Early Voting thread.

[wbrocks67]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

Like I said above, I think NC is comparable to 2018, since voting patterns/systems are mostly the same as then. (similar amount of votes in around this time too)

[It’s so Joever]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

wbrocks likes to make tedious hacking points comparing 2018 and 2022 even though voting patterns are very different these days and that has still held in specials and primaries. I don’t understand why though, surely he gets this at this point?

[wbrocks67]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

wbrocks likes to make tedious hacking points comparing 2018 and 2022 even though voting patterns are very different these days and that has still held in specials and primaries. I don’t understand why though, surely he gets this at this point?

I feel like I'm a broken record here; the only states that I've personally found worth comparing to 2018 are GA and NC, and for the same reason of voting patterns (and systems like early voting, etc.) are generally the same.

[It’s so Joever]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

Like I said above, I think NC is comparable to 2018, since voting patterns/systems are mostly the same as then. (similar amount of votes in around this time too)

This is just objectively ridiculous. Covid-19 and Trump have changed voting patterns for at least a couple years now. Yes Covid is not a salient issue anymore, but the skepticism of early voting remains a thing among the MAGA movement as evidenced by RoJo. There is zero primary, special, or 2021 data to back up your point, are you implying that somehow after late August everyone decided to randomly switch voting patterns?  

[Brittain33]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

I thought Ralston said Dems won ED in Nevada in the past, it’s just a low number.

[SnowLabrador]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

I thought Ralston said Dems won ED in Nevada in the past, it’s just a low number.

We'll have to see, but the current data looks bad for Cortez Masto.

[Brittain33]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

I thought Ralston said Dems won ED in Nevada in the past, it’s just a low number.

We'll have to see, but the current data looks bad for Cortez Masto.

Your response doesn’t relate to what I posted.

[MRS DONNA SHALALA]

People should feel free to use data to prove their priors, but many are misusing it to do so.

1) Those Ralston reports are based on the vote that’s in right now. Given that the GOP cleans up on Election Day, it’s absolutely brutal for there to be any scenario where Laxalt is within 1 point in the early vote. If 90% of the vote is early, that just means he needs to win Election Day by 10 points or so.

2) Comparisons to 2018 are only valid if there is evidence of the voting method pattern being similar to 2018 (primary results, polling, etc) I’ve seen examples of states where it resembles 2020, I’ve seen zero evidence of places where it resembles 2018.

I thought Ralston said Dems won ED in Nevada in the past, it’s just a low number.

Yup, Dems won ED in Nevada in 2018 with ~4000 votes. Republicans won 2020 by about ~16,000 votes. But I don't think either elections are fair comparisons to 2022.

[bilaps]

Current numbers don't look god for Dems in NV, but we don't know what numbers will be like in 7 days. Mail remains biggest question. How much is there to be counted and what are the margins. So too early to tell for both sides where they are. One caveat I have is numbers in FL look really really really bad for Dems and I know that states didn't corelate much in 2020, but at some point one would think that NV,AZ,PA and GA especially couldn't vote like 10 pts to the left of FL.

[bilaps]

Return rate in Oregon:

Dems 16,9%
Reps 19,2%
Other 7%

[2016]

Another Gigantic Day for Republicans in Florida. They expand their early Vote lead to over 137K Ballots in the combined VBM/IP Vote
https://twitter.com/FLVoiceNews/status/1587174419163746304

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Current numbers don't look god for Dems in NV, but we don't know what numbers will be like in 7 days. Mail remains biggest question. How much is there to be counted and what are the margins. So too early to tell for both sides where they are. One caveat I have is numbers in FL look really really really bad for Dems and I know that states didn't corelate much in 2020, but at some point one would think that NV,AZ,PA and GA especially couldn't vote like 10 pts to the left of FL.

