Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Zombie Walk coincides with Palin appearance in Asheville Previous entry: Fundamentalism is emotionally abusive

Eight More Days Of This…Seriously

imageWingnuttia has a new windmill to tilt after…could Obama lose California

The answer is no.  The answer has always been no and will always be no.  But the results are stunning!

California has begun early voting already as well as mail-in balloting. The number of people who have gone in to vote in person has been extensive. The results so far prove what we had always suspected. The polls are being proven as totally unreliable. Although the results of early balloting have not been disclosed,of course,how many Republicans and how many Democrats have voted has been revealed.

The results are simply shocking. The polls showed Barack Obama with an 18 point lead in California just a few days ago. The results thus far are the complete opposite. In the most liberal state in the entire country,the results are that 99,000 Republicans have voted and 96,000 Democrats voted. In the mail-in balloting the results so far are that 9,000 Democrats sent in their ballots and that 5,000 Republicans did so. So with nearly 210,000 people having voted,the Democrats have only a 1,000 vote advantage !

Remember back when the Corner was saying that Obama’s GOTV effort was a miserable failure because of the low numbers of people who’d early voted in Ohio?  And then remember how that point was entirely worthless, because there was still a month of voting left to go?  This is a lot like that. 

There are about 24 million registered voters in California.  Even assuming a ridiculously low 50% turnout, that places the number of voters for the November 4th election at 12 million.  This means that the 210,000-voter harbinger for Democratic doom constitutes 1.75% of voters in a low turnout election.  Why might you have low Republican-leaning early voter turnout in a solidly blue state?  Logic would dictate that since nobody’s putting money into early voting efforts there, the pool that’ll turn out is essentially random.  And tiny. 

Of course, the conservative base is desperate like whoa for any good news…so this means that Barack Obama will lose California and John McCain is already our next old white male president.  Strata-Sphere:

First there was early voting and registration in Ohio, where Obama’s campaign promised to make huge gains - only to fall 80% short of their mark. All the hype in Ohio was pure fantasy when it came to Obama getting out the vote with this massive wave, which turned out to be barely a ripple.

This is in reference to the earlier revelation that you can stop counting votes a month beforehand.

Second, Gallup came out with poll numbers showing the amount of early voters between Obama and McCain show no huge wave for Obama, but actually a dead even race. Even though Gallup’s own national poll models showed a huge lead for Obama, it was not showing up in the early voting.

I’ve been hearing a lot about this Gallup poll on the right, so here’s a shot of it:

This has been shown as a “dead heat”, in no small part because one of the tests to become a conservative blogger is to solve the problem 2+6 with a reference to Edmund Burke.  What the poll shows is that roughly equal proportions of Obama and McCain’s supporters are voting…but Obama has more supporters.  It’s “tied” in the same way that a basketball game is tied because each team has has possession of the ball an equal number of times.  You know…not.

Gina Cobb says that Californians hate socialists, Marxists and Communists (that state got back into Real America in a hurry), and Doug Ross reminds us that four years ago, Kerry was also massively ahead and yet, lost.  By “massively ahead” he means behind at almost the exact margin he lost by.

It strikes me that these people would be a lot less angry and sad if they weren’t really, really stupid.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Jesse Taylor on 07:18 AM • (57) Comments

Some days California is the most liberal state in the Union. Some days it’s New York. But any state that doesn’t give Republicans every public office can be the most liberal state in the Union.

Comment #1: Lesly  on  10/27  at  08:36 AM

Maybe I’m obtuse.  I don’t understand why just because you’re a Democrat or Republican you’re necessarily voting along party lines.  I’m registered Democrat but I vote all over the map.  I know some Republicans who are disgusted by what the party has become and are voting Democrat.  So your registration means what?

Comment #2: speedbudget  on  10/27  at  08:51 AM

“So your registration means what?”

Silly!  Everybody knows once you’ve registered as a Republican, you must vote Republican. 

Democrats can throw their votes away on Democratic candidates, but can also do the right thing and vote for Republicans…

Comment #3: MikeEss  on  10/27  at  09:35 AM

This has been shown as a “dead heat”, in no small part because one of the tests to become a conservative blogger is to solve the problem 2+6 with a reference to Edmund Burke.

