposed to be? That he will somehow help Coons? Do you even think he's even that popular in Delaware anymore? I mean, ever since he's joined the administration he's mostly been known for dumb comments like "summer of recovery" and "500,000 jobs". Plus he represents all the old establishment baggage that's unpopular these days. If Obama's approval rating is really 50%, he could probably help Coons more than Biden.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 15, 2010, 12:05:55 AM
I just found out he was once photographed burning the Serbian flag outside the Serbian embassy and screaming pro-Kosovo slogans. So I hate him now.

Seems like a decent fellow.

He has Albanian ancestry. The bigots on Free Republic trashed him for that. They were about 10-1 pro Serbia, and anti Bosnia and Kosovo. I of course was in the minority, along with an retired CIA agent, who knew the region like the back of his hand. We used to PM each other, about all the vicious bigots, and some bent on near genocide. Some even wanted American troops to be killed, until JimRob decided his business model did not include the endorsing of killing American troops.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 15, 2010, 12:09:31 AM
Unless something weird is out there, I suspect Ayotte wins.  She's up by 700 now.

Torie is right - turnout on the Republican side seems a little low.  Probably hurt Lamontagne.

     Agreed. The consistent erosion of Lamontagne's position as the night went on has been intriguing, to say the least. I guess it validates the hypothesis that Manchester was an area of uncommon strength for Lamontagne.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 15, 2010, 12:09:46 AM
NH-02 has been called for Bass


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 15, 2010, 12:11:29 AM
I just found out he was once photographed burning the Serbian flag outside the Serbian embassy and screaming pro-Kosovo slogans. So I hate him now.

Seems like a decent fellow.

He has Albanian ancestry. The bigots on Free Republic trashed him for that. They were about 10-1 pro Serbia, and anti Bosnia and Kosovo. I of course was in the minority, along with an retired CIA agent, who knew the region like the back of his hand. We used to PM each other, about all the vicious bigots, and some bent on near genocide. Some even wanted American troops to be killed, until JimRob decided his business model did not include the endorsing of killing American troops.

     Is pro-Serbia sentiment normal? One of my best friends is Slovenian, & as such my view of the region has been informed by someone with a strongly anti-Serbian bent.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 15, 2010, 12:11:54 AM

Damn, I was hoping Horn would defeat that big spender.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 12:12:36 AM
AP hasn't called it last I checked, but I agree with Sam - Rice should be cooked by Schneiderman.  Brodsky seems to have hurt her in Westchester.   It also looks like Paladino is getting Edwards, not Ognibene, as his running mate, given what's still out.  Bizarrely, Paladino didn't help out Ognibene much in Erie County, while Long Islanders voted for Edwards, like Lazio would have wanted.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 15, 2010, 12:13:21 AM
I just found out he was once photographed burning the Serbian flag outside the Serbian embassy and screaming pro-Kosovo slogans. So I hate him now.

Seems like a decent fellow.

He has Albanian ancestry. The bigots on Free Republic trashed him for that. They were about 10-1 pro Serbia, and anti Bosnia and Kosovo. I of course was in the minority, along with an retired CIA agent, who knew the region like the back of his hand. We used to PM each other, about all the vicious bigots, and some bent on near genocide. Some even wanted American troops to be killed, until JimRob decided his business model did not include the endorsing of killing American troops.

     Is pro-Serbia sentiment normal? One of my best friends is Slovenian, & as such my view of the region has been informed by someone with a strongly anti-Serbian bent.

It was normal for fundamentalist Christians, who also hated Clinton, and since it was Clinton's war, that just fed the fire. I strongly supported Clinton in both endeavors. It was simply the only moral choice.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 15, 2010, 12:14:33 AM
I just found out he was once photographed burning the Serbian flag outside the Serbian embassy and screaming pro-Kosovo slogans. So I hate him now.

Seems like a decent fellow.

He has Albanian ancestry. The bigots on Free Republic trashed him for that. They were about 10-1 pro Serbia, and anti Bosnia and Kosovo. I of course was in the minority, along with an retired CIA agent, who knew the region like the back of his hand. We used to PM each other, about all the vicious bigots, and some bent on near genocide. Some even wanted American troops to be killed, until JimRob decided his business model did not include the endorsing of killing American troops.

     Is pro-Serbia sentiment normal? One of my best friends is Slovenian, & as such my view of the region has been informed by someone with a strongly anti-Serbian bent.

The Freepers probably liked the Serbs because they were Christian unlike the Muslim Bosniaks and Albanians. My position is that they were horrendous in Bosnia but really no worse than the Croats, and were certainly the better side in Kosovo which was basically a battle between an at least semi-democratic state and a terrorist insurgency.

Of course the Croats are Catholic, but that's not really why I don't like them so much, it has more to do with their fascist sympathies and Nazi supporting.

Oddly enough, there are probably FAR more fundamentalist Christians in Albania than Serbia today.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 12:16:45 AM
...and the AP calls NY-Dem-AG for Schneiderman.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 15, 2010, 12:16:54 AM
We can debate the doings in the former Yugoslavia another time BRTD. The Balkans become a big hobby of mine, and I read a ton about its history, from the beginning, because it was just so fascinating - and so F'ed up.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 12:18:32 AM
Ayotte's pulling away, up by almost 1,300 now with 238/301 in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 15, 2010, 12:20:46 AM
We've hit the one hour mark... Feel free to report anytime, D.C.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 15, 2010, 12:21:30 AM
...and the AP calls NY-Dem-AG for Schneiderman.

Not surprising.  I would say the ending margin will be somewhere between 10,000-12,000


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 12:22:14 AM
We've hit the one hour mark... Feel free to report anytime, D.C.

Why should they?  DC seems to want to win the title of slowest counter today, but New Hampshire is really giving them a run for their money.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 15, 2010, 12:31:25 AM
Alright, Ayotte and Guinta are both going to win. All that's left is D.C. which can go f**ck itself. I'm out.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 15, 2010, 12:36:21 AM
That's not true NCYank.  Denny f-in Hastert, Trent Lott, Tom Delay, Livingston, Dole, Frist (who supports Obamacare) and porker Mitch McConnell spent our way out of office, added new regulations and FDR-like invasions of freedom like the Patriot Act (which Obama quietly but enthusiastically supports).  The leadership doesn't just consist of those individuals however.  It also consists of entrenched individuals like Snowe, Collins, McCain and now Grahamnesty.  They were all working together not just to simply pass moderate policy (as something like a middle class tax cut would have been), but to add BRAND NEW entitlements and put a very liberal immigration plan together for pete's sake.

Most of them are Conservatives who lost their way.


Its hard to put them in the same group with Castle, Simmons, Kirk, Chafee. They may annoy you on issues but they certainly were not "in charge" at the time either. Quite the opposite.

Plus my defination of conservative differs from yours substantially, especially on defense. Some of the people who lost to the Tea Party like Norton, and Grayson were fine on Immigration and every other issue to be considered Hard Core Conservatives by myself and perfectly adequate ideologically. I am not an anti-war zealot, but I will agree Iraq was a mistake in hindsight, unless you have a time machine though so we could know then what we do now. I supported the Patriot Act, also. This is all the more surprising considering I was firmly opposed to the Iraq war in 2003.
NCYank what is the difference between a conservative who has lost their way and a liberal?  Those individuals have certainly not found their way back and do not deserve leadership.  That's why O'Donnell's victory was so important as a symbol.  It revealed how much they are against conservatives (whether of my stripe or yours).  They immediately announced that they were dropping financial support for her in the race - I guess that one couldn't wait for a quiet press release a couple of weeks later.  Norton is one of the few establishment endorsed individuals this cycle who has endorsed her winning opponent and held decent views.  Grayson has been such a sore loser that he hasn't even been able to endorse Paul and as he was being groomed by McConnell (who in order to win in 08 campaigned on the virtues of pork), I fully suspect that he would have been sending pork straight back home to KY.

I probably hold closer views to you than you think, but differ on the means.  The Patriot Act in a trustworthy person's hands can be a great tool to fight terrorism, yet in Obama's hands is an opening to an invasion of privacy like none other.  That's why it should not exist.  With that said, I think we need a decent defense structure that can also be offensive (particularly in Israel's case).

A big difference. A moderate Republican has values, usually. Chafee probably didn't, Specter didn't for sure but most do. You just don't agree with them. Those states (CT, DE, CA, ME, NY, and ILL). I don't expect states to elect people that are outside of that state's mainstream of political views. But if I have to choose between a far left Dem and somewhat liberal Moderate Republican. I want that Republican. I just don't expect him to vote on all that is brought forward. But he will get my party in controll of the committees and thus put my legislation on the floor. Even if they don't vote for it, by being their they unlock the votes of Lee, DeMint, Coburn etc because they can vote on Conservative legsilation not what Harry Reid or Chucky Cheese Schumer feels like putting up. That is the value in choosing a moderate Republican who can win over an unelectable Conservative and in this case a nutcase. It doesn't surrender my values, it strategically advances them by empower the Senators that are Conservatives from Al, NC, GA, WY, AK, UT, ID, KS, MO, OH, etc.

Now compare that to Trent Lott who for years claimed to be a Conservative, and Bill Frist who ran in 1994 as a Southern Conservative from states like MS and TN, that got into office running as conservatives in conservative states and as leaders brought us Amnesty, and pork. There are some Moderate Republicans with good scores on Immigration while "Conservatives" like Lott and Frist had D's and F's. CHRIS SHAYS, JIM GREENWORD, and even MIKE CASTLE  had B's from Americans for Better Immigration, higher then JD Hayworth's score actually. Sam Brownback, has a horrible Score on immigration, yet is considered by most as a Conservative. We were not betrayed by the Moderates, we were betrayed by the leadership. If you had reasonable and practical expectations of the Moderate Republicans beyond their primary use as warm bodies to get Republicans in control, then you would not regard their acts as "treason". They didn't betray sh**t. They are as they have always been. Most of the leadership that failed us were self-described Conservatives like Bush, Hastert, Delay, Lott and Frist. I also like Castle, Simmons, and Campbell as individual's as well. All of them had attractive qualities on a personal level. And while that may not advance anything on its own, it certainly would kill the Senate to have some more humans in there and few less robots for the camera.

If I were NRSC chair, I would have not only dropped support for candidacy but publically declared her unfitness for office. Thats why I am not NRSC Chair. :P You don't spend money on lost causes. The NRSC dropped support for Schafer in 2008. I really liked Schafer. But I didn't blame the NRSC, they did what they thought necessary to mediate loses and CO had become a lost cause at that point. I blamed the cycle. Here I would blame O'Donnell.

Grayson was not McConnell's clone. He was picked because he had connections to Jim Bunning and was thought to be the only one who could unite the KY GOP and not run into what McConnell did in 2008, by motivating the Conservative base. They wanted to remove Bunning but replace him with someone he knew and was "supposed" to support.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 15, 2010, 12:39:26 AM
Here is another good example. "Rino" Charlie Bass joined with Jeff Flake in early 2006 in an attempt to oust the GOP leadership in the House. Blunt, Boehner, Hastert, and all of Delay's people. I wouldn't call that treason, but an attempt to restore sanity after our real traitors had run us into the ground.

Continue blaming moderates for the out touch leadership. You are going after the wrong people.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dan the Roman on September 15, 2010, 12:57:13 AM
Guinta is performing quite poorly. Reinforces what i have heard about him running a bad campaign.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on September 15, 2010, 12:57:45 AM
What a nice present to wake up to!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 15, 2010, 01:01:14 AM
     NH-1 called for Guinta. Now we just need a call for NH-Sen & we are done here.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 01:04:17 AM
     NH-1 called for Guinta. Now we just need a call for NH-Sen & we are done here.

Rochester seems to be the biggest town out - 6 precincts.  Most of its county has been marginal.  Some towns on the Mass border west of Nashua are also out.  The rest of what's out is scattered.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 15, 2010, 01:12:04 AM
Karl Rove unloads on O'Donnell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Jlh1EsgS7Q&feature=player_embedded


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Marokai Backbeat on September 15, 2010, 01:17:21 AM
Karl Rove unloads on O'Donnell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Jlh1EsgS7Q&feature=player_embedded

Amazing.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 15, 2010, 01:17:43 AM
Even Dick Armey has thrashed her.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 01:21:48 AM
NH with 249/301 in and Ayotte (blue) up by 1,465 over Lamontagne (green):

()

Some random dude won Dixville with 3 votes (red).  Towns without polls are in yellow in this iteration of the map.  Tie=light gray.  Not reporting = dark gray.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 01:26:40 AM
AP called NY-Rep-Lt. Gov for Edwards.  It's an all-Western New York ticket versus Cuomo's balanced ticket.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 15, 2010, 01:38:44 AM
Karl Rove unloads on O'Donnell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Jlh1EsgS7Q&feature=player_embedded


Thank you Karl Rove for exposing Sean Hannity as the Neocon hack he is.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 01:52:07 AM
The 250th NH precinct - or a restatement or absentees - caused Ayotte's lead to fall from over 1,400 to 964.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on September 15, 2010, 01:56:29 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 15, 2010, 01:58:53 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

So what? It doesn't really matter how Paladino and Lazio end up splitting their 40% or so of the vote.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Ronnie on September 15, 2010, 02:01:50 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

ugh, why is he wasting his time?  Does he have any sense?  DOES HE ACTUALLY THINK THAT SPLITTING THE VOTE WITH ANOTHER REPUBLICAN WILL HELP HIS CHANCES, EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

ugh


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 15, 2010, 02:04:08 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

So what? It doesn't really matter how Paladino and Lazio end up splitting their 40% 30% or so of the vote.

Fixed


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: redcommander on September 15, 2010, 02:05:40 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

Maybe he will come in second place. Paladino is almost as big of a disaster as O'Donnell. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl on September 15, 2010, 02:08:20 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

So what? It doesn't really matter how Paladino and Lazio end up splitting their 40% 30% or so of the vote.

Fixed

Having both Paladino and Lazio on the ballot will probably bring Cuomo's share of the vote down a bit since both factions of the GOP will have their candidate to vote for.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Associate Justice PiT on September 15, 2010, 02:09:32 AM
     Ayotte's lead is now at 888 votes. She's in a good position, but it's not quite over yet.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 15, 2010, 02:11:53 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

So what? It doesn't really matter how Paladino and Lazio end up splitting their 40% 30% or so of the vote.

Fixed

Having both Paladino and Lazio on the ballot will probably bring Cuomo's share of the vote down a bit since both factions of the GOP will have their candidate to vote for.


  First off Cuomo was already going to get over 60% of the vote, rather easily.  Secondly, not sure how many people will even know Lazio is still going to be on the ballot.  Keep in mind he is completely broke.  


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 15, 2010, 02:13:24 AM
    Ayotte's lead is now at 888 votes. She's in a good position, but it's not quite over yet.

Up to 979 with 257/301 reporting


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 02:16:06 AM
Lunar-

Actually, it sucks to be Dinallo.  The AP revised the Orleans County tally - he lost big there, too.  John Leguizamo's relatives must not live there, either.  Coffee won the county.

BTW- How did Blakeman win Otsego County?  He's not from there, and I doubt the Cooperstown area voted any differently than its neighboring counties.  Perhaps the AP count has gone wacky.

ETA - Yup.  Otsego's website (http://www.otsegocounty.com/depts/boe/Results.htm) shows Malpass winning the county and Rice with nowhere near 50% of the vote there, as the AP claims.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 02:17:16 AM
    Ayotte's lead is now at 888 votes. She's in a good position, but it's not quite over yet.

Up to 979 with 257/301 reporting

Rochester was coming in, with Lamontagne winning the town by about 5 points.  Other towns must be putting Ayotte's lead back up.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 03:52:10 AM
No more movement in NH.  They will win the slowest reporting jurisdiction race.  Even DC's almost all in - Fenty lost, per the AP.

FWIW, a straight-line projection of NH-Sen-R assuming the missing towns come in in the same percentages as the towns already in in their county (both Republican+Undeclared turnout percentage and Ayotte/Lamontagne/Other percentage) gives Ayotte about a 1,075 vote win and a 0.77 point margin.  

We'll have to wait and see if reality reflects straight-line projected math.  Or I've even done it properly.

Lamontagne leads in Hillsborough (Manchester) and Rockingham (Portsmouth) counties.  Ayotte leads in all other counties.  Coos in North Country and Strafford (Rochester) are least in.  Belknap (Keene/SW NH) and Cheshire (Laconia/Lakes) are most in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: patrick1 on September 15, 2010, 04:04:04 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

So what? It doesn't really matter how Paladino and Lazio end up splitting their 40% 30% or so of the vote.

Fixed

Having both Paladino and Lazio on the ballot will probably bring Cuomo's share of the vote down a bit since both factions of the GOP will have their candidate to vote for.


  First off Cuomo was already going to get over 60% of the vote, rather easily.  Secondly, not sure how many people will even know Lazio is still going to be on the ballot.  Keep in mind he is completely broke.  

I voted for Lazio yesterday and will be voting for him in November. It is not for my like of Lazio, rather my extreme distaste for the other two.  I think this will have Conservative party ballot implications as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Oakvale on September 15, 2010, 05:43:58 AM
Yeah, so, the Republicans pretty much blew their chances of a Senate majority? Good work, Tea Party!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on September 15, 2010, 06:01:05 AM
Also, Doug Hoffman will be playing 3rd party spoiler in NY-23... again (link (http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/eyeon2010/2010/09/new-york-23.html)).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tmthforu94 on September 15, 2010, 06:48:09 AM
Also, Doug Hoffman will be playing 3rd party spoiler in NY-23... again (link (http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/eyeon2010/2010/09/new-york-23.html)).

This guy is so selfish. I question the judgment of anyone who would vote for him.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 15, 2010, 07:10:22 AM
Unless something weird is out there, I suspect Ayotte wins.  She's up by 700 now.

Torie is right - turnout on the Republican side seems a little low.  Probably hurt Lamontagne.

     Agreed. The consistent erosion of Lamontagne's position as the night went on has been intriguing, to say the least. I guess it validates the hypothesis that Manchester was an area of uncommon strength for Lamontagne.

Lamontagne performed well there and decently up north.  He performed very weakly out in the western part of the state.

My point about turnout is that he would have certainly benefitted from more independents showing up.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Verily on September 15, 2010, 07:30:23 AM
Hahah, Lazio will stay in the race on the Conservative line (link (http://twitter.com/kaitlynross1/status/24545320022)).

ugh, why is he wasting his time?  Does he have any sense?  DOES HE ACTUALLY THINK THAT SPLITTING THE VOTE WITH ANOTHER REPUBLICAN WILL HELP HIS CHANCES, EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE IN THE FIRST PLACE?

ugh

If the Conservative Party won less than 2% of the vote, they'd lose their automatic ballot access and die almost instantly, like what happened to the Liberal Party after 2002. He's trying to save the Conservatives.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Hash on September 15, 2010, 08:01:27 AM
Does Lamontagne have a chance of pulling back ahead with the remaining 44 polls?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: rbt48 on September 15, 2010, 09:04:46 AM
One would almost think that NH knew it had a good close race here and decided to drag out the drama as long as reasonably possible. 

What a stark contrast from the speed that Dixville Notch reports compared with other parts of the state!


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on September 15, 2010, 09:29:08 AM
Well, since the smoke has cleared here in Massachusetts, let me run down some of the key race.

Overall, surprisingly good turnout for Republicans, who had only one statewide primary (that ended in a lopsided romp).

MA-10
On the Republican side, it looks like my predictions of a Perry romp were accurate. He scored 31,361 votes -- that's 62% -- to Malone's 14,875 (29%) with a couple others bringing up the rear. In fact, Perry got more votes than the Democratic nominee, Norfolk DA Bill Keating (28,617), who narrowly edged State Sen. O'Leary (27,817). Democratic turnout barely outpaced Republican turnout, despite both sides having highly competitive primaries (and despite this being, you know, Massachusetts). That's a dead canary kind of warning in a D+5 district.

MA Attorney General
Martha Coakley was unopposed. The real news here is that Republicans were able to get someone nominated -- Jim McKenna -- via write-in ballots. (That's no small feat, considering 10,000 people had to write him in statewide.) McKenna's presence on the ballot means Republicans have fielded a candidate for every constitutional office here in Massachusetts for the first time in a long while. This race has potential, if only because McKenna is gifted with Coakley's huge negatives and benefits from a strong GOP environment nationally.

MA Treasurer
Grossman (D) won with 61%. Not much surprise here. He faces State Rep. Karyn Polito (R) in November. Grossman is the early favorite, of course, but Polito is unusually well funded for a GOP challenger.

MA Auditor
Democrats got their best nominee in Suzanne Bump, who won 50% against two opponents. On the GOP side, Mary Z. Connaughton slaughtered her opponent, Kamal Jain, with 87% of the vote. This one, I think, has the potential to be an interesting race -- Connaughton has a great message in that she's the candidate for auditor who is actually an auditor.

Elsewhere in the Commonwealth
There were a few other interesting races here and there. Golnik (R) beat Maes for the right to face Rep. Niki Tsongas (D) in MA-05. A few state reps lost their primary, including Pam Richardson (D) out in Framingham.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 09:38:42 AM
MA-10
On the Republican side, it looks like my predictions of a Perry romp were accurate. He scored 31,361 votes -- that's 62% -- to Malone's 14,875 (29%) with a couple others bringing up the rear. In fact, Perry got more votes than the Democratic nominee, Norfolk DA Bill Keating (28,617), who narrowly edged State Sen. O'Leary (27,817). Democratic turnout barely outpaced Republican turnout, despite both sides having highly competitive primaries (and despite this being, you know, Massachusetts). That's a dead canary kind of warning in a D+5 district.

How many people voted in the 1996 Delahunt-Johnston match? I can't find that number anywhere. That would be a good point of comparison.

Keating's going to pound Perry on his "I frisked a girl and I liked it" problem. 45,000 votes is good for a Republican primary in a Mass. congressional district, but he'll need a lot more than that to win and will have to be careful not be completely defined by his scandal if he wants to ride general Republican coattails to win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on September 15, 2010, 10:09:29 AM
How many people voted in the 1996 Delahunt-Johnston match? I can't find that number anywhere. That would be a good point of comparison.

You didn't look hard enough!  :)

In the 1996 Democratic primary, 47,484 people showed up. Compare that to the GOP side, where turnout stood at 20,269 for a similarly crowded race.


Keating's going to pound Perry on his "I frisked a girl and I liked it" problem. 45,000 votes is good for a Republican primary in a Mass. congressional district, but he'll need a lot more than that to win and will have to be careful not be completely defined by his scandal if he wants to ride general Republican coattails to win.

I guess it depends on how Keating spins it. Had Perry been the one doing the strip searching, it'd be much more of a slam dunk issue.

It clearly wasn't enough to cause Perry any problem in the primary.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 10:34:55 AM
In the 1996 Democratic primary, 47,484 people showed up. Compare that to the GOP side, where turnout stood at 20,269 for a similarly crowded race.

It's reassuring to me that this primary drew so many more Dems. But, yeah, in this district in this year, Keating is going to have to win over a lot of independents who voted for Scott Brown over Coakley, which is doable but not a gimme.

Quote

Had Perry been the one doing the strip searching, it'd be much more of a slam dunk issue.

I have a wicked little hope that by Election Day, most people will think it was him because that's what they digest from the news.

The quotes from his supervisor etc. will make for a strong attack ad. Whether it works, we'll see.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 15, 2010, 10:43:44 AM
You  have just got to love the Manchester Union Leader, bless it.  Here (http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Senate%3a+Ayotte%2c+Lamontagne+in+tight+race&articleId=7d9f849a-0b1e-4da8-933f-ad8f3287e29e) is how its front page story starts off regarding the Senate race:

Quote
Riding a surge of late-breaking support from conservatives and even mainstream Republicans who grew tired of his foes' negative campaign tactics, 52-year-old Ovide M. Lamontagne was desperately trying early this morning to hold onto a lead he mounted in initial returns and pull off an epic upset in the GOP U.S. Senate primary.

:P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 15, 2010, 10:59:06 AM
Karl Rove unloads on O'Donnell

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Jlh1EsgS7Q&feature=player_embedded

Amazing.

Well the silver lining of watching that interview is that Hannity was well - owned by Karl - totally.  It is sad that Hannity will probably still be on the tube doing his brand of "journalism" when I depart from this mortal coil. He will just be around forever. Folks seem to lap up his agitprop as if it were a nice chilled glass of Gray Goose.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 15, 2010, 11:08:57 AM
I would hate to have been Beau Biden today.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 11:20:45 AM
I would hate to have been Beau Biden today.

Serves him right for treating this opportunity so cavalierly. If he wanted to be a U.S. Senator, he should have fought for the chance.

I'm biased, I hate the idea of Beau Biden being handed the Senate seat. Whatever good he's done in his military service and trying to build up his own career... the royalty aspect is gross.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Badger on September 15, 2010, 11:45:23 AM
Frankly, a competative Castle-Beau Biden race in November would've greatly highlighted the issue of electability in the GOP primary. Played to the average primary voter, that might have been enough of a difference for Castle to win.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 12:42:52 PM
Ayotte declared the winner in NH.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 12:45:24 PM

No doubt true, but by whom?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Sam Spade on September 15, 2010, 12:46:22 PM
Frankly, a competative Castle-Beau Biden race in November would've greatly highlighted the issue of electability in the GOP primary. Played to the average primary voter, that might have been enough of a difference for Castle to win.

Castle-Biden was never going to happen because neither of the parties who could make it happen wanted to.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 12:56:14 PM

Secretary of State in NH.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 12:57:42 PM

AP is still stuck on 274/301 - and hasn't declared a winner.  Is someone else showing complete returns?

Edit: I see the NH SoS (http://www.sos.nh.gov/stateprimary%202010/index2010.htm) has the tally at  Ayotte 53,044  Lamontagne 51,377, with no further details as to town breakdown.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Citizen (The) Doctor on September 15, 2010, 01:01:59 PM
I see a recount coming.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 01:03:54 PM

Margin is too big for Lamontagne to risk dragging this out unless he's nuts.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 01:06:43 PM

Margin is too big for Lamontagne to risk dragging this out unless he's nuts.

Well, assuming the margin is under 2%, it won't cost him much - $500 or $1,000, depending on whether it's under 1%.  Right now, it appears to be in between 1 and 2% (though the exact difference depends on how many votes others received in the final tally, which we don't know).


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 15, 2010, 01:09:44 PM

Margin is too big for Lamontagne to risk dragging this out unless he's nuts.

He's a tea partier. The nutiness is implied.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 01:18:23 PM
A new NH law (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2010/HB1535.html) requires the margin be within 1.5% of the total ballots cast in the primary in order to be eligible for recount.   Lamontagne is almost certainly within that threshhold.  But he only has until 5PM today to decide whether to request a recount.



Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 02:35:35 PM

Margin is too big for Lamontagne to risk dragging this out unless he's nuts.

He's a tea partier. The nutiness is implied.

Coons once called himself a "bearded marxist".  The nuttiness is implied.

See how that works?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 15, 2010, 02:39:46 PM

Margin is too big for Lamontagne to risk dragging this out unless he's nuts.

He's a tea partier. The nutiness is implied.

Coons once called himself a "bearded marxist".  The nuttiness is implied.

See how that works?

Marxism = "Nutty" is subjective.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 02:48:26 PM

Margin is too big for Lamontagne to risk dragging this out unless he's nuts.

He's a tea partier. The nutiness is implied.

Coons once called himself a "bearded marxist".  The nuttiness is implied.

See how that works?

Marxism = "Nutty" is subjective.

Tea Party = "Nutty" is subjective, except to "progressives" who think the tea party is the devil.  Marxism = "Nutty" is subjective, except to conservatives who think Marxism is the devil.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 03:14:29 PM
One more Delaware map, this time of the close Republican race for US House:

()

Rollins (in blue) lost to Urquhart (in green) by less than 700 votes.  Why was it closer than the Castle-O'Donnell race?  Well, Rollins won some New Castle RDs south of about I-95/295 and didn't get as slaughtered in Sussex County.  Rollins won that one Kent County RD by 3 votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 15, 2010, 03:24:28 PM
I would hate to have been Beau Biden today.

Serves him right for treating this opportunity so cavalierly. If he wanted to be a U.S. Senator, he should have fought for the chance.

I'm biased, I hate the idea of Beau Biden being handed the Senate seat. Whatever good he's done in his military service and trying to build up his own career... the royalty aspect is gross.

IMO, his inheriting the Senate seat would be in keeping with the traditions of the Senate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 03:35:08 PM
Lamontagne conceded (http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Ayotte+defeats+Lamontagne+in+U.S.+Senate+primary&articleId=7d9f849a-0b1e-4da8-933f-ad8f3287e29e) and will not seek a recount.

In Alaska (http://www.adn.com/2010/09/14/1454693/murkowski-to-reveal-her-intentions.html), Murkowski will announce whether she will run a write-in campaign on Friday.  IIRC, today is the deadline for another party's candidate to step down and nominate her instead.  It looks like the Libertarians and Democrats will not do so.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 03:47:54 PM
Looking at the NY numbers, if I were Carolyn McCarthy, I'd be a bit concerned that there were only a couple thousand fewer Republican votes cast NY-04 Republican primary than in the hotly-contested NY-01 race - or even Peter King's NY-03 primary.

Not only that - but thus far, there were 2,500 more votes cast in Nassau for the Republican Gubernatorial race than for the Democratic AG race - even though the Nassau DA was running in the AGs race, which heated up the airwaves.

Just saying.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 03:56:37 PM
Looking at the NY numbers, if I were Carolyn McCarthy, I'd be a bit concerned that there were only a couple thousand fewer Republican votes cast NY-04 Republican primary than in the hotly-contested NY-01 race - or even Peter King's NY-03 primary.  

Just saying.

Good find. Only 23,000 votes cast in a primary is a much greater concern for Republicans in NY-1 than 21,000 Republicans should be for Democrats in NY-4. On the same day, the Republican primary in MA-10 drew over 50,000 with no marquee state-level races to speak of.

The Republican in NY-4 is going to need far, far more than 10,000 votes to get to Washington.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 04:09:27 PM
Looking at the NY numbers, if I were Carolyn McCarthy, I'd be a bit concerned that there were only a couple thousand fewer Republican votes cast NY-04 Republican primary than in the hotly-contested NY-01 race - or even Peter King's NY-03 primary.  

Just saying.

Good find. Only 23,000 votes cast in a primary is a much greater concern for Republicans in NY-1 than 21,000 Republicans should be for Democrats in NY-4. On the same day, the Republican primary in MA-10 drew over 50,000 with no marquee state-level races to speak of.

The Republican in NY-4 is going to need far, far more than 10,000 votes to get to Washington.

Aren't Massachusetts primaries quasi-open, with Unaffiliateds able to vote in either party's primaries?  New York's are about as closed as they can be - party members only; no election day changes permitted.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 04:12:19 PM
Aren't Massachusetts primaries quasi-open, with Unaffiliateds able to vote in either party's primaries?  New York's are about as closed as they can be - party members only; no election day changes permitted.

Good point. Although I suppose this would matter if we posited that there are independents who would have voted in the NY-4 GOP primary if they could have... and the jury is out on that.

I don't think 20,000 votes cast in NY-4 is that significant. Nassau used to have a fearsome Republican machine and there are surely that many old folks in the district who'd come out to vote for the nominee for governor. We know Republican core voters are engaged this year. But that's not a basis for victory in that district in this day and age.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 04:55:10 PM
Aren't Massachusetts primaries quasi-open, with Unaffiliateds able to vote in either party's primaries?  New York's are about as closed as they can be - party members only; no election day changes permitted.

Good point. Although I suppose this would matter if we posited that there are independents who would have voted in the NY-4 GOP primary if they could have... and the jury is out on that.

I don't think 20,000 votes cast in NY-4 is that significant. Nassau used to have a fearsome Republican machine and there are surely that many old folks in the district who'd come out to vote for the nominee for governor. We know Republican core voters are engaged this year. But that's not a basis for victory in that district in this day and age.

It's not the overall vote total I'm talking about - it's the relative number of votes cast in each primary.  That voters in NY-04 turned out in about the same numbers as more hotly contested races that everyone is watching matters.  And there are fewer registered NY-04 Republicans than NY-01 or NY-03 to boot.  That (so far) with all but 20 precincts reporting, fewer Democrats turned out to vote in Nassau County than Republicans when their own DA was in a hotly contested, heavily advertised race for AG says a lot about the mood in the suburbs. As of 4/1, Democrats had about a 17,000 active voter registration advantage in Nassau.  It's not as Republican as you think.

I said if I were McCarthy, I'd be concerned - not that she would definitely or is even likely to lose.  McCarthy can't just sit back and expect to win re-election.  Not this cycle.  

Keep an eye on NY-04.  It could be a sleeper.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 15, 2010, 05:12:41 PM
Aren't Massachusetts primaries quasi-open, with Unaffiliateds able to vote in either party's primaries?  New York's are about as closed as they can be - party members only; no election day changes permitted.

Good point. Although I suppose this would matter if we posited that there are independents who would have voted in the NY-4 GOP primary if they could have... and the jury is out on that.

I don't think 20,000 votes cast in NY-4 is that significant. Nassau used to have a fearsome Republican machine and there are surely that many old folks in the district who'd come out to vote for the nominee for governor. We know Republican core voters are engaged this year. But that's not a basis for victory in that district in this day and age.

It's not the overall vote total I'm talking about - it's the relative number of votes cast in each primary.  That voters in NY-04 turned out in about the same numbers as more hotly contested races that everyone is watching matters.  And there are fewer registered NY-04 Republicans than NY-01 or NY-03 to boot.  That (so far) with all but 20 precincts reporting, fewer Democrats turned out to vote in Nassau County than Republicans when their own DA was in a hotly contested, heavily advertised race for AG says a lot about the mood in the suburbs. As of 4/1, Democrats had about a 17,000 active voter registration advantage in Nassau.  It's not as Republican as you think.

I said if I were McCarthy, I'd be concerned - not that she would definitely or is even likely to lose.  McCarthy can't just sit back and expect to win re-election.  Not this cycle.  

Keep an eye on NY-04.  It could be a sleeper.


I don't think is much room for concern.  Yes, Rice is the Nassau DA, and the AG race received quite a bit of attention, but this is still the AG race we are talking out.  The top of the Primary ticket was an AG race on one side and a Gov race on the other.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 05:25:52 PM
I don't think is much room for concern.  Yes, Rice is the Nassau DA, and the AG race received quite a bit of attention, but this is still the AG race we are talking out.  The top of the Primary ticket was an AG race on one side and a Gov race on the other.

Well, I hope McCarthy feels the same way and goes the way of Suozzi.  However, I think her campaign staff is smarter than that.

Perhaps they were more prevalent on cable, but I didn't see a single ad for the NY Republican governor's race and only received a few mailers, mainly from Paladino.  Kathleen Rice's ads were on TV 24-7, as were Schneiderman's and Coffey's and Dinallo's.  And there were Senate primaries on both sides.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 15, 2010, 05:34:30 PM
I don't think is much room for concern.  Yes, Rice is the Nassau DA, and the AG race received quite a bit of attention, but this is still the AG race we are talking out.  The top of the Primary ticket was an AG race on one side and a Gov race on the other.

