Congressional Special Elections Results Thread (OLD, PLEASE UNSTICKY)

[ON Progressive]

https://twitter.com/decisiondeskhq/status/1013211728287432709?s=21

Is there another R or D taking a bunch of votes there? That's a county which gave 61.6% of its vote to Farenthold in 2016

[ON Progressive]

Not surprising at all.

The Democratic base in this district is Latinos, and they always have bad turnout. It also doesn't help that it's a Saturday election that had almost no real attention (I've seen more coverage of state legislative specials than this election).

[ON Progressive]

Note that there's a tabulation error on the AP's part on the NYT page. The actual result is Cloud 308, Holguin 46, Bruun 20, Barrera 17.

[ON Progressive]

Note that there's a tabulation error on the AP's part on the NYT page. The actual result is Cloud 308, Holguin 46, Bruun 20, Barrera 17.

The actual result where?

Texas Secretary of State's website

https://enrpages.sos.state.tx.us/public/jun30_329_county5.htm?x=0&y=0&id=304

[ON Progressive]

Note that there's a tabulation error on the AP's part on the NYT page. The actual result is Cloud 308, Holguin 46, Bruun 20, Barrera 17.

The actual result where?

Texas Secretary of State's website

https://enrpages.sos.state.tx.us/public/jun30_329_county5.htm?x=0&y=0&id=304

You're reading the early vote. The total vote matches the NYT total for Jackson county.

They fixed it then. I first saw it showing Holguin at 308, the Libertarian at 46, and some random Dem in third. Those kinds of tabulation errors happen a lot but get fixed in a few minutes.

[ON Progressive]

Looks like Bastrop only went 52.2-46.2 Republican in this election. The part of Bastrop that is in TX-27 went 59-36 Trump.

As for Nueces, Dems got 50.4% while Reps got 49.6%. The whole county is in TX-27, and it went 48.8-47.2 Trump in 2016.

[ON Progressive]

If people are going to care more about some people shouting at Trump administration officials than Trump's actions, they were always Republican voters anyway.

[ON Progressive]

I mean, it would be fair to take from this result some pessimism on Beto O'Rourke's chances, given that he'd need some kind of major shift in Texas voting patterns that might be unexpected Hispanic turnout which didn't show up here.

Well, given that O'Rourke never had a shot at winning in the first place, this really isn't news.

Lmao he's down 5 in the latest poll. If being down 5 means you have no shot then we might as well call WV, MT, and MO Safe D at this point.

Polling isn't everything, as we learned in 2016.

You would think a forum which is solely dedicated to US elections would stop peddling garbage like this that you see from Youtube comment sections.

I made a post a while ago that "STATEWIDE POLLS WERE OFF A LOT" was mostly not true. I won't quote it here since it's a long list, but just know that the only states with polling errors above 4% were OH (Trump was leading in the polling average anyway), IA (Trump was also leading in the polling average anyway), and WI.

[ON Progressive]

I mean, it would be fair to take from this result some pessimism on Beto O'Rourke's chances, given that he'd need some kind of major shift in Texas voting patterns that might be unexpected Hispanic turnout which didn't show up here.

Well, given that O'Rourke never had a shot at winning in the first place, this really isn't news.

Lmao he's down 5 in the latest poll. If being down 5 means you have no shot then we might as well call WV, MT, and MO Safe D at this point.

Polling isn't everything, as we learned in 2016.

You would think a forum which is solely dedicated to US elections would stop peddling garbage like this that you see from Youtube comment sections.

I made a post a while ago that "STATEWIDE POLLS WERE OFF A LOT" was mostly not true. I won't quote it here since it's a long list, but just know that the only states with polling errors above 4% were OH (Trump was leading in the polling average anyway), IA (Trump was also leading in the polling average anyway), and WI.

Well, 4% more than made the difference in a bunch of states, so a 4% error allowance seems big to me.

Literally the only state with a polling error above 4% that changed the result from the polling average was Wisconsin. PA didn't require even a 3% polling error to flip from the polling average.

Your narrative is easily annihilated the moment it faces actual scrutiny.

[ON Progressive]

O’Connor up 2-1 in early voting https://mobile.twitter.com/darreldrowland/status/1017200227298791425

That is not a correct conclusion from the data.  Nobody knows who those votes were cast for until they are counted.

Also this is just in Franklin County.

'
Also, this isn't even partisan registration (Ohio doesn't have that). It's just what party you voted for the last primary you voted in IIRC.

[ON Progressive]

https://twitter.com/DKElections/status/1018939889600081920

I dont think hes winning this. He will need a lot of momentum to take this.

It is a couple points better than his last poll, and a Green taking 5% in a special would be really strange considering there's a history of special election electorates being the most partisan of any.