Super Tuesday results thread

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Jun 08, 2010 at 20:11


Results from Politico.  You can also follow my coverage tonight on Twitter.

Update 11:02: AP calls Arkansas for Blanche Lincoln.  Suck.  No more vote updates below. New thread coming soon-ish.

Arkansas Senate, 84.5% precincts reporting
Halter Lincoln
% 48.2% 51.8%
Votes 109,465 117,782

Update 10:40 Thinking ahead for a moment, the questions now are if we still get the good derivatives language, if a message has been sent anyway, and how we prevent voting problems in the future.

Update 10:38 And, its over. Turns out Pulaski was a mistake. Lincoln is going to win tonight, and then get creamed in November.

Update 10:35 Swing State model now projects Lincoln by only 1.1% due to massive 18-20% pro-Halter swing in Pulaski county. Some think the Pulaski report might be an error since it is so against the trend tonight. A wild an developing story...

Update 10:25: Halter moves into the lead, at least for now.

Update 10:12: The swing is pro-Lincoln by just under 3%  Halter is improving, however.  Also, even with a swing to Lincoln, Halter can still win. Taniel explains how on Twitter:

Only way for Halter to win despite these shifts is if turnout balance has shifted in favor of his counties. Which we can't know easily.

Update 9:48: Swing State model slowly improving for Halter, but he is still behind where he needs to be by about 4.8%.

Update 9:38: Halter underperforming in many counties according to the Swing State Project model.  Still early though.

Update 9:11 pm: Absentees compose almost all of the early voting so far. Lincoln appears to have won that group narrowly.

*****

Personally, I will also be following the Republican Senate primaries in Nevada (10 pm eastern) and California (8 pm pacific), as well as the potential teabagger upsets of incumbent House Republicans in SC-04 and NJ-07 (polls already closed in  both campaigns.  You can discuss any campaign you like in the comments.

Four incumbents have already been defeated for renomination this year.  That number should go up tonight.


Chris Bowers :: Super Tuesday results thread

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

No Results But... (4.00 / 1)
I voted at around 4:40 PM, and by what I saw of the sign-in log, less than 10% had voted.  More like 5%.

One tiny data point from California.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


Also for this precinct in South San Diego (4.00 / 1)
I was one of the first people to vote in this precinct... at 3 PM. Small-D democratic fervor is alive as ever here!

Then again, this is a pretty heavily GOP precinct (as most are in SD County outside the gentrified zones). The old ladies mentioned I was a Democrat with something of an air of contempt (that's normal here.. a slight huff of disapproval is not considered uncouth) when they handed me my ballot. I just smile derisively, as is my way. ;-)

Still, no tea baggers to be found... which I always take as a good sign!

"More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly." -Woody Allen, My Speech to the Graduates


[ Parent ]
Where in SD are you? (0.00 / 0)
I'm currently in University City.

[ Parent ]
Rachel Maddow (0.00 / 0)
talked about every Republican race she could find, but so far hasn't so much as mentioned the Harman-Winograd race.  

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
politico again? (0.00 / 0)
can't we use secretary of state links?

why promote those hacks?


Vote tallies reversed (0.00 / 0)
The table needs a quick fix.

Three counties complete (0.00 / 0)
none particularly good for Halter:

Grant County:
Tonight Halter 53.4 - 46.6
Was 43 - 32 Halter
Margin way down for Halter: was 340 now only 146

Quachita
Tonight 53.8 46.1 Lincoln
Was 43-42 Halter
Margin of  of about 270 for Lincoln versus margin of 30 for Halter

Columbia
Tonight Halter won 57-42, won before 51-34
Margin for Halther well down

Montgomery
Tonight 50.2 to 29.8, margin of 4
was 42-37, margin of 80

Lafayette looks better.  Was 56-35 tonight is 70.6 versus 29.  Margin is about the same: tonight it is 218 versus 250.

Perhaps the rural counties will come and and save Halter based on the Lafayette results.

Overall though it looks to me as though Halter is losing ground.


At this point Lincoln's best (0.00 / 0)
county Pulaski has still only reported early voting results.  Pulaski accounted for about 14% of the state total, and Lincoln had a margin of 8,000 votes and won that county by 12.  She is up by 20% tonight, but the returns are scattered.


[ Parent ]
According to politico (0.00 / 0)
Lincoln leads Pulaski 59.9 to 40.1 with 40% in.

I don't know where Chris is getting his numbers, but I am getting mine here:
http://www.politico.com/2010/m...


It wasn't voting problems (4.00 / 3)
It was voting subversion.  And it was prememditated.  It was on purpose and I bet that the number of reductions of polling places were disproportionately in Halter freindly counties.

The establishment protects its own.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller


Yup .. (0.00 / 0)
Lincoln lost Garland County(site of the hanky panky this time) last time by about 600 votes .. she won Garland this time by 60

[ Parent ]
It wouldn't have mattered (0.00 / 0)
total turnout in Garland was about 7,000 votes, Halter needed like 4,000 votes to tie Lincoln, he wasn't getting them in Garland.  

[ Parent ]
It does matter (4.00 / 2)
when people are disenfranchised - if that is really what happened, it matters.

That's different than saying it would have swayed the election. (That said, it's not clear that your argument addresses this question - the claim is that people couldn't vote. Turnout being low there is consistent with that argument. The real question is whether turnout dropped in this county significantly more than turnout dropped in other counties, and what would probably have happened if this county had not been different - assuming it was.)

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.


[ Parent ]
Turnout wasn't low in Garland (0.00 / 0)
it was slightly lower than on May 18 and slightly less of a drop off that statewide. If voters were disenfranchised, they sure managed to overcome it anyway.  

[ Parent ]
Yeah, Lincoln's voters all made it, that's for sure (4.00 / 1)
Any reason you know of why Halter's performance in Garland dropped so significantly?

[ Parent ]
How was turnout in Garland County? (0.00 / 0)


It's funny to what depths of minutae (0.00 / 0)
discussions of the various oil spill fixes go, yet there is little discussion of our "first past the post" electoral system, which is far more damaging.

No matter who wins, the people lose.


CA House races (0.00 / 0)
CA-36: Harman 65.1 - Winograd 34.9 with 4.6% reporting.  Don't know how to take this...

CA-50: Busby 64.0 - Emblem 36.0 with 11.7% reporting. (Emblem is the more progressive one, in case you didn't know.)


CA-36 is Harman 61.5 - Winograd 38.5 with 28.8% reporting (0.00 / 0)
This is not good!!

[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox