MI-Gov: Granholm's lead... GONE.
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 29, 2024, 07:06:10 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  MI-Gov: Granholm's lead... GONE.
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: MI-Gov: Granholm's lead... GONE.  (Read 2676 times)
Moooooo
nickshepDEM
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,909


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: 3.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 14, 2006, 04:31:29 PM »

Rasmussen:

MICHIGAN GOVERNOR
Jennifer Granholm (D) 44%
Dick DeVos (R) 43%


Ive been saying this all along.  MI will be the sleeper state in 2006.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,675
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2006, 05:03:18 PM »

I take it that Michigan's souring economy is finally catching up with her.... 
Logged
Q
QQQQQQ
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,319


Political Matrix
E: 2.26, S: -4.88

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2006, 06:40:21 PM »

Rasmussen has been on crack this year.
Logged
Virginian87
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,598
Political Matrix
E: -3.55, S: 2.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2006, 06:50:01 PM »

Didn't realize the Dems were doing a bad job in Lansing.
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2006, 07:00:53 PM »

Nevermind my post but  she's going to win  by around 10%
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 14, 2006, 07:03:48 PM »
« Edited: February 14, 2006, 07:09:18 PM by 9iron »

Didn't realize the Dems were doing a bad job in Lansing.

Well the democrats only control the governors office so Granholm is the only democrat in Lansing the state house and senate are republican controlled along with the attorney General and secretary of state
Logged
Flying Dog
Jtfdem
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,404
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2006, 07:42:55 PM »

I highly doubt the credibility of this poll. All polls (including ramussens) had granholm consistently leading DeVos by 10-15 points. Nothing has changed recently in the state of michigan that would swing against granholm. I will have to see a few more polls to see if this poll has any credibility.
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2006, 07:49:46 PM »

MOE

But I buy the idea it's somewhat close.
Logged
Yates
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873


Political Matrix
E: -0.38, S: 1.54

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 14, 2006, 07:51:17 PM »

I would say that this poll translates into a five-percent Granholm lead.
Logged
Flying Dog
Jtfdem
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,404
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 14, 2006, 08:30:26 PM »

Look at this:

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-32/1139756048167110.xml&storylist=newsmichigan

Logged
ATFFL
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,754
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2006, 10:34:54 PM »


It took them 10 days to find 600 people?  Rasmussen's daily flash polls are conducted over too short a time, but that poll took too long.  Also, it is up to a month out of date.  Why are they releasing it on Feb 12?

Not saying it is wrong and Rasmussen is right.  Just saying both seem to have structural problems and they do not come near overlapping in timeframe.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 15, 2006, 12:23:28 AM »


It took them 10 days to find 600 people?  Rasmussen's daily flash polls are conducted over too short a time, but that poll took too long.  Also, it is up to a month out of date.  Why are they releasing it on Feb 12?

Not saying it is wrong and Rasmussen is right.  Just saying both seem to have structural problems and they do not come near overlapping in timeframe.

I really have this problem with Rasmussen, as I said in the Texas thread.  I don't trust one-day polls like I trust polls conducted over a two-five day span max. 

Ten days is too long and gives an opportunity for statistical inaccuracies also.
Logged
MissCatholic
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,424


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 15, 2006, 10:08:40 AM »

Rasmuusen is fully on drug overload. trying to motivate the republican base.
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 15, 2006, 04:01:35 PM »

yeah this poll is trash Granholm will win by around 8-10%
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 15, 2006, 04:11:35 PM »

Rasmuusen is fully on drug overload. trying to motivate the republican base.

lol
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2006, 04:20:25 PM »

I'm watching the state house and senate  races, the democrats have a chance at the state house (58-50-2 vacant) but the senate will stay republican (22-16)
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2006, 04:27:49 PM »

The state senate map



1,2,3,4,5,8,9,10,14,18,19,23,26,27,31,38  are democratic seats
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2006, 04:44:38 PM »

Link to the State House districts (the map is too detailed to post)

http://www.michigan.gov/cgi/0,1607,7-158-12540_13083---,00.html
Logged
Flying Dog
Jtfdem
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,404
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2006, 05:32:08 PM »

My Prediction

Granholm 52%
DeVos      47%
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 18, 2006, 10:56:45 PM »
« Edited: February 18, 2006, 11:14:33 PM by 9iron »

here's the top 17 closest districts (where the race was between 55%-45%)

If anyone cares the Michigan Hous is 58 republicans 50 democrats and 2 vacancy (both vacancies were democratic seats but one of the seats district 56 (listed below) is very close seat.  there will be not special election just the november election winner will be appointed early.  The other vancant seat is Pontiac is very democratic)

the democrats need to pick up 4 of 11 seats (assuming they hold both now vancant seats it's 4 of 11 because one of the  vancant seat which they need to hold is listed below.

11 are republican held 6 are democratic held the democrats need
district  rep.  %        dem      %           discription of district
19th  rep  53.13%   dem   46.87%  (Livonia in Wayne county)
26th  rep  45.16%   dem   49.07% (Royal Oak in Oakland county)
30th   rep  53.85%   dem  46.15% (Sterling Heights in Macomb county)
39th   rep  52.39%   dem  45.32% (Commerce/ West Bloomfield Oakland Co)
51st   rep  54.55%   dem  45.45%  (South Genese county NOT Flint area)

55th   rep  49.68%   dem  50.32%  (the rest of Monroe county)
56th   rep  47.10%   dem  49.11%  (Eastern Monroe county)
61st   rep  54.89%   dem  45.11% (Western Kalamazoo co. and Kalamazoo twp)
62nd  rep  53.37%   dem  46,63% (Calhoun Not including Battle Creek)
64th   rep. 50.51%   dem  49.49% (Jackson county not the city)
65th   rep. 51.38%   dem  48.62% (Jackson city and east Jackson co.)
67th   rep  45.20%    dem  54.80%  (Ingham county but Not lansing area)
75th   rep. 52.23%   dem  47.77% (Grand Rapids city part)
91st   rep  51.99%   dem  48.01% (Muskegon county not including the city)
97th   rep  51.66%    dem  48.34% (Bay, Arenac, Gladwin, Clare counties)
107th  rep  46.47%  dem  53.53%  (Emmett, Mackinac, Chippewa)


the 4 most marginal republican held seats (assuming there will be a dem swing)

64th   rep. 50.51%   dem  49.49% (Jackson county not the city)
65th   rep. 51.38%   dem  48.62% (Jackson city and east Jackson co.)
91st   rep  51.99%   dem  48.01% (Muskegon county not including the city)
97th   rep  51.66%    dem  48.34% (Bay, Arenac, Gladwin, Clare counties)
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2006, 11:03:15 PM »

of course it looks good here like the dems will win it back with a little swing 2004 was a presidential election I can post the 2002 numbers most of them have the republican  around +5%  2002 was a good republican year which could also explain it.
Logged
Dave from Michigan
9iron768
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2006, 11:06:06 PM »
« Edited: February 18, 2006, 11:10:36 PM by 9iron »

link to 2002 and 2004 results (yeah I realize the source I'm assuming the results are right)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=159x3691

here are the official numbers from the Secretary of state by precinct

just click all counties for 2002 or 2004 hit Ok, them select the state rep district

http://miboecfr.nicusa.com/cgi-bin/cfr/precinct_srch.cgi
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.223 seconds with 10 queries.