AWESOME.

Comment #4: killjoy  on  10/27  at  09:36 AM

I’ve noticed the push on NPR is full on for the rethugs.  Stories all weekend have featured just how plucky and resilient the republicans are and just how motivated all those disaffected Hillary are.  It’s no surprise that the Nice Polite Republicans radio network would come out strong in the late hours to do their best make it a “close race”.

As California, yeah right.  The national republicans have done everything but declare war on the state (think the contrived Enron energy crisis…and more)..  I doubt the citizens of California are going to forget that when voting.

Comment #5: ice weasel  on  10/27  at  09:38 AM

BTW, I love how many wingnuts seem to have incredibly basic problems understanding statistics and simple math. 

Maybe all those years of rejecting science, logic, and anything resembling intellectualism (at least anything not found in an an Ayn Rand novel) are finally biting them in the ass…

Comment #6: MikeEss  on  10/27  at  09:40 AM

If Obama loses California I’m moving to Canada.  It’s hard to believe buttheads like McCain and Palin are still in a ‘race’.

Check out:  www.buttheadpolice.com

to VOTE for them to get asses stamped on their heads.  Make a statement.  Spread the word!!! LOL.

Comment #7: wakeupUSA  on  10/27  at  09:53 AM

Ahahahahahaha!

God, they’re fucked.

Comment #8: Ben D.  on  10/27  at  09:55 AM

BTW, I love how many wingnuts seem to have incredibly basic problems understanding statistics and simple math. 

“If I have 30% of 100 and you have 30% of 50, who has more? Class?”

“It’s a tie! We each have 30%!”

Comment #9: Dweeze  on  10/27  at  10:54 AM

You know, how are we supposed to benefit from “Drill Baby Drill” unless there is some socialism involved.  Can these twits think two steps out and realize that all that oil will just go into the world market unless there is some government interventiion to make it stay here? 

Even Palin seems to get that under the slimy surface, with her tattooed molecules of oil and all.

Comment #10: Ms Kate  on  10/27  at  11:01 AM

Interesting ... they assume that the registrations are evenly distributed - 50% Democrat, 50% Republican.

What they failed to notices is that N(dem)>>>N(rep) this year, and democrats have historically outnumbered republicans in the past century. 

Then again, if they understood science and numbers, they wouldn’t be wingnuts, now would they. 

All of this is, of course, aimed at getting their own out to prevent a landslide mandate for Obama ala Reagan.  This isn’t about us - it is about getting their guys off the bench to vote, and not vote for Barr.

Comment #11: Ms Kate  on  10/27  at  11:04 AM

Well, since they have the MATH, I suggest they head on over to Intrade and bet the nest egg on McCain in California.

Comment #12: PanAmerican  on  10/27  at  11:08 AM

There’s optimism and then there’s thinking that wishing makes it true.  Wingnuts have trouble telling the difference.

Comment #13: Amanda Marcotte  on  10/27  at  11:11 AM

“—I’ve noticed the push on NPR is full on for the rethugs.  Stories all weekend have featured just how plucky and resilient the republicans are and just how motivated all those disaffected Hillary are.  It’s no surprise that the Nice Polite Republicans radio network would come out strong in the late hours to do their best make it a “close race”.—”

Honestly, I haven’t noticed that at all.  For every “John McCain is a plucky maverick underdog” I hear a story about how “Barack Obama is simply running the board with massive crowds and obscene amounts of fund raising.”  They’re trying to play “fair and balanced” to a degree, which is rather silly but ultimately harmless.

I’m more bothered by their random anti-environmentalist or zomg-socialism! bits that get run whenever an AEI guy gets too close to a mic.  Even though its a bit of a craps shoot, NPR is the best news radio in Houston.

Comment #14: Zifnab25  on  10/27  at  11:19 AM

Oh, and in regards to the “Republicans could win California!!11!!1eleventyone1!” nonsense, weren’t they crowing about how John Kerry was totally going to get ousted in Massachusetts a few months back?  Completely fucking delusional.

Comment #15: Zifnab25  on  10/27  at  11:20 AM

First there was early voting and registration in Ohio, where Obama’s campaign promised to make huge gains - only to fall 80% short of their mark. All the hype in Ohio was pure fantasy when it came to Obama getting out the vote with this massive wave, which turned out to be barely a ripple.

They should tell that to my kids, who had to stand in line for almost two hours yesterday so that the husband and I could vote early.  And I’d say, just from observing who had what party approved lists of who to vote for, that close to 70-80% of those people were voting for Obama.

And, even though I’d promised my six year old that he could vote for Obama instead of me (he’s very excited about the election—they’ve been talking about it in his social studies class at school), the poll observer (not the workers, they were pretty cool) watched him like a hawk and wouldn’t let him even touch the machine.  Because apparently getting your kids involved in the process is a bad thing and it’s such a horrible idea to let my kid push the vote button after I’d made my choices.  And I do realize that it’s officially against the rules, but really—I was standing right there and it’s never been a problem before with the old ladies at our local polling place (they let my three year old push the button for me in the primary).

Comment #16: ks  on  10/27  at  11:25 AM

“If I have 30% of 100 and you have 30% of 50, who has more? Class?”—- “It’s a tie! We each have 30%!”

And there you have it - the basis of support for the Flat Tax.

Comment #17: Xecklothxayyquou Gilchrist  on  10/27  at  11:29 AM

“—And I do realize that it’s officially against the rules, but really—I was standing right there and it’s never been a problem before with the old ladies at our local polling place (they let my three year old push the button for me in the primary). —”

Voter Fraud!  Voter Fraud!  Voter Fraud!
So THIS is how Obama plans on winning the election?  That devious bastard.

Comment #18: Zifnab25  on  10/27  at  11:29 AM

Wow, I didn’t even know we had early voting! I looked it up and there’s only one measly little early polling location per county. Thank goodness I live 6 blocks from SF City Hall. =D Thanks for the info, I’m getting dressed to go vote.

Silly Republicans, thinking that California would vote for McCain. I don’t think I’ve even met a Republican Californian in more than three years.

Comment #19: Sara Pulis  on  10/27  at  11:32 AM

“Silly Republicans, thinking that California would vote for McCain. I don’t think I’ve even met a Republican Californian in more than three years.”

Sara, Welcome to San francisco. If you want to meet a CA repub, you have to come to my neck of the woods (Orange County) or go inland (Fresno, Bakersfield).

www.letcaliforniaring.org

Comment #20: Mark  on  10/27  at  11:39 AM

Ah.  Another example of the degree to which liberals are illiterate.

Nowhere in the Strata-Sphere post does the author suggest that McCain might win California.  NOWHERE.

In fact, he implicitly states that he expects Obama to win CA: “That means that in the less liberal states he [Obama] is in real trouble.” 

His point - which in your foaming-at-the-mouth-must-debunk-everything-I-read-even-when-I-read-it-wrong - was that there is WEAKNESS in the Obama numbers in CA early voting.  The FACT that California is showing weakness suggests that there will be weakness elsewhere as well.  In those states that are close (OH, PA, NC, MO, etc) this could translate into McCain victory.

Comment #21: Scaliger  on  10/27  at  11:40 AM

“RedState post” not “Strata-Sphere post”.

Comment #22: Scaliger  on  10/27  at  11:41 AM

It’s a matter of record that absentee ballots tend to be a higher percentage of Republican voters than Democrats, but given the Shrubs’ approval rating, along with McCains’ blunders, I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of the ballots would be for Obama, YMMV.

Comment #23: The Dark Avenger and Guardian of 10 Gold Chow Mein  on  10/27  at  11:42 AM

Have that doofus check where the votes are coming from.  In Los Angeles the closest
early voting location is a half hour drive or an hour and a half bus ride.  Not really
great access for the millions of us here waiting to vote for Obama.

Comment #24: gloryla  on  10/27  at  11:42 AM

“Like, whoa”?  Seriously?  >_<

Comment #25: Eric  on  10/27  at  11:42 AM

which in your foaming-at-the-mouth-must-debunk-everything-I-read-even-when-I-read-it-wrong

Project much?

Comment #26: Dweeze  on  10/27  at  12:06 PM

“The FACT that California is showing weakness suggests that there will be weakness elsewhere as well.  In those states that are close (OH, PA, NC, MO, etc) this could translate into McCain victory.”

...okay.

#1 - What makes you think “California is showing weakness”?  As Jesse pointed out, the numbers are so incredibly premature and minuscule you can draw no accurate predictions from them at this time.

#2 - What makes you think that the way we Californians vote has anything at all to do with how people in Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, or Missouri vote?  We’ve got a “Republican” governor for god’s sake.  But he ain’t no Republican like the rest of them would recognize…

So in the end, Scaliger, what is it you are trying to say?  And do you actually have any valid evidence to support your assertions?...

Comment #27: MikeEss  on  10/27  at  12:14 PM

MikeEss,

You’ve proved my point again (to wit: liberals can’t read).

*I* wasn’t making an argument about the results in California; I was showing how Jesse Taylor had misread the post at Redstate.

Comment #28: Scaliger  on  10/27  at  12:19 PM

In Georgia most counties have only had one voting place open up to today, since September 22 when early voting began.  Fulton county had three polling places open for early voting and now, (as of today), has seven.  The other metro counties have way fewer polling places per capita than the rural counties, most of whom have one polling place, but a much smaller population.  According to Democratic Underground, African-Americans are voting in disproportionate numbers, 39% of early voters are African-American while only 29% of registered voters are. 

Georgia doesn’t have party registration though, so it’s not really possible to tell what percentage of voters are Republican or Democrat, but African-Americans are usually Democratic voters. 

Clarke county, where the University of Georgia is located, and is one of the only liberal enclaves in North Georgia has only two polling places open.  I suspect that there will still be long lines and long waits on election day because a disproportionately smaller number of voting booths will be in place in the metro counties and places with larger African-American populations. 

Obama probably still won’t carry the state, but it’s good to see the big turnouts among African-
Americans anyway.  It gives one hope for the future.

Comment #29: G Porgy  on  10/27  at  12:21 PM

*I* wasn’t making an argument about the results in California; I was showing how Jesse Taylor had misread the post at Redstate.

Other than me not doing that, good job!  You’re almost up to reading like a big boy (or girl)!

You’ll notice that I said “Wingnuttia”.  And to that claim, I submit to you the Strata-Sphere, Gina Cobb and Doug Ross posts, all of which make the “Obama losing California” claim, coupled with the RedState post as introductory background.

There’s a simple way to follow a complex argument - reading it.  I highly recommend it.

Comment #30: Jesse Taylor  on  10/27  at  12:24 PM

So, using small words so we can read them, Mr/Ms Scaliger do you agree with the Redstate bullshit or not?  ‘Cause according to my simpleton’s reading of your words, it sure sounds like you agree.

And if you agree, it doesn’t matter if you can read well or not — you’re stupid…

Comment #31: MikeEss  on  10/27  at  12:25 PM

Keep in mind that the big hockey states are Minnesota and Massachusetts, so don’t be surprised if Palin causes them to go red also too. That scenario seems at least as likely as this one.

Comment #32: vaux-rien  on  10/27  at  12:27 PM

“—The FACT that California is showing weakness suggests that there will be weakness elsewhere as well.  In those states that are close (OH, PA, NC, MO, etc) this could translate into McCain victory. —”

I WANT TO BELIEVE!

Seriously, how does a conjectured weakness in California translate to McCain victory in some of the swingy-er states?  Pennsylvania is going to flip red because Obama’s GOTV efforts in LA aren’t big enough?  The 200k that didn’t get kicked off the voter rolls in Ohio are going to vote McCain after all because Obama just isn’t commanding a big enough lead in Beverly Hills and the OC?  I mean, that’s just forty flavors of ignorant.  Is anyone surprised that Obama isn’t putting as much effort into his GOTV efforts in states that are traditionally deep blue?  ZOMG!  McCain’s turnout in Arizona is lackluster!  Obama could win McCain’s home state!  Or even Utah!

