The absentee/early vote thread

[Badger]

Isn't the City of Youngstown itself pretty black?

Yep the black and white population there is pretty equal at roughly 45%.

Yeah, but not the county as a whole by a long shot.

[Badger]

http://iowastartingline.com/2016/09/29/the-state-of-iowas-early-vote-and-how-it-all-works/

Iowa: As of Thursday morning, Democrats have more than twice as many absentee ballots requested than Republicans. However, Democrats also lag far behind the number of absentees requested at this point in 2012, while Republicans are slightly ahead of their past performance. It’s not enough for Democrats to simply beat Republicans on the early vote, they need to do it by a wide margin.

The national Clinton campaign reportedly researched when the most effective time of the campaign was to talk with voters, and used that data to adjust the early vote schedule.

The first day early vote numbers were publicly reported, Democrats were only at 45% of their totals in 2012 at that time. Now they’re to 56%.

Jeez! Those are encouraging numbers for IA Republicans.

[Badger]

Iowa absentee ballot stats as of 10/3

RIP Dem hopes in IA.

[Badger]

Iowa absentee ballot stats as of 10/3

RIP Dem hopes in IA.

It should be noted, though, that Obama won Iowa by about 92,000 votes in 2012. So at least the Dems have some wiggle room that they would have in a state like, say, Florida.

IF Democrats don't drop at all in the election day vote while losing ground dramatically in thee early vote. but that's highly unlikely.

[Badger]

New data from Iowa.

So if I see this right, the Dems are starting to pick up on the absentee ballot requests in IA, after deliberately holding out on the push until later than average in the season (Per some of the various political sites reporting)?

Links?

[Badger]

https://www.wired.com/2016/10/hashtag-can-tell-us-early-voting-ohio/

I hate unscientific data much as anyone but here it is.


"But it’s hard to ignore the surprising enthusiasm gap between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the hashtag #OHVotesEarly, which started trending on Twitter this morning as early voting kicked off in Ohio. Throughout the election cycle, Clinton supporters have often been out-shouted by Trump’s and Bernie Sanders’ more vocal voter bases. Today, however, the Ohio hashtag was brimming with photos of voters who had already cast votes for Hillary Clinton. Meanwhile, many of the tweets that included references to Trump were about how the hashtag is—you guessed it—rigged.

But according to Twitter’s data, the enthusiasm gap is real. The social media site tells WIRED that of the tweets sent using the hashtag #OHVotesEarly over the last 24 hours, 75 percent included mentions of Clinton, while just 25 mentioned Trump. “It’s an inexact science,” says Twitter spokesman Nick Pacilio, but it’s a staggering disparity, nonetheless.

it's particularly inaccurate as hashtag anything skews heavily towards younger voters. how many people over 55 have a twitter account? over 65?

[Badger]

Good numbers from CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/26/politics/early-voting-statistics-2016-election/index.html

Arizona
Dems ahead by 4,116 votes, a major improvement from their position at this time four years ago, when they trailed by 21,179.

Colorado
Democrats have outvoted Republicans by more than 10,000. At this point in 2012, Republicans had the advantage by about 7,600 votes.

Florida
Republicans currently hold an 18,120-vote advantage, a paltry amount compared to their 113,222-vote edge at this time in 2008.

Nevada
Democrats hold a nearly 15,000-vote lead, a slight improvement from their position in 2012.

North Carolina
Democrats better than their 2012 pace, but Black vote only 25% share vs 30% in 2012.

Utah
At this point in 2012, Republicans led Democrats in early voting by more than 31,000 voters. But so far this year, the GOP advantage is only 15,834.

Iowa
Democrats are ahead of Republicans in the latest early vote count, but their margin is lower than it was at this point in 2012, to the tune of about 7,200 votes

That's surprising about Nevada . from all I'd been reading I thought Democrats were absolutely romping in the early vote. I'd assumed compared to previous years , but apparently incorrectly .

[Badger]

Based on recent ealry voting

FL+NC+OH in TRUMP's pocket.

so TRUMP just needs 10 EV more.

WI or NV+NH or MI or PA

#Trump2016

alright you twerp. it seems we're going to need a rehash.

$500 Trump loses and I'm giving you 2-1 . I'll further give you 3-2 odds he loses FL.

Put your money where your mouth is here and now, or S.T.F.U.

If you continue to post your unmeritorious crap without taking my challenge, you are officially an honorless poltroon--i.e. my bitch.

Ball's in your court, chump. Put up or shut up.

