CA GOV 2021 - 2022 megathread

[Gass3268]

Elder actually half-conceded

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1438006393441689600?s=20

[Хahar 🤔]

By the California Secretary of State's numbers, No is now under two-thirds of the total vote. This is great news for Republicans and I think bodes well for next year.

[soundchaser]

I’ll say it ‘til I’m blue in the face: redistricting =/= free Republican gains.

It adds up nationally to a net of ~8-12 Republican gains, even after you account for losses in CA/IL/NY.

I don’t know why you think that when it’s still so up in the air. The IN map could have been 8R-1D, but it’s sticking at 7R-2D.

[kwabbit]

My final prediction is now No +19%, which is up from no +14% last week. Would this be a reasonable +19% map or should I tweak it a little bit. I'm not sure how OC, Riverside and Fresno will exactly vote for, so I guess they will vote yes by under a 2-3% margin.

Man, My prediction was quite off on the margin and in some counties as well. Oh well.

No +19% seems pretty good. There is no ED vote in yet, I think your SoCal predictions will be on point.

OC mathematically does not have the votes out to flip to Yes even if the remainder is 100% for recall. Given Riverside margin atm I don't think it flips either.

Are you sure about that, NYT has OC at 58% No with 64% of the vote in. That is, 37% No, 27% Yes of the eventual vote far. According to that, Yes would need about 64% of the eventual vote for 50/50. Now that I did the math, I think OC will be +2 No, but it's not mathematically impossible.

Saw somewhere that the total in-person vote in OC was 103K. Which would mean NYT is overestimating the remainder.


Actually, CA SoS is showing OC as all in with 58% no, so...lol

I don't think OC is 100% in, not at all. The vote in OC is 800k, in 2020 it was 1.5 million. This election will obviously be lower turnout, but not by that much in an educated county like OC. If you look at the counties where NYT has the % in higher, the vote totals are a lot closer to the 2020 election level. NorCal returns imply about 75-80% of 2020 turnout. The SoS system may be showing that, but that might be signifying that it's gotten votes from all precincts, not that all precincts have reported all of their votes.

As an addendum more results came in, so now it's 56/44 so obviously not all of the votes were in when it said 100% lol.

[Non Swing Voter]

I’ll say it ‘til I’m blue in the face: redistricting =/= free Republican gains.

It adds up nationally to a net of ~8-12 Republican gains, even after you account for losses in CA/IL/NY.

I don’t know why you think that when it’s still so up in the air. The IN map could have been 8R-1D, but it’s sticking at 7R-2D.

Yeah and we don't know how bad the losses in NY/CA will be at this point.

The only thing we know for absolute certain is that the GOP will lose a seat in West Virginia.  

[emailking]

Maybe, but their benchmark was clearly flawed so the 99.5% threshold was irrelevant in this case.  They didn't account for the fact that the remaining mail/early votes were late-arriving and were thus more similar to election day than to the rest of the early vote.

That's the part you don't know though. It's not clearly flawed because Trump got close. We don't know what their 99.5% confidence interval was so we don't know if it's irrelevant or not. Trump getting within 10,000 votes could have been inside of it while Trump winning might not have been.

[Adam Griffin]

Yeah, I can't see how there aren't another 300k votes (possibly more) in Orange.

[Non Swing Voter]

My final prediction is now No +19%, which is up from no +14% last week. Would this be a reasonable +19% map or should I tweak it a little bit. I'm not sure how OC, Riverside and Fresno will exactly vote for, so I guess they will vote yes by under a 2-3% margin.

Man, My prediction was quite off on the margin and in some counties as well. Oh well.

No +19% seems pretty good. There is no ED vote in yet, I think your SoCal predictions will be on point.

OC mathematically does not have the votes out to flip to Yes even if the remainder is 100% for recall. Given Riverside margin atm I don't think it flips either.

