Jay Cost Election Review Part 3 & 4

Jay Cost (RCP's HorseRace Blog) has published parts 3 and 4 of his election review.

Part 3: The West
Part 4: The Midwest

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

2010 Democratic Senate Super-Majority?

Federally elected politicians are successfully re-elected 98% of the time, which makes vacancies and retirements critical to the power players within the two parties.

It is expected today that Sen. Voinovich (R-OH) will announce his retirement in 2010. Along with Sen. Brownback (R-KS) and Sen. Martinez (R-FL) there will be 3 open Republican seats up for election in 2010.

Although there is hope for gains in the House, they probably won't be substantial enough to change the dynamic Democrat majority. Which leaves me with a pessimistic outlook for GOP congressional advances in 2010.

Although, a lot can change in 2 years.

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

Jay Cost Election Review Part 2

Part 2 of Jay Cost's Election Review focuses on the South Atlantic region. An interesting read for anyone asking how Obama turned Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida red.

Part 1: West and East South Central
My Election Review: "A historical guide to the future of Conservatism"

Enjoy!

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

An Election Review by Jay Cost

If you enjoyed my 7 part series "A historical guide to the future of Conservatism" analyzing the 2008 election against previous elections, I highly recommend a new series by Jay Cost "Election Review".

Part 1 or what appears to be a thorough statistical and data-driven analysis of the 2008 election was published today. I enjoy Jay's previous articles for his detailed and agnostic approach. In his series, Jay takes a more intimate look at regional demographics and is focused less on any particular party or ideology.

Enjoy!

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

No Franken Way!

The Minnesota state Canvassing Board appears ready to announce Al Franken as the winner of the 2008 Senatorial election over Norm Coleman. The latest media reports show a 225 vote lead for Franken. The December 30th report from the office of Secretary of State Mark Ritchie (D) shows a 49 vote lead for Franken.

According to Minnesota state law, an election cannot be certified if there is pending litigation challenging the outcome of the election. The Canvassing Board and SECSTATE Ritchie can announce Franken as the winner of the recount but that does not complete the process.

Coleman has file a lawsuit over 650 duplicate ballots that were improperly rejected. He may pursue a case against broader counting errors and the process all together. As today's WSJ points out, there is some funny business in the counting results. "...one Canvassing Board member, State Supreme Court Justice G. Barry Anderson, has acknowledged that "very likely there was a double counting." Yet the board insists that it lacks the authority to question local officials..."

Until this litigation is settled, SECSTATE Mark Ritchie is bound by law to withhold Certification. I will not be surprised if he proceeds in contradiction. However, Governor Tim Pawlenty (R) also has to sign the official Certification, which I doubt he will do unless there is absolute determination of the victor.

Meanwhile, as of this past Saturday Senator Coleman's term has expired and seat is now vacant. So the Democratic Senators, most notably Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), want to seat Al Franken until the vacancy is filled. Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) has said "Sen. Schumer's exultations are premature to say the least." and promises to filibuster any attempt to fill seat without state certification.

I am impressed! I figured it would take the Democrats at least 3 months to draw their divisive line in the sand. This will be the catalyst for Republican backlash against their power playing. Queue the filibusters! The honeymoon of working together under a new administration is over before it starts. Thank you!!

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

Update on Minnesota Senate Race

As the Franken campaign has claimed since recounting began, the continue their claim of a narrow margin of votes post-recount. These claims got some legitimacy this week then for a moment the canvassing board, after counting only the Franken challenged ballots, had Franken up my almost 200 votes. That has since been reverse after the counting of the Coleman challenged ballots.

The Minnesota Secretary of States office (official results) has Coleman up by 215

The Star Tribune (educated projections) has Coleman up by 188

It is difficult to dissect what the campaign and newspaper estimates contain and do not contain. Therefore it is probably appropriate to stick with the SECSTATE count reporting.

In case you didn't pay attention last week.

The sage continues....

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

Georgia & Minnesota update

Congratulations to Senator Chambliss on his impressive 57.4% to 42.6% win yesterday! Welcome back for your second term. Thank you for your commitment to Conservative principles (94.19 ACU rating) and your continued fight for them in the coming years.

Coleman's lead is now at 303 votes after Franken picked up 37 unexpected votes from 171 previously uncounted ballots.

Franken got another boost when Minn. Secretary of State Mark Richie (D) asked local officials to examine the previously rejected absentee ballots (approx. 12,000). This includes the 1,000 ballots that the Franken campaign has been fighting to get recounted claiming they had been improperly rejected.

With 93% of the vote recounted, it appears the Franken is gearing up for the legal end-game in which he hopes to sway the outcome with absentee ballots and the almost 6,000 challenged ballots from the recount.

This is going to drag on for a long time!

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

A historical guide to the future of Conservatism: Part 5

A continuation of my series; A historical guide to the future of Conservatism.

Previous Parts:

• Part 1: Popular Voting in Aggregate
• Part 2: Gender and Race
• Part 3: Age and Religion
• Part 4: Regional and Population Size

Part 5: Eduction and Income

This 5th part of the series focuses on on Education level, income level, and perceived financial betterment as voting populations. Although not tit-for-tat, parallels can certainly be drawn between the level of education and ones' income. However, as the data shows, higher educated voters tend to vote Democrat whereas higher income voters tend to be Republican. The data for perceived financial situation (better today, the same, and worse today) is maybe the most unique data set that I have analyzed because there is not heredity to the social-psychic perceptions of ones' prominence. Whereas with Religion or location or even age, identifiable social and psychological patterns can be formed by history. People tend to vote like their parents, when they become parents. Generations' voting habits are formed by events that they experienced together (Great Depression, 1960s Civil Rights movement, the peaceful prosperous 1990s, 9/11, etc.). But, perceived financial improvement crosses all demographics. A wealthy person might answer the question that they are worse today with market damage to their financial security. Meanwhile a poorer person may have gotten a promotion or bought a cheap house and consider themselves better today. Its a situational demographic that along with "job approval of the current administration" polls and "country in the right direction" polls forms an almost insurmountable trifecta of predication to Presidential election outcome

Education:

Starting with Education, the data is broken into achievement levels and their percentages for each:

• Not a High School Graduate - 4%
• High School Graduate - 20%
• Some College - 31%
• College Graduate - 28%
• Post-Graduate Degree - 17%

While only 4% of the voting population, those who are Not a High School Graduate have gone Democrat by +5% in every election since 1980 with the exception of 1984 and 2004 ironically. This is another demographic that Obama swung hard back towards the Democrats from gains in 2004 winning by 28%.

Having gone for the winner in every election since 1980, the High School Graduate has eerily matched victory margins. While not by substantial margins, Democrats have been growing and Republican shrinking among voters in this demographic. These voters are some recent High School grads who may not have started college, but more likely are the working class, blue-collar, tradesmen of this country. Likely concerned with industry success, small-business success, and pocketbook issues.

The voters with Some College have also gone for the victor in every election since 1980. At 31% of the voting population, Democrats have consistently been growing in percentage in this demographic going from 35% in 1980 to 51% in 2008 (a 16% growth). Republican took a clear hit in 1992 and have not been able to recover. Liberal ideas dominate most college/university campuses, so it is not a surprise that Democrats have been growing here. However, to compete Republicans need to organize around college groups to pull in the young able bodied volunteers and voters who form the back bone of grassroots politics.

Republicans have won the College Graduate votes until this year when Barack won it by 2%. With 28% of the voting electorate, this obviously an important group to build upon. Republicans need to return to holding and building its constituency around this group.

Democrats have averaged 10% victories among those with a Post-Graduate Degree. Obama won this group by 18% in 2008. Democrats are growing among this demographic and their numbers continue to increase, 17% of the electorate reported having a post-grad degree, an all time high.

Income:

The Income data is broken into achievement levels and their percentages for each:

• Less than $15K/year - 6%
• $15K to $30K/year - 12%
• $30K to $50K/year - 19%
• $50K to $75K/year - 21%
• $75K to $100K/year - 15%
• Greater than $100K/year - 26%
• Greater than $200K/year - 6%

Income levels create the same bell-curve as education levels in terms of voter populations. Those earning Less than $15K/year are 6% of the voting population in 2008 and have gone Democrat overwhelmingly. Barack won these voters by 48%! Democrat margins have been growing. Because it is a "less than" qualifier, this likely includes those with no earned income. It is overly simplistic to attribute this voting pattern to economic principles, but as it relates to income this group favors the more Liberal ideals of taxation and redistribution.

Those making $15K to $30K/year also have favored Democrats overwhelmingly. Their numbers have grown to their largest margins of 23% for Barack! Being general laborers, young professionals, recent college grads, etc. it is a population that Republicans need to do better with to build a future.

