The absentee/early vote thread

[Xing]

Is he saying that Dems won by 3,000 in 2012, but only by 2,200 this time? That's a pretty significant drop.

he is but at that time washoe was much closer.

and i don't think day to day comparisons over 4 years make much sense, if your reach the same number. (same advantage over republicans, even with higher number of people overall)

Sorry to be a broken record, but same raw advantage with a higher total vote means that the % margin is down. If Dems pull even with 2012 %-wise, I'd feel a lot better about the Senate.

As I said earlier, the Senate race this year is not the same as it was in 2012. Berkley was damaged, and a lot of people voted NOTA. Heller only got 46.5% of the vote. I doubt that Heck can win with that same percentage.

[ApatheticAustrian]

contrary to most of the country, we get close to 40% of the overall vote in NV.

dem would need to cannibalize themselves to death to lose this year.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Is he saying that Dems won by 3,000 in 2012, but only by 2,200 this time? That's a pretty significant drop.

he is but at that time washoe was much closer.

and i don't think day to day comparisons over 4 years make much sense, if your reach the same number. (same advantage over republicans, even with higher number of people overall)

Sorry to be a broken record, but same raw advantage with a higher total vote means that the % margin is down. If Dems pull even with 2012 %-wise, I'd feel a lot better about the Senate.

As I said earlier, the Senate race this year is not the same as it was in 2012. Berkley was damaged, and a lot of people voted NOTA. Heller only got 46.5% of the vote. I doubt that Heck can win with that same percentage.

I certainly don't expect CCM to trail Hillary by as much as Berkeley trailed Obama. Still, based on the polls I've seen, I'd guess she's probably trailing her by 2-4 points. That means we have to make sure Hillary carries the State by at least 4. These EV results seem to suggest that she's in that general area, but they're not enough to feel comfortable yet.

[ApatheticAustrian]

if it's doable it will be done....as ralston points out, since dems and unions know, HRC is no obama and the latinos are enraged, they are working like mad to GOTV, especially in washoe.

[morgieb]

https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/793682522991308800

You must be logged in to read this quote.

NV is Safe D

THE FRIEWEL IS EXPANDING!

[Ogre Mage]

The Political Hat: "Nevada Early Vote Update 2016 (Day 10 of 14)"

http://politicalhat.com/2016/11/01/nevada-early-vote-update-2016-day-10-of-14/

"In Summary

     With over two-thirds of the early voting over, it continues to look like 2016 will be a worse year than 2012. The Republicans are set to lose two of Nevada’s four Congressional districts, the Assembly, the state Senate for at least four years, and potentially give Cortez Masto a life-time appointment to the U.S. Senate while concomitantly enshrining her as the new Democratic king-maker in Nevada.

     To whit: Republicans should be hitting the panic button like a crack monkey putting down the crack pipe."

In this story on 538, Jon Ralston says:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-early-vote-in-nevada-suggests-clinton-might-beat-her-polls-there/

[IceSpear]

Yeah, NV is safe D, but lol @ the idea that "Trump can't afford to lose it."

[NOVA Green]

@NOVA Green: With those numbers in Oregon, do you think Democrats are poised to make anymore gains in the legislature? What about the SoS race - I heard that was close as well, no?

Virginia----

As you likely well know Oregon is one of those weird states where there can be both massive blowouts in Presidential races, but statewide races frequently go into a traditional "upstate" vs "downstate" dynamic.

That being said, I strongly suspect that the Republicans chances of winning their first statewide election since 2002 (SoS) race will likely fail considering what appears to be a major down-ballot effect against even moderate Republicans that have been carefully groomed in what has rapidly become a one-party state, where we used to vote for Republican Senators like the much esteemed Mark Hatfield, not even to mention the great and honorable Tom McCall...

Now, Brad Avakian is well respected figure when it comes to items like worker's rights (Throughout almost all of Oregon) when he was a steward over the Labors & Industries office, but got hit hard in the primaries, including some major endorsements for his opponent for "politicizing" the SoS office on items outside of his State Constitutional jurisdiction.

State House & Senate--- It only takes one seat on the OR House to create a Supermajority, so will need to take some guesses as to where the pickups might be.

OR- HD-06- Medford--- Traditionally Republican town shifting D.

