Open Left - North Carolina

CA Measure to Improve Youth Voter Engagement Goes to Governor

project vote — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted to Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

The California Legislature approved a bill last week to extend voter registration privileges to 17-year-old citizens. If signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the bill would help put California youth on the road to a lifetime of democratic participation.
Nearly half of all eligible voters under age 30 nationwide were not registered to vote in 2008. Assembly Bill 30 extends voter registration opportunities to all 17-year-olds, not just those who will be 18 by the next election, as current California law allows. This change would "make implementation of preregistration more efficient and streamlined, and should lead to less confusion," wrote Elizabeth Wu of the New America Foundation, a nonpartisan public policy group, in a press release Tuesday. AB 30 would more effectively reach young people in high school civics classes and voter registration drives, and ultimately get them on the rolls in advance of turning the legal voting age of 18.

Voter registration is "one of the largest barriers to voting," said Steven Hill, director of the foundation's Political Reform Program, because "citizens often become energized by candidates or issue campaigns in the last weeks of an election only to find they are not registered to vote." The idea of allowing young people to register in advance not only has them ready to participate upon turning 18, but it also instills civic duty at an early age.

"Research has demonstrated that developing good 'political engagement' habits at a younger age will increase the likelihood of civic participation as an adult," said Hill. "AB 30 will help break the 'disengagement cycle' that often prevents young people from developing habits of participation that carry over into their adult years."

While several states like California already permit certain 17-year-old citizens to preregister to vote, only five extend the opportunity to all 16 or 17-year-olds. States with laws similar to the pending AB 30 include Louisiana and Oregon. Preregistration is also extended to citizens as young as 16 in states like Hawaii, Florida, and most recently, North Carolina, which passed House Bill 908 into law last month.

Rhode Island also passed a preregistration bill earlier this summer, only to be vetoed by Governor Donald Carcieri. However, FairVote - a voting rights group that has long championed preregistration in the state - hopes that with the "huge majorities in favor of the bill in both the RI House and Senate this year," the General Assembly will override the governor's veto, according to a July blog entry. Proving to be a popular year for preregistration, a similar measure was adopted by the Michigan House. The pending HB 4261 awaits a hearing in the Senate Committee on Campaign and Election Oversight.

To monitor the California and Michigan bills, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org.

After 2008 Election, Some States Want to Make Voting Easier; Others Determined to Make it Harder

project vote — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:32:40 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

Following an historic turnout in the 2008 election comes a flurry of election reform agendas from both sides of the battle over voting rights. Since November 4, some state lawmakers have seized on the success of early voting and Election Day Registration (EDR) as models for facilitating voter registration, while others appear to have been threatened by the heightened turnout and inspired to introduce restrictive voter ID and proof-of-citizenship bills for the 2009 legislative session.

Following what appears to be significant progress this year in closing participation gaps among historically underrepresented young and minority voters, we review Election Day stories in states with voter ID and EDR laws, and preview next year's legislative battle for election reform.
Election Day Registration

In North Carolina, lawmakers report being "proud" of the implementation of the state's 2007 Same Day Registration law, which permits early voters to register and vote at established "One-Stop" voting sites, according to the Raleigh News and Observer. In the 2008 primary and presidential elections, the law seemed to boost voter registration while cutting the use of provisional ballots by more than half, compared to figures from the 2004 election. On average, EDR states tend to outperform non-EDR states in election outcome by a minimum of 10 percentage points, according to public policy group, Demos.

"State Rep. Paul Luebke said he expects other states to model North Carolina's early voting system," according to the report. "The only change he would suggest for the next elections would be to standardize the hours, encouraging local boards of elections to stay open longer in early voting."

Despite the smooth success of Same Day Registration at early voting sites in North Carolina and other states,Republican lawmakers in Ohio are pushing to end the state's new mandate to allow voters to register during the early voting period.

State Republicans recently announced that they would file legislation to move the voter registration deadline to 65 days before Election Day, according to an Associated Press report. They hope to pass the bill before the 2008 session ends "and a new, Democratic-controlled House takes over in January."

However, election law expert Dan Tokaji said the bill will likely run into opposition as "federal law clearly prohibits states from having registration deadlines earlier than 30 days before an election."

Before the Nov. 4 election, the "Republican Party sued Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to stop the same-day window...but state and federal courts upheld it."

Brunner has planned an election summit in December to review the elections process and will likely not adhere to any changes before the new legislature takes over, according to the AP report.

Meanwhile, states like West Virginia are considering implementing Election Day Registration, which currently exists in about eight other states in its traditional form whereby eligible citizens may show up at their polling place on Election Day, register to vote and cast a ballot. First implemented in Maine in 1973, EDR is also practiced in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire and Wyoming. Other states, like North Carolina, Ohio and Connecticut permit variations of the option to register and vote at the same time, either during an early voting period, or-in the case of Connecticut-on a special ballot that only allows them to vote for the president.

"I lost my card, and I didn't think I could do it too close to the time," said one West Virginia voter and supporter of an EDR law, according to Parksburg, W. Va. News station, WTAP. "So, if it was that way, I could have voted."

However, Woods County clerk, Jamie Six, who "studied the idea for the state clerk's association" is against the implementation of EDR.

"The poll workers have a long and very busy day already," Six said. "And to add this to their plate to take care of on election day, we don't feel it would be fair."

While EDR in the state is unlikely, Six says it is possible to allow voters to register during the early voting period. "A committee of the West Virginia Legislature is to hear from Six on Monday," according to WTAP.

In the 2008 session, about 19 states introduced EDR legislation. Bills are pending in four states: Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Ohio. None of these bills have moved since this summer.

At least two states, Texas and Montana, which currently practices EDR, have pre-filed several bills relating to EDR for the 2009 session.

Voter ID

While some states were facilitating voter registration and voting this year, Indiana - home of the country's strictest voter ID law - reportedly turned some of its young voters away without casting a regular ballot, and even encouraged poll workers in other states to mandate voter ID when no such law existed in the first place.

Despite being properly registered and equipped with out-of-state and student ID, the young voters were only allowed to vote provisionally on Nov. 4, leaving some discouraged and others in tears, according to a letter to the Indianapolis Star by Leon Riley, an election official at Butler University's Hinkle Fieldhouse precinct.

"The Indiana voter ID law amounted to disenfranchisement for a number of young, well-informed voters, as well as some voters who have various limitations of resources, transportation and problem-solving ingenuity. Is this what we want for some of our brightest and best, or for some who need help along the way? In fairness, this unnecessary barrier must be abolished," wrote Riley.

The day before the election, an emergency motion was filed to stop enforcement of the voter ID law based on constitutional violations. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago denied the motion a week later without citing any reasons why, according to the Indiana Lawyer.

With the controversy over the U.S. Supreme Court's upholding of Indiana's voter ID law, and a flurry of voter registration fraud allegations in the weeks before the election, poll workers in some states appeared confused over their own states' laws. Voters in Mecklenburg County, Virgina, for example, complained that poll workers illegally asked them to provide proof of identification, including photo ID, according to the Smith Hill Enterprise. There were also reports of misleading signs outside of polling places that indicated photo ID was required.