The voters making $30K to $50K/year (19%) and $50K to $75K/year (21%) form the nucleus of the country. They are the highest in percentages of the population and they straddle the current median household income ($50,233.00 in 2007). They have typically been closely split between Democrat and Republican, with 2 exceptions. Bush won the $50-75K vote by 13% in 2004 and Obama won the $30-$50K by 12% in 2008. Bush had neutralized Democrat gains in the $30-50K group but McCain failed to retain that hold. Conversely, Republican have been steadily adding 5% in the $50-75K group from '92 to '04 until Obama reversed that to come within 1% of McCain. Ranging from $30K to $75K is a broad group but these are the working "Middle Class" voters that make up 40% of the voting population. A variety of other issues will affect their votes but one thing is certain, they don't want to pay any higher taxes!

The voters making $75K to $100K/year have gone Republican in every election since 1996 until this year. Obama won this group by the narrow margin of 3%, but it speaks volumes about the lack of impact that McCain's economic proposals had upon these voters. Being the senior contributors, middle aged younger management, or small business owners, these voters vary.

An impressive 26% of voters make Greater than $100K/year and of those 6% make Greater than $200K/year. So contrary to Democratic rhetoric, a quarter of the voters in this country are making more than $100 grand. Since 1996 those making more than $100K have gone Republican, until 2008 when McCain & Obama split these voters at 49%. Another indication of McCain's failed economic message/platform. There is only data from 2004 & 20008, but Obama reverse a 28% Bush advantage in '04 among those making greater than $200K to win the group by 6%. Amazing given the impending tax increases for these voters presented by Obama during the campaign.

Financial Situation:

The responses for Financial Situation are broken into whether someone feels "better today", "worse today", or "the same today" against an undefined yesterday.

• Better Today - 24%
• Same Today - 34%
• Worse Today - 42%

This was one of the more interesting breakdowns because of its historical predictability regarding the outcome, as I described above. Remember that the undefined past in the question makes this response difficult to dissect and attribute to specific events. Rather, it is a gut reaction as to how people feel about "things" today.

With the financial crisis exploding in the middle of the campaign season, I'm surprised that only 42% responded that they are Worse Today. When you look at all three of the graphs together you can see that Democrats felt better after Clinton years and Republican after Bush years. It is interesting that Independents have been heavier in the worse today response regardless of the President, likely due to their cynical attitude towards the 2 parties.

Looking at the past elections, if you think of the Better Today voter casting their ballot out of affection and the Worse Today voter out of distaste, and the Same Today as somewhere in between it gets interesting.

1992: After 12 years of Republican rule, Bush's 37% margin among Better Today voters could not withstand Clinton's 47% margin among Worse Today voters. With Same Today voters split, the independents made the difference. Independents were 14% in the Better Today and Democrats at 24%. However Independents were 25% to the Republicans 14% in Worse Today. It was this 10% that probably had the biggest impact on Bush's loss.

1996: Clinton won the Better Today voters by 40% and Dole won Worse Today voters by 30%, Same Today voters were split. Enough said.

2000: Gore won the Better Today voters by 25% and Bush won the Worse Today voters by 30%. However, Bush split the tightly coupled Same Today voters to win by 25%. By targeting those who were content with the benefits they saw during the Clinton years, but dissatisfied with his conduct in office and social liberalism of the late '90s, he was able to upset Gore.

2004: Bush won the Better Today voters by an astounding 61% and Kerry won the Worse Today by 59%. Unlike 2000, Bush lost the Same Today crowd by 1%, but held on with the larger number of people who felt Better Today.

2008: McCain won the Better Today voters by 23% (less than half the margin of Bush in 2004) and Obama won the Worse Today by 43%. Obama also won the Same Today by 8%.

When applying the % of the vote for each group, Obama's 54% breaks down into 9% Better Today, 15% Same Today, and 30% Worse Today. Meaning 1/3 of the country felt they were Worse Today and voted for Obama, staggering! McCain's 44% breaks down into 13% Better Today, 19% Same Today, and 12% Worse Today. Clearly Obama capitalized on the voters who felt Worse Today and minimized McCain's numbers among those who felt Better Today to win.

Republicans, now being the opposition party, need to convince voters in 2012 that they are Worse Today and to vote for the Republican candidate. They do this by highlighting Obama's failures and their financial impact. We'll see how this recession plays out but it seems like the tools are already in motion and economists predict we will be coming out of this in late 2010 or 2011, just in time of Obama to claim credit!! Conversely, Republican need to minimize Obama's margin among those who will feel Better Today. If we are coming out of the Recession, this will be difficult but not impossible.

