The absentee/early vote thread

[Xing]

The results so far don't look that great for Hillary (compared with 2012), but it's VERY early. I remember that when most of the early votes were counted in 2012, Obama had a narrow lead over Romney, but he ended up losing by 2. Kay Hagan had a larger lead once the early votes were counted, about 5 points, but she also lost.

[Xing]

It's early, but those don't seem to suggest an enormous Republican trend in the state, which would be necessary to flip ME-02.

[Xing]

Well, early voting from that Old North site show Democrats holding longer than in 2012.



Also, while the Democrats and Unaffiliateds are ahead of their 2012 numbers, Republicans are lagging behind.

According to this graph the GOP took the lead 51 days before Election Day last cycle.

While this is good news, my worry is that a lot of White conservative Democrats that haven't voted in ages have been reengaged by Trump and that passion is partially at work here. Or maybe this is all just a sign of Clinton's superior ground game.

My guess would be that it's a bit of both. Overall, these numbers are looking good so far, but it is still very early.

[Xing]

The Republican surge in Maine doesn't look like it's happening just yet. I suppose it's possible that Trump is winning unaffiliated voters by a wide margin, or a lot of Democrats are voting for Trump, but those numbers alone suggest a very slight R trend in ME-02, rather than a 9% swing or greater.

[Xing]

This is encouraging, but I don't want to rad too much into this. Registering new voters is one thing, getting them to the polls is a different kind of challenge.

[Xing]

Well, so much for Safe R Iowa. In terms of Party ID, it's now looking more like it did in 2012. How do the other states compare to 2012?

[Xing]

Guys, please ignore the troll and don't let him derail this thread.

[Xing]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Either I was right all along, or Ascott's and my avatar really are working some magic here.

[Xing]

lol @ the people who ever though Nevada was anything but Safe D.

Yep, that's what I've been telling people from the start.

[Xing]

Based on Ralston's Twitter, it seems he's pretty much calling NV for Clinton.

[Xing]

https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/791100260604981248

Republicans won today's votes in Washoe by a whopping five votes, but that's after getting hammered the previous three days.

[Xing]

These results in specific are, overall, good for D, right?

they are still lacking regarding hispanic support but they have potential.

in 3-4 days the experts promise they can deliver good projections.

I definitely would not assume all Republican-registered Hispanics in Florida are voting for Trump.

Yeah, that's probably the catch. I would bet a decent number of Latinos in Florida and places like Texas will be voting for Hillary.

[Xing]

Hillary's got NV. The vote gap is pretty much identical to 2012, and even if there are some crossover votes for Trump from WCWs, there are certainly some crossover votes for Hillary as well, from Latinos.

[Xing]

Apparently, Democrats are having an off-day today in NV. Any word on Souls to the Polls?

[Xing]

Is high turnout in the WOW counties really good news for Trump? My impression was that he's relatively weak for a Republican in those counties, and that he would be stronger in the more rural NW parts of the state and in Green Bay.

[Xing]

OK, I know I'll get blasted again for being a killjoy and everything, but... from the NC and FL results, doesn't it look like SttP was a massive flop? African-Americans were supposed to narrow their turnout deficit at least a bit, right? Instead the latest numbers I've seen show them still way down.

If this is wrong please explain me why, but for God's sake cut it with the unbacked "everything will be fine" mantra.

No one's taking this up? Uh-oh.

I haven't seen the latest NC/FL numbers, but if it was a flop, then that's definitely bad new for those two states. There's still time, though, and even if low black turnout does sink Hillary in NC/FL (I doubt that this will actually happen), that's not going to be enough for Trump to win. NV, CO, and WI all look great for Hillary right now, meaning that unless Trump wins PA, he's not going to win.

[Xing]

People are reading way too much into these early voting numbers. They certainly don't prove that FL looks good for Trump or that ME-02 is gone for Trump. I'd rather trust the polls, tbh.

I agree that they don't definitively prove anything, though they can give us clues about certain states, especially if compared to early voting from 2012 (NV and CO are promising for Hillary, Trump seems to be improving on Romney in IA.)

[Xing]

I wouldn't say that Trump has the advantage in IA, so much as it looks like he's overperforming Romney. Remember that Obama won by 5.8%, so a slight improvement for Trump isn't going to be enough to flip it. FL looks very ambiguous right now.

[Xing]

But I thought we were wrong to be confident about Clinton in FL! Obviously, there's still a week to go, but the fact that a lot of Latinos in Florida might be voting for Hillary despite not being registered with either party, or even being registered as Republicans should help some red avatars relax a bit.

[Xing]

Do people really think that Hillary is in danger of losing Wisconsin? If Marquette somehow shows a tied race or Trump ahead, then there might be cause for concern, but it seems like all the talk about Wisconsin being winnable for Trump has been just that, talk. Polls have consistently had Hillary ahead, and these early votes don't suggest a strong R trend in the state.

[Xing]

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).

[Xing]

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

You must be logged in to read this quote.

NV is Safe D

[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.