The misinformation amounted to a misinterpretation of the Help America Vote Act, which required voters who registered by mail after 2003 to provide proof of ID.

"The voter being asked to present a photo ID is not the preferred language to use," said Jessica Lane of the State Board of Elections. The preferred language, she said, is to ask for "a form of ID."

Whatever the intention, voters were set back after waiting hours in long lines, leaving to get their IDs, or possibly, not return at all, according to the Enterprise.

"I am registered with neither party. I am a devout independent with libertarian leanings, but I believe in the constitution and the fact that everyone needs to get out and vote," wrote one concerned voter. "Was anyone denied the right to vote? If they did not have a photo ID and saw the sign, did they say 'Oops. I guess I can't vote' and leave?".

For voter ID advocates, preventing the extremely rare crime of individual voter fraud is worth the risk of compromising a voter's right to cast a ballot. However, preventing many eligible voters from casting a ballot just to prevent a rare crime hardly seems on par with democracy. A four year investigation by the federal government found only 24 instances of voter fraud out of more than 214 million votes cast. Several studies have found that a number of already under-represented Americans - primarily young, elderly, minority and poor - would have a difficult time meeting the requirements. These studies include a Brennan Center survey that found 21 million Americans were without the required identification; a University of Washington study that found about a quarter of Indiana's young, African-American and low income voting-age populations lack the necessary ID; and a University of Georgia study found the state's Latino and Black voters were twice as likely not to posses required ID compared to White voters.

Yet despite the lack of evidence of voter fraud, and a well known, recent history of young and elderly voters missing out on the democratic process in Indiana (including Indiana nuns and Notre Dame University students who were turned away in the 2008 primaries) lawmakers in states like Oklahoma and Texas are hoping to make voter ID a reality in 2009.

While acknowledging that Oklahoma Speaker of the House Chris Benge "and the others pushing for a voter ID system have a certain level of common sense on their side (one idea is to offer free ID with their plan), Wayne Greene of the Tulsa World dismisses the argument that if people are required to show photo ID to cash a check, they should be required to show ID when they vote. Greene points out that there is plenty of evidence of people attempting to cash fraudulent checks, but no evidence of people attempting to cast fraudulent votes in Oklahoma.

"Benge told me he didn't have any examples of fraudulent voting to justify what sounds like a pretty expensive free ID system," Greene says. The state, which introduced and failed seven voter ID bills this year, will convene for the 2009-2010 session next February.

Immediately after Election Day, lawmakers in Texas - where there was a serious voter ID battle during the 2007 session - pre-filed a few bills requiring voter ID as well as proof-of-citizenship at registration.
Supporters of voter ID hope to have it in effect by the next gubernatorial election, according to local publication, Athens Daily Review.

In total this year, 25 states introduced voter ID bills, and bills are still pending in four states: Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

Track these and other election-related bills by visiting www.ElectionLegislation.org.

After this presidential election's phenomenal turnout that showed the American electorate is finally closer to representing all of its citizens, lawmakers should recognize that voters take this fundamental right seriously. The passage of laws that help facilitate that right are far more conducive to a fair and healthy democracy than the passage of those that prevent some citizens from voting at all.

Quick Links:
www.ElectionLegislation.org

In Other News:

More minorities voted this year, but white turnout dropped - McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's 8.5 million-vote margin over John McCain was fueled by a more than 20 percent surge in minority voting, a new analysis of exit polling data suggests.

Minnesota group asks feds to investigate problems with state's voter rolls - Associated Press
ST. PAUL (AP) - A group opposed to Minnesota's same-day voter registration law has asked the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate problems it suspects with the state's voter rolls.

Woman seeks limits on mentally disabled voters - Associated Press
GRINNELL - A Deep River woman wants to change a[n Iowa] state law to require that mentally disabled voters be supervised when they cast a ballot.

Erin Ferns is a Research and Policy Analyst with Project Vote's Strategic Writing and Research Department (SWORD

Elizabeth Dole - the absentee Senator

NoThirdBushTerm — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:17:50 GMT

Where in the world is Elizabeth Dole?

Well, she's not in North Carolina. In recent years, she has only spent a few weeks in the state. All the while, she's voting with President Bush 92% of the time. This has resulted in a very low effectiveness ranking.

Elizabeth Dole has been busy in Washington DC representing the failed policies of the Bush administration. We need someone to represent North Carolina.

It's time for a change.

Elizabeth Dole - Silent in the Senate

NoThirdBushTerm — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:02:11 GMT

Elizabeth Dole - the silence is deafening.

After 6 years on the Senate banking committee she managed to not ask a single question, about anything!

And now, our economy is in trouble, banks are failing, and the stock market is dropping.

Elizabeth Dole's lack of action on the committee is an appalling level of oversight. Adding to that, she voted against legislation to help people stay in their homes, and has been labeled as ineffective by North Carolina newspapers.

While Dole sat in silence, she did manage to collect donations from Wall Street to the tune of $850,000. Was it all just "hush-money?"

It's time for Dole to leave the Senate, and clear the way for someone who will speak up for North Carolina.

Early Exit Polls: Obama Leads In Georgia

Chris Bowers — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:51:09 GMT

Survey USA is starting to report crosstabs for early voters in many of their recent state polls. In every state where they have such crosstabs, Obama is ahead by shocking margins. First, Georgia:

Early and absentee voting began in Georgia on 09/22/08. Among the 18% of Georgia voters who tell SurveyUSA they have already voted, Obama leads by 6 points; among those who have not yet voted, McCain leads by 11.

With 18% of the vote in, this crosstab is effectively an "exit poll" showing that Obama is literally winning in Georgia right now. Similarly surprising pro-Obama margins can be seen in several other states, like Iowa:

Among the 14% of Iowa voters who say they have already cast their ballot, Obama leads by a 2:1 margin.

And New Mexico:

Among the 10% of New Mexico voters who say they have already voted, Obama leads by 23 points.

And North Carolina:

Obama has a slight advantage among those who tell SurveyUSA they have already voted. North Carolina has 15 Electoral College votes

And Ohio:

Of the 12% of respondents who tell SurveyUSA they have already voted, Obama leads by 18.

None of the other Survey USA polls released this month included early voting subsets. Still, these numbers are enough to indicate that Obama is clearly over-performing among early voters compared to his standing among all voters. This means that the Obama field campaign is obviously superior to McCain's, and that even if McCain tightens the campaign later on, Obama will already have banked a substantial lead. Early voting is also an excellent protection against the voter suppression tactics Republicans regularly employ.

Obama is winning big across the board right now. Best of all, this lead is not just in polls, but in actual votes.

Update: Survey USA also reports that Jim Martin leads by 4% in the Georgia Senate campaign, among early voters.

