Early & Absentee Voting Megathread - Build the Freiwal

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Probably Clark County absentees:

https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1057301528711577600

A 40K firewall is looking likelier.

It is more likely to be 45kish than 40k, presuming a usual Dem pickup at the last minute.

[Mehmentum]

Republicans are cannibalizing their support in North Carolina too:



Source

Uh, that chart shows that exactly the same % of Democrat and Republican early voters voted in 2014.

[Xing]

With most of the rurals in (Lyon county is missing, which will probably net Republicans a few hundred votes), the Democratic statewide lead is about 12K, above where it was yesterday. The freiwal in Clark is at 28.4K. Unless Republicans knock it out of the park today, or the usual Democratic push in the last three days doesn't happen, I think the fat lady may begin her opening recitative. She was clearly warming up over the weekend with some lip trills.

[junior chįmp]

Muhllenials are voting in NC

[Gass3268]

Republicans are cannibalizing their support in North Carolina too:



Source

Uh, that chart shows that exactly the same % of Democrat and Republican early voters voted in 2014.

3% more Republicans who voted on election day are voting early.

[junior chįmp]

Indianapolis:
https://twitter.com/robaburg/status/1057318571192315905

Marion County coming out pretty big.  Already surpassed 2016 numbers and there is early voting every day from now until election day except for this Sunday. 

Good news for Donolley and his RV

[Mehmentum]

Republicans are cannibalizing their support in North Carolina too:



Source

Uh, that chart shows that exactly the same % of Democrat and Republican early voters voted in 2014.

3% more Republicans who voted on election day are voting early.

Yeah, but 4% of this year's Democratic early voters also voted early this year.

[TheRocketRaccoon]

https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/status/1057328570496765952?s=19

https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/status/1057329627738267648?s=19

https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/status/1057330449997979648?s=19

[J. J.]

I took a look at the amount the final RCP average was off the actual results in 2016 in some of these states.  This is what I found:

FL   +1.0 R
IN   +8.3 R
MO +7.5 R
TX   -3.0 R
AZ   -0.5 R
NV   -3.2 R

If this were added/subtracted from the current RCP results, the Republicans would take IN, MO, TX and AZ (by 0.2). The Democrats would take FL and NV.

I looked at these numbers earlier... but for a different reason.  Since elections tend to have a pendulum swing effect... I was wondering if polling models would over-compensate for 2016 polling errors.  If so, this would lead to polls in IN & MO being tilted a bit too Republican this year... and polls in NV & TX to a lesser extent being slightly tilted Dem.  Polls in AZ & FL staying about the same.

If over-correcting is the case- all of these Senate races really are razor edge close this year (other than Texas... but Texas has its own polling challenges this year in trying to gauge the Beto effect).  The states potentially most affected by over-correcting would be IN & MO, since they were outside the margin of error in 2016. (If an over-correcting occurred, polls could indicate that IN & MO would go Dem this year).

Has J.J. ever heard of "confirmation bias"? Polling in 2016 was not weighed for education which resulted in the infamous underpolling of Mr Trump. Reading pollsters like Siena helps understand the world around you.

Siena et al have corrected their method -  and are likely poised to underestimate the Democrats this time.
The hypothesis of DataGuy is much more plausible, as Undecided voters are primarily undecided about re-electing the incumbent. Usually, they decide to give someone they think to know a second chance. Negative qualities are remembered 10 times better than positive qualities, unless you know things about someone beforehand(advantage for the incumbent) and immunizes your belief system against negativity.

I'm not making a prediction, just looking at the numbers.  My prediction is different.

I would also note that, if this would be the result, AZ would go Democratic today.

That said, I'll treat +2 Heller in NV differently than I would Hawley +2 in MO.

[DataGuy]

To be honest, all this talk of "firewalls" strikes me as supremely overconfident. Did you know that, in 2016, the Clark County "firewall" was about 73,000 votes, yet Clinton only ended up winning the state by 2.4% and 27,000 votes?

Yes, this is a midterm year, but it's a very unusual one and turnout in NV is expected to be about 80% of 2016 turnout. People are almost acting like this is a presidential election. To be roughly equivalent to 2016, the so-called firewall in Clark would have to be about 58,000 votes. And we're already declaring a Senator Rosen based on what might be a 35,000 or 40,000 vote margin?