Well, I hope McCarthy feels the same way and goes the way of Suozzi.  However, I think her campaign staff is smarter than that.

Perhaps they were more prevalent on cable, but I didn't see a single ad for the NY Republican governor's race and only received a few mailers, mainly from Paladino.  Kathleen Rice's ads were on TV 24-7, as were Schneiderman's and Coffey's and Dinallo's.  And there were Senate primaries on both sides.

Some ads were on cable.  Also keep in mind in addition to the Governor's race on the GOP side which had a Long Island connection with Lazio, both Senate races had Long Island connections as well.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nclib on September 15, 2010, 05:46:03 PM
The results in Delaware are incredible. It shows the right-wing wants to push conservative candidates at all cost (even ironically control of the Senate). Even Karl Rove admitted that O'Donnell isn't conservative in personal life (lies, ethics charges, etc.). Certainly the far-left is far more pragmatic--can anyone even imagine an inverse situation happening for the Dems?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: nclib on September 15, 2010, 05:49:58 PM
Lamontagne leads in Hillsborough (Manchester) and Rockingham (Portsmouth) counties.  Ayotte leads in all other counties.

Is this still true? What are the best county % for each?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 15, 2010, 05:49:59 PM
The problem with NY-04 is that the Republicans nominated the candidate who has very little money (Fran Becker: $88k raised, $25k on hand), not the one that has been fundraising fairly proficiently (Frank Scaturro: $558k raised, $208k on hand). Yes, yes, blah blah blah, money isn't everything, but come on, it's Long Island. That won't buy you a single TV ad. He also looks a bit unhinged on the issues (http://www.beckerforcongress.com/issues.php) for a fairly Democratic district. And of course, the Long Island candidate didn't win the gubernatorial primary.

Anyway, here's a map of the Wisconsin gubernatorial primary.

()

The gray county (Meonomenee -- do do dododo) had zero Republican primary votes.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 06:04:04 PM
Lamontagne leads in Hillsborough (Manchester) and Rockingham (Portsmouth) counties.  Ayotte leads in all other counties.

Is this still true? What are the best county % for each?

Unless I've screwed up the Excel lookup functions, yes.  Ayotte's best county was Sullivan, where she took 45.3% of the vote thus far (not all is in in the AP's count).  It was also Lamontagne's worst - he only won 26.6%.   Lamontagne's best was Hillsborough, where he won 41.4%.  Ayotte's worst was actually Rockingham, largely because Binnie had a better showing there than most other places.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 15, 2010, 06:30:56 PM
Is O'Donnell's site having a Sharron Angle style "re-tool"?
http://christine2010.com/

There's only the donation notice...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tmthforu94 on September 15, 2010, 06:47:19 PM
Is O'Donnell's site having a Sharron Angle style "re-tool"?
http://christine2010.com/

There's only the donation notice...
I noticed that too...
Question: Can Mike Castle run as an Independent?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey on September 15, 2010, 06:51:11 PM
Is O'Donnell's site having a Sharron Angle style "re-tool"?
http://christine2010.com/

There's only the donation notice...
I noticed that too...
Question: Can Mike Castle run as an Independent?

Given the fact that that's never been brought up on the forum, I'm guessing he can't (but I could be wrong), though he could probably run a write-in campaign.

If that were to happen though, I could see Mike Castle and Chris Coons splitting the left wing vote (Castle would probably be best off not running on the right at this point, Christine O'Donnell's supporters aren't bolting), allowing O'Donnell to win election with a 1912 mandate.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 07:02:36 PM
Is O'Donnell's site having a Sharron Angle style "re-tool"?
http://christine2010.com/

There's only the donation notice...

Someone's been reading left-wing talking points. The DNC's website was down yesterday.  Did it have a Sharon Angle style "re-tool", trying to forget the "progressive" mistakes of the past?

O'Donnell's website reportedly crashed from the attention.  She's having a fund raiser - and raised almost $750,000 so far today.  Democrats should be afraid - not necessarily of O'Donnell, but of the political climate that brought her to victory.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 15, 2010, 07:34:41 PM
Given the fact that that's never been brought up on the forum, I'm guessing he can't (but I could be wrong), though he could probably run a write-in campaign.

It has, and he can't, and he won't run as a write-in.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tmthforu94 on September 15, 2010, 08:21:29 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Brittain33 on September 15, 2010, 08:21:36 PM
Cinyc, my response would be that if only 25,000 votes were cast in NY-1, the assumption that the race was "hotly contested" and sets a standard for high turnout is in question. You're judging NY-4 in relation to NY-1, but I question if NY-1 means what you argue it does.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 15, 2010, 08:26:15 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...

Hasn't he been saying that for months? As per usual his claims have nothing to do with reality.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Хahar 🤔 on September 15, 2010, 08:28:14 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...

Do you bring this up to laugh at Dick, or because you think that the information is important?


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 15, 2010, 10:27:41 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...

Dick Morris is simply wrong.  I think Gillibrand's race is going to be closer than most think for various technical reasons, but her seat is not in play right now.  And DioGuardi probably doesn't have the money or name recognition to make it become in play.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee on September 15, 2010, 10:42:40 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...

Don't beleive anything that guy says. I long for that days when Alan Colmes actually called him out, now Hannity just hangs on his every word with no accountability.

Once again, NY-04 picks the worst possible choice to run against McCarthy. As such, McCarthy's stint in Congress will continue for sure.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Beet on September 15, 2010, 10:56:42 PM
Frankly, I thought DioGuardi would do better than he did. It's amazing that Malpass nearly knocked him off.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 16, 2010, 01:18:21 AM
If this was a different year and I was in a weird mood... who knows... maybe I'd give the old bastard my first ever Republican vote.

He's not winning anything serious again though. lol.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 16, 2010, 06:14:44 AM
What are everyone's predictions for tomorrow?

DE:

US Senate (GOP):
O'Donnell 54%
Castle 46%

DC:

Mayor (DEM):
Gray 49%
Fenty 40%

NH:

US Senate (GOP):
Ayotte 39%
Lamontagne 35%
Binnie 17%
Bender 9%

NY:

Governor (GOP):
Paladino 52%
Lazio 48%

US Senator Special (DEM):
Gillibrand 76%
Goode 24%

US Senator Special (GOP)
DioGuardi should win. I found out today that he is strongly against the Iraq and Afghanistan blunders. That's pretty interesting.

US Senator (GOP)
No clue who'll win this. Flip a coin.

Attorney General (DEM)
Schneiderman 34%
Rice 33%
Sean Coffey 16%
Dinallo 9%
Brodsky 8%

NY-14 (DEM)
Maloney wins big.

NY-15 (DEM)
Rangel survives. It won't be very close.

NY-23 (GOP)
Doheny over Hoffman. I'm not sure about the margin here.

Hmm, not a bad showing if I don't say so myself (called Gillibrand-Goode exactly right!). I'm still a bit shocked by the size of Paladino's margin though.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on September 16, 2010, 07:21:58 AM
O'Donnell's website reportedly crashed from the attention.  She's having a fund raiser - and raised almost $750,000 so far today.  Democrats should be afraid - not necessarily of O'Donnell, but of the political climate that brought her to victory.

Congratulations to Christine O'Donnell, who has the distinction of being both a symptom and a disease at the same time.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 16, 2010, 08:37:45 AM
Paladino won Erie County 93-7.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: WMS on September 16, 2010, 12:20:26 PM

- MA-09 (D) - Conservadem Stephen Lynch faces a challenge from the left in attorney Mac D'Alessandro. Lynch, of course, has a large cash advantage.

- RI-02 (D) - Rep. Jim Langevin faces two primary challengers, the more significant being State Rep. Betsy Dennigan, but he should have little trouble winning another term.

Oh, I'm calling BS. Is being pro-life, in and of itself, enough to be called a 'conservadem'? Nice to see liberal tolerance is still going strong. ::)

Oh, and both of these fine pro-life Democrats won their primaries. Neener neener neener. :P


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Lief 🗽 on September 16, 2010, 12:23:55 PM
Lynch is presumably a conservadem because he voted against Obamacare.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 16, 2010, 12:24:37 PM

- MA-09 (D) - Conservadem Stephen Lynch faces a challenge from the left in attorney Mac D'Alessandro. Lynch, of course, has a large cash advantage.

- RI-02 (D) - Rep. Jim Langevin faces two primary challengers, the more significant being State Rep. Betsy Dennigan, but he should have little trouble winning another term.

Oh, I'm calling BS. Is being pro-life, in and of itself, enough to be called a 'conservadem'? Nice to see liberal tolerance is still going strong. ::)

Oh, and both of these fine pro-life Democrats won their primaries. Neener neener neener. :P

We're a bit more tolerant of dissenting opinions than the GOP then clearly.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 16, 2010, 12:30:03 PM

- MA-09 (D) - Conservadem Stephen Lynch faces a challenge from the left in attorney Mac D'Alessandro. Lynch, of course, has a large cash advantage.

- RI-02 (D) - Rep. Jim Langevin faces two primary challengers, the more significant being State Rep. Betsy Dennigan, but he should have little trouble winning another term.

Oh, I'm calling BS. Is being pro-life, in and of itself, enough to be called a 'conservadem'? Nice to see liberal tolerance is still going strong. ::)

Oh, and both of these fine pro-life Democrats won their primaries. Neener neener neener. :P

Lynch got his primary challenge because of his vote on healthcare. Dennigan also didn't really mention Langevin's pro-life stances during the campaign. Neither of these races had anything to do with abortion.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: You kip if you want to... on September 16, 2010, 12:41:22 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...
()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 16, 2010, 05:58:57 PM

- MA-09 (D) - Conservadem Stephen Lynch faces a challenge from the left in attorney Mac D'Alessandro. Lynch, of course, has a large cash advantage.

- RI-02 (D) - Rep. Jim Langevin faces two primary challengers, the more significant being State Rep. Betsy Dennigan, but he should have little trouble winning another term.

Oh, I'm calling BS. Is being pro-life, in and of itself, enough to be called a 'conservadem'? Nice to see liberal tolerance is still going strong. ::)

Oh, and both of these fine pro-life Democrats won their primaries. Neener neener neener. :P

I didn't say anything about Langevin's ideology? And Lynch is pretty conservative for a guy in a safe Dem district.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Filuwaúrdjan on September 16, 2010, 06:38:03 PM
Though not really for that district. In any case, that he could even be thought as such is an indication of how the meaning of the term 'conservative democrat' has shifted almost out of recognition over the past couple of decades.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 16, 2010, 07:23:36 PM
Strange video: http://videoshare.politico.com/singletitlevideo.php?bcpid=19407224001&bctid=610259329001

Neither O'Reilly or Palin can remember who she endorsed in New Hampshire. Or Palin didn't understand O'Reilly was taking to her. But O'Reilly also makes it sounds like the guy he's talking about is Lamontagne and that he was endorsed by Palin and that he won, when in fact Palin endorsed Kelly Ayotte and she won.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: xavier110 on September 16, 2010, 07:35:23 PM
Strange video: http://videoshare.politico.com/singletitlevideo.php?bcpid=19407224001&bctid=610259329001

Neither O'Reilly or Palin can remember who she endorsed in New Hampshire. Or Palin didn't understand O'Reilly was taking to her. But O'Reilly also makes it sounds like the guy he's talking about is Lamontagne and that he was endorsed by Palin and that he won, when in fact Palin endorsed Kelly Ayotte and she won.

LMAO <3 Sarah.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: patrick1 on September 16, 2010, 10:22:14 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...

Don't beleive anything that guy says. I long for that days when Alan Colmes actually called him out, now Hannity just hangs on his every word with no accountability.

Once again, NY-04 picks the worst possible choice to run against McCarthy. As such, McCarthy's stint in Congress will continue for sure.

Fran Becker has run before and he will put out good numbers in my neighborhood (he is from here).  He will also be able to capitalize on an enthusiasm gap that I think is palpable right now.  However, it the end this will not be able to put him over the top, only slightly closer.
I honestly think the other Republican fella was hurt by his youth- he looked about 15 in his campaign mailings.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 16, 2010, 10:54:35 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...

Don't beleive anything that guy says. I long for that days when Alan Colmes actually called him out, now Hannity just hangs on his every word with no accountability.

Once again, NY-04 picks the worst possible choice to run against McCarthy. As such, McCarthy's stint in Congress will continue for sure.

Fran Becker has run before and he will put out good numbers in my neighborhood (he is from here).  He will also be able to capitalize on an enthusiasm gap that I think is palpable right now.  However, it the end this will not be able to put him over the top, only slightly closer.
I honestly think the other Republican fella was hurt by his youth- he looked about 15 in his campaign mailings.


I don't think Fran has run before (unless he didn't make it out of the Primary in another year).  Are you sure you aren't thinking of his brother Greg, who ran against McCarthy in 98 and 2000??  As a side note his father Frank represented parts of what is now the 4th during parts of  the 50's and 60's (was the 3rd and 5th during that time)

Regardless, doesn't have a chance.  Probably does a bit better than Martins who lost 64-36, but won't get anywhere close to winning or making it competitive.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 16, 2010, 11:08:09 PM
I don't think Fran has run before (unless he didn't make it out of the Primary in another year).  Are you sure you aren't thinking of his brother Greg, who ran against McCarthy in 98 and 2000??  As a side note his father Frank represented parts of what is now the 4th during parts of  the 50's and 60's (was the 3rd and 5th during that time)

Regardless, doesn't have a chance.  Probably does a bit better than Martins who lost 64-36, but won't get anywhere close to winning or making it competitive.

Tom Suozzi was a shoe-in for reelection, too.  Republicans didn't have a chance.  Ditto County Executive Spano in Westchester.  That county's too Democratic; a Republican couldn't possibly have won the seat.  Yet one did.  And the political environment is worse for Democrats now than it was a year ago.

Long Island Democrats should be very wary, lest they go the way of Tom Suozzi.  If they haven't learned that lesson, they deserve to lose.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: patrick1 on September 16, 2010, 11:10:56 PM
According to Dick Morris, Gillibrand's seat is now in play...

Don't beleive anything that guy says. I long for that days when Alan Colmes actually called him out, now Hannity just hangs on his every word with no accountability.

Once again, NY-04 picks the worst possible choice to run against McCarthy. As such, McCarthy's stint in Congress will continue for sure.

Fran Becker has run before and he will put out good numbers in my neighborhood (he is from here).  He will also be able to capitalize on an enthusiasm gap that I think is palpable right now.  However, it the end this will not be able to put him over the top, only slightly closer.
I honestly think the other Republican fella was hurt by his youth- he looked about 15 in his campaign mailings.


I don't think Fran has run before (unless he didn't make it out of the Primary in another year).  Are you sure you aren't thinking of his brother Greg, who ran against McCarthy in 98 and 2000??  As a side note his father Frank represented parts of what is now the 4th during parts of  the 50's and 60's (was the 3rd and 5th during that time)

Regardless, doesn't have a chance.  Probably does a bit better than Martins who lost 64-36, but won't get anywhere close to winning or making it competitive.

Haha, yeah you are exactly right. I was thinking of Greg.  I kinda lump them all in together. His brother Hilary runs the largest real estate biz in town.  Those races were before I moved to this district.  I agree with you on the race,  I see it could be around 55-45.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tmthforu94 on September 16, 2010, 11:28:18 PM
Strange video: http://videoshare.politico.com/singletitlevideo.php?bcpid=19407224001&bctid=610259329001

Neither O'Reilly or Palin can remember who she endorsed in New Hampshire. Or Palin didn't understand O'Reilly was taking to her. But O'Reilly also makes it sounds like the guy he's talking about is Lamontagne and that he was endorsed by Palin and that he won, when in fact Palin endorsed Kelly Ayotte and she won.
I don't think Palin could hear him, based on her facial expressions.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 16, 2010, 11:35:34 PM
I don't think Fran has run before (unless he didn't make it out of the Primary in another year).  Are you sure you aren't thinking of his brother Greg, who ran against McCarthy in 98 and 2000??  As a side note his father Frank represented parts of what is now the 4th during parts of  the 50's and 60's (was the 3rd and 5th during that time)

Regardless, doesn't have a chance.  Probably does a bit better than Martins who lost 64-36, but won't get anywhere close to winning or making it competitive.

Tom Suozzi was a shoe-in for reelection, too.  Republicans didn't have a chance.  Ditto County Executive Spano in Westchester.  That county's too Democratic; a Republican couldn't possibly have won the seat.  Yet one did.  And the political environment is worse for Democrats now than it was a year ago.

Long Island Democrats should be very wary, lest they go the way of Tom Suozzi.  If they haven't learned that lesson, they deserve to lose.

Ehh, I doubt Becker will have the PBA shilling for him the way Managno did.  Also the 4th is quite a bit more Democratic than Nassau as a whole, and one key factor that wasn't present last year is the top of the ticket, which will be a Democratic landslide.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: patrick1 on September 17, 2010, 12:10:59 AM
I don't think Fran has run before (unless he didn't make it out of the Primary in another year).  Are you sure you aren't thinking of his brother Greg, who ran against McCarthy in 98 and 2000??  As a side note his father Frank represented parts of what is now the 4th during parts of  the 50's and 60's (was the 3rd and 5th during that time)

Regardless, doesn't have a chance.  Probably does a bit better than Martins who lost 64-36, but won't get anywhere close to winning or making it competitive.

Tom Suozzi was a shoe-in for reelection, too.  Republicans didn't have a chance.  Ditto County Executive Spano in Westchester.  That county's too Democratic; a Republican couldn't possibly have won the seat.  Yet one did.  And the political environment is worse for Democrats now than it was a year ago.

Long Island Democrats should be very wary, lest they go the way of Tom Suozzi.  If they haven't learned that lesson, they deserve to lose.