Update 2: Also, I should note that I share skepticism of those who think this all sounds like 2004, and as such is too good to be true. However, keep in mind that during the early voting phase in 2004, Kerry never actually led Bush. During early voting in 2008, we all know that Obama is well ahead right now. That, combined with a less than effective McCain ground game (Bush's was excellent, McCain's isn't) makes things very different from 2004.

Update 3: It should be noted that these subsets have very high margins of error. However, that Obama is outperforming his overall numbers in every single one of these subsets makes it highly unlikely that this is just "statistical noise." If it were truly random, than the early voting numbers would be pro-McCain in at least one of the five states listed here. Instead, Obama outperforms in all five.

Update 4: If Obama is ahead by 30% in Iowa with 14% reporting, should we already call the state for Obama? I'm tempted.

Update 5: 538 has more on this.

Are Voters Registered? Check Here to Ensure Every Vote Counts on Nov. 4

project vote — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 22:50:23 GMT

Cross posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

As history has shown, there is a difference between submitting a voter registration application and finding your name on the rolls when you go to vote. With registration coming to a close, Project Vote is conducting emergency efforts to ensure that no one who wants to vote is left out on Election Day.

Project Vote's Registration Repair Program is an intensive and urgent effort to collect and rectify large numbers of registrations that have been rejected by boards of election. We have been working all over the country to obtain disqualified applications and to contact would-be voters to repair applications with missing or erroneous information.

Check www.ProjectVote2008.org to see if your county has disqualified applications
Project Vote offers a Web site to help voters to check if they, their friends or neighbors were rejected by election authorities because of alleged or actual deficiencies in their application. Unless these people have already fixed the problem or filed another, corrected application, they will not be able to vote in November. The lists are available at www.ProjectVote2008.org. Currently featured states include Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Check back often as lists will be updated with more information in coming days.

Given that many of these counties have registration deadlines this Monday, we encourage voters to ensure they are not excluded from the voter rolls. Voters who discover they are not registered may fix the problem immediately by calling or visiting the local elections office to file a new, correct registration. This must be done before the Oct. 6 deadline to ensure all citizens who thought they registered to vote may cast a ballot on Election Day.

For more information on how to file a new, correct application, call these voter hotlines, provided by the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: 866 OUR VOTE (866 687-8683) or 888 VE Y VOTA (888 839-8682).

No other organization is conducting such an effort to save registrations that have fallen through the bureaucratic cracks. Several boards of election have been cooperative, recognizing the importance of ensuring that every American who wants to vote is able to vote. In other cases, however, Project Vote is being met with reluctance, resistance, or outright refusal from election boards who seem content to allow thousands of would-be voters to turn up on Election Day and find that they've been left off the rolls.

Note: It is a violation of law in many states to use any of the information on any of these lists for commercial purposes.

Call your Representative This Morning and say No to the Bailout Bill

Jim Neal — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 04:37:33 GMT

I have spent much of this week lobbying my representatives in Congress to vote against the proposed bailout legislation. If this issue is of importance to you, then please call your Congressional representative this morning and weigh in.

The blogosphere is game-changing medium for our democracy and its impact will only grow. However, on the eve of an unprecedented Congressional vote on a $700 billion bailout bill, our Congressional representatives were not reading blogs. A day after the Senate loaded a revised bill with $150 billion of enticements to change the votes of House members, our Congressional representatives were not reading blogs. And regardless of whether one blogged about a sky which is falling or a ground which is shaking, our Congressional representatives were not reading blogs.

They are counting however. In the cloakroom, votes; in their offices, phone calls. So call. They work for you. Tell them what you want, not what you think you can get.

I watched the VP debate earlier and was put off by the sense of alarm expressed by Governor Palin and Senator Biden as they bandied their respective ticket's budgetary excesses back-and-forth: "$10 billion per month.." or "$1.5 billion on.." or "a $1 trillion increase over four years.." Put off by their avoiding any debate on the merits of the Senate's record-breaking passage a $700 billion bailout to shareholders of private sector corporations and a $150 billion bribe to swing votes in the House today.

To hell with talk of a pig with lipstick; there was an 850 billion dollar pink elephant in that auditorium in St. Louis which neither Gov. Palin nor Sen. Biden had any interest in discussing before the American public. An 850 billion dollar pink elephant which was crafted over the span of eight days. In just eight days Senators Biden, McCain and Obama have voted to spend more on a bailout than has been spent on the "war" in Iraq over the past seven years. Anyone remember the certainty and resolve with which the Congress rushed to judgment about Iraq? Over eight days, Congress has made a risk assessment which necessitates a $700 billion subsidy plus a $150 billion tip. In the context of what happened in the Senate, I'm not particularly fired up by fist-pounding over, what, a trifling $40 billion in tax break to oil companies over the past eight years?

I have called and emailed my Representative in NC, David Price, twice (Monday and Thursday.) He voted in favor of the bill last Monday. I called and emailed NC's US Senators, Elizabeth Dole and Richard Burr on Wednesday. Senator Dole voted against the bailout; Senator Burr voted for its passage. Wednesday evening, Sen. Dole's challenger, Democrat State Senator Kay Hagan (who defeated me in the May primary)announced that she would have voted against passage.

At the end of the day, however, what really matters is how you feel, what do you want? Your voice counts as much as anyone's. "The highest office in America", said Harry Truman, "is that of citizen."

Call your Representative and tell them. Trust me: they're counting those calls.

Below is the email which I sent to Representative Price echoing my opposition to the bailout bill.
October 2, 2008

The Honorable David Price
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Via Email

Dear Mr. Price,

In a follow-up to my letter of September 29th I urge you to vote no on H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

The Act fails to provide stabilization to the well-being of either homeowners or middle-class and poor Americans. It privatizes the losses of shareholder-owned financial institutions. It grants extraordinary powers to the executive branch to expend taxpayer funds in a capricious fashion. It is bereft of any meaningful Congressional oversight. It suspends mark-to-market financial accounting regulations and thereby allows a company to overstate the value of its assets and capital base-rendering its financial statements grossly misleading.

A yes vote on the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 will have dubious effect on the health of our nation's economy. A yes vote is an endorsement of the baseless contention that "action is better than no action." A yes vote ignores probable attendant consequences of the Act, such as devaluation of the dollar, stagflation, signaling private sector participants that the American taxpayer will bail out bad behavior, and encouraging the bailout of other industry sectors under stress. A yes vote ignores the doctrine of checks and balances intended to curb abuses of power by one branch of our government. A yes vote turns a blind eye to Congress' experience when ceding authority to the executive branch, most notably its' Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. A yes vote conveys powers to the Treasury Department which are unprecedented and mind-boggling. A yes vote affirms the "oversight-by-hindsight" provisions of the Act as other than impotent and toothless.

The amended bill on which you will vote differs from Monday's H.R. 1424 dramatically. The Act has swelled from 110 pages to 450 pages-in the span of 48 hours. It's no longer a $700 billion bailout bill; it's now an $850 billion bailout bill. The Senate, in an attempt to draw support for the passage of the Act by members of the House, added an extraordinary $150 billion of pork barrel enticements, including subsidies for kids' wooden arrows, rum, wool research, auto-racing tracks and films and television production.