The fact is that Democrats are significantly underperforming their 2016 "firewall" both in Clark and statewide, and that still holds true when it's adjusted for this year's expected turnout. Even with their much larger EV padding, Clinton and Cortez-Masto barely won the state. I am not saying that Heller's going to win, but what I am saying is that it's foolish to "call" anything based on the early vote.

To me, it's still a tossup. Yes, Rosen could win. Perhaps there is a reasonable argument for tilting this race in her favor. But to rate this "Safe D" or even "Likely D" is not realistic. This race will still be decided by independents, who could easily go either way.

*Corrected some numbers to reflect exclusively early vote (accidentally added in Election Day vote), but the point still stands.

[Pollster]

Judging by the current numbers, I would not doubt that Democrats overblew their concerns about Nevada in order to get the GOP to divert money there from other, more competitive races.

[Tender Branson]

Yesterday, TN was back to 87% of 2016 early turnout, suggesting that the pace is picking up a lot again.

Last week it went down to as low as 70-75% of 2016 early turnout ...

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

As more ballots are being returned in CA, the party registration is steadily shifting more towards Dems (particularly in the OC districts, it seems).

https://twitter.com/VanceUlrich/status/1057320829296422912

[ON Progressive]

As more ballots are being returned in CA, the party registration is steadily shifting more towards Dems (particularly in the OC districts, it seems).

https://twitter.com/VanceUlrich/status/1057320829296422912

That’s what I expected. Not that R party registration is meaningful in OC anyway.

[Xing]

To be honest, all this talk of "firewalls" strikes me as supremely overconfident. Did you know that, in 2016, the Clark County "firewall" was about 73,000 votes, yet Clinton only ended up winning the state by 2.4% and 27,000 votes?

Yes, this is a midterm year, but it's a very unusual one and turnout in NV is expected to be about 80% of 2016 turnout. People are almost acting like this is a presidential election. To be roughly equivalent to 2016, the so-called firewall in Clark would have to be about 58,000 votes. And we're already declaring a Senator Rosen based on what might be a 35,000 or 40,000 vote margin?

The fact is that Democrats are significantly underperforming their 2016 "firewall" both in Clark and statewide, and that still holds true when it's adjusted for this year's expected turnout. Even with their much larger EV padding, Clinton and Cortez-Masto barely won the state. I am not saying that Heller's going to win, but what I am saying is that it's foolish to "call" anything based on the early vote.

To me, it's still a tossup. Yes, Rosen could win. Perhaps there is a reasonable argument for tilting this race in her favor. But to rate this "Safe D" or even "Likely D" is not realistic. This race will still be decided by independents, who could easily go either way.

*Corrected some numbers to reflect exclusively early vote (accidentally added in Election Day vote), but the point still stands.

The thing is, Trump won Independents by double digits AND there was a rural surge on Election Day. I highly doubt either of those will happen for Heller this year, let alone both. There's a realistic chance that Democrats get to a 45K lead in Clark, which, if you consider the fact that turnout is somewhat lower than it was in 2016, should tell you all you need to know.

[Ebsy]

Trump had everything go right for him on election day in Nevada and still didn't win. That tells you a lot.

[Hydera]

Nevada is a very strange state,

I remember during 2016 election almost everyone on this forum and on the Tele (CNN and MSNBC) claiming Trump is doomed in Nevada and would do much worse then Romney did 4 years ago, he'll do worse in Nevada in comparison to Colorado,
on Election night Trump lost by a much narrower margin, the margin he lost was a lot similar to Kerry in 2004, while he lost Colorado with almost similar margins Romney lost the state...

Everybody thought that latinos in Nevada would turn out in large numbers and help Hillary.  Nobody expected that Hillary's total votes would go up only by 8K while trump's went up by almost 50K due to middle aged and older voters who didnt feel the state's economy improved much since the 2007-2009 recession.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Here is an update on the TargetSmart crosstab between Vote History and Partisanship as compared to yesterday, for states where TargetSmart has updated data. Keep in mind, the numbers below are all comparisons to the same point in 2014. So D+ means that there was a swing to Dems in comparison to 2014, but it does not necessarily mean that there are more (or less) modeled Dem early voters in absolute numbers than the absolute number of Republican voters.

