absentee/early vote thread, part 2

[alomas]

No, Romney won whites by 24 in Florida...

Right! I looked at the wrong numbers. It's going to be close then, I hope whites have a better share of the electorate than 67%, around 70% or so.

[Dr. Arch]

No, Romney won whites by 24 in Florida...

Right! I looked at the wrong numbers. It's going to be close then, I hope whites have a better share of the electorate than 67%, around 70% or so.

70% was their share in 2012, and it's not happening this year. More Latinos have voted already than in the entire 2012 cycle. It's a huge Latino turnout election.

[alomas]

70% was their share in 2012, and it's not happening this year. More Latinos have voted already than in the entire 2012 cycle. It's a huge Latino turnout election.

67% -> http://edition.cnn.com/election/2012/results/state/FL/president/#exit-polls

[Dr. Arch]

70% was their share in 2012, and it's not happening this year. More Latinos have voted already than in the entire 2012 cycle. It's a huge Latino turnout election.

67% -> http://edition.cnn.com/election/2012/results/state/FL/president/#exit-polls

Okay, in that case, it's definitely not happening for the reason stated above.

[Cruzcrew]

Romney won whites by 20 nationwide and lost to Obama.

It is only early voting though

While the overall early vote is more democratic leaning than the EV vote, a significant amount of 65+ white retirees who heavily skew Republican have already submitted their ballots, which makes the 7 point drop off pretty concerning for Trump. Florida is a state where Trump probably needs to win whites overall by about 25 to win the state and to make up for only a 17% lead in the EV vote, he easily needs a 30+% lead on EV with white voters which is pretty difficult with so many white women swinging towards Clinton.

[Mallow]

Sorry to burst your red avatar orgy here, but here's the reality on CO right now. Republicans pulled ahead with Early voters. Magellan may be a questionable pollster, but they are usually good about releasing the Early Vote stuff in CO ahead of the SoS.

http://kdvr.com/2016/11/04/republicans-overtake-democrats-in-early-voting/

You are also way, way, way off on Nevada this week. I don't care about alleged L2 data. The raw numbers suggest overwhelmingly that the Republicans have made significant inroads on the early vote vs. 2012, erasing a 8% deficit from 2012 to about 3.5% this year. Keep in mind, they already shaved a point off of the D margin from 2012 in Week 1.

2016: http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=4555
2012: http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=2503

The numbers you reference ("8%" vs. "3.5%") are 1. off--it's 7.19% to 3.49%, you can't round one up to 8% and the other to 3.5%, that makes no sense (EDIT: Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying... I don't understand what you mean by shaving a point off week 1 in 2012 when you're also mentioning "erasing" a lead from 2012 to 2016, which doesn't make sense to me)--2. they don't include Absentee/Mail-In ballots which, when added in, change the leads to 5.6% for 2012 (42.2% and 36.6%) and 3.3% for 2016 (40.1% and 36.8%)--3. they don't include today's results, so cannot be compared directly to 2012--and 4. and most importantly, a drop from 2012 by even the 4.5% you quote, let alone the more realistic 2.3% including all the data, wouldn't be enough to flip NV, which was won by Obama with a margin of 6.7% in 2012. So... I don't understand your point.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wow.

Haven't seen this confirmed, but makes sense. Matches O's lead in 2012 when he won by 6.7. Of course, Heller won by 1.2% in the same circumstance.

They updated the official numbers at NV SOS:

http://nvsos.gov/sos/elections/voters/election-turnout-statistics

So now with (most) of week 2's final day's totals in, the week 2 numbers are as follows (including absent/mailing)...
2012: D+5.6% ( 42.2/36.6/21.2 )
2016: D+5.0% ( 40.6/35.6/23.8 ) [2016 not including yesterday was only D+3.3%!]

The Democrats' margin lead is only 0.6% lower in week 2 of this week than it was in the same week in 2012. And in 2012, Obama won Nevada by 6.7%. It's going to take a lot more than a 0.6% improvement amongst Republicans to make up that difference. Would require a huge shift in the preference of the "Other" voters.

[heatcharger]

Jon Ralston calls the state of Nevada for Hillary Clinton (and probably Catherine Cortez-Masto).

Trump would need unthinkable Election Day numbers to overcome the early vote lead that Dems hold.

[Person Man]

Jon Ralston calls the state of Nevada for Hillary Clinton (and probably Catherine Cortez-Masto).

Trump would need unthinkable Election Day numbers to overcome the early vote lead that Dems hold.

At least we have Nevada taking the place of New Hampshire in das Freiwal. It will be a funky looking map.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Jon Ralston calls the state of Nevada for Hillary Clinton (and probably Catherine Cortez-Masto).

Trump would need unthinkable Election Day numbers to overcome the early vote lead that Dems hold.

At least we have Nevada taking the place of New Hampshire in das Freiwal. It will be a funky looking map.

Meh, NH will hold in the end.

[Dr. Arch]

Jon Ralston calls the state of Nevada for Hillary Clinton (and probably Catherine Cortez-Masto).

Trump would need unthinkable Election Day numbers to overcome the early vote lead that Dems hold.

Freedom news!

[Confused Democrat]

Delusional Trumpkins on Twitter:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mallow]

So now with (most) of week 2's final day's totals in, the week 2 numbers are as follows (including absent/mailing)...
2012: D+5.6% ( 42.2/36.6/21.2 )
2016: D+5.0% ( 40.6/35.6/23.8 ) [2016 not including yesterday was only D+3.3%!]

The Democrats' margin lead is only 0.6% lower in week 2 of this week than it was in the same week in 2012. And in 2012, Obama won Nevada by 6.7%. It's going to take a lot more than a 0.6% improvement amongst Republicans to make up that difference. Would require a huge shift in the preference of the "Other" voters.

http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=4543
http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=2501
If we include week 1 + week 2 numbers, we get the following...
2012 D/R/O: 308,828/260,066/135,622 for a D margin of +6.9% (final margin was Obama +6.7%)
2016 D/R/O: 323,466/277,417/166,532 for a D margin of +6.1%

One could argue that R's have improved over 2012, but the improvement is marginal at best. These are still very bad numbers for Trump.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

So now with (most) of week 2's final day's totals in, the week 2 numbers are as follows (including absent/mailing)...
2012: D+5.6% ( 42.2/36.6/21.2 )
2016: D+5.0% ( 40.6/35.6/23.8 ) [2016 not including yesterday was only D+3.3%!]

The Democrats' margin lead is only 0.6% lower in week 2 of this week than it was in the same week in 2012. And in 2012, Obama won Nevada by 6.7%. It's going to take a lot more than a 0.6% improvement amongst Republicans to make up that difference. Would require a huge shift in the preference of the "Other" voters.

http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=4543
http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=2501
If we include week 1 + week 2 numbers, we get the following...
2012 D/R/O: 308,828/260,066/135,622 for a D margin of +6.9% (final margin was Obama +6.7%)
2016 D/R/O: 323,466/277,417/166,532 for a D margin of +6.1%

One could argue that R's have improved over 2012, but the improvement is marginal at best. These are still very bad numbers for Trump.

That of course assumes that the O voters aren't breaking more one way than the other.

[BoAtlantis]

https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/status/794910680197513216

"Trump announced on stage that he is going to go to Minnesota before Election Day"

Trump should also visit DC, CA, NY while he's at it.

[ApatheticAustrian]

would be intelligent if he were in the lead and wanted to help down-ticket reps...i think a lot of CD could switch this cycle.

[Mallow]

So now with (most) of week 2's final day's totals in, the week 2 numbers are as follows (including absent/mailing)...
2012: D+5.6% ( 42.2/36.6/21.2 )
2016: D+5.0% ( 40.6/35.6/23.8 ) [2016 not including yesterday was only D+3.3%!]

The Democrats' margin lead is only 0.6% lower in week 2 of this week than it was in the same week in 2012. And in 2012, Obama won Nevada by 6.7%. It's going to take a lot more than a 0.6% improvement amongst Republicans to make up that difference. Would require a huge shift in the preference of the "Other" voters.

http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=4543
http://nvsos.gov/sos/home/showdocument?id=2501
If we include week 1 + week 2 numbers, we get the following...
2012 D/R/O: 308,828/260,066/135,622 for a D margin of +6.9% (final margin was Obama +6.7%)
2016 D/R/O: 323,466/277,417/166,532 for a D margin of +6.1%

One could argue that R's have improved over 2012, but the improvement is marginal at best. These are still very bad numbers for Trump.

That of course assumes that the O voters aren't breaking more one way than the other.

For sure, and that seems to be the R's only hope at this time. It would take a mighty big shift in Other voters' preferences, though (was something like Obama+3 for Others in 2012, whereas from the current early voting numbers, Others would need to break something like Trump+28 in 2016 to tie it up)

[BoAtlantis]

http://www.oldnorthstatepolitics.com/



"Democrats have hit their same totals from four years ago on this same day, but registered Republicans are 13.8 percent ahead of their same-day 2012 totals and registered unaffiliated voters are 43.4 percent ahead of their same day totals--the notably story of North Carolina's early voting."

"In terms of voters' race in absentee NC voting, whites continue their 72 percent of the ballots cast, while black voters are 22 percent and all other races are at 7 percent of the ballots cast:"

"Black voters have been making up their deficit from four years ago, now down only 8 percent from their 2012 same-day numbers (down 59,200 ballots), with white voters up 19 percent and all other races up 53 percent.  This all other races category could be something to watch with their dramatic rise. "

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Who wins NC won't be down to D v R or AA v White - but where the unaffiliated voters go.

[BoAtlantis]

So black votes kinda caught up in NC but also above and beyond their lagging numbers, the over-performance of whites in % is probably the reason why black votes % look way more down than it looks.

Raw # wise, Bitzer says they're down 8% from their same-day totals in 2012, not exactly earth-shatteringly disappointing numbers, considering voting restrictions, after-hurricane effects and the fact that Hillary isn't Obama.

If Hillary carries NC, one way to reconcile is that we're underestimating significant % of educated whites among unaffiliated that are NeverTrumpers and Republicans over-performance is partially due to Dixiecrats party switch.

[ApatheticAustrian]

cohn says, the missing white voters in 2012 are democrats/younger people....

i am sceptical.

[win win]

He is counting voter registration and making the wrong assumptions that a 6 point lead in voter registration means Clinton is leading by 6 points. In fact, many polls of Nevada do assume Hillary gets a big lead in sampled Democrats to sampled Republicans , but still showed the race to be extremely close.

2016 early votes
323466   0.42 D registered
277415   0.36 R registered
166532   0.22 I registered
767413   

and here is a scenario using this data where Trump can be LEADING at the moment
D registered (82% vote Hillary, 8.5% vote Trump)
R registered (6.5% vote Hillary, 85% vote Trump)
I registered (40% vote Hillary, 50% vote Trump) (Romney won by 7% in 2012)
Total H 349095   
Total T 349339 <-- Trump ahead at the moment

The assumptions of voting habits of D, R and I are based on the latest 4 polls in NV.
These polls in NV have consistently shown that D break for Trump more often than R for Hillary.
The four NV polls has Trump ahead in registered I by an average of 12 points.

The key takeaway is Trump needs some combination of 3.5% more crossover voters + 10% edge in Independents to be ahead in NV, based on early voting data.

[alomas]

CNN poll showed Trump carrying Indies 2-1 (58-29) but that's almost impossible. Romney carried it 50-43 so he would need to outperform him by let's say 20 points. I don't believe it's possible.

[mencken]

What does Ralston say the absolute percentage of D voters relative to 2016? As red avatars were so fond of reminding us in 2012, many Independents are actually Republicans disgusted with the party's leadership (i.e. prime targets for Trump).

[Kalimantan]

The opinions from Ralston and Schale are very interesting, but they are democrats, for balance are there similar Republican operatives giving their regular take on numbers?

[Devout Centrist]

What does Ralston say the absolute percentage of D voters relative to 2016? As red avatars were so fond of reminding us in 2012, many Independents are actually Republicans disgusted with the party's leadership (i.e. prime targets for Trump).

There's a huge difference between self identified independents in polls and the actual registered independents.

That being said, the OP is relying on Trump overperforming Romney with independents and Clinton only winning 82 (!) percent of Democrats. That math is nothing short of Dick Morris level insanity.