That is a whopping price tag to expect folks in the 4th District and across America to pay for what a criminal attorney might characterize as legislative bribery. By comparison, the Congress passed smart legislation last February through the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 which helped struggling middle-class Americans. That targeted legislation cost $150 billion but it put money in the pockets of middle-class Americans. Yet now, you are about to vote on a $700 billion bailout bill rejected by the House on Monday which is now laden $150 billion of pork. That is, colloquially, a lot of pork to digest in a day.

Many in Congress are running full-throttle based on panic. And panic is overwhelming the better judgment and reason of many of your colleagues. Wall Street will gyrate up and down and credit markets will remain anxious; the former is hoping for a Congressional handout while the latter is waiting to assess risk.

Though I realize that Congress lacks the will to provide relief where it is needed- in the pockets of the middle class- there is a vastly superior structural alternative to the proposed bailout. The Treasury should invest in troubled firms by acquiring convertible preferred stock, paying a dividend and convertible to common stock at a modest premium. No suspension of mark-to-market accounting, no confusion over how to value toxic securities; greater transparency, and identical protection to beleaguered firms even if their toxic assets are worthless. Eliminate the pork which the Senate dangles before you and revise the bankruptcy laws so judges have leeway to allow homeowners to keep their homes and adjust the terms of their mortgages. Then send the bill back to the Senate.

That is an economic stabilization plan which puts Americans' interests ahead of those of shareholders in financial institutions. That is a plan which gives homeowners' a chance to keep their homes. H.R. 1424 isn't a plan, it's a reaction.

The Act on which you will vote tomorrow is the proverbial sow's ear dressed up to look like a silk purse stuffed with $150 billion.

Godspeed in your deliberations.

Sincerely yours,

Jim Neal

Editor blasts fellow editors for calling 'Obsession' distribution a 'free speech issue'

johnalive — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:41:03 GMT

John Robinson, editor of the Greensboro News and Record writes:
One thing has bothered me about the discussion of the distribution of the "Radical Islam" DVD. Some of those papers explaining their decisions to distribute the DVD to readers suggest that not doing so is censorship. And that they are erring on the side of free speech.

Of course, it's not free speech. It's a paid advertisement making the case for one side of a complicated, controversial issue. The papers will distribute the other sides, presumably, if they can come up with the money to pay for it. But most likely, the papers will not publish their information because the other sides won't take out ads.

As for censorship, not distributing a paid advertisement is not censorship. Newspapers decide not to publish information every day. Most of the time we call it news judgment. Other times we call it lack of space. We never call it censorship...particularly when the information is readily available elsewhere, as it is in this case (on YouTube).

Just saying.

Story here.

Elizabeth Dole: Missing Inaction

Betsy Muse — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:33:25 GMT

Elizabeth Dole's absence from North Carolina has long been fodder for discussion among Democrats. We're prone to refer to her as a carpetbagger and talk about her 40+ year absence from the state, her voting history in Kansas, her run for president as a Kansan and her residence at the Watergate where she and husband Bob have lived since they were married in 1975. What we don't talk about is her long history of service in North Carolina because there is no history to speak of.

You would think that after a rushed residency period and her election to the U.S. Senate as a "North Carolinian" in 2002 that Dole would start spending a little more time in this state. Time she could use to get to know the people and our goals, dreams and hopes for the wonderful state we live in. Time she could use to gain understanding of the challenges and obstacles we face in North Carolina. If you honestly thought Dole was going to spend any substantive time here, you're wrong. Dead wrong.
Here's what folks in Salisbury, NC - Dole's alleged city of residence - had to say about Liddy:

According to Media General Services, there are years where Dole spent far less than one month in the state.

Documented Days Spent by Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina During Her First Term
2003 - 55
2004 - 34
2005 - 20
2006 - 13
2007 - 50
2008 (through Friday) - 97
-SOURCE: Senate Travel Records, Dole Campaign and Senate Office Press Releases, Senate Office Schedule, and North Carolina Newspaper Clips.

Dole is aware that she has been criticized for her many years in Washington and she gave her response in Rob Christensen's drooling love-fest for Liddy in today's News & Observer.

"I think people understand that you can't run the Red Cross from Salisbury," Dole said in an interview last week. "You can't run a Cabinet agency from Salisbury."

Sure, Liddy, we understand that you wanted a career that took you away from North Carolina, but now you want a career that should bring you back to North Carolina and until it came time to gear up for and run for reelection you couldn't be bothered to do your job for the people of this state.

Dole is no longer running the Red Cross. Dole no longer has a Cabinet position. Dole is supposed to be attending Banking Committee meetings and meetings of the Senate Armed Services Committee. She is supposed to be doing her job in Washington when she isn't in the state she represents. Apparently, though, Liddy Dole has a problem with that part of her job as well.

After reviewing many transcripts and watching hundreds of hours of video I can confirm that Dole has not participated in quite a few meetings - at last count 61 - of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. This is not a committee that meets every day and sometimes it doesn't meet more than once a month. I have heard it rumored by more than one person in Washington that Mrs. Dole does not often attend the meetings of her assigned committees.

Dole's campaign has claimed her assigned committees are important to North Carolina. If that's the case, why doesn't she bother to show up very often? If Mrs. Dole had worked a little harder on the banking committee do you think maybe she could have helped avert our current crisis? I guess we'll never know. What we do know is that Elizabeth Dole has certainly "worked hard" to earn her ineffectiveness rating.

North Carolina needs a senator in Washington who represents North Carolinians. Please help us send Kay Hagan to Washington.

Wednesday Evening Round-up Thread

Chris Bowers — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 23:27:06 GMT

Here are a few items for a fine Wednesday evening:

Two new national polls, from NBC and CBS, both show Obama up by 3%, down from 6% in both a couple weeks ago. Obama continues to lead, but McCain continues to catch up.
Obama likes single payer health care:
"If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go ahead with a single-payer system," Obama told some 1,800 people at a town-hall style meeting on the economy.

That's cool. Although, I do wonder about single payer sometimes. I mean, France isn't single payer, and they have just about the best system in the world (not to mention a lot of private, supplemental insurance), so it isn't exactly the end-all, be-all of good health care systems.
McCain agrees with the draft:
QUESTIONER: If we don't reenact the draft, I don't think we'll have anyone to chase Bin Laden to the gates of hell.

[Appaluse]

MCCAIN: Ma'am, let me say that I don't disagree with anything you said.