This is an important thing to focus on because it provides some indication as to which side is bring in more new voters, and which side is cannibalizing its reliable voters more.

In general, it seems like in most states things got a bit better for Republicans than they were yesterday in more states, but quite a lot of states were exceptions where it got better for Dems. However, overall the early vote turnout seems to still be substantially better in most states for Dems than in 2014.

There are (at least) two possible reasons why Rs may have improved in the states where they improved. First, in many states Republicans have historically tended to do relatively well in early voting on the 1st Monday/Tuesday and so maybe they are just doing well now as a part of that historical trend. However, since these comparisons are compared to the same day in 2014, that should at least somewhat control for that. Secondly, it is also possible that Dems were particularly excited to vote early, and have now exhausted their most excited voters, leaving room for the Republicans to catch up a bit.


In general there is probably more Republican cannibalization in comparison to 2014 than Dem cannibalization, but that is a bit less true than it was yesterday.


AZ --- Super Voter ---           R+3.3 ---           (D+0.7 Since Yesterday)
AZ --- Frequent Voter ---           D+1.5 ---           (D+1.1 Since Yesterday)
AZ --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+12.3 ---           (D+1.3 Since Yesterday)
AZ --- Never Voted ---           D+26.9 ---           (D+0.7 Since Yesterday)

First, AZ improved notably since yesterday for Dems. It was already a really great improvement over 2014, and is now even better, with Dems pulling in even more new voters now, and Rs cannibalizing themselves.



CA --- Super Voter ---           D+6.7 ---           (R+0.8 Since Yesterday)
CA --- Frequent Voter ---           D+6.5 ---           (R+1.4 Since Yesterday)
CA --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+5.7 ---           (R+2.6 Since Yesterday)
CA --- Never Voted ---           D+1.9 ---           (R+4.1 Since Yesterday)

CA got notably better for Rs, but remains better for Ds than 2010. Of course, we are also really more interested in Congressional District specific #s than statewide for CA.



CO --- Super Voter ---           D+9 ---           (R+1.8 Since Yesterday)
CO --- Frequent Voter ---           D+11.2 ---           (R+2.5 Since Yesterday)
CO --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+14.4 ---           (R+2.4 Since Yesterday)
CO --- Never Voted ---           D+12.5 ---           (R+1.7 Since Yesterday)

CO improved notably for Rs as compared to yesterday, but remains a big improvement for Dems across the board as compared to 2014.



FL --- Super Voter ---           D+6.1 ---           (R+0.7 Since Yesterday)
FL --- Frequent Voter ---           D+9.3 ---           (R+0.2 Since Yesterday)
FL --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+9.5 ---           (R+0.1 Since Yesterday)
FL --- Never Voted ---           D+15.1 ---           (R+0.3 Since Yesterday)

FL got very slightly better for Rs, although less so among the less likely voters, who are more important. But it remains much better for Dems than 2014, particularly with Dems bringing more less likely voters in to early voting.



GA --- Super Voter ---           D+3.1 ---           (D+0.8 Since Yesterday)
GA --- Frequent Voter ---           R+0 ---           (R+0.2 Since Yesterday)
GA --- Infrequent Voter ---           R+5.9 ---           (R+0.6 Since Yesterday)
GA --- Never Voted ---           R+0.6 ---           (R+0.8 Since Yesterday)

GA yesterday seems to have had slight changes, and was a good day for Dems among Super-Voters, but a better day for Rs among less likely voters. Unfortunately for Dems, it looks like they may be cannibalizing more than Rs in Georgia (in comparison to 2014), and that Rs are doing a better job of getting out more infrequent voters.



IA --- Super Voter ---           D+6.9 ---           (R+1.1 Since Yesterday)
IA --- Frequent Voter ---           R+1.7 ---           (R+0.2 Since Yesterday)
IA --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+4.2 ---           (R+0.8 Since Yesterday)
IA --- Never Voted ---           D+1.2 ---           (R+2.2 Since Yesterday)

IA got better for Rs in a sort of weird, hard to discern way. It remains strange, with Dems gaining a lot with Super Voters (cannibalization risk), Rs gaining a bit with Frequent voters, and Ds gaining a bit with the less likely and new voters.