[Badger]

Badger drops in and absolutely lays it down. Nice.

I've always wondered where Trump supporters would put their money if they had to bet their life savings on it.

My guess is that they would also probably bet Hillary like the rational people. But since talk is cheap, they are being intellectually dishonest with themselves.

exactly. i will win either poll states' money, silence, or honor. anyway it's a victory.

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/electionsmith/status/792733751063121921

"Yesterday was a lackluster day of early voting for Dems in Florida...only 3.5k more Ds than Rs voted EIP. In '12, Ds>Rs on 1st Sat by 40k"

Coupled with new polls from Florida today, no bueno.

Now those are some not so great numbers. It's offset a little bit, as he notes after this, that unaffiliated voters in FL this cycle look to be and should be breaking hard to HRC, but that's still not a great number.

wait a minute y'all. as a commentator in Smith's feed said, and Smith acknowledged, 1st Saturday in 12 was also the first dat of EIV. True?

[Badger]

Yes, Hispanics will turn out in DROVES to vote for Hillary CLinton because they see her as so much more favorable that President Obama.

For the argument "well they will because they hate Trump and all the things he said". During a 2012 debate Mitt Romney said he was going to deporte hispanics and make things to the point where they want to self-deporte. He got what, 27% of the Hispanic vote? Yes, them and AA are much more enthusiastic to vote for Hillary than Obama. Really? Okay we will see soon enough..

Can we clear up that almost no one here is saying Clinton will win Texas. 90+% of the most diehard red avatars are simply excited it'll actually be close this year, and maybe this'll be the start of TX being competitive in another 4-6 years (which fwiw I personally doubt, believing TX will revert largely to the norm without Trump and demographics will need over a decade to give Democrats a shot).

The point is your posts are currently far more annoying than illuminating. Perhaps you ought to at least forgo attacking strawmen?

[Badger]

So NC went R in 2012 and the AA vote is down right now by 18% yet you all are saying NC looks great for HRC right now? Obama lost in 2012 by 1-2% and the AA vote was 18% higher at this time last year no matter the reason for the lower turnout, yet NC again looks so good for her? Please explain.

College-educated white voters swinging wildly to Dems.

How could you possibly know the above to be true?

The polls, all of them.

Ohhh the "polls" are, you mean the polls for example showing CLinton a week ago up 15% in a 4 way national race which is basically mathematically impossible? Or do you mean ALL of the polls showing Clinton up 20-35% in the Michigan Primary all the way up until the night before the primary, when she lost by 1-2 % to Sanders in the State. OVER a 20% swing of "all of the polls were showing". Those polls are what you guys are going off of, okay than.

Thought we had actual data showing who voted for who with all of the celebrating, lol. Was wondering if they were giving that info out on a daily basis, i didn't think they were but wasn't sure.

If you are going to place your hopes on all the polls having been off for the MI Democratic primary over 6 months ago, but ignore that Trump lost hard among late deciding voters in damn near every state outside NH and IN (maybe NV?), you are going to have a tough night next Tuesday.

[Badger]

Didn't Obama win Iowa by a fairly significant margin (like 5% or so)?  Why is there paranoia about matching his exact early vote in 2012?  

No idea. That Democrats are doing well so far in early voting is reason enough to at least not panic over Iowa. She doesn't need to win by 5.81% like Obama in 2012. If she wins it by 0.5%, it's still a win, and the only ones who might suffer in that scenario are a limited set of downballot IA Democrats that get starved of some marginal coattails.

Right!

I see a lot of comparisons in this thread to 2012.  But people seem to be forgetting that Obama won in 2012 by a fairly comfortable margin across the vast majority of battleground states.  So the fact that Hillary is even close to on par with those numbers indicates that she's better positioned than Trump in this election.

I think the concern comes from the polling so far as well, which has been far more favorable to Trump than they ever were for Romney in the state.

Can I mention that while the overall Democratic EV numerical lead in IA is lagging behind 2012, isn't theirpercentage lead nearly on par with 2012?

[Badger]

A lot of people dismissed the massive drop in black turnout in the Dem primary but it looks like its not a fluke.

True.

[Badger]

Didn't Obama win Iowa by a fairly significant margin (like 5% or so)?  Why is there paranoia about matching his exact early vote in 2012?  

No idea. That Democrats are doing well so far in early voting is reason enough to at least not panic over Iowa. She doesn't need to win by 5.81% like Obama in 2012. If she wins it by 0.5%, it's still a win, and the only ones who might suffer in that scenario are a limited set of downballot IA Democrats that get starved of some marginal coattails.