No matter the context, a competent, properly vicious, attack minded Democratic campaign would go after McCain hard for this.
Speaking of attacks, during the Democratic national convention, just about every speaker should mercilessly attack Republicans for their convention themes: peace, prosperity and reform. That is just bald face lying, and it needs to be called such. It needs that these are the three things that have been most lacking under Republican governance. Republicans brought us nothing but war, corruption, and an erosion of our national wealth. And, to boot, they continue to lie about it, by claiming they are bringing the opposite. During the convention, Democrats must hammer this home by directly, repeatedly attacking Republicans for their convention themes. Do it.
A new poll in North Carolina shows McCain ahead 44.5%--42.8%, while a new poll in New Hampshire shows Obama ahead 47%-46%. Pollster.com shows both states slightly less competitive than do these polls, although they are undoubtedly among the thirteen swing states according to my Presidential forecast.
I have been very spotty on checking my email over the last few days. I just don't want to do it all the time anymore. Weren't there times in our lives when people would call other people if they had something important to say to them? Now, I get hundreds of emails a day, most of them I either don't want to read because they are press releases and email list discussions, or because it is just piling another hour or more onto my workday. Email has become an omnipresent source of work related stress-you are never done or free from work, because you have to check your email. Aarrggghhhh. It just never ends, and I need a breather.

This is an open thread. What are you thinking, reading, or doing tonight?

Who Gets To Vote? States Battle Over Voter ID and Election Day Registration

project vote — Thu, 29 May 2008 18:25:04 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

In light of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to uphold Indiana's voter ID law, the state-by-state battle to pass similar legislation has escalated with politicians seeking partisan gain furiously pushing laws that hinder access to the ballot. However, lawmakers seeking to dismantle barriers to electoral participation are just as committed to election integrity and protecting the voting rights of potentially millions of voters by calling out voter ID laws as "sheer political posturing." Meanwhile, positive measures to increase participation through Election Day Registration (EDR) are gaining ground in several states even as Iowa prepares to test-drive its new EDR law in the June 3 primary.
Voter ID

Last week, two states introduced new voter ID bills, including Mississippi. The state - which convened for a "costly special session" - introduced two new voter ID bills after seven failed at the end of the 2008 regular session in April. One bill, S 2004a passed, but is expected to die in the House, according to Jackson, Miss. publication, The Clarion Ledger. The other state, North Carolina introduced voter ID bill, H 2284, explicitly citing the Supreme Court's Indiana decision and the state's unspecified "voter fraud history" as reason to enforce voter ID.

This week, stubborn Illinois politicians extended the deadline to pass voter ID bill, H 4403 for the third time since the bill was introduced in January. The state is projected to adjourn on May 29. Illinois' openness to continued efforts to pass a voter ID bill was not mimicked in Massachusetts on Tuesday when lawmakers blocked an effort to allow voter ID legislation in the city of Lawrence, according to The Eagle Tribune.

The Lawrence bill passed the city council in February in hopes of silencing "frequent rumors of electoral fraud and voter mischief," the mayor, Michael Sullivan, said. In another interview, Sullivan admitted he was not aware of actual voter fraud in the state, the Eagle Tribune reported. Even on the national level, voter fraud is exceedingly rare. Between 2002 and 2005, the federal government was able to secure just 24 voter fraud convictions out of 214 million ballots cast in federal elections during the same period, according to Project Vote report, The Politics of Voter Fraud.

Despite nine pending voter ID bills, such legislation is unwelcome in Mass., having a "powerful enemy" in chief election officer and Secretary of State William Galvin and organizations such as MassVote and the state ACLU, which "contended requiring voter ID was an unreasonable burden on voter access."

While the Mass. legislature blocked the bill to avoid setting "a precedent of allowing individual communities to have different election laws," Delaware politicians were less concerned with confusion and disenfranchisement. State legislators enacted a law permitting Milton city councilors to pass an ordinance requiring both proof of citizenship to register to vote and voter ID to cast a ballot.

This legislative session, Project Vote has monitored 25 states that introduced numerous voter ID bills. Currently, six states are still considering such legislation. To track some of these bills, visit ElectionLegislation.org (registration required).

Election Day Registration

On the positive side of election reform, several states are considering or preparing to implement a measure that "significantly increases the opportunity to cast a vote and participate in American democracy."

Iowa will "test" a new law allowing citizens to both register and vote on Election Day during the June 3 primary, according to the Associated Press. "It will be a good test for the county commissioners, because in November there will be a flood of people," said Secretary of State Michael Mauro.

The AP noted fears of voter fraud as a result of convenient registration procedures like EDR.

However, "administered effectively, Election Day Registration may actually provide more security for the ballot, not less," according to Demos, a research and advocacy organization. "As the secretary of state of Minnesota [Mark Ritchie] recently put it, 'EDR is much more secure because you have the person right in front of you-not a postcard in the mail. That is a no-brainer. We have 33 years of experience with this.'"

Election Day Registration helps enfranchise historically underrepresented communities, including minorities and young people. Currently, eight states allow same day registration, most of which boast a turnout rate 10-12 percent above the national average, Demos reports.

Last week, Ohio joined the ranks of seven other states that are currently considering EDR. The state introduced House Joint Resolution 6 to provide for same day registration. It is currently in the House committee on State Government and Elections. Same day registration is also being considered by Congress. Earlier this month, Sen. Russell Feingold introduced an EDR bill, S 2959. The bill is currently in the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. To monitor Election Day Registration bills, visit ElectionLegislation.org or Demos.org.

Quick Links:
Voter ID:
Bills and Contact:
Miss. Senate Bill 2004a
Sponsor: Sen. Terry Burton (R-31)
Resources:
BLOG: Counter framing Voter ID: Voting is a Right, Not a Privilege. Voting Matters Blog.
Citizens Without Proof: A Survey of Americans' Possession of Documentary Proof of Citizenship and Photo Identification. Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.
EDR:
Bills and Contact:
Mass. S 2514
Sponsor: Joint Committee on Election Laws
Mich. H 410
Sponsor: Rep. Bettie Scott (D-3)
Neb. L 803
Sponsor: Sen. Ray Aguilar (NP-35)
N.J. S 141
Sponsor: Sen. Raymond Lesniak (D-20)
N.Y. A 4488
Sponsor: Asm. Michael N. Gianaris (D-36)
N.Y. S 581
Sponsor: Senate Rules Committee
Ohio HJR 6
Sponsor: Rep. Tyrone K. Yates (D-33)
Okla H 3035
Sponsor: Rep. Ryan McMullen (D-55)
Resources:
www.Demos.org

In Other News:

The Vote Fraud Bogeyman: Evidence suggests that rampant voter fraud is a myth, and voter-ID laws may suppress votes rather than protect them - Newsweek
Just as a sizable fraction of American children firmly believe in a bogeyman in the closet, many American adults are gripped by the paranoid fear that the opposing political party regularly steals votes-Democrats allegedly do this through vote fraud (i.e., casting ballots for dead people) and Republicans apparently do so through vote suppression (i.e., preventing voting through intimidation or misinformation).

Arizona to seek dismissal of challenge to voter ID law - Associated Press
State officials say a challenge to Arizona requirements for voter identification and proof of citizenship should be thrown out in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding Indiana's voter ID law.

Erin Ferns is a Research and Policy Analyst with Project Vote's Strategic Writing and Research Department (SWORD).