IL --- Super Voter ---           D+5.9 ---           (D+0.2 Since Yesterday)
IL --- Frequent Voter ---           D+7.6 ---           (D+1.2 Since Yesterday)
IL --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+16 ---           (D+0.8 Since Yesterday)
IL --- Never Voted ---           D+0.3 ---           (D+1.4 Since Yesterday)

IL was good for Dems before, and now is a bit better.



MI --- Super Voter ---           D+2.4 ---           (D+0.1 Since Yesterday)
MI --- Frequent Voter ---           R+2.8 ---           (R+0.4 Since Yesterday)
MI --- Infrequent Voter ---           R+1.9 ---           (R+2.6 Since Yesterday)
MI --- Never Voted ---           R+2.9 ---           (R+1.9 Since Yesterday)

Michigan looks better for Rs than before, and it already looked surprisingly good for Rs (in terms of turnout, at least, which is not the same thing as candidate choice). What is most concerning for Dems is that they appear to be cannibalizing more, while Rs are bringing in more new/infrequent voters relatively.



MN --- Super Voter ---           R+3 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
MN --- Frequent Voter ---           R+1.5 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
MN --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+3.9 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
MN --- Never Voted ---           D+9.7 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)

No update in MN  - Rs cannibalizing more, Dems bringing new voters.



MT --- Super Voter ---           R+1.7 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
MT --- Frequent Voter ---           D+1.8 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
MT --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+4.7 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
MT --- Never Voted ---           D+1.9 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)

No update in MT  - Rs cannibalizing more, Dems bringing new voters.



NC --- Super Voter ---           R+2 ---           (D+0.9 Since Yesterday)
NC --- Frequent Voter ---           D+0.6 ---           (D+1 Since Yesterday)
NC --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+2.1 ---           (R+0.1 Since Yesterday)
NC --- Never Voted ---           D+6.8 ---           (D+0.6 Since Yesterday)

Some improvement for Dems in NC, but mostly among Super/Frequent voters, so a bit more cannibalization maybe.



ND --- Super Voter ---           R+3.2 ---           (R+0.8 Since Yesterday)
ND --- Frequent Voter ---           R+2.1 ---           (R+0.3 Since Yesterday)
ND --- Infrequent Voter ---           R+0.5 ---           (R+0 Since Yesterday)
ND --- Never Voted ---           D+15.5 ---           (R+2.7 Since Yesterday)

Early vote in ND was looking bad for Heitkamp, and now is looking even worse.



NJ --- Super Voter ---           D+4.7 ---           (D+1 Since Yesterday)
NJ --- Frequent Voter ---           D+4.6 ---           (D+0.2 Since Yesterday)
NJ --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+9.1 ---           (R+0.5 Since Yesterday)
NJ --- Never Voted ---           R+12.3 ---           (R+0.3 Since Yesterday)

Unfortunately it looks like Dems are cannibalizing a bit more in NJ, while Rs made small gains among Infrequent and New voters.



NV --- Super Voter ---           D+8.2 ---           (D+0.1 Since Yesterday)
NV --- Frequent Voter ---           D+16.2 ---           (D+0.4 Since Yesterday)
NV --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+21.9 ---           (D+0.8 Since Yesterday)
NV --- Never Voted ---           D+14 ---           (D+1.7 Since Yesterday)

A notable improvement for Dems in NV. And what is even better, the improvement for Dems was even more concentrated than before among Infrequent/new voters. Dems are just killing the early vote in NV (at least in comparison to 2014, which is not the best baseline).



OH --- Super Voter ---           R+0.6 ---           (R+0.2 Since Yesterday)
OH --- Frequent Voter ---           R+0.9 ---           (R+0.2 Since Yesterday)
OH --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+2.7 ---           (R+0.3 Since Yesterday)
OH --- Never Voted ---           D+10 ---           (R+0.2 Since Yesterday)

Slight improvement across the board for Rs in OH. Overall, pretty similar to 2014, which doesn't sound the most confidence inspiring for Dems there, to be frank.