:-p

Comment #33: Zifnab25  on  10/27  at  12:31 PM

psst - there may be 24 million people of voting age in California, but if you check the SoS’ website you’ll see that only about 16 million of them are actually registered to vote. This doesn’t change the fact that 210,000 is a tiny fraction of the people who will vote in CA this year, of course, but I’m pedantic like that raspberry

Comment #34: Lisa  on  10/27  at  12:32 PM

...with her tattooed molecules of oil and all.

{cartoon headshake}  Bblblblblbbl -WUHH!?!?!?!?!

Comment #35: Eric, Rejector of Memez  on  10/27  at  12:40 PM

Seriously, how does a conjectured weakness in California translate to McCain victory in some of the swingy-er states?  Pennsylvania is going to flip red because Obama’s GOTV efforts in LA aren’t big enough?

I think the implication is that McCain is outperforming the polls by something like 20% and if California is in play he’ll win something like 40 states. I’ve been searching and I can’t find where that redstate diarist got their numbers from, there’s a lot of quoting from the redstate post but no one’s linking to a polling source.

It’s getting way too much coverage for such a ridiculous “story” but I’m happy to let them have their fun while it lasts.

Comment #36: vaux-rien  on  10/27  at  01:05 PM

His point - which in your foaming-at-the-mouth-must-debunk-everything-I-read-even-when-I-read-it-wrong - was that there is WEAKNESS in the Obama numbers in CA early voting.

Considering that each county only has one early voting location, I suspect there’s also weakness in McCain’s numbers in CA early voting.  But don’t let that keep you from clinging desperately to your one last shred of hope.

Comment #37: Mnemosyne  on  10/27  at  01:35 PM

Jesse’s analogy is spot-on (and hilarious) with regards to just looking at the Gallup poll.  But if you combine them with the received ballots numbers, you can spin a non-mathematically retarded “good news for McCain” conclusion out of this.  Obama has 96,000 votes in CA.  If 10% of Obama supporters have voted, that would mean 960,000 votes for Obama in California.

McCain has 99,000 votes in CA.  If 9% of McCain supporters have already voted, that means that there would be (1/.09) * 99,000 = 1.1 million votes total for McCain in California.  Can you feel the McMentum????

This assumes the national “have you already voted” percentage is the california “have you already voted” percentage.  Since AFAIK Obama hasn’t been trying to get a lot of early votes in safe states like California, one would expect it to be a lot less.  If only 5% of Obama supporters have voted in CA, then he would be looking at close to 2 million votes to McCain’s 1 million.

Comment #38: math major  on  10/27  at  01:38 PM

But if you combine them with the received ballots numbers, you can spin a non-mathematically retarded “good news for McCain” conclusion out of this. 

This also fails because it relies on the notion that the 105,000 Democratic voters (96,000 in-person plus 9,000 mail-in votes) = 105,000 Obama votes and the 104,000 Republican voters (99,000 in-person plus 5,000 mail-in votes) = 104,000 McCain votes.

Comment #39: Dweeze  on  10/27  at  02:05 PM

his also fails because it relies on the notion that the 105,000 Democratic voters (96,000 in-person plus 9,000 mail-in votes) = 105,000 Obama votes and the 104,000 Republican voters (99,000 in-person plus 5,000 mail-in votes) = 104,000 McCain votes.

Sure, but the failure is simpler. In the comments ‘redalert’ claims that he got these numbers from the SF Chronicle and he swears they were on sfgate.com but apparently they’ve mysteriously disappeared. I’m calling shenanigans, the whole thing is simply a lie.

Comment #40: vaux-rien  on  10/27  at  02:36 PM

I think what they’re trying to say is that the ethusiasm gap which would be a major problem for McCain (even if the polls were tied) isn’t going to be as much of a problem.

Mind you, comparing states which we know are going to go one way or the ohter to states still up for grabs is its own form of epic fail.

Comment #41: Karmakin  on  10/27  at  02:38 PM

Vaux-rien, these are the same people that think that rumor becomes truth through repitition.  If the grand circle jerk that is the McCainosphere sees multiple copies of something in their inbox in a single day, that means it must be true and their repetitions of bullshit, lies, and things people clearly don’t give a fuck about must be having a game-changing effect!

Comment #42: Ms Kate  on  10/27  at  02:43 PM

It strikes me that these people would be a lot less angry and sad if they weren’t really, really stupid.

they also wouldn’t -be- those people

Comment #43: firefall  on  10/27  at  04:17 PM

How do you people think the reborn “Patriot” movement is going to get its “the government is illegitimate” meme started? Those rats ain’t gonna fuck themselves, you know. Fantasies of McCain really getting three hundred million votes, but having ACORN steal the election from him and install our new socialist overlord take time to get down pat, and there’s no time like right now to get started on that resentment. The folks over at Confederate Yankee are hip to this. Get with the program, everyone!

Comment #44: grendelkhan  on  10/27  at  04:23 PM

Come on now early voting in California is NOT like say Georgia, Nevada, N.C or other battle ground states.  There people KNOW their votes WILL make a difference and hence you see people voting early where it really means something.

Comment #45: Dale Parks  on  10/27  at  04:39 PM

It strikes me that these people would be a lot less angry and sad if they weren’t really, really stupid.

No, but they’d be a lot more dangerous.

Comment #46: Peter Principle  on  10/27  at  05:01 PM

I’ve been searching and I can’t find where that redstate diarist got their numbers from,

Neither can the Redstate diarist. But he saw it somewhere on the San Francisco Chronicle website, which is notoriously difficult to link to, and stuff.

I’m putting this in the “making shit up” category.

Comment #47: mythago  on  10/27  at  05:16 PM

2+6 with a reference to Edmund Burke.

Genius snark. I am in awe.

Comment #48: DanF  on  10/27  at  05:48 PM

As bombs fell outside the Reich Chancellery and the Soviets were just outside Berlin Jospeh Goebbels ran screaming into Hitler’s bunker with news that Roosevelt was dead!  Surely they’d now have a chance to win after all!  Sad, the tortured gymnastics these Republican minds are going through…

Comment #49: Sinomania!  on  10/27  at  06:29 PM

G Porgy

Georgia doesn’t have party registration though, so it’s not really possible to tell what percentage of voters are Republican or Democrat, but African-Americans are usually Democratic voters. 

Clarke county, where the University of Georgia is located, and is one of the only liberal enclaves in North Georgia has only two polling places open.  I suspect that there will still be long lines and long waits on election day because a disproportionately smaller number of voting booths will be in place in the metro counties and places with larger African-American populations.

I’m a resident of Athens-Clarke, and I voted today!  It was about a thirty minute wait between eleven am and noon.  I suspect that we’ll have long lines at the advance voting all week.  I actually usually prefer to vote on election day itself—I like running into my neighbors lining up in the gym at the local school; I always wind up voting at the same time as Bertis Downs, REM’s business manager—but given the stakes in this election, I chose to wait in a line today in the hope that it will make the line shorter next Tuesday for other Obama voters.

Comment #50: Pen Brynisa  on  10/27  at  07:01 PM

I just double-checked—I would have to drive 50 miles round-trip in order to vote early since LA County, in their infinite wisdom, decided to have the only early voting location be at the very southern end of the county (Norwalk, if anyone cares).  So it looks like I will be toddling down to my local voting location on 11/4 after all.

I have a feeling you’re not going to get great early voting turnout if you decide to have only one location per county, especially in a place like California that has really big counties.  Just a notion.

Comment #51: Mnemosyne  on  10/27  at  08:34 PM

>>...so this means that Barack Obama will lose California and John McCain is already our next old white male president.

Oops! You let the mask slip! “White male president”? What’s that all about? You’re supposed to be post-racial, but you seem fixated on McCain’s race. Bad, Jesse, bad.

Comment #52: randomizer  on  10/27  at  08:51 PM

Scaliger:

I live in a district in San Diego that always goes Republican. It is part of what used to be referred to as “Reagan Country.” The FACT is that Obama leads McCain in my district, so I wouldn’t get too excited about early voting in California, Skippy.

Sorry (not) to burst your bubble, but the damnedest thing about CA is that there are lots of Republicans out here that are decent, reasonable, liberal-minded people—-our Governor, for instance. They’re not real fond of right wing bible thumpers, and they aren’t going to vote for some crazy loon from Alaska that speaks in tongues and thinks rape victims should be forced to give birth to the child of their attackers.

Hey! Did ya hear the one about Obama being in a statistical tie with McCain in Arizona?

Ouch!

Comment #53: Boo Boo  on  10/27  at  10:36 PM

Some people are just too dense. Just for kicks I ran those early voting numbers through a likely voter screen using the newest state polling. Of course not all Dems will vote for Obama and not all Rep. will vote McCain. By doing that Obama claims a nice 55% of the early voting. But there is one larger piece missing, independent. Who prefer Obama in CA by a 2:1 margin. So, even if you took this non-representative sample as an actual proxy for voting in CA McCain is buried once you add in independents, and merely toasted when you filter the results through, you know, reality.

Comment #54: Chaz  on  10/28  at  02:03 AM

“Sara, Welcome to San francisco. If you want to meet a CA repub, you have to come to my neck of the woods (Orange County) or go inland (Fresno, Bakersfield).”

Redneck Orange County? But it’s so rich! Are they all Beverly Hillbillies?
SF apparently has some Republicans; they keep finding people to lose local elections. We have alot of rich people here, too; maybe their neck of the woods is where all the ‘Pub action is?

Comment #55: Sara Pulis  on  10/28  at  02:13 AM

If McCain/Palin win the White House, what good will it be?

If the nastiest, dirtiest, most erratic campaign mounted in the 21st Century
(and even though it’s only a few years old, that is saying something),
can triumph over the most obvious leader to emerge in decades,
what hope does our nation have?

What direction would a McCain/Palin administration take us?
Do you think that they even know themselves?
Have you noticed that the color scheme of the McCain campaign
isn’t even red, white and blue? It’s blue, white and gold. Which USA is that?

All I hear from the McCain/Palin camp is “Barack this,” and “Obama that.”

What I hear from Obama is “We can do this,” and “we can fix that.”

I say, let’s vote for hope, change and a continuation of Democracy.
4 more years of Reaganomics will turn us into
THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF THE UNITED STATES

OBAMA = PROGRESSION + OPPORTUNITY
MCCAIN = REGRESSION + STAGNATION

Comment #56: ALL TAXES ARE A REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH  on  10/28  at  09:32 AM

Even assuming a ridiculously low 50% turnout, that places the number of voters for the November 4th election at 12 million.  This means that the 210,000-voter harbinger for Democratic doom constitutes 1.75% of voters in a low turnout election.  Why might you have low Republican-leaning early voter turnout in a solidly blue state?  Logic would dictate that since nobody’s putting money into early voting efforts there, the pool that’ll turn out is essentially random.  And tiny.

Err…unless I’m terribly confused about what you’re saying here, this is really really incredibly wrong. If we accept the claim that the pool that turned out for early voting really were random, then this would be, in essence, a perfect poll of California voters. A poll just like those that show Obama leading by 20%, but with one major difference: it would be more than 10 times more reliable. Yes, it’s a tiny fraction of all voters, but that’s the *whole idea* of polling: that, through the magic of statistics, you can deduce things about a large population through a small random sample.

So accepting the premise that this is a random sample would lead us to conclude that support for Obama in California is something like 50.2% +/- 0.2%. And it would also lead us to conclude that the last three polls showing support of 56%, 59%, and 61% were way way off. Off by roughly twice the radius of their 95% confidence interval. Now, given that, do we accept the premise that the early voters were a random sample of voters? Or, maybe, just maybe, do we decide that, for whatever reason, early voting has been disproportionately Republican?

Of course, the ridiculousness of the Red State post can be even more easily demonstrated. Forget about the mail-in ballots. If this data means something with them, it also means something without them. We then have McCain *leading* by 1.5%. It should be obvious, even to the inhabitants of Red State, that this means absolutely nothing.

Comment #57: Nick  on  10/28  at  04:01 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.