Clinton's Edge in Some State General Election Polls

HalLew — Wed, 21 May 2008 19:02:01 GMT

There are lots of great posts concerning state polling for the upcoming General Election such as Chris' just begun Presidential Forecast. A topic I have been thinking about is how much better Clinton seems to do against McCain than Obama in some state polls. A recent example is the NC SUSA poll, and people like Jerome at MyDD like to cite such polls as evidence that the Dems are picking the wrong (weaker) candidate. Jerome's point is largely irrelevant - Obama is the nominee and whining that your candidate would be doing better in General Election polls only serves to weaken the Dem cause. But the NC SUSA poll raises some other interesting questions.

The first question that comes to mind, which is about as irrelevant as Jerome's whining: Does anyone think Clinton would be polling so well in places like NC if she were the nominee? Looking at the internals of the NC SUSA poll, it is clear that women are the primary difference. They support Clinton 56-37 over McCain, yet they support McCain 47-46 over Obama. That is a 20-point swing towards McCain. From my perspective, as an Obama supporter, this seems like sour grapes. The differences between Obama and Clinton are minor compared to the difference between either Dem and McCain and I cannot for the life of me explain why some one who supports Clinton would vote for McCain against Obama. Thus, I believe that if these women truly bought into Clinton's message, then they will also buy into Obama's message. Back to the question: would Clinton would be polling so well in places like NC if she were the nominee, or do people think there would be Obama supporters telling pollsters that they will vote McCain rather than Clinton. The most talked about constituency of Obama's base is African Americans and they break 89-7 Obama/McCain and 74-9 Clinton/McCain in SUSA's NC poll. While this does represent a 17-point difference in favor of Obama in a match up with McCain, I wouldn't call it a swing to McCain like the female vote. For the women, there is 7% other/undecided in both Obama/McCain and Clinton/McCain matchups. Ten percent of NC women are truly telling SUSA that they would vote for Clinton in a Clinton/McCain contest, but they would vote for McCain in a Obama/McCain contest (note there is a statistically insignificant 1-point difference for men: 41% for Clinton and 40% for Obama). For African Americans there is 4% other/undecided in the Obama/McCain match-up, but 17% other/undecided in the Clinton/McCain match-up. The subgroup of African Americans who support Obama, but not Clinton, largely fall into the other/undecided category. If Clinton were the nominee I am sure these African Americans would support her. However, if she were the current presumptive nominee, after all of the racist rhetoric that has come out of her camp, do people think African Americans would still be telling pollsters that they wouldn't vote for McCain, or would we see something like a 15-20 point support for McCain among African Americans? I think it would be the latter and thus Clinton's impressive 8-point lead over McCain in NC would shrink substantially.

While thinking about the first question, a second, and I think much more relevant question came to mind: Who are the 10% of women who are telling SUSA that they would vote for Clinton over McCain but McCain over Obama? This is a question that could be looked at from two ends of the political spectrum. We could view these women as conservatives who generally vote Republican in federal elections, and they simply refuse to vote for a black man for President. On the other end of the spectrum we could view these women as Clinton's most diehard supporters, currently very depressed and frustrated at losing a close contest, believing that the Obama campaign has belittled Clinton, possibly believing the Obama campaign has been sexist, and as a result of all of this telling SUSA they will vote McCain over Obama. The optimist in me believes the latter. Since, as I said earlier, the differences between Obama and Clinton are minor compared to the difference between either Dem and McCain, to believe the former is to believe that 10% of NC women are racists (while apparently none of the NC men are), and I cannot be persuaded to believe that. Thus, I believe that a large portion of these women who are currently telling SUSA they will vote for Clinton over McCain but McCain over Obama will ultimately vote for Obama. It will be interesting to see if future polls show this to be true.

Directing Lower Ticket Cash This Cycle

Matt Stoller — Thu, 08 May 2008 15:12:27 GMT

I just got a form fundraising email from JB Poersch, the head of the DSCC and Chuck Schumer's acolyte. Poersch is quite good at political strategy, and he's discussing Senate candidate Kay Hagen in North Carolina versus Liddy Dole as 'the sleeper' race of 2008. It might be, and could bring us to 58 or 59 in the Senate. Much as the open secret of South Carolina is that Lindsay Graham is closeted, the open secret of North Carolina is that Liddy Dole is senile. She could lose if she acts too much like a bumbler.

Here's Poersch:

Kay Hagan is a great Democrat and a great candidate to topple Dole. As a leader in the state Senate, she has developed a statewide reputation as a moderate who can run and win in November. Her favorability ratings are already as high as Dole's, and Hagan doesn't carry nearly the same level of unfavorable baggage.

That said, Hagen supported retroactive immunity for telecom companies, didn't know if she would support Mukasey for Attorney General, and would not support children's health care (SCHIP) if it were funded by tobacco taxes (unlike the rest of NC's Congressional delegation). She might be a good Democrats, but she's also conservative.

Party organizations like the DSCC support conservative ideas because it is easier to raise money from business with conservative candidates while going to liberals, offering nothing and saying 'we need to get to 60'. There's going to be a lot of chatter about getting to 60 votes in the Senate, and there's a good reason to want to get there to break filibusters. But the reality is that the Senate is going to be conservative regardless of whether we're at 60 votes or 58, with people like Max Baucus Chairing powerful committees. We need more liberals in the Senate, not just more Democrats. We ought to go directly to the more liberal Senate candidates, like Al Franken in Minnesota, Novick/Merkley in Oregon, Tom Allen in Maine, and Tom Udall in New Mexico. Let the telecom PACs fund the DSCC and candidates like Kay Hagen, they get good value for their money.

Maps: Primary Results and Identity Politics

dreaminonempty — Thu, 08 May 2008 14:11:11 GMT

Time for another look at the results maps for Guam, Indiana, and North Carolina:

Click to enlarge.

Overall, the results in all three contests were pretty solidly linked to demographics. Poblano has been busy running the regressions and making predictions, but for those of you who don't get much out of t-values, I've included some maps for several demographics below. And, the usual nationwide views. Finally, some evidence that Clinton's support in Appalachia isn't necessarily about race.
First, the updates to the old maps:

Click to enlarge.

Can't really see Guam too well at this scale.... but we're getting a lot closer to coloring in the map of the US though!

Guam

As we watched returns from Guam trickle in, names like Yigo and Barrigada suddenly became a lot more common in the blogosphere. How could one district go so heavily for Obama and another - the very last district, the biggest - nearly wipe out his lead? The island's only a few miles wide, fer cryin' out loud!

So here's a couple maps of one major demographic difference I found correlated with Obama's performance:

Click to enlarge.

The major ethnic groups on the island are Asian and Pacific Islander. Obama tended to better in the districts with large proportions of Pacific Islanders. Then again, Obama did lose in American Samoa... but it was a very low-turnout caucus. Aren't those supposed to favor Obama? Well, that's another diary.

