absentee/early vote thread, part 2

[Phony Moderate]

it's simple.

if cohn's model is even in the same universe than reality, than NC is clinton's and if she wins NC, she also wins high-educated CO/VA/NH.

That model no longer applies.

Pubs are coming home, including the educated Pubs. They are declaring themselves "undecided" in most recent polls, but expect that "undecided" is a codeword for shy Trump.

Shy Trump voters are not a thing.

*If* there are (and I'm not saying there are) they are probably claiming to be Johnson voters.

[Yank2133]

it's simple.

if cohn's model is even in the same universe than reality, than NC is clinton's and if she wins NC, she also wins high-educated CO/VA/NH.

That model no longer applies.

Pubs are coming home, including the educated Pubs. They are declaring themselves "undecided" in most recent polls, but expect that "undecided" is a codeword for shy Trump.

Shy Trump voters are not a thing.

Yup.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/upshot/donald-trump-cant-count-on-those-missing-white-voters.html?_r=0

[Ozymandias]

Marc Caputo ‏@MarcACaputo  9m9 minutes ago
A number that should scare Trump in re: early/absentee FL vote: 54.6%. That's % of WOMEN who have voted. Women break strongly for Hillary

[Virginiá]

Yup.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/upshot/donald-trump-cant-count-on-those-missing-white-voters.html?_r=0

It's telling when a candidate's supporters have been reduced to almost solely relying on strange, unproven & unlikely phenomena or straight up electoral miracles to justify their assertions that their candidate will beat the odds and pull out a win.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

Marc Caputo ‏@MarcACaputo  9m9 minutes ago
A number that should scare Trump in re: early/absentee FL vote: 54.6%. That's % of WOMEN who have voted. Women break strongly for Hillary

51% of the entire 2012 vote is already in with the early vote...Women are voting big time for Hillary...I think we can assume that Florida is strongly leaning Hillary right now.

[ApatheticAustrian]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/794258943774171137?lang=de

[Speed of Sound]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/794258943774171137?lang=de

Full party of deplorables. They haven't become this, they always were this and just have a safe space now.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

     Total number of ballots cast in all reporting jurisdictions: 34,351,774 votes making up 74.3% of the entire 2012 early vote.

[ApatheticAustrian]

     Total number of ballots cast in all reporting jurisdictions: 34,351,774 votes making up 74.3% of the entire 2012 early vote.

still seems kind of low, since only a few days are left...even stops tomorrow at some places.

is this normal? (lots of mail outstanding i guess)

[JerryArkansas]

     Total number of ballots cast in all reporting jurisdictions: 34,351,774 votes making up 74.3% of the entire 2012 early vote.

still seems kind of low, since only a few days are left...even stops tomorrow at some places.

is this normal? (lots of mail outstanding i guess)

The last few days of early voting are huge.  They are usually what makes or breaks when it comes to numbers.

[GeorgiaModerate]

it's simple.

if cohn's model is even in the same universe than reality, than NC is clinton's and if she wins NC, she also wins high-educated CO/VA/NH.

That model no longer applies.

Pubs are coming home, including the educated Pubs. They are declaring themselves "undecided" in most recent polls, but expect that "undecided" is a codeword for shy Trump.

And what evidence tells you this?

[Speed of Sound]

     Total number of ballots cast in all reporting jurisdictions: 34,351,774 votes making up 74.3% of the entire 2012 early vote.

still seems kind of low, since only a few days are left...even stops tomorrow at some places.

is this normal? (lots of mail outstanding i guess)

The last few days of early voting are huge.  They are usually what makes or breaks when it comes to numbers.

Which is why we should all be watching very carefully the next couple days.

[Ljube]

it's simple.

if cohn's model is even in the same universe than reality, than NC is clinton's and if she wins NC, she also wins high-educated CO/VA/NH.

That model no longer applies.

Pubs are coming home, including the educated Pubs. They are declaring themselves "undecided" in most recent polls, but expect that "undecided" is a codeword for shy Trump.

And what evidence tells you this?

No real evidence, except that the number of undecided/refused has increased in recent polls.

This election appear to be like no other.

[Joe Biden is your president. Deal with it.]

This makes me wonder that some battleground states will be called early due to early voting reaching 2012 PV levels.

[ApatheticAustrian]

And what evidence tells you this?

closer polls, showing everything from a tie to a trump lead.

[Speed of Sound]

This doesn't really belong here, but I don't know where to put it. I don't have much thought on it yet, but it's worth a read/think (long tweet storm):

https://twitter.com/PatrickRuffini/status/794259488664649732

[BoAtlantis]

https://twitter.com/steveschale/status/794263573073690624

Obama at Duval to encourage early voting.