OR-HD-15- Albany--- used to be a heavily Republican city that voted Obama in '08 and is a working-class town and commuter town with a rapidly growing Latino population and more affordable than some neighboring communities in terms of housing. Personal note- Have a few Grandchildren now enrolled in Elementary School out there that are now virtually bilingual, as a result of living in a city where Latinos now represent 40% of the young folks in the community. (Republican incumbant running unopposed)

OR-HD-19- SE Salem---- I could also see this as a potential flip in a wave election. Salem is the largest city in Oregon with a major Latino population, and even though the district includes some suburbs and rural areas outside of the city, and is predominately Anglo, Trump isn't very popular within the City of Salem, although he'll probably do ok in rural parts of Marion County overall.

OR-HD-23- Rural Benton/Polk/Yamhill--- This ones a bit weird, considering how many folks on the Forum consider Democrats to not exist in small town and rural America.

As I learned several decades back as a "young buck" this is a part of the state in the beautiful foothills of the Oregon Coast range where "the Rednecks grow dope" and the "hippies own guns". I could tkae any of y'all on a tour of this part of the state and roll through every small village and tell stories about how loggers paid off their mortgages during down times in the Timber industry in the late '70s/early 80s growing a bit of Herb on Federal/State Land and went indoors in the late '80s/ early '90s when the National Guard was sent in to do Aerial and Chopper activities.

Needless to say these parts of the Coast Range in Benton/Polk/Yamhill aren't too crazy about outside political figures telling them what to do...

(Republican Incumbent running unopposed but Libertarians and Pacific Greens will likely do quite well)

OR-HD- 24---  One of the largest Latino rural HD's in the state.... IF we see significant Latino turnout, this could well flip Dem considering the demographics.

OR-HD-37--- Could potentially flip in a Dem surge.... is heavily exurban Portland, but includes places like Tualatin and cities in Clackamas County that are # NeverTrumpers.

OR-HD-54- Bend Oregon. Bizarre that a Republican still represents this district in a heavily Democratic City, although there are some suburban areas outside of town that vote heavily Republican for "normal" party candidates.

So here is my roundup, although all being said, Democrats aren't actually running competitive candidates in many of potential pickups that I identified, but yes Dems could actually win a super-majority if they defend most exiting seats and pick up a few of the others that I identified.

[ApatheticAustrian]

Yeah, NV is safe D, but lol @ the idea that "Trump can't afford to lose it."

if he loses it, way nm/nh/nv is initially blocked....and now he MUST switch at least 3 midwestern states. (oh + ia × ?)

[Erich Maria Remarque]

I start to think, that Upshot/Sienna was a pretty big outlier. NC is clearly a tossup. Probably slightly towards Trump.
[with all information for now]

From https://twitter.com/ElectProject/status/793792941127004160

[BoAtlantis]

Republicans continue to overachieve in NC but so do unaffiliated people.

[HillOfANight]

It looks like the FL/NC polls are backwards, with NC being less diverse, Florida being more diverse (Latinos more than offsetting lower Black share).

[alomas]

Florida has updated its numbers and Republicans have actually increased their advantage to 15-20k! NC also look favourably for Trump judging by the early vote, Clinton must overperform Obama amongst Indies by a few points and the black numbers are down. Both states are close though but I'd give an edge for Trump. In Arizona, Ohio and Iowa he has a bigger edge IMO. Strange decision from her to campaign in Arizona today.

But unfortunately I can't see a firewall state that is going to fall. Pennsylvania and Michigan look the best bet judging by the fact they are not voting until Election Day. She is ahead by a few points though.

It looks like the FL/NC polls are backwards, with NC being less diverse, Florida being more diverse (Latinos more than offsetting lower Black share).

I wouldn't say so. Florida's Hispanics are less favourable to Clinton than national average while blacks voted almost unanimously for her.

[Gustaf]

I haven't followed this in enough detail so I'd be glad if someone could help me out. I have the following 2 impressions:

1. Early voting statistics as posted in this thread (racial/partisan breakdown of early voters) show middling to poor results for Clinton, in aggregate - that is, she's running close to or slightly behind Obama 2012 numbers in those terms.

2. Polls consistently indicate Clinton is leading and leading big among early voters.

Could this suggest that Clinton is simply doing a lot better among whites than Obama did and taken together this is kind of a good sign? Or is one of my impressions wrong? Or is there another explanation?

[HillOfANight]

I wouldn't say so. Florida's Hispanics are less favourable to Clinton than national average while blacks voted almost unanimously for her.

The surging Hispanic vote definitely isn't voting for Trump. They were 60-40 for Obama in 2012 in Florida, maybe 70-30 at worst for her this year, which is still a huge improvement.

[The Other Castro]

I haven't followed this in enough detail so I'd be glad if someone could help me out. I have the following 2 impressions:

1. Early voting statistics as posted in this thread (racial/partisan breakdown of early voters) show middling to poor results for Clinton, in aggregate - that is, she's running close to or slightly behind Obama 2012 numbers in those terms.