Cities and schools
Now, a close-up of the east, where we just had two contests and have one next week, along with a few key demographics. First, on the left, the percent of the population with a college education. On the right, the total population of each county. In the middle, the Obama-Clinton map.

Click to enlarge.

The islands of higher education often, but not always, coincide with urban counties. Strength in either demographic tends to lead to an increase in support for Obama. Indiana is a textbook case: can you find the major universities in Indiana? And Indianapolis? Gary?

Race and ethnicity
On the left, the percent of the population that identifies its ethnicity as 'American' in the census. On the right, the percent who identify as African-American. In the middle, the Obama-Clinton map again.

Click to enlarge.

Clinton tends to do very well where people self-identify as American; Obama (with some help from Clinton) has consolidated support in the African-American community.

Looking at these maps, it's pretty clear what will happen in West Virginia and Kentucky.

Identity Politics
We've heard a lot about identity politics this year, but there's many ways identity can play on the field of politics. Some, I would argue, are really quite positive, others are obviously negative.

The Ugly. Racism and misogyny have been playing a role for a number of voters, sadly. There's a fair number of people, in polls or in person, who actually admit to refusing to vote for a woman or African-American. And the maps above have made us very suspicious - is Clinton getting such strong support in Appalachia because she's not black? There is no way to tell for sure how much of a role racism and misogyny are playing, although experience and anecdote tell us it is playing a role. The exit polls ask if race or gender is a factor, but even those who vote for Clinton because she's white may be doing so because they sincerely believe this country will never elect a black man. That is not blameless, but it's not the same as hatred or supremacy either.

On the Good Side. And of course the other way identity can play a role is a positive association. At its most reductionist this is 'Women vote for Clinton' and 'Blacks vote for Obama' - which leads to claims of racism on the part of blacks and, what would it be? misandrony? on the part of women. There's no denying that humans are tribal critters and like to associate with people they think are like them, and proudly vote for memebers of their tribe, but there is something else going on too, I think, whether consciously or unconsciously - the 'Walk in My Shoes' factor. When a politician can 'connect' or 'feel your pain' or 'appeal' to a group - part of it, in my opinion, is simply that if folks think a politician has had similar experiences to a voter, the politician might be more likely to understand and be able to solve the problems that voter has.

So Clinton, by this reasoning, appeals to women - especially women of her generation - not just because she's a woman, but because she knows what it's like to have to work twice as hard to get half the recognition, and she knows what it's like to be damned for not baking cookies. She knows these things, yes, because she is a woman, but it is the fact that she knows them that is important. And despite being the Senator from New York, she is a Clinton, and that means Arkansas. So she should appeal to folks from Arkansas through the Appalachians because she has experience in the culture and knows what folks are going through. So would go this line of reasoning.

How much of Clinton's appeal in this region is positive and how much negative? One thing we can do is look at general election polls. Back of the envelope estimates show that about 25%-50% of the white Democrats in this region will vote for McCain over Obama. This the maximum for how many Democratic voters won't vote for a black man. For comparison, about 30% of Appalachian white Democrats also voted for Bush in 2004. (Can we even call them Democrats?? Are these Dixiecrats who still haven't converted to Republican?) What we really would like to do is redo the election with Hillary Clinton versus, say, Barbara Boxer. Now it's just a guess, but I'm guessing Clinton would still sweep the Appalachians against Boxer; I assume Boxer would do better than Obama, though, and those would be the people who are voting primarily on race. Sadly, we can't run that experiment and find out, so we will never know the extent that racism has played in the primary process.

Turns out, we do have something of a control group to look at: the Republicans. There's lots of flaws, but there was a folksy Arkansas governor in the race. How did he do? Meng Bomin has the map (I strongly encourage you to click through, it's a diary that didn't get half the attention it deserved):

Click to enlarge.

On the left, results for Huckabee. On the right, a black and white version of the county-level Cliton-Obama map. See anything familiar in Appalachia? We can conclude that the pattern of Clinton's support in Appalachia is consistent with positive support for an Arkansan. Even for those who may have had race as a motivation, it might not have been the primary motivation.

Now what about Obama? On the negative side, there's a certain percent of Democrats who say they won't vote for Clinton but will vote for Obama in the general. That sets the maximum who won't vote for a woman at 12% of Democrats nationwide, but we know that includes a fair number of African-Americans and other supporters who would consider the primary to have been stolen by Clinton at this point. And we can't break things down by region, and I haven't seen numbers broken down by gender. It'd be nice to redo the election with Senator Michelle Obama versus Hillary Clinton to see what happens.

On the positive side, Obama may appeal to Pacific Islanders because he seems more likely to pay attention to them, given that he grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia. He has been an organizer in an urban, African-American community: we see he has strong support in cities, and among activists and African-Americans. And young people see that he had to pay off college loans and took a while to land on his feet, not to mention he seems to take them seriously. And those of us who feel like outsiders, who have been told for decades we're not Real Americans because we're not blue-collar straight white men who disdain education and like to eat junk food, watch football, and kill things - well, some of us see an Obama who's been an outsider no matter where he went, and who, when he talks about the United States of America, might, for once, actually mean it.

Cross-posted at DailyKos.

Delegate and Popular Vote Details

Chris Bowers — Wed, 07 May 2008 04:21:21 GMT

Obama has won North Carolina's pledged delegates 63-52, according to Green Papers. Their estimates are usually accurate to within one delegate either way, so I trust them. Obama also appears to have won the North Carolina popular vote by 226,500 or so, which is almost identical to Clinton's margin in Pennsylvania and Indiana combined.

The delegate count in Indiana is murkier, largely because the votes are coming in slower. In the extremes we have Democratic Convention Watch, which currently projects Clinton 35-33 Obama with four undecided, and CBS, which projects Clinton 38-29 Obama with five undecided. While these are not incompatible projections I am strongly prone to lean toward the DIY independent site, since such sites have shown, time and time again, to be way ahead of established news sites in delegate counts. In terms of the popular vote, Clinton is currently ahead by 20,000 and dropping with 92% reporting. I don't regret declaring her the popular vote winner at all, since I'll still be proven correct and since only one delegate is decided by the popular vote. I've been wrong about individual delegates before, and really that is all that is at stake in the popular vote.

Still, a very, very big night for Obama. The media has been giving him stupid rules to follow (pierce your nipples with flag pins or we will run Rev. Wright 24 / 7!), and he beat those rules tonight. I don't like those rules, but Obama played them, and won. The narrative will reward him as a result.

Interim Thread: Big Night For Obama

Chris Bowers — Wed, 07 May 2008 00:58:22 GMT

It looks like Obama will win North Carolina by 15% or more, and manage to only lose Indiana by only 3-4%. Overall, he will beat expectations in both states, so long as expectations are defined as final polling averages. Further, these wins will translate both into an overall delegate victory, and a substantial popular vote victory. Given that Obama was already ahead in both categories (delegate info here and popular vote info here), and that there are now very few states remaining, that is a very good night for him. Really, even though he was already gaining on McCain, it is just what he needed to help turn around the media narrative.