Key Takeaways:

• Reverse Democrat growth among the less educated
• Reclaim a majority of those with some college or college grad
• Stop the slide among those with Post-Grad degrees
• Interrupt Democrats impressive margins and growth among those making less than $30K
• Securing a majority among the majority of voters, those making between $30 - $75K
• Return to growth among those making more than $75K, make 2008 a fluke
• Win a significant margin of those who will feel Worse Today in 2012
• Minimize the margin of those who will feel Better Today in 2012
• Find a way to split those who will feel the Same Today in 2012.

coming soon... Part 6: Voting Patterns and Party ID

Signing off...JCB

Source: http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/national-exit-polls.html

Sphere: Related Content

Get to know your DEM Senators

As a follow-up to my previous post; Get to know your GOP Senators, I wanted to provide the same information on the Democratic Senators. So I gathered the data on all 56 known Democratic Senators in 2009, plus the 2 Independents that caucus with the Democrats, minus Obama and Biden, and left the remaining 2 races outstanding.

This first image shows all 58 DEM and Ind. Senators listed alphabetically by state. I've added data on their last election, margin of victory, the winner of that state in the 2008 Presidential election, the Presidential margin of victory in 2008, their next election, the year they were elected/appointed, the number of years in the Senate, and their American Conservative Union (ACU) Rating. http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgh6x7fv_104fxd8t6qs

Second, I wanted to understand who some of the future leaders are going to be. I applied the same filtering as my GOP analysis; by those who had an ACU rating less than 10%, been in the Senate for 8 years or more. That generated the following 9 names. This is a scientific approach and does not include personality and leadership traits.

Assuming Clinton gets pulled for SECSTATE, there are a couple of others who stick out. The CA twins, Dick Durbin, and Chuck Schumer have all exerted themselves as sponsors of key legislation, leadership on key committees, and leadership roles behind the scenes. All 9 are in heavy Democratic states so they face little threat of running a liberal agenda. Chuck Schumer would be my one-to-watch. He chaired the re-election committee this year and is an assertive voice. He hasn't had a job outside of politics since starting as a NY Assemblyman at the age of 23. He's got a tenacious attitude and represents Democratic positions reasonably well on the TV chat shows. http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgh6x7fv_106f6brd4gz

Finally look ahead to 2010 for opportunities it appears that Republicans will be on the defensive again. Salazar (CO) had the narrowest margin of victory in his 2004 win over Coors, but CO is becoming a strong Democratic state. Feingold (WI) who won by 11%, but would be a tough win. Lincoln (AR) presents a good opportunity in a state trending GOP, but sadly the Arkansas Republican party failed put up a challenger to Pryor (AR) this year when he seemed like a logical target. Many of the others are stalwarts who've won sizable victories in their past elections. Dodd (CT) has low approval ratings since the financial crisis, but would likely be replaced by a Democrat or would run as an independent like Joe Lieberman. Barack's vacant seat in IL will be up in 2010, but would be a difficult state to find a good GOP candidate. Maybe Dennis Hastert!
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgh6x7fv_108g327htgp

Still to come is a comparison of the two party's Senate representatives in which I will highlight:

• Polarization DEM vs. GOP
• Senators elected in "enemy" states
• Which party is really a regional party?

Signing off...JCB

Sphere: Related Content

Barack more divisive than President Bush?

Jay Cost does it again. This time regarding the polarization of the country this year. Take a look at his article linked below. The data analysis that he conducted concludes that we are more divided than in previous years. So don't think this victory is a sweeping mandate Democrats. You have work to do. Barack has proposed what they Democrats would not allow George W. Bush to do, be a "uniter, not a divider". Well as the election shows, Barack, you are more divisive than George W. Bush!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/11/polarization_continues_under_o.html Sphere: Related Content

2008: Not a Landslide, not a blowout, not a realignment

Jay Cost at RCP is quickly becoming one of the writers I anticipate the most. His approach is similar to my logic in the use of historical and factual data to analyze and interpret current events or questions.

He helps re-affirm in his most recent post what I analyzed in my previous post ; that past elections to show that this was not a landslide victory for Obama.

Update: An article by Stuart Rothenberg http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/11/is_2008_a_realigning_election.html Sphere: Related Content

The Historical significance of Obama: 2008

As a person who's interpretations ride on a historical compass, I was inclined to measure the lauded "Obama mandate" as a result of his victory. First I wanted to see how significant his Electoral Vote (EV) totals and margin of victory were in comparison to past elections. Second, I wanted to see how significant his Popular Vote total were in comparison to those same past elections. And finally, in a post to follow, I wanted to see the demographics to judge his constituency and mandate beneficiaries.

Before we get started, the source of all of this data is: Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

Let's start with the winning Presidential candidates EV as a % of the Total number of available EV. Since EV totals have varied throughout our history, I can't measure the total but rather the percent of the total to measure the scale victory.

Obama in 2008, won 365 of the 537 EV or 68%. Of the 55 elections that preceded 2008, lets analyze how many of the winners got more or less that 68% of the total available EV.

• 26 got less than 68%
• 1 got exactly 68%
• 28 got more than 68%

So in terms of capturing a percentage of the available EV, this was an average election. When we put it on a graph we see that this election is lackluster in regard to the victories in 1984, 1972, 1964, 1936, 1864, 1820, and 1804. In the past 20 years we had more competitive races. Excluding the rollercoaster from 1936 to 1984, this ironically trends more like the turn of the 20th century than in any other point. Coming off some tight victories (divided populous) we see a growing pattern from 1876 to 1932 with increasingly aligned population (Republicans won 9 of those 14 elections). So maybe this indicates a coming tide of Democratic control of the Executive, but let's examine further.

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgh6x7fv_0cqwbhcgj

Next I wanted to look at the Margin of Victory in EV as a % of the total available EV.

In 2008 Obama's Margin of Victory was 193 EV (365-192) which is 36% of the total 537 EV. Again let's compare that with the 55 elections preceding 2008:

• 25 got less than 36%
• 2 got exactly 36%
• 28 got more than 36%

More evidence that this was an average victory. Translate the margin of victory into alignment of the electorate behind a candidate, party, or ideas and historically the victory doesn't seem all that grand. When put on a graph, most of the results match the % of total numbers above due to the dominance of 2 parties. However, when you look at some of the blowout victories in history, they are winning by +80% of available EV. That's a unified country! So this analysis only re-enforces the first's conclusion that Obama's victory is substantial but not historic.

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgh6x7fv_2cj5x75jx

Now let's look at the Popular Vote. Note that the Popular Vote is only regarded from 1824 forward. Due to lack of accuracy and tracking prior to that election, the numbers of previous elections are generally discarded.

In 2008 Obama received 52.6% of the popular vote. Comparing the 46 elections from 1824 to 2004:

• 26 got less than 52.6%
• 0 got exactly 52.6%
• 20 got more than 52.6%

Once again, in mathematical context this is only a average victory and indicates a polarized electorate. Since 1988 the winner has not had more than 50% of the popular vote. Even in the blowout elections they barely broke 60%.

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dgh6x7fv_4ftthr3cq

So why is this considered such a big election win? My hypothesis:

1. We have had so many close election recently so, short-term memory is the cause
2. First election in a long time that didn't include a present or former President or Vice President
3. The majority of people feel that the country in on the wrong track, so there is a longing for unity and direction
4. The gains for the Dems in Congress.
5. The media/pundits' guy won!
6. The other historical significance; 1st Black President.

The more they overhype this victory, the more difficult it will be for Obama to meet the expectations. It will also make it easier for Conservative to re-brand the Republican party. From now on I will refer to it as the "New Republican Party". I suggest this tag is adopted by the GOP Leadership once the necessary changes take place because the Republican Party is a damaged brand.

The good news is that there is still a Conservative voter base to build upon. In my next post I'll analyze the Exit Poll data to figure out where Obama gained, who is constituency is, and where we need to target in this re-birth.

Signing off...JCB

Sphere: Related Content

President Obama!

Congratulations to President-elect Obama on his historic achievement. Aside from the obvious fact that he is now the first black President of the United States, Sen. Obama ran a campaign that was in a word, effective. He used technology, the momentum from the press, and an uncanny ability to sacrifice people for political expediency at the right times (e.g., Rev. Wright). Successfully blaming McCain for the "failed policies" of the Bush Administration was key to this entire campaign. In some ways, it's surprising to see no headlines stating "Bush Lost!" or something to that effect.

The political pendulum shifts from left to right, and this election is not unprecedented. President Clinton came to power in 1992 with a similar majority of Democrats in both houses. We weren't assigned our shovels then; rather, the Republicans swept control of Congress in the greatest revolution in American politics. We ushered in the era of Gingrich, the contract with America, and fiscal responsibility. We ran budget surpluses, and saw the biggest economic boom in decades.

You tend to learn a little more from defeat than from victory. While the Democrats can revel, quite justifiably, in their victory today and in the months to come, we Republicans can take hard look at what got us here. While the Democrats chose one of the most liberal Senators in their bunch to run, and win, the Presidency, we chose a moderate by most accounts. If Bush, or the GOP, has had any truly "failed" policies, it has been in trying to reach across the aisle. Attempting to gain good favor from the press and the Democrats, Republicans failed to act in accordance with our principles, to cut spending, and to win the arguments over limited government and greater responsibility and accountability.