2. Polls consistently indicate Clinton is leading and leading big among early voters.

Could this suggest that Clinton is simply doing a lot better among whites than Obama did and taken together this is kind of a good sign? Or is one of my impressions wrong? Or is there another explanation?

My guess is that the largest discrepancy comes from new, more Democratic-voting prone voters, like Hispanics and Latinos, registering as Unaffiliated voters. The D v. R matchups alone likely wouldn't be producing such a lead for Clinton in early voter polls unless the U's were breaking heavily for her.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

2. Polls consistently indicate Clinton is leading and leading big among early voters.

It depends on how well Obama was doing in polls among EV. For instance if he was doing ~better, then it is nothing strange at all. And MOE should be taken into account.

Otherwise, it could indicate some sort of realigment (that would not shoke me).

It looks like the FL/NC polls are backwards, with NC being less diverse, Florida being more diverse (Latinos more than offsetting lower Black share).

What is raw numbers of EV by race in Florida 2012 vs 2016?

[HillOfANight]

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/hispanics-make-greater-share-florida-early-vote-2016-n676486
Whites down 4%.

[Gustaf]

2. Polls consistently indicate Clinton is leading and leading big among early voters.

It depends on how well Obama was doing in polls among EV. For instance if he was doing ~better, then it is nothing strange at all. And MOE should be taken into account.

Otherwise, it could indicate some sort of realigment (that would not shoke me).

It looks like the FL/NC polls are backwards, with NC being less diverse, Florida being more diverse (Latinos more than offsetting lower Black share).

What is raw numbers of EV by race in Florida 2012 vs 2016?

I guess that's possible but it'd imply white early voters differ enormously from white election day voters. Is that the case? 

[fldemfunds]

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/hispanics-make-greater-share-florida-early-vote-2016-n676486
Whites down 4%.

With a week of EV to go. I think they'll be around 66-67% this cycle at the end of it all.

[BoAtlantis]

Steve Schale

http://steveschale.com/

Total Ballots cast: 4,466,624

Total Vote By Mail: 2,168,750(51.4%)
Total Early Vote: 2,297,874 (48.6%)

Republicans: 1,798,954 (40.3%)
Democrats: 1,781,498 (39.9%)
NPA: 886,172 (19.8%)

Total Margin: GOP +0.39%

there are still 1,173,799 vote-by-mail ballots sitting out there, and yes, Democrats have more outstanding mail in ballots than Republicans. Unreturned vote-by-mail ballots remains the same as yesterday, looking like this: 41D-35R-24NPA, meaning 82,541 more Democrats have ballots sliding between the couch cushions.

"Secondly, Hispanics are absolutely surging. Almost 14% of the electorate, more than half of Hispanic Dems (51%) and Hispanic NPA (57%) are low propensity, which has led the Dems to a 90k voter lead with unlikely voters. Now 31% of Dem voters are low propensity, compared to 24% of Republicans. It's higher than both with NPAs."

"I've been thinking about the "why Dems aren't ahead" question, and I think the answer may be more structural than obvious. Over the last four years, Democrats have lost about 400k white Dems, many to party switching, and a large number in North Florida. I'm going to explore this question more, but I have a hunch those 12 leads people keep talking about week built, in part, with voters who are not Dems anymore, and probably in the end didn't vote for Obama."

[Brittain33]

I'm not buying this lower black turnout theory.  Black voters are probably less enthusiastic about Hillary than they were for Obama 4 years ago, so they aren't turning out day 1 to vote for her.  But at the end of the day they are a reliable voting bloc and they will eventually turn out for her. 

It feels non-controversial for me. Black turnout ticked up noticeably in 2008 and 2012 to be higher than white turnout; why shouldn't it drift down closer to 2004 levels? No one was surprised that Dem turnout in Florida was down after Lieberman wasn't on the ballot. It's about the infrequent voters on the margins who need this particular affinity to feel like voting relevant.

[Stranger in a strange land]

I wouldn't say so. Florida's Hispanics are less favourable to Clinton than national average while blacks voted almost unanimously for her.

The surging Hispanic vote definitely isn't voting for Trump. They were 60-40 for Obama in 2012 in Florida, maybe 70-30 at worst for her this year, which is still a huge improvement.

Remember also that much of the new Hispanic vote is either Puerto Ricans fleeing economic collapse on the Island, and if memory serves, Puerto Ricans vote Democratic at nearly the rate Blacks do. Also, young Cubans who would have aged into the voting pool or registered for the first time are much less Republican than their elders.