Ehh, I doubt Becker will have the PBA shilling for him the way Managno did.  Also the 4th is quite a bit more Democratic than Nassau as a whole, and one key factor that wasn't present last year is the top of the ticket, which will be a Democratic landslide.

The landslide could also suppress turnout though. I don't see too many people enthusiastic about Cuomo.  That said I still don't think it is winnable.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 17, 2010, 12:54:52 AM
I don't think Fran has run before (unless he didn't make it out of the Primary in another year).  Are you sure you aren't thinking of his brother Greg, who ran against McCarthy in 98 and 2000??  As a side note his father Frank represented parts of what is now the 4th during parts of  the 50's and 60's (was the 3rd and 5th during that time)

Regardless, doesn't have a chance.  Probably does a bit better than Martins who lost 64-36, but won't get anywhere close to winning or making it competitive.

Tom Suozzi was a shoe-in for reelection, too.  Republicans didn't have a chance.  Ditto County Executive Spano in Westchester.  That county's too Democratic; a Republican couldn't possibly have won the seat.  Yet one did.  And the political environment is worse for Democrats now than it was a year ago.

Long Island Democrats should be very wary, lest they go the way of Tom Suozzi.  If they haven't learned that lesson, they deserve to lose.

Ehh, I doubt Becker will have the PBA shilling for him the way Managno did.  Also the 4th is quite a bit more Democratic than Nassau as a whole, and one key factor that wasn't present last year is the top of the ticket, which will be a Democratic landslide.

The landslide could also suppress turnout though. I don't see too many people enthusiastic about Cuomo.  That said I still don't think it is winnable.

Exactly.  If Democrats think Cuomo, Schumer and Gillibrand are perceived as ultra-safe, they just might not turn out on election day, which will have an effect on down-ballot races.  It's how Bloomberg ended up doing much worse than the polling suggested he would.  Down ballot Democrats should hope that one of those three races is at least competitive, i.e. within single-digits, so Democrats have an incentive to go out and vote.  Republicans will crawl over broken glass to vote the bums out at this point.

I am not saying McCarthy is vulnerable - she'll probably win.  But we should be keeping an eye on the race.  It's only a D+6 district in a county that's been unexpectedly turfing supposedly safe incumbents.  Had the guy with the money won, we would have been watching closer.  NY-04 is my NY sleeper pick to monitor.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 17, 2010, 07:07:58 AM
Didn't someone do an analysis of the Suozzi loss and find that he won the NY-04 areas but lost big in the NY-03 areas? I swear I remember reading something about that.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on September 17, 2010, 07:28:49 AM
Honestly, we should keep half-an-eye on any race D+6 or lower. There are bound to be unexpected surprises this year—and this includes scenarios where people like Titus win but someone like Bishop or even McCarthy loses.

I half-heartedly root against McCarthy every year. I feel for her loss, but she had no business making a congressional career out of it.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Smash255 on September 17, 2010, 07:56:18 PM
Didn't someone do an analysis of the Suozzi loss and find that he won the NY-04 areas but lost big in the NY-03 areas? I swear I remember reading something about that.

Even without looking deeper into it, no question about that.  Mangano is also from the NY-3 portion of Nassau (Bethpage) and represented part of that area in the County Legislature.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/14 - DE/DC/MD/MA/NH/NY/RI/WI; 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 18, 2010, 01:06:51 AM
Didn't someone do an analysis of the Suozzi loss and find that he won the NY-04 areas but lost big in the NY-03 areas? I swear I remember reading something about that.

Considering the intent with how the districts are drawn, that hardly would be a shocker.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 18, 2010, 07:15:52 AM
Hawaii's primary is tonight, for those of you that want to stay up until midnight ET. I won't be.

Results pages: AP (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2010/by_county/HI_Page_0918.html?SITE=AP&SECTION=POLITICS) | Official (http://hawaii.gov/elections/results/2010/primary/)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 18, 2010, 02:56:57 PM
Some minor problems reported at a few Hawaii polling places but nothing out of the ordinary. Budget cuts have caused some voters to go to alternate sites than they're used to and that's causing a bit of confusion.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 19, 2010, 01:35:02 AM
Clearly no one cares about this primary, but with the absentee vote reporting (estimated at 12.5% of the overall vote) Abercrombie leads 59%-40%. The AP has called it for him but the local station is holding back and even the Abercrombie camp doesn't seem ready to declare victory yet. I think it's pretty clear he won but maybe the Hawai'ians know something the AP and I don't.

The next results are due at 9:30 PM local time (3:30 AM EST). I plan to be sound asleep.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Eraserhead on September 19, 2010, 01:42:12 AM
Clearly no one cares about this primary,

Wow, that appears to be an understatement... I kind of figured that a couple of people would be posting about it at least.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: they don't love you like i love you on September 19, 2010, 01:53:30 AM
Maybe if there was something interesting people would care, like if Case and Hanabusa were at it again. Then there'd be lots of posting.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Tender Branson on September 19, 2010, 04:32:52 AM
Hawaii results (99% counted):

Governor (Dems): Abercrombie 60%, Hannemann 38%
Governor (GOP): Aiona 95%

Turnout: Dems 224.000 voters, GOP 42.000 voters

Senate (Dems): Inouye 88%
Senate (GOP): Cavasso 67%

Turnout: Dems 213.000 voters, GOP 33.000 voters

HI-01 (Dems): Hanabusa 79%
HI-01 (GOP): Djou 97%

Turnout: Dems 100.000 voters, GOP 20.000 voters

HI-02 (Dems): Hirono
HI-02 (GOP): Willoughby 47%, Wharton 46%


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Niemeyerite on September 19, 2010, 04:50:03 AM
Hawaii results (99% counted):

Governor (Dems): Abercrombie 60%, Hannemann 38%
Governor (GOP): Aiona 95%

Turnout: Dems 224.000 voters, GOP 42.000 voters

Senate (Dems): Inouye 88%
Senate (GOP): Cavasso 67%

Turnout: Dems 213.000 voters, GOP 33.000 voters

HI-01 (Dems): Hanabusa 79%
HI-01 (GOP): Djou 97%

Turnout: Dems 100.000 voters, GOP 20.000 voters

HI-02 (Dems): Hirono
HI-02 (GOP): Willoughby 47%, Wharton 46%

Hanabusa can win this race without any problems given the GOP turnout.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 19, 2010, 07:15:16 AM
There's also the fact that anyone not on the west coast was probably in bed at the time. Anyway, I'm glad the homophobe Hanneman lost.

Hawaii appears not to have party registration, and the only primary of note was the Dem primary for Governor, so I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from the turnout.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dgov on September 19, 2010, 03:03:59 PM
Hawaii results (99% counted):

Governor (Dems): Abercrombie 60%, Hannemann 38%
Governor (GOP): Aiona 95%

Turnout: Dems 224.000 voters, GOP 42.000 voters

Senate (Dems): Inouye 88%
Senate (GOP): Cavasso 67%

Turnout: Dems 213.000 voters, GOP 33.000 voters

HI-01 (Dems): Hanabusa 79%
HI-01 (GOP): Djou 97%

Turnout: Dems 100.000 voters, GOP 20.000 voters

HI-02 (Dems): Hirono
HI-02 (GOP): Willoughby 47%, Wharton 46%

Hanabusa can win this race without any problems given the GOP turnout.

Brown won in MA despite having something close to a 10-1 turnout deficit for the primaries.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: tpfkaw on September 19, 2010, 03:19:42 PM
Hawaii results (99% counted):

Governor (Dems): Abercrombie 60%, Hannemann 38%
Governor (GOP): Aiona 95%

Turnout: Dems 224.000 voters, GOP 42.000 voters

Senate (Dems): Inouye 88%
Senate (GOP): Cavasso 67%

Turnout: Dems 213.000 voters, GOP 33.000 voters

HI-01 (Dems): Hanabusa 79%
HI-01 (GOP): Djou 97%

Turnout: Dems 100.000 voters, GOP 20.000 voters

HI-02 (Dems): Hirono
HI-02 (GOP): Willoughby 47%, Wharton 46%

Hanabusa can win this race without any problems given the GOP turnout.

Brown won in MA despite having something close to a 10-1 turnout deficit for the primaries.

But Coakley had three serious challengers, while Brown really didn't.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Torie on September 19, 2010, 03:20:41 PM
I suspect Djou will win. Yet another prediction for someone to laugh at in a few weeks. :)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Dgov on September 19, 2010, 03:31:19 PM
Hawaii results (99% counted):

Governor (Dems): Abercrombie 60%, Hannemann 38%
Governor (GOP): Aiona 95%

Turnout: Dems 224.000 voters, GOP 42.000 voters

Senate (Dems): Inouye 88%
Senate (GOP): Cavasso 67%

Turnout: Dems 213.000 voters, GOP 33.000 voters

HI-01 (Dems): Hanabusa 79%
HI-01 (GOP): Djou 97%

Turnout: Dems 100.000 voters, GOP 20.000 voters

HI-02 (Dems): Hirono
HI-02 (GOP): Willoughby 47%, Wharton 46%

Hanabusa can win this race without any problems given the GOP turnout.

Brown won in MA despite having something close to a 10-1 turnout deficit for the primaries.

But Coakley had three serious challengers, while Brown really didn't.

Well, Djou didn't have anything close to a serious primary, while Hanabusa still had to officially claim the mantle of the Democratic candidate.  Voting in HI is also Mail-only IIRC, which severly depresses primary turnout for uncompetitive races


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: cinyc on September 19, 2010, 03:41:38 PM
Well, Djou didn't have anything close to a serious primary, while Hanabusa still had to officially claim the mantle of the Democratic candidate.  Voting in HI is also Mail-only IIRC, which severly depresses primary turnout for uncompetitive races

The special election was mail-in only to save money.  But I'm pretty sure regularly scheduled primaries and general elections are not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 19, 2010, 03:47:24 PM
Well, Djou didn't have anything close to a serious primary, while Hanabusa still had to officially claim the mantle of the Democratic candidate.  Voting in HI is also Mail-only IIRC, which severly depresses primary turnout for uncompetitive races

The special election was mail-in only to save money.  But I'm pretty sure regularly scheduled primaries and general elections are not.

Correct.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Mr.Phips on September 19, 2010, 08:59:41 PM
Hawaii results (99% counted):

Governor (Dems): Abercrombie 60%, Hannemann 38%
Governor (GOP): Aiona 95%

Turnout: Dems 224.000 voters, GOP 42.000 voters

Senate (Dems): Inouye 88%
Senate (GOP): Cavasso 67%

Turnout: Dems 213.000 voters, GOP 33.000 voters

HI-01 (Dems): Hanabusa 79%
HI-01 (GOP): Djou 97%

Turnout: Dems 100.000 voters, GOP 20.000 voters

HI-02 (Dems): Hirono
HI-02 (GOP): Willoughby 47%, Wharton 46%

Hanabusa can win this race without any problems given the GOP turnout.

Brown won in MA despite having something close to a 10-1 turnout deficit for the primaries.

Brown didnt have the former Congressman of his district dominating at the top of the ticket. 


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: WMS on September 20, 2010, 11:04:26 AM
In order, then...

Lynch is presumably a conservadem because he voted against Obamacare.
It's not quite that simple, from this little bit (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/lynch-still-firmly-a-no-after-meeting-with-obama.php) he criticized it from both the left and right. Then again, so did I. :P

We're a bit more tolerant of dissenting opinions than the GOP then clearly.
But only a bit. :P There is definitely an effort by the NARAListas to drive out the pro-lifers if they can, however (didn't Stupak get a challenge before he dropped out?) - true in NM, as well, complete with murky applications of non-profit law. And then there's the official party platforms...

Lynch got his primary challenge because of his vote on healthcare. Dennigan also didn't really mention Langevin's pro-life stances during the campaign. Neither of these races had anything to do with abortion.
But I bet that was an underlying reason for why they keep getting primary challenges, hmm? ;) Especially with Langevin (I recall the NARAListas screaming at the very thought of Langevin getting the nod to run against Chafee in 2006)...

I didn't say anything about Langevin's ideology? And Lynch is pretty conservative for a guy in a safe Dem district.

- MA-09 (D) - Conservadem Stephen Lynch faces a challenge from the left in attorney Mac D'Alessandro. Lynch, of course, has a large cash advantage.

Right there. :P Ah, this does keep coming up with him, but as Al put it...

Though not really for that district. In any case, that he could even be thought as such is an indication of how the meaning of the term 'conservative democrat' has shifted almost out of recognition over the past couple of decades.

I mean, seriously. I see this as another sign of the increasing radicalization of both parties, a process which has been going on for a while, but is increasing...


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Capitan Zapp Brannigan on September 20, 2010, 11:24:15 AM
People don't dislike Lynch because of his stance on abortion, it was more his no vote on healthcare, when he didn't need to vote no.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Small Business Owner of Any Repute on September 20, 2010, 11:35:53 AM
I suspect Djou will win. Yet another prediction for someone to laugh at in a few weeks. :)

I'm still with you on that, Torie.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 20, 2010, 01:45:21 PM
Lynch got his primary challenge because of his vote on healthcare. Dennigan also didn't really mention Langevin's pro-life stances during the campaign. Neither of these races had anything to do with abortion.
But I bet that was an underlying reason for why they keep getting primary challenges, hmm? ;) Especially with Langevin (I recall the NARAListas screaming at the very thought of Langevin getting the nod to run against Chafee in 2006)...

No, it really wasn't the reason at all this year. You clearly haven't been following these races at all and shouldn't comment on something you don't know anything about.

Some of your responses to the other posters are also bizarre but I'll let them take care of those.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on September 20, 2010, 05:51:45 PM
In order, then...

I didn't say anything about Langevin's ideology? And Lynch is pretty conservative for a guy in a safe Dem district.

- MA-09 (D) - Conservadem Stephen Lynch faces a challenge from the left in attorney Mac D'Alessandro. Lynch, of course, has a large cash advantage.

Right there. :P Ah, this does keep coming up with him, but as Al put it...

I think all those emoticons have affected your reading comprehension. Read again carefully.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: WMS on September 22, 2010, 10:42:37 AM
People don't dislike Lynch because of his stance on abortion, it was more his no vote on healthcare, when he didn't need to vote no.
I'll partially agree - there certainly are those who dislike him for that stance, but his vote on healthcare has higher salience this year. And Lynch has faced problems for quite a while past this year...

No, it really wasn't the reason at all this year. You clearly haven't been following these races at all and shouldn't comment on something you don't know anything about.

Some of your responses to the other posters are also bizarre but I'll let them take care of those.
Arrogant little prick, aren't you? If you had paid attention to what I said, I was referring to the overall trend of them getting primary challenges and not just for this year. I'll agree that the immediate salience of the abortion issue for this year is certainly less, but as part of the long-term trend it is certainly a reason those two get primary challenges. Now, instead of having a reasoned discussion you decided to be an ass about it, so what say you improve your attitude a bit, eh?

I think all those emoticons have affected your reading comprehension. Read again carefully.
Ah, I misunderstood the part about Langevin. I admit I'm wrong in mistaking your comments about Lynch (who is still not a conservadem - Gene Taylor he is not) for those on Langevin. Sorry for the confusion on that point.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 9/18 - HI)
Post by: Meeker on September 22, 2010, 12:34:54 PM
No, it really wasn't the reason at all this year. You clearly haven't been following these races at all and shouldn't comment on something you don't know anything about.

Some of your responses to the other posters are also bizarre but I'll let them take care of those.
Arrogant little prick, aren't you? If you had paid attention to what I said, I was referring to the overall trend of them getting primary challenges and not just for this year. I'll agree that the immediate salience of the abortion issue for this year is certainly less, but as part of the long-term trend it is certainly a reason those two get primary challenges. Now, instead of having a reasoned discussion you decided to be an ass about it, so what say you improve your attitude a bit, eh?

Haha, whatever man. You came in here talking out of your ass about something you didn't know anything about and when you got called out on it you just resorted to personal attacks. Have a good day.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 10/2 - LA runoff... and that's it)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on October 01, 2010, 06:54:20 PM
Bumping for the very last primary, the LA-03 runoff. There's also an open primary for Lt. Governor. Results will be here tomorrow starting 9 PM Eastern. (http://staticresults.sos.louisiana.gov/1022010_MultiParish.html)


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 10/2 - LA runoff... and that's it)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on October 02, 2010, 09:12:33 PM
If anyone cares, Landry is winning the LA-03 runoff 2-1, which is extremely unsurprising. Dardenne is in first for the Lt. Governor primary; battling it out for the second slot are Democrat Caroline Fayard and Republican (and '07 candidate) Sammy Kershaw.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 10/2 - LA runoff... and that's it)
Post by: minionofmidas on October 03, 2010, 03:11:35 AM
2-1 is surprising. Landry winning easily is not.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (Up next: 10/2 - LA runoff... and that's it)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on October 03, 2010, 07:43:34 AM
It'll be Dardenne and Fayard for Lt. Governor next month. Dardenne only got 28% of the vote, but the combined Democratic vote was about 36%, so I guess we know how that'll go.


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (It's all over now, baby blue)
Post by: JohnnyLongtorso on October 04, 2010, 06:16:58 PM
One more map for the road, the Lt. Governor open primary:

()


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (It's all over now, baby blue)
Post by: Eraserhead on October 04, 2010, 06:53:25 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W27oYDpMykQ


Title: Re: 2010 Primaries Thread (It's all over now, baby blue)
Post by: tmthforu94 on October 04, 2010, 07:01:08 PM
Thoughts on the Connecticut Senate debate?

I don't think either candidate had necessarily a game-changing moment, but I think McMahon performed a lot better. She's obviously a better speaker and debater than Blumenthal is. I think her "shining moment" was when she was defending herself for spending her own money. Her closing was also very strong, while Blumenthal's was very choppy. While his views are probably more in line with Connecticut, it seemed like he didn't prepare much for the debate.