Government works for us, not the other way around. That's a strong message that is not dead just yet. The true test of leadership is not in compelling people to act through the lethal force of passed legislation, but rather in convincing others that your arguments are right, just, and best for the country. As Conservatives we will not have the ability to pass laws for at least the next 2 years, so we must rely on the power of logic, and the courage of our convictions.

This Democratic victory does two major things. It gives us a chance for a rebirth as a Conservative party, and it allows us to finally absolve ourselves of blame for any of the shortcomings of the liberal ideology. Let's be perfectly clear about this. Republicans failed, not Conservatism. This batch did not have what it takes to make our arguments effectively to the American people. Sen. McCain is one of the most honorable men to have served our nation, and I'm glad to see him stick around the Senate for a while. Yet, we need a new batch of fresh, young, Conservatives with a flare for tradition! Defend life, defend America, and create a platform based on fiscal responsibility and self-sufficiency for all Americans. That's our simple charge going forward. 55 million Americans chose Sen. McCain as their President, and although that fell short of putting him in office, it speaks volumes about the health of our party. Florida voted for Obama, but they also voted for traditional family values. It's time to go back to our roots, summoning the spirit of Reagan, Lincoln, and Teddy Roosevelt, and find a new way forward so that this nation shall not perish from the earth. I respectfully disagree with my favorite radio host, Neal Boortz. He says that we are at a "tipping point" where over half of Americans, who don't pay taxes, will suddenly be the new majority. He brings up some solid points, and I highly suggest you read his "Nuze" column today. Still, our best hope is for a fresh, new batch of CONSERVATIVE Republicans in 2010 to lead the charge!

As a final note, I would like to say that Democrats have gotten what they (and the mainstream press) have asked for... THEY are firmly in power, and they can't blame Bush anymore. Let's see how it works for us.

--Joshua Brooks Sphere: Related Content

How did this happen?

For those asking themselves this morning, "How did this happen?" here is what the numbers say.

Despite what the Obama camp would like you to believe, for the most part the electoral demographics have NOT changed dramatically.

Some slight changes:

• Turn-out in aggregate was up
• Black turnout was up only a few percentage points.
• First time voter turn-out
• Young (-30)

As expected, Obama won the -30 and McCain the +55.

Remember the historical aspect of this election. This was Barack's election to lose.

• 8 years of a party in the White House
• President with low approval ratings
• Congressional control with low approval ratings
• Financial crisis which favors Democrats
• Competitive primary with HRC that energized and engaged the base
• A stratified GOP

The only thing working against him was his inexperience vs. large national security issues. His job was reassuring voters that he was competent and safe as Commander in Chief. Apparently, he did that.

Given all of this, it is amazing how well McCain actually did!

It was sad to see McCain walk off the stage last night. He is a true American. He has given more than most to the country he loves. The right man, the wrong time.

Today starts the revival of the conservative movement. The pendulum will swing back. In 1984 and 1994 the Dems were all but written off as a national party. The GOP will take some lumps and re-build. I'll be talking more in the future about our new leadership, the direction of conservatives, and the role of the opposition party.

Keep your head up!

Signing off...JCB

Sphere: Related Content

State of the Race: Final analysis and predications

Here we are, Election Day! One final look at the campaign and observation guide to tonight's reporting.

First, My view of the state of the race. There are Tier1 toss-ups (true toss-ups) and Tier2 toss-ups (leaning and hopeful pick-ups).
















Lets start with the Tier 2 states.
Leaning Blue:

• CO (9) - The historical GOP stronghold has recently been trending blue. This is the cornerstone of the Dem. Western Strategy in 2008. They held their convention in Denver and have invested heavily in Hispanic turnout.
• MN (10) - A historic DEM stronghold. Hasn't voted GOP since Nixon, but has been trending red recently. Bush narrowly lost MN in both 2000 and 2004. Hotly contested Senate and House races in key GOP districts along with very conservative and/or very liberal candidates in those races give McCain a shot with the higher turnout.
• PA (21) - A battleground state that has typically gone blue. BO is counting on high turnout in the black urban eastern areas around Philly. McCain is hoping that a combination of Murtha's mouth, Barack's coal comments, and the inspiring Barletta campaign will help turn this large state red.
• NH (4) - Always a wild-card. The "Live Free, or Die" state has a history of coming through for McCain when he needs it most. It was the catalyst of his primary comeback. There is a tough fought Senate campaign and McCain hopes that this anti-tax state hears his message on BO's tax policies.