Are you sure about that, NYT has OC at 58% No with 64% of the vote in. That is, 37% No, 27% Yes of the eventual vote far. According to that, Yes would need about 64% of the eventual vote for 50/50. Now that I did the math, I think OC will be +2 No, but it's not mathematically impossible.

Saw somewhere that the total in-person vote in OC was 103K. Which would mean NYT is overestimating the remainder.


Actually, CA SoS is showing OC as all in with 58% no, so...lol

I don't think OC is 100% in, not at all. The vote in OC is 800k, in 2020 it was 1.5 million. This election will obviously be lower turnout, but not by that much in an educated county like OC. If you look at the counties where NYT has the % in higher, the vote totals are a lot closer to the 2020 election level. NorCal returns imply about 75-80% of 2020 turnout. The SoS system may be showing that, but that might be signifying that it's gotten votes from all precincts, not that all precincts have reported all of their votes.

How could any county be even close to 100%?  Doesn't CA allow ballots mailed out today to count even if they are received days from now?  And who knows how many of them are out there.

[Sestak]

Guys ignore vosem, he’s desperately trying to find a way to cope.

[Non Swing Voter]

Elder actually half-conceded

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1438006393441689600?s=20

And the audience booed him when he said that.  It's like the GOP has been trained to just claim fraud instinctively now.

[Beet]

Newsom was basically saved by no one challenging him on the Dem side.

[Vosem]

I’ll say it ‘til I’m blue in the face: redistricting =/= free Republican gains.

It adds up nationally to a net of ~8-12 Republican gains, even after you account for losses in CA/IL/NY.

I don’t know why you think that when it’s still so up in the air. The IN map could have been 8R-1D, but it’s sticking at 7R-2D.

State-by-state estimates made by prominent pundits; Sabato predicted that IN would stick and has a net gain of 12, for instance. (When I counted it out in March I got 9, but then I did think IN would go 8R-1D. All of the tiny differences end up cancelling out; the CO commission, for instance, has a much more pro-Republican map than was expected, with Cory Gardner winning 4/8 seats).

[Non Swing Voter]

Can someone do a welfare check on THG?  As someone who has like 2000 posts in his first two months his complete absence tonight has me concerned.

[Sestak]

Newsom was basically saved by no one challenging him on the Dem side.

By this logic, almost every Democratic nominee ever has been “saved” by not having another Democrat challenging them in a general election…

[Vosem]

Guys ignore vosem, he’s desperately trying to find a way to cope.

https://twitter.com/ryanmatsumoto1/status/1438002514402545666

...were you around for Election Night 2020? Serious question.

[Greedo punched first]

Newsom was basically saved by no one challenging him on the Dem side.

By this logic, almost every Democratic nominee ever has been “saved” by not having another Democrat challenging them in a general election…

Except Feinstein.

[Non Swing Voter]

I’ll say it ‘til I’m blue in the face: redistricting =/= free Republican gains.

It adds up nationally to a net of ~8-12 Republican gains, even after you account for losses in CA/IL/NY.

I don’t know why you think that when it’s still so up in the air. The IN map could have been 8R-1D, but it’s sticking at 7R-2D.

State-by-state estimates made by prominent pundits; Sabato predicted that IN would stick and has a net gain of 12, for instance. (When I counted it out in March I got 9, but then I did think IN would go 8R-1D. All of the tiny differences end up cancelling out; the CO commission, for instance, has a much more pro-Republican map than was expected, with Cory Gardner winning 4/8 seats).

It's all just conjecture at this point though.  We don't have maps.  And in some states redistricting is going to be fairly hard to gerrymander perfectly because of so much mail balloting in 2020.  For instance, in Virginia most people voted early and the ballots went to central precincts so we don't have good results by precinct.  

[emailking]

Newsom was basically saved by no one challenging him on the Dem side.

That was the point.

[Vosem]

Newsom was basically saved by no one challenging him on the Dem side.

No one challenged him on the Dem side because he was never going to lose to start out with. Come on now.

