September Electoral Math

Punditry aside, Obama is still winning the election, given current polls. Taking toss-ups out of the picture, Obama slips into office, not by a large margin, but by a reasonable one, 273-265, or roughly by Iowa or Colorado. (Colorado, having filled up with California refugees over the past ten years or so, is going to get more and more solidly “blue” over time, and even more dominated by its urban enclaves. The beginnings of this are beginning to be seen in Montana as well (and for the same reasons), but isn’t yet translating into a political sea-change.

The states in play are, generally speaking, the typical ones:  Iowa has Obama up 9 points, but has a tendency to really swing wildly during the last few days, so RCP marks it as “leaning.”  Pennsylvania has Obama up by 4… why they count this state as a tossup is a mystery, given the well-known tendency of the Philly machine to discover as many necromantic votes as is necessary to win.

The Palin ticket has definitely sparked some enthusiasm in the Republican base — good thing for them, too, or else McCain would be toast.  But any triumphalism currently being seen on the right is very, very poorly placed.

Advertisements
Previous Post
Leave a comment

7 Comments

  1. Anna

     /  September 9, 2008

    For the outsider here, it very much might turn on who actually will go and vote when the day comes around… and that’s not necessarily those whó are the loudest now.

    Reply
  2. Alex

     /  September 9, 2008

    You have it exactly right. But what’s more is it depends not only on who votes, but also which votes are counted correctly. Since 2000 the election machines and systems are in an even worse shape than before, so it would not surprise me in the slightest that EVERY voting district, especially the poor ones where claims of voting irregularities will pop up, will help determine the election more than expected.
    A tyranny of the minority. How quaint…and yet the norm lately.

    Reply
  3. Careful, Alex. Backing up that last statement might get hard. Happening? Indubitably. The norm?

    Reply
  4. convivialdingo

     /  September 10, 2008

    Well – I do tend to follow the voting machine systems a bit, as a acquaintance of mine(Avi Ruben) is very vocal about it.

    I think you’re going to see a massive amount of scrutiny of voting systems (both paper and electronic) across the board. I disagree that we’re in worse shape than we were in 2000 & 2004, as states have begun to hold voting systems companies over the fire.

    Also – in general you’re seeing a big emphasis on training the electoral judges.

    I think that you’re going to see a massive turnout this November because the issues people care about, namely their pocketbook, are really at stake.

    I don’t see the Republicans taking the Presidency – but I do think they’ll take seats in the house.

    If anything – it’s going to be a wild ride.

    Reply
  5. Alex

     /  September 10, 2008

    Well the situation with the election machines in Ohio where I live isn’t real pretty. They’re trying to convince people to vote by mail so there are not long lines on election day right now because they’re starting to indicate that they won’t be able to handle the expected turnout. Yes – they’re holding the companies that make these machines up to a lot of scrutiny, and yet nothing is really being done.
    Oh I hope I have a very hard time proving my comment about minority opinions dictating what happens to the majority, but lately my pessimism and cynicism have been right on target. I’d like to think that it’s dumb luck at the moment, but if you have a few districts that look “funny” from an election standpoint, those few districts will decide the election and not the majority of votes cast – just like in 2000 and in 2004. I fully expect it to happen again in 2008.
    Please understand me though – I WANT TO BE WRONG ON THIS. I’d like to believe in our system again, but at the moment I feel it’s a sham.

    Reply
  6. convivialdingo

     /  September 10, 2008

    I’d agree with that… my comments were mostly concerned with the total blindness we had previously as opposed to knowing what to look for in cases of fraud.

    In 2000 – we had know way of knowing if, how, or when voter fraud could have occurred (other than hearsay). Today we pretty much can determine if and how – but “when” really depends on election judges and vote audits right now.

    You should join your precinct and volunteer – better to confirm your fears than live with them!

    Reply
  7. convivialdingo

     /  September 10, 2008

    know = no…. argh!!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  • Featured Eyeballs

  • What’s today again?

    September 2008
    M T W T F S S
    « Aug   Oct »
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    2930  
  • Archives

  • Blog Stats

    • 131,350 hits
  • Recent Comments

    Arnie on “The people who shot at…
    Cults and Context |… on So, about that Bruce Jenner…
    Cults and Context |… on Yes, I AM, in fact, looking at…
    Cults and Context |… on How The Internet Says “D…
    Kat Laurange on Hungarian Military Sabre …
  • %d bloggers like this: