Display:
Any movement in the senate races ? Last I heard was 57 + lieberman.

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 12:30:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes.  Looks like 58 Dems (counting Lieberman), 41 Reps and a runoff in Georgia.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 12:47:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The AA turn-out in Georgia is staying above 30% of total votes.  This is Good News for Obama as well as the Dem Senate candidate Martin.

A 10/31 Research 2000/Kos poll of the Kentucky race has:

McConnell (R) 47 (46)
Lunsford (D) 44 (42)

Already voted (16% of sample)

McConnell (R) 44
Lunsford (D) 56

which is looking good for Lunsford.  Going into tomorrow with a 12% lead means the GOP has to first dig themselves out of a hole before they can pull ahead.  Also the Dem GOTV operation can concentrate on getting identified Dem voters to the polls by ranking: firm Obama voters to Undecideds.  

They are expecting a 70% turn-out in Kentucky.  

The WSJ poll has Obama leading 51 to 43 (MOE 4%.)

McCain gutted the budget for his GOTV operation to fund  his weekend advertising.  This is going to hurt his voting totals.

I'm expecting GOP national vote totals to revert to '00 levels which was ~50 million.  I'm expecting Dem turn-out to be the same (due to racism) as the Kerry '04 numbers, ~59 million.  These raw vote estimates projects to a 54.13% to 45.87% Obama win; roughly in-line with the WSJ poll.  Giving an Obama win of 8.26%.

This is (barely) within Landslide territory.  

With these numbers it is possible to conclude the Georgia and Kentucky Senate races are definitely in play.  Giving an outside chance the GOP is going to be slaughtered in this election, losing 10 Senate seats and upwards of 35 House seats.  

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:25:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
McCain's ads seem to have done nothing and may actually have backfired.  Check out the chart at Real Clear Politics.  McCain is stuck at 44 and may actually be moving down.  Obama, in contrast, literally headed almost straight up, now closing in on 52.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:27:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Have the more rightwards leaning media organisations polls slid towards Obama over the last few days, so that they can paint a relatively small Win compared to their poll results as a democrat failure? might that be what is showing up in the polls as McCain failure over the last few days?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:39:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Not sure.  Could be noise, or the undecideds might simply be breaking for Obama.  McCain might be going down, but that's not clear.  Both should go up as they take their share of undecideds, barring a catastrophe on either side.  Beltway CW sez McCain gets a 70/30 split of undecideds.  I thought more like 55/45.  But right now they seem to be going almost 100% for Obama on that RCP chart.  He's just a bit more than half a point away from his largest lead ever.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:42:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
how do they justify that 70/30 split? is it people who were really decided, just didn't want to admit they were voting republican?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:48:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's people who don't pay attention mostly, and who just aren't comfortable with Obama.  Or so the pundits say.  Chris Matthews had a good rant on them after Obama's infomercial.  "He's got a great family, he's served his community, (etc).  What's it gonna take for these people to vote for a black guy?"

I never bought it, frankly, but as you know I'm not a big believer in the Bradley Effect (which is basically what the pundits were predicting).  I thought the demographics said they'd break with a slight McCain lean, but nothing incredible, and a break for Obama is hardly out of the question.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:51:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The sacrificial sheep's liver had two bumps on it.

Also during the sacrifice birds were seen flying from the East to the West.

What else does one need?

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:02:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Beltway CW sez McCain gets a 70/30 split of undecideds.

No way.  Nonsense.

I'll your 55/45 Obama/McCain projection.  Obama has out hustled McCain in every single state he's entered.  That's what gets the Undecideds.

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:53:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The theory is that these are Republicans who are unhappy with their Party, but who can't bring themselves to vote for Obama or pro-lifers who like everything else about Obama.  I think mostly these people will break evenly or stay home.  

Also worth noting: undecideds sometimes, who knows how often, say they are undecided for weird personal reasons: the need for attention, the desire for people to leave them alone, the paranoia that their neighbors will find out.  They may very well know who they are voting for.

"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.

by poemless on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:04:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Right.  I was referring to True Undecided voters.
by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:12:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, no, my call was M55-45O on the undecideds.  Maybe 60/40.  Slight McCain lean.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:22:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
In that case:

I don't agree.  

The Dems have too many structural advantages.  Or it could be put the GOP has too many disadvantages.  These  advantages and Obama's GOTV is teh awesome and something the country has never seen.  

Ever.

Could I be wrong?  Of course.  

But the ground operation is critical for getting 'your' Undecideds to the polls as, by definition, these voters are low-information, low-enthusiasm, and loosely attached to the process.  The CW is based on previous elections where the GOP had the superior ground game.

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:41:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Heh.  Well, so far, you seem to be more right than me, and I'm certainly not complaining. :)

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:56:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am older, thus wiser, than you.  (and get the HECK off my lawn!  Darnitall!!!)

Stick with me kid and you'll be wearing horse poop as big as diamonds.

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 03:23:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I am older, thus wiser, than you.

Hey, I whomped you on Iowa.  Now if you'll please toss my nerf football back into my yard, that'd be swell. ;)

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 03:29:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ok, here tis ---

Seriously, I've learned a lot from your posts.  Thank you.

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 03:44:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This is when the 72-hour Undecideds, decide.  They seem to be breaking nationally for Obama but that's a low confidence statement.  

What we can state with confidence is the McCain campaign has a severely broken GOTV operation which means Obama DOES have a major structure advantage in the attempt to carry this group.

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:50:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The McCain campaign has been a Charley-Foxtrot from the git-go.  No reason to change a losing strategy, huh?  

Meanwhile, all campaign long Obama has over-preformed Southern polling.  Southerners in general and AAs, in particular, don't like giving their voting intents over the telephone to strangers.  I'd be willing to wage this upturn is in the South.

We could even be looking at SC going Obama.  

At which point my head will explode.  

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 01:46:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
At which point my head will explode.

You and Justin Webb. This could get messy.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:10:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Every rational prediction is SC should be one of the early states for McCain.  If, for some weirdness, it does go Obama then we're looking at Mississippi, Arizona, Kentucky, and (god help us) even Texas and Louisiana being in play.  In that scenario Obama could end up in the 400 and MAYBE 500 EV range.

And the muffled sound of ka-boom ripples across the US.

;-)

This is VERY unlikely, BTW.

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:26:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The only truly interesting thing in the BBC coverage is the historical map of previous elections.

I had no idea that the South used to be a Dem stronghold, or just how badly Dems have been slaughtered in landslides.

There has never been a true Dem landslide of 400+. Clinton came closest, but there's been nothing to match the total wipe outs inflicted on Dukakis and McGovern.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:35:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Eeehm, Johnson v. Goldwater, 1964? Plus, Roosevelt got over 400 every election he stood.
by nanne (zwaerdenmaecker@gmail.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:41:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I had no idea that the South used to be a Dem stronghold

And Abe Lincoln was a Republican.

"Pretending that you already know the answer when you don't is not actually very helpful." ~Migeru.

by poemless on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:42:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That I knew. :)
by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:48:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The South was reliably Dem until President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, ending Jim Crow.

That signing was basis of the GOP Southern Strategy.

by ATinNM on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:47:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
FDR got over 400.  He actually got over 500 in '36.  LBJ got close to 500 in the last hurrah of the New Deal Coalition.  But, yeah, no Dem in the modern era has hit 400.  Clinton came close.  It'd be very tough for Obama, but he's got a shot at it (gotta win all the obvious swing states, plus Georgia and Arizona).

The history of American politics is largely a history of conservative industrialists and capitalists with brief periods of pretty strong liberalism thrown in when things got way off track.

The Dems were the party of slavery and, later, Jim Crow right up to the 1960s.  Johnson said, just before he signed the Civil Rights Act, "We've lost the South for a generation."  It's been three generations, actually.  Might finally start to see some daylight tomorrow (ironically, with a black nominee).  Dems did the right thing and paid for it by losing a lot of for forty years.

But, really, we've been in a conservative swing for forty years.  Prior to Nixon, it was a liberal swing, even under guys like Ike.  Now we seem to be at the very front end of the next realignment, which looks like a liberal one.

Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin

by Drew J Jones (myfriends@thisispancakes.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 04:12:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Nixon was not a part of Movement Conservatism, even if he was an asshole.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid (arvid.hallen at gmail.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 06:12:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series