Even though she has some good states left--West Virginia, Kentucky and Puerto Rico--it is extremely hard to see how Clinton catches up now. Obama's overwhelming advantages should start to sink in with the media now, especially given that he beat expectations despite Wright and arugula and whatever. Those attacks are not working. Obama's wins tonight will net him a bunch of superdelegates, too, such as Heath Shuler in NC-11. Fact is, Obama is ahead even with Michigan and Florida included, and even if he receives zero delegates from Michigan. However, it appears he has already won at least 31 delegates from Michigan, even if Clinton gets everything exactly her way when it comes to seating those delegations.

Anyway, I'm taking about three hours off. We know the winners and general trend of the evening, but the final delegate and popular vote counts won't be determined for a while. This is an interim period in the returns, and so here is an interim thread for the evening. I'll be back to blog the final details and totals at midnight.

Indiana and North Carolina Results Thread

Chris Bowers — Tue, 06 May 2008 22:25:30 GMT

Clinton wins Indiana, Obama wins North Carolina. Overall, Obama wins most delegates and popular vote for the evening.

Indiana: 67% Reporting, 72 pledged delegates at stake
Clinton: 53% (38 del)
Obama: 47% (29 del)
Popular Vote: Clinton +52,200. Trend moves back to Clinton.

North Carolina: 22% reporting, 115 pledged delegates at stake
Obama: 61% (35 del)
Clinton: 37% (23 del)
Popular Vote: Obama +146,300. Trend favors Obama.

Update 7--Why the networks still haven't called Indiana: I guess the networks still haven't called Indiana because there are no results from the pro-Obama counties of Lake, St. Joseph's, and Tippecanoe, which are all university areas. Also, the northeast part of the state close to Illinois has no results in. While I stand by my projection for Clinton to win Indiana, it does seem like there is no way Clinton can win the overall popular vote tonight. So, Obama wins May 6th by every measure, strengthening his already solid grip on the nomination.

Update 6--Delegate Tracking: The key delegate threshold for the at-large vote in Indiana is 53.125%, which would give Clinton 1 9-7 split of the at-large delegates. In North Carolina, the at-large delegate thresholds are 13-13 below 51.93%, 14-12 Obama at 51.93% and 15-11 Obama at 55.77%. The PLEO delegate thresholds in NC is 6-6 below 54.167%, 7-5 Obama above 54.167%. All of these numbers are only for the votes for viable candidates.

Update 5--Obama will win most delegates tonight: Looking at the exit polls and early results, it now seems certain that Obama will gain delegates tonight. Considering that he was already well ahead, that is pretty crushing for Clinton.

Update 4--Obama wins North Carolina popular vote: Early exit polls show him ahead 55%-41%, which is overwhelming.

Update 3--I am projecting Clinton as the winner of Indiana popular vote: The early returns from Marion county (Indianapolis) indicate that Obama will not make up enough votes there to close the gap. In fact, Clinton's popular vote lead continues to grow.

Update 2--High turnout, McCain's base troubles: Indiana turnout looks to be about 1,000,000 voters. Pretty impressive for a primary. I'm kind of surprised they haven't called this for Clinton yet. Also, McCain wins Indiana with only 76% of the vote, which is kind of paltry given that he hasn't had an opponent in two months.

Update--Indiana Exit Polls: CBS has the exit poll here. First look says Clinton 52%-48% Obama. That probably means that Clinton won Indiana by more than 4%.

Prelude To Indiana and North Carolina Results Thread

Chris Bowers — Tue, 06 May 2008 19:59:21 GMT

Polls in Indiana close at either 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. eastern, depending on the time zone the precinct is in. For North Carolina, polls close statewide at 7:30 p.m. Given the polling averages in the two states (see here and here for Indiana, and here and here for North Carolina), popular vote winners should be called fairly quickly. Of course, delegate counts will take quite a bit longer.

Turnout is, of course, very heavy in both states, just as it has been this entire primary season. There might be some exit polls at some point, but I wouldn't trust any of them. I'll be back at 6 p.m. eastern to blog the results live

Opening the Day: North Carolindia Goes to the Polls

Matt Stoller — Tue, 06 May 2008 13:00:00 GMT

Here's my day opener.

This is a horrible negative ad. I don't mean horrible in the sense of 'it's mean', I mean horrible in the sense that it's just dumb. It doesn't say anything except that Hillary is negative and mean. Ok then.

I got a nice welcome at Dailykos after my diary on http://gastaxscam.com made the top recommended slot.

amazing. Stoller comes onto a 90% pro Obama blog as if he doesn't stink from all the trash he's written about the candidate. Simply Google Stoller and Obama and see what bubbles up.

Go movement! (Ok, I'm kidding and singling out the most annoying comment.)

Todd Beeton notes that the NRCC claimed Democrat Don Cazayoux's victory in an R+7 district is good for Republicans.

Registration for Blogging While Brown is open (via What About Our Daughters).

Larry Kissell had the best campaign trick in 2006 when he paid the difference between the current price of gas (then around $3) and the price of gas when his opponent took office in 2002 ($1.22). It was inexpensive and motorists lined up around the block to get the cheap gas, generating substantial media buzz.

But that gimmick was premised on a return to cheap oil, which isn't going to happen. So what's a different stunt our candidates can pull?

Indiana and North Carolina are holding their primaries tomorrow. Obama is leading in early voting in North Carolina by 15 points or so, but Clinton sent her best field person there and she is contesting it heavily. Demographically, Indiana should be hers and undecideds tend to break her way.

I don't care, this contest is over.

It is very likely that the Democrats, led by Steny Hoyer, will screw us on FISA this week. Jane Hamsher isn't spreading false rumors.

What are you reading?

Polls and Delegate Previews for NC, IN

Chris Bowers — Mon, 05 May 2008 18:07:07 GMT

North Carolina
Polling Averages
--Pollster.com regression line: Obama 50.1%--41.5% Clinton
--RCP simple mean: Obama 49.6%--42.6% Clinton

Delegates
--CQ Politics district-level delegate projection: Obama 40-37 Clinton
--At-large delegate thresholds: 13-13 below 51.93%; 14-12 Obama at 51.93%; 15-11 Obama at 55.77%
--PLEO delegate thresholds: 6-6 below 54.167%, 7-5 Obama above 54.167%

My Prediction
Obama 54.5%-45.5% Clinton, Obama 62-53 Clinton delegate count

Indiana
Polling Averages
--Pollster.com regression line: Clinton 49.5%--43.3% Obama
--Real Clear Politics simple mean: Clinton 48.3%--42.5% Obama

Delegates
--CQ Politics district-level delegate projection: Clinton 24-23 Obama
--At-large delegate thresholds: 8-8 below 53.125%, 9-7 Clinton above 53.125%
--PLEO delegate thresholds: 5-4 at 50.000%

Prediction: Clinton 53.5%--46.5% Obama, Clinton 38-34 Obama

*****

What are your predictions for tomorrow?