Right!

I see a lot of comparisons in this thread to 2012.  But people seem to be forgetting that Obama won in 2012 by a fairly comfortable margin across the vast majority of battleground states.  So the fact that Hillary is even close to on par with those numbers indicates that she's better positioned than Trump in this election.

I think the concern comes from the polling so far as well, which has been far more favorable to Trump than they ever were for Romney in the state.

Can I mention that while the overall Democratic EV numerical lead in IA is lagging behind 2012, isn't theirpercentage lead nearly on par with 2012?

I actually didn't know that. Thanks! But if total votes are up, and numerical lead is down, how is % lead on par? Maybe I'm misunderstanding. At any rate, if it ends up close in early vote, the point is taken that Obama's +5 cushion is comfy feeling.

Look at the graphs. The raw EV numbers in IA are lagging 2012. Democrats are still behind %-wise from this point in 2012, but only nominally.

[Badger]

The reason Democrats are getting so nervous is they inherently know Clinton is so unlikable, her support buttressed by loathing of Trump as the greater evil is only an inch deep. If it cracks, it sinks hard into the 40's.

I don't think that's what's happening here, but the fright is somewhat understandable (albeit still mostly over the top).

[Badger]

The reason Democrats are getting so nervous is they inherently know Clinton is so unlikable, her support buttressed by loathing of Trump as the greater evil is only an inch deep. If it cracks, it sinks hard into the 40's.

I don't think that's what's happening here, but the fright is somewhat understandable (albeit still mostly over the top).

I don't think thats what Democrats are wetting the bed about. It's not that we believe that our candidate is inherently unlikable, we're just distraught by the fact that Donald Trump is the second most likely person to become POTUS come November 8th.

To put it bluntly.

A lot of us believe that the stability of our Republic hangs in the balance. Most of us don't think Hillary is going to lose, in fact, most of us believe she's going to win by a comfortable margin. Any chance of Trump winning this election, no matter how small, is enough to make us nervous.

Well, that too, but I was too lazy to add that.

[Badger]

The reason Democrats are getting so nervous is they inherently know Clinton is so unlikable, her support buttressed by loathing of Trump as the greater evil is only an inch deep. If it cracks, it sinks hard into the 40's.

I don't think that's what's happening here, but the fright is somewhat understandable (albeit still mostly over the top).

could be wrong but there have been tons of fear and doubt and panic in 2012 and obama is anything but not likable.

Badger's argument doesn't make any sense even on its own merits. Polling has shown that a much larger share of Clinton's supporters are voting for her to support her than say the same about Trump.

True, but those are mostly non-persuadable Clinton backers. There are a solid number who still see her as the lesser evil for now, but are still looking for a reason not to vote for her.

Mind you, Trump's the same way, though until recently most of the persuadables had already abandoned ship. Some are now climbing back on board.

[Badger]

Iowa absentee ballot stats, 11/1

Ballots requested:

DEM: 252,589
GOP: 202,634
IND: 136,250
Other: 1,962

Ballots cast:

DEM: 205,540
GOP: 162,467
IND: 102,623
Other: 1,455

Dem ballot request lead stays around 50K and their overall vote lead is 43K. I'd say a little below par

again, compare the difference in percentage rather than raw numbers to 2012. I believe Clinton is only nominally behind.

[Badger]

Compared to Obama (which is OK) or compared to Gore/Kerry (which is not OK)

I'm not sure. This is my first election that I've canvassed in. It's not that they aren't voting - it seems like all the older (30 - 35+) African Americans I've talked to are definitely voting.. it's the younger ones. I have noticed a steep decline in interest between knocking on a middle+ age black voter's door and a <30 door. It doesn't seem like they are against Hillary, but they just seem really turned off to the whole thing. However, most of them said they were going to vote, but it sounded to me like a 50/50 or maybe 60/40 chance that they vote as opposed to 80/20 for the older folks.

did you really just call 30 and up "older"?

[Badger]

as i said.

black is up...all others are even more up.

but the end result is the same. if white voters are an increased share of the electorate, Trump benefits bigly.

[Badger]

Congrats to xingkerui and all the rest of us who never bought the junky Nevada polls.

Thanks

Anyway, Heck should overperform Trump, but I think too many people assume that this year's Senate race is a 2012 redux. The thing is, CCM<3 is a decent candidate, and certainly no Berkley, and the only reason Heller won is because many Democrats voted NOTA (he only got 46.5% of the vote).

Yeah. Heck is f$%ked.