Lol we're not losing NV you can say it all you want and we're not losing OR the National trends if Early voting is 47/35 D

CCM is leading and every poll and Sisolak, it's a 303 map anyways watch


Most Ds live in the North CA, DC, IL, NY DTW, MKE anyways 279 blue wall

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

https://www.immigrantjusticefund.org/press/2022/10/31/new-poll-shows-battleground-state-voters-want-candidates-to-deliver-pro-immigrant-solutions

HART just confirmed the 303 blue 🧱🧱🧱

[wbrocks67]

Does anyone have historical data for CA-41?

It's still early in the CA vote, but even at this point, the Dems have a 15% return rate in this district, vs 12% for GOP. This is the opposite of statewide, where Reps are at 13% and Dems at 12%.

Not trying to get too excited, since the indy vote or something may be pretty GOP, but this seems like a rather good sign, or at least one where Dems are not depressed in this Trump +2 district...

[Minnesota Mike]

Does anyone have historical data for CA-41?

It's still early in the CA vote, but even at this point, the Dems have a 15% return rate in this district, vs 12% for GOP. This is the opposite of statewide, where Reps are at 13% and Dems at 12%.

Not trying to get too excited, since the indy vote or something may be pretty GOP, but this seems like a rather good sign, or at least one where Dems are not depressed in this Trump +2 district...

I don't have any historical data except that during the primary Dems looked very good here early but election day/late absentees broke heavily Republican. A race to watch but I'm not holding my breath.

[wbrocks67]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

[It’s so Joever]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

I’m not sure NYC is exactly where Zeldin would want higher turnout.

[Minnesota Mike]

https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/newsRoom/pressReleases/2022/20221031BallotReturnReporting8daysout.pdf

Colorado's latest.

Dem- 178,178 (33.13%)
Rep- 159,359 (29.64%)
Other- 200,198 (27.23%)
Total- 537,735

Total turnout down compared to same date in 2018. In 2018 Reps also had a small lead.

https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/newsRoom/pressReleases/2018/PR20181029BallotsReturned.html

[wbrocks67]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

I’m not sure NYC is exactly where Zeldin would want higher turnout.

Especially not Manhattan, which is seeing the best turnout of all 5 boroughs.

[Duke of York]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

I’m not sure NYC is exactly where Zeldin would want higher turnout.

It isn't. The higher the turnout there the better for Hochul.

[philly09]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

I’m not sure NYC is exactly where Zeldin would want higher turnout.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6suD_ine_Ho

[Minnesota Mike]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

I’m not sure NYC is exactly where Zeldin would want higher turnout.

I know NY turnout is always god awful but those early vote numbers are not very impressive.

[Duke of York]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

I’m not sure NYC is exactly where Zeldin would want higher turnout.

I know NY turnout is always god awful but those early vote numbers are not very impressive.

New York did not have early voting until 2019 so there is not much data to compare. 50 percent of 2020 is not bad at all.

[wbrocks67]

NYC Zeldin surge?

https://twitter.com/brigidbergin/status/1587172770772910082?s=20&t=QjprSjSFK...

I’m not sure NYC is exactly where Zeldin would want higher turnout.

I know NY turnout is always god awful but those early vote numbers are not very impressive.

I mean, it's rather close to 50% of 2020 presidential turnout, I'd say that's pretty good. Not to mention, this is just in-person; unclear how the absentee/mail ballots are going.

A Zeldin overperformance is halfway predicated on sleepy Dem turnout, which doesn't really seem to be happening yet.

[kwabbit]

Does anyone have historical data for CA-41?

It's still early in the CA vote, but even at this point, the Dems have a 15% return rate in this district, vs 12% for GOP. This is the opposite of statewide, where Reps are at 13% and Dems at 12%.

Not trying to get too excited, since the indy vote or something may be pretty GOP, but this seems like a rather good sign, or at least one where Dems are not depressed in this Trump +2 district...

A big part of the Dem base in the district are affluent Gays, so about the most early mail heavy demographic possible. The primary looked very good for Dems at first, but the E-day/late arriving mail wasn't. This district will have among the widest early/e-day splits in the State.