[Holmes]

Newsom was basically saved by no one challenging him on the Dem side.

By this logic, almost every Democratic nominee ever has been “saved” by not having another Democrat challenging them in a general election…

Well, sure, but being really the only Democrat in the recall and Elder basically being the "only" Republican turned the recall into Newsom vs Elder, which helped Newsom a lot.

[soundchaser]

Elder actually half-conceded

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1438006393441689600?s=20

And the audience booed him when he said that.  It's like the GOP has been trained to just claim fraud instinctively now.

Imagine the cognitive dissonance required to think that the only way your party could lose an election in one of the states where they’ve performed the worst nationally for the last 15 years is fraud.

[politicallefty]

How could any county be even close to 100%?  Doesn't CA allow ballots mailed out today to count even if they are received days from now?  And who knows how many of them are out there.

That's right. Not all of the outstanding vote is the Election Day vote. California allows ballots to be counted so long as they were postmarked by today.

[Vosem]

I’ll say it ‘til I’m blue in the face: redistricting =/= free Republican gains.

It adds up nationally to a net of ~8-12 Republican gains, even after you account for losses in CA/IL/NY.

I don’t know why you think that when it’s still so up in the air. The IN map could have been 8R-1D, but it’s sticking at 7R-2D.

State-by-state estimates made by prominent pundits; Sabato predicted that IN would stick and has a net gain of 12, for instance. (When I counted it out in March I got 9, but then I did think IN would go 8R-1D. All of the tiny differences end up cancelling out; the CO commission, for instance, has a much more pro-Republican map than was expected, with Cory Gardner winning 4/8 seats).

It's all just conjecture at this point though.  We don't have maps.  And in some states redistricting is going to be fairly hard to gerrymander perfectly because of so much mail balloting in 2020.  For instance, in Virginia most people voted early and the ballots went to central precincts so we don't have good results by precinct.  

We already have maps from some states, we know what the legal requirements and responsible bodies are in every state, and we know what's possible and what isn't because enthusiasts from both parties have spent the past decade making dozens of draft maps for every state. Details like the shape of IN-1 or MD-6 are hard to foresee, but the overall result is quite clear.

[Non Swing Voter]

Maybe CA should make it harder to recall its governors.  It seems like you can just get really organized and get this on the ballot even if it's extremely unpopular.  Seems like a waste of time and money.  

[Non Swing Voter]

I’ll say it ‘til I’m blue in the face: redistricting =/= free Republican gains.

It adds up nationally to a net of ~8-12 Republican gains, even after you account for losses in CA/IL/NY.

I don’t know why you think that when it’s still so up in the air. The IN map could have been 8R-1D, but it’s sticking at 7R-2D.

State-by-state estimates made by prominent pundits; Sabato predicted that IN would stick and has a net gain of 12, for instance. (When I counted it out in March I got 9, but then I did think IN would go 8R-1D. All of the tiny differences end up cancelling out; the CO commission, for instance, has a much more pro-Republican map than was expected, with Cory Gardner winning 4/8 seats).

It's all just conjecture at this point though.  We don't have maps.  And in some states redistricting is going to be fairly hard to gerrymander perfectly because of so much mail balloting in 2020.  For instance, in Virginia most people voted early and the ballots went to central precincts so we don't have good results by precinct.  

We already have maps from some states, we know what the legal requirements and responsible bodies are in every state, and we know what's possible and what isn't because enthusiasts from both parties have spent the past decade making dozens of draft maps for every state. Details like the shape of IN-1 or MD-6 are hard to foresee, but the overall result is quite clear.

It really is not.  Dems could force a talking filibuster tomorrow and make partisan gerrymandering illegal.  Courts could intervene in certain states.  There are a ton of unknowns.  Do you not recall 2018 and the PA Supreme Court delivering like 4 or 5 seats to Dems.  What you are describing is literally best case scenario for Republicans.