OR --- Super Voter ---           D+8.7 ---           (R+2.1 Since Yesterday)
OR --- Frequent Voter ---           D+7.9 ---           (R+1.3 Since Yesterday)
OR --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+1.7 ---           (R+0.8 Since Yesterday)
OR --- Never Voted ---           R+8.3 ---           (D+0.6 Since Yesterday)

Improvement for Rs in Oregon as compared to yesterday. However, it is still better for Dems than 2014, and the R gains from yesterday were concentrated among Super-Voters, so that suggests some more R cannibalization than before.



TN --- Super Voter ---           R+6.2 ---           (R+2.7 Since Yesterday)
TN --- Frequent Voter ---           R+4.2 ---           (R+2.6 Since Yesterday)
TN --- Infrequent Voter ---           R+5.3 ---           (R+2.8 Since Yesterday)
TN --- Never Voted ---           R+6.3 ---           (R+1.4 Since Yesterday)

TN early vote was bad looking for Dems, and now is even worse, across the board.



TX --- Super Voter ---           D+3.8 ---           (R+0.2 Since Yesterday)
TX --- Frequent Voter ---           D+4.5 ---           (R+0.3 Since Yesterday)
TX --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+7.8 ---           (R+1 Since Yesterday)
TX --- Never Voted ---           D+11.3 ---           (R+1.5 Since Yesterday)

TX is worse than yesterday for Dems, although still much better than 2014.



UT --- Super Voter ---           R+1.3 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
UT --- Frequent Voter ---           D+13 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
UT --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+27.1 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)
UT --- Never Voted ---           D+36.2 ---           (No Update Since Yesterday)

No update in UT - still looks amazing overall for Dems with Infrequent/New voters.



VA --- Super Voter ---           D+10.5 ---           (D+0 Since Yesterday)
VA --- Frequent Voter ---           D+15.3 ---           (D+0 Since Yesterday)
VA --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+15 ---           (D+0.1 Since Yesterday)
VA --- Never Voted ---           D+4.9 ---           (D+0 Since Yesterday)

Only a handful of new votes in VA, hardly any change, still great for Dems in comparison to 2014.



WA --- Super Voter ---           D+4.2 ---           (R+1.5 Since Yesterday)
WA --- Frequent Voter ---           D+10.7 ---           (R+1.6 Since Yesterday)
WA --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+7.8 ---           (R+1.4 Since Yesterday)
WA --- Never Voted ---           D+3.3 ---           (R+0.1 Since Yesterday)

R improvement in WA pretty much across the board, but still better for Dems than 2014.



WI --- Super Voter ---           D+1.1 ---           (R+0.4 Since Yesterday)
WI --- Frequent Voter ---           D+4 ---           (R+0.4 Since Yesterday)
WI --- Infrequent Voter ---           D+18 ---           (D+0 Since Yesterday)
WI --- Never Voted ---           R+4.8 ---           (D+0.6 Since Yesterday)

Small changes in WI, with Rs doing a bit better with more likely voters than yesterday. Still a shift to Dems overall concentrated among Infrequent voters.

[Virginiá]

btw, just curious, but will anyone keep a running tally of the House popular vote as they report, or is this something we just have to wait until the dust has settled for?

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

btw, just curious, but will anyone keep a running tally of the House popular vote as they report, or is this something we just have to wait until the dust has settled for?

People with direct access to the AP results feed will calculate it for us.

[Gass3268]

Arizona down to R+10:

https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/status/1057328570496765952

[libertpaulian]

Eh, those AZ numbers still suck.  Wasn't the GOP lead in EV in the low-single digits before Election Day (where Trump still eked out a 4% victory)?!

[ON Progressive]

A couple things:

1) GOP ultimately won on Monday, but only by a few hundred ballots. That's not good enough I would argue.

2) Washoe early vote has come in for today: https://twitter.com/RalstonReports/status/1057456239418855424

This is also not good enough. The exact Dem lead in Washoe is 734 votes, by the way.

[Ebsy]

The early voting period has been like watching Dean Heller's demise in slow motion.

[Gass3268]

Eh, those AZ numbers still suck.  Wasn't the GOP lead in EV in the low-single digits before Election Day (where Trump still eked out a 4% victory)?!

It's dropped 1% in two days.