Leaning Red:

• MO (11) - This historical bellwether state has been trending red lately but will be hotly contested once again. BO will rely on the DEM strongholds of St. Louis and KC for high turnout.
• IN (11) - This historically strong GOP state is a battleground for the first time since 1960. BO is counting on heavy bleed-over from IL into Gary and the Northern border to turn this state red. Southern IN is very conservative. McCain's biggest obstacle is the efficient campaigning of Senator Evan Bayh.
• NC (15) - Another historical GOP stronghold that is in contention this year. Many Northern transplants have turned this state more blue in the past 3-5 years. Companies have concentrated in the Research Triangle with is lower taxes and relocated many New England and Mid-Atlantic employees. Only MN has as many hotly contested races this year. The Senate race between Dole & Hagan will generate massive turnouts. McCain hopes to hold strong in the west and eastern military communities.
• FL (27) - The infamous state of recent lore. FL is a strong GOP state in state politics. In Federal elections the Miami DEMS, Jewish NY transplants, and colleges tend to balance the state. McCain looks to hold the panhandle, northern districts, heavy Cuban vote, and a surprising number of Jewish voters persuaded by Joe Leibs. The central part of the state is where the election will be decided.

On to the Tier1 (Real toss-up) states:

• NV (5) - No matter how you pronounce it, Nevada has been a toss-up in the past few elections. BO will hope for strong Hispanic turnout and heavy voter concentration from the Las Vegas area. McCain will hope to hold the rest of the state and capitalize on many of the Western transplants to the Vegas suburbs (fastest growing city in the U.S. the past 5 years) that have made the area more competitive.
• NM (5) - The quiet battleground. This state has had the closest margin of victory on average in the past 3 elections. It will be hotly contested. McCain hopes the White v. Heinrich contest will help. He faces a strong state favorite in Bill Richardson, who has certainly helped BO navigate this complex state.
• OH (20) - This is where the 2 candidates have fought the hardest. This is ground zero of the fist fighting. There are a few House races that may help McCain. But this is the state to watch. McCain hopes to hold the Cincinnati and Columbus strongholds. BO will look for strong turnout in Dayton and Cleveland. Watch the potential legal battles over voter registration fraud. The Secretary of State is DEM and has made some recent decisions that may be contested.
• VA (13) - This traditionally strong GOP state is the #1 target for the DEMs this year. BO has outspend McCain 4 to 1 in some markets. McCain will hope that BO Coal comments and social conservatives in the west will come out. BO is relying on the Eastern D.C. bleed-over voters to help turn this state blue. BO has been aided by some very savvy state DEMs (Kaine & Warner).

So now you know what I'll be watching in the state-by-state calls. A word of caution, ignore the MSM exit poll predictions. They have been skewed in the past and this year will be heavy BO. Mark my words, they will have to retract a called state (FL circa 2000).

My predictions:
McCain holds OH, IN, MO, NC, and FL. He picks up NM narrowly and upsets in PA due to high turnout in Western PA. He will be close in MN and NV. BO will easily win CO and VA.

Look for too-close-to-call on the following states late into the night:
PA, OH, VA, NC, and NM.

Look for post-election legal battles in these states if things are really tight:
NM & OH.

State with the tightest margin of victory:
NM

State most likely for the networks to call early have to recall:
PA

I leave you with a joke:
Barack Obama has proposed "Change". His supports are obsessed with the thought of "Change". Well if he gets elected, all we'll have left in our pockets is.... change!

Signing off...JCB

Update: Good to see McCain focusing on the states he needs to deliver my predicted results; "Before the day was over, McCain and his two charter planes had touched down in Florida, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Indiana, New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona." Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/03/AR2008110303465.html?hpid=topnews

Hitting Western PA: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_596682.html Sphere: Related Content

Election Eve: Gov./Senate/House races that will help GOP turnout for McCain

Tomorrow is Election Day. Polls have tightened.

Late breaking news may sway some of the Battleground voters:

1. Obama = Bankrupt the Coal industry comments could hurt in Ohio, Penn, and VA.
2. Palin = Cleared in Troopergate, helps with swing vote women in FL and the midwest

What helps McCain are the states where there are hotly contest Governor, Senate, and House races. As everyone talks about Dem voter turnout this year, watch these races help draw higher turnout of the conservative base. Some states where he will benefit:

1. New Hampshire = Sununu is in a hard fought race for his Senate seat
2. Minnesota = Coleman v. Franken (No Franken Way!) is one of the most expensive Senate races ever. Also Michele Bachman in a conservative House district could help McCain's numbers there significantly. Paulsen v. Madia (long held GOP stronghold)
3. Penn = Russell v. Murtha in Western PA, Barletta v. Kanjorski (heavy GOP territory)
4. NM = White v. Heinrich
5. NC = Kissell v. Hayes, Dole v. Hagan, and Perdue v. McCrory.
6. FL = Feeney v Kosmas, Rooney v. Mahoney (heavy GOP territory), Diaz-Balart v. Garcia in a heavy Cuban voting Miami suburb, Keller v. Grayson
7. OH = Stivers v. Kilroy, Chabot v. Driehaus
8. NV = Porter v. Titus (battleground counties for NV)

To quote the radio announcer from Game 6 of the greatest World Series ever, in which the MN Twins beat the ATL Braves on a Kirby Puckett Home Run; "We'll see ya tomorrow night!"

Sorry Dallas, I guess ATL got its payback in '98 against the Vikes.

Signing off...JCB

Sphere: Related Content

McCain: Surging to the end

McCain is fighting. His surge may be enough in some states to make a difference. In others it just won't be enough. Tomorrow will tell.

Could Minnesota turn RED!?! Being from MN, I'm happy to see it's close but I don't see McCain over taking Obama.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/03/could-mccain-win-minnesota/

A guide to watching election outcomes tomorrow night:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11022008/photos/news004a.jpg

State-by-state breakdown:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20081101/tpl-us-usa-politics-states-20b2d2f.html Sphere: Related Content

The little campaign that could...

While every pundit and MSM news outlet continues to write-off McCains' chances, he continues to chip away at BO's lead.

With a week left to go, it is amazing the tide of pessimistic reporting for McCain. Given that his gap in polls is within the margin of error and that he is closing the gap (even in polls that had him behind 10% last week), I think he is making a late surge and could win this election!! Some of the articles I've read today help solidify my optimism.

Rasmussen has him within 3%
Gallup has him within 2%
RCP average (greatly skewed by the +10% polls lately) has him within 5.9%

Dick Morris makes that case that the remaining undecideds will break for McCain
Boston Globe article: McCain has a real chance at PA

Watch the Catholic vote

Get excited people!! 7 days to go and the comeback kid is on the ride!!

Signing off...JCB Sphere: Related Content

State of the Race: McCain's limited opportunities

This is where we are at with 8 days to go.

McCain has to hold Ohio and Florida, which I think he has a good shot at doing. If he loses either, this could be an early night.

According to my map below, there are 36 EV up for grabs.

As Virginia goes, so will this election. If Barack wins Virgina, McCain will have to win the other 4 to tie at 269. If McCain wins VA, then he needs either of the 2 western states. Not impossible given his Western roots. Barack has put a lot of money into VA and CO (4 to 1 in some markets) and will probably turn CO blue. Dallas, get to work!!

NH is a wild card with McCain's history in the state. I think Barack's socialist heart will hurt him a lot in the state with the motto "Live Free or Die". Other wildcards are the congressional districts of NE and ME. McCain is running well in the one ME district that could get him 1 EV. This might make the difference.

Signing off...JCB

Sphere: Related Content

EC Average - Bradley Effect = Tie?!

Bradley Effect: A negative variance between poll numbers and actual voting for a minority candidate. Attributed to LA Mayor Tom Bradley who lost his bid for CA Governor in 1982 despite being ahead in most polls.

Most liberals would attribute this to racist whites, but that is hardly the whole story. My opinion is that guilt and apathy are the real forces at play. Guilt in that when you ask someone in a public setting (i.e. survey, interview) they psychologically avoid racial landmines. When in reality they may not favor that candidate for practical-issues related reasons. Obama will likely see a lot of this, people feeling like they have a moral/historical obligation to put the first minority in the Executive. Apathy can be attributed to the voting habits of many of Obama's core constituencies; youth, blacks, trendy liberals. Every election we hear about how the youth vote is expected to be strong, and they usually disappoint. The trendy liberals are those who support liberal causes in breath only. These are the people who are swayed in their vote based on Matt Damon's opinion.

Obama does have core constituencies that have higher turnouts; Hispanics & blue collar union members. But McCain trumps these with key groups that consistently have the highest voter turn-outs; elderly & those who attend some form of religious worship regularly.

So since even the liberal political analysts are predicting a +2-3% error in polls vs. voting based on race I figured I'd apply that to the current EC averages.

This first graphic is the EC Avg. map from RealClearPolitics from 10/2:

This next graphic is adjusted to give McCain a +3% in state-by-state averages:

The result is a 269-269 tie! So if the Bradley Effect holds true, this race is a lot closer than it may appear.

Remember this, people vote out of fear and love. Fear and then Love.

Signing off....JCB

Sphere: Related Content