Look at the crowd enthusiasm.

[Speed of Sound]

https://twitter.com/steveschale/status/794263573073690624

Obama at Duval to encourage early voting.

Look at the crowd enthusiasm.

#Theraceto13%

[HillOfANight]

On Upshot's NC vote tracker, they have over half the total vote as in, and Hillary winning already-submitted votes by 10. That means Trump has to win remaining votes by at least 10 to carry the state. Not to mention 4 more days of early voting at current support numbers (roughly 50/50, if we're being conservative). That means Trump would have to win the election day vote pretty overwhelmingly unless things shift his way in the state right now. So, even if that Trump +7 poll was accurate and that's how people vote for the remainder of the election, he'd still lose the state overall.

Somebody please double-check my math, because it sounds a bit Karl Rovey when I read it back to myself.

It is based on a single Sienna/Upshot poll with Clinton +7. If the poll was right and the race has not changed since    OCT. 20-23, Trump is done.

I believe that Sienna is recontacting the poll's respondents to measure whether they have voted early or not and who they voted for, and is then making a projection for the rest of the state.

No, they are not recontacting voters to find out if they voted early, they can tell that by the data from the election board. They're also applying their old polling data to the early votes as they come in. If they have a big polling error (Trump's margin among Whites), their whole tracker is screwed...

[BoAtlantis]

This doesn't really belong here, but I don't know where to put it. I don't have much thought on it yet, but it's worth a read/think (long tweet storm):

https://twitter.com/PatrickRuffini/status/794259488664649732

My takeaway from YouGov is this.

"We consider it almost certain that Clinton was never as far ahead as many published polls suggested at the high points of the campaign, and equally that she has not lost as much by recent events as some published polls suggest. The truth is more boring: real change mostly happens slowly, and the impact of campaign events is much less than the media makes out."

Essentially, she has never led by 12% and she has never trailed. The real lead is around 3-6%.
It's why it's important to equally consider polls in the past as well and not just the most recent ones.

[BoAtlantis]

https://twitter.com/steveschale/status/794263573073690624

Obama at Duval to encourage early voting.

Look at the crowd enthusiasm.

#Theraceto13%

[Erich Maria Remarque]

On Upshot's NC vote tracker, they have over half the total vote as in, and Hillary winning already-submitted votes by 10. That means Trump has to win remaining votes by at least 10 to carry the state. Not to mention 4 more days of early voting at current support numbers (roughly 50/50, if we're being conservative). That means Trump would have to win the election day vote pretty overwhelmingly unless things shift his way in the state right now. So, even if that Trump +7 poll was accurate and that's how people vote for the remainder of the election, he'd still lose the state overall.

Somebody please double-check my math, because it sounds a bit Karl Rovey when I read it back to myself.

It is based on a single Sienna/Upshot poll with Clinton +7. If the poll was right and the race has not changed since    OCT. 20-23, Trump is done.

I believe that Sienna is recontacting the poll's respondents to measure whether they have voted early or not and who they voted for, and is then making a projection for the rest of the state.

They are not recontacting, but looking at NC statistics. NC is one of few states, who gives all statistic with names etc.
But as I said, it depends on initial poll results. If results were wrong, or race shifted, then you cannot longer apply it. They use EV statistics only as a LV screen [and probably demographigs breakdown? IDK].

Yup.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/upshot/donald-trump-cant-count-on-those-missing-white-voters.html?_r=0

It's telling when a candidate's supporters have been reduced to almost solely relying on strange, unproven & unlikely phenomena or straight up electoral miracles to justify their assertions that their candidate will beat the odds and pull out a win.

This article has nothing to do with Shy Theory. Like not at all.

[ApatheticAustrian]

this gets more disgusting each minute:





Emails show how Republicans lobbied to limit voting hours in North Carolina
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-northcarolina-insight-idUSKBN12Y0ZY

You must be logged in to read this quote.

READ THIS THING.

[Ozymandias]

Not sure if this has been posted already, but it has a lot of nice graphs about NC early voters:

http://www.oldnorthstatepolitics.com/

[Virginiá]

This article has nothing to do with Shy Theory. Like not at all.

Uhm? I read his link before posting and I'm well aware of what it was about. Did you not consider why I responded to his post while using two different terms? If I was solely referring to the shy voter theory I'd have responded to Ebsy's post.

Sheesh LittleBig, maybe next time be a little slower to pounce would ya?