• comment on a post Presidential Thread: OH, MI, NM, CO & NV over 9 years ago
    I'm biased, because I'm more of a Clinton Dem than a Dean Dem, but I feel like Dean and Michael Moore was great for energizing our base, but in the general election they scared people away.  I always felt like some of the furtherest to the left wanted to see us lose in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Kerry's position on terror and Iraq was always "I support...but"  The but's turn people off.

    I don't know. I really don't. I'm frustrated and I'm just guessing.  We won elections with Clinton.  I just can't see how we can lose to our a president that did such a bad job on an objective level.  If we can't beat Bush, if we lose Senate and House seats when we have our bases fired up, what do we do.

    We are a minority party right now, and we need to figure out what is going to get us 5% more of the vote.

  • comment on a post November 3rd Thread over 9 years ago
    Bush is up by 100K votes right now with about 8% left.  This is not Florida, whose final margin was 500 votes, this is a lot of votes.  

    Assuming 200k provisional votes, we would have to win those votes 150K to 50K.  Ain't going to happen by a long shot.

    About the exit polls: the exit polls are systematically flawed.  I wish I could say that Bush cheated and outperformed exit polls, but the fact he did so in almost every single state leads me to one sad conclusion, the exit polls royally fucked up.

    The reason?  All polls rely on the results being standardized to a voter model.  Most models assume something like 37% Dems, 33% Reps.  The problem is that those models don't appear to be correct anymore.  A bunch of people apparently switched to Reps after 9/11.

    If we lose Ohio by 100K votes and claim we were cheated, we're just kidding ourselves and the American people will punihs us even more.  We didn't just lose Ohio, we lost Florida, Iowa, New Mexico, and an assload of Senate and House seats.  We have to accept it and figure out what to do next.

    Anyway, let's not give up until the remainder of the Ohio votes are counted, but if the result stays the same, let's be classy losers and immediately get to work at preventing the Reps from pushing through their destructive agenda.

  • comment on a post Open Thread over 9 years ago
    "Bush may or may not be all that religous, but he has convinced the stupid, uneducated south, and a few other areas that he is and he plays on that and it works for him."

    Respectfully, this attitude is exactly why we lose elections.

  • comment on a post Presidential Thread: OH, MI, NM, CO & NV over 9 years ago
    lol I'm a Kerry supporter, and I hate the French.
  • comment on a post Presidential Thread: OH, MI, NM, CO & NV over 9 years ago
    I believe about 200K provisional ballots.  Right now, the margin is 140K votes with 16% of the precincts left.  We would have to win the provisional ballots 170K to 30K, which isn't going to happen.

    I don't think the provisional ballots even become an issue at all unless we can get the margin down to 50K votes.  

  • comment on a post Open Thread over 9 years ago
    This has turned into a bloodbath.  if Bush wins NM, then the republicans will have won the presidency and picked up seats in both the Senate and House.  We've really got to figure out what we have to do as a party to get back into power.  Instead of anger and bitterness, we need ideas, energy, perhaps some adjustment to our positions, and MUCH better candidates.
  • comment on a post Presidential Thread: OH, MI, NM, CO & NV over 9 years ago
    I thought we had sme special going with the enthusiasm, the turnout, etc. but we are facing the prospect of Bush having a second term, and Reps gaining Senate and House seats.  We mobilized the best we possibly could, but if things hold the way they look now, we just got another ass kicking.

    My first instinct is anger, but we need to look at our party from top to bottom.  What issues are we losing people on?  How do we get better candidates (face it, kerry wasn't a great candidate)?  Why does our GOTV get such great press, but then the Reps quietly mobilize their base as well or better?

    The scariest thing is that Bush outperformed the polls, which tells me that the historic voter models used in the polls aren't effective anymore.  In other words, between 9/11 and today, a bunch of dems and independents went Republican.

  • comment on a post Presidential Thread: OH, MI, NM, CO & NV over 9 years ago
    I'm running the numbers on Ohio, and it does not look good for us.
  • comment on a post Presidential Thread: Focus on PA, FL, IA, MN and WI over 9 years ago
    I still think we can take it as long as we take Ohio.  If we get Ohio, Michigan, Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin are looking strong for us.

    Let's not get pessimistic yet.

  • comment on a post Presidential Thread: Focus on PA, FL, IA, MN and WI over 9 years ago
    Exit polls have been notoriously bad for years.  In 2000, they also overpredicted for Gore.  If you notice, Kerry is underperforming exit polls in nearly every single state.  I seriously doubt that Reps have managed dirty tricks in every single state.  Instead, I think exit polls have some fundamental flaws.
  • comment on a post President Thread--General over 9 years ago
    On a good note, it looks like Delaware is going our way now.
  • comment on a post Open Thread over 9 years ago
    For the second straight election, the exit polls are far off.  I have some theories about this, but I don't want to jump to any conclusions yet.  We have plenty of time and precincts left to win this election.
  • comment on a post House Returns Thread: East of the Mississippi over 9 years ago
    Damn thought we'd win that one.
  • comment on a post Presidential Thread: Focus on PA, FL, IA, MN and WI over 9 years ago
    Either way, I've learned never to trust an exit poll again.  They are worthless.
  • comment on a post Open Thread over 9 years ago
    I'd rather be in our shoes than theirs right now, but here is what the other side is saying:

    (posted from little green footballs, which is roughly a rep version of this site)

    There are media reports that we are behind in early exit polls. Here's my sense of things. The early exit poll numbers are hard to make sense of right now, until we dissect and analyze them, which is being done even now. It's of course still early, and it depends on where in the state the numbers are coming from. Much more importantly, our data also suggests what Drudge is reporting: the early samples are heavily weighted toward women (58 percent), which would of course give an artificial advantage to Senator Kerry. That imbalance will not hold up. Indeed, among men we are winning 53-45. To put it another way: if we'd one down in states with a sample that is heavily female, we're in good shape with the overall population. To put it a third way: it looks like the first exit polls are a reflection of the composition of the electorate, not how the president is performing. Once those return to norm, the President should gain several points (2-3 pts) and Senator Kerry should lose several points (2-3 pts), giving the President the lead in a number of states.

    Also of note: right now we are ahead among Catholic in Wisconsin by ten points (we lost Catholics in Wisconsin in 2000). The same is true of Pennsylvania. And in the early exits nationally, we are getting 40 percent of the Hispanic vote (in 2000, we received 35 percent).

    One other thing: the early exit polls in 2000 looked a good deal bleaker than what we are seeing today. For example, early exit polls in 2000 showed us down by four in Arizona; we won by six. Early exit polls in 2000 showed us even in Colorado; we won by nine. And early exit polls in 2000 showed us down by three in Florida; we ended up slightly more than even.

    I'm not being Pollyannaish here; the race will be a close one. But I would simply caution against putting too much weigh on such early polls. This drama has a ways to go before it fully unfolds.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads