Welcome to DCW
Upcoming Events9/26/16 - Debate #1
10/4/16 - VP Debate
10/9/16 - Debate #2
10/19/16 - Debate #3
11/8/16 - Election Day
Tag Cloud2008 Democratic National Convention 2012 Democratic National Convention 2012 Republican National Convention 2016 Democratic National Convention 2016 Election 2016 Republican National Convention Abortion Affirmative Action Affordable Care Act Antonin Scalia Ben Carson Bernie Sanders Bob McDonnell Canada Chris Christie civil rights Delegates Delegate Selection Donald Trump First Amendment Health Care Hillary Clinton Immigration Iowa Iowa Caucuses Iran Jeb Bush John Kasich John McCain Marco Rubio Martin O'Malley Missouri Nevada New Hampshire Paul Ryan Pennsylvania polling Puerto Rico redistricting Russia same-sex marriage Supreme Court Ted Cruz United Kingdom Voting Rights
DCW in the News
Clinton Sanders 2842 1865 56 not voting/abstained Trump Cruz 1537 569 1237 to win
Category Archives: Elections
As evening turns into night in the Eastern and Central time zones, the pace picks up. For whatever reason, 8:00 p.m. is a popular time for states in the Eastern time zone to close their polls as is 7:00 p.m. in the Central time zone. As discussed in part two, lines at the polls means that the networks typically only have enough results to call races if the races are not close. Most of the states that will be called by 8:00 p.m. are not the races that will decide the election. Because most of the polls will have been closed for two hours, there is a good chance that the Indiana senate race may be called by 8:00 p.m. There is some chance that Georgia (an at-risk state that Trump needs to win) or Virginia (an at-risk state that Clinton needs to win) will be called before 8:00 p.m. Sixteen states will close their polls at 8:00 p.m. as will the polls in part of several other states. While the results from the early states give some clues about the shape of the race, the shape of the race will become much clearer when the returns from these states start to come in.
8:00 p.m. (EST) — The remainder of the polls close in Florida. The polls close in Alabama, Connecticut, D.C., Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Tennessee. The polls close in the eastern part of Michigan, Kansas, South Dakota, and Texas. Several of these states should have quick calls for president, but several states are key states for the outcome of this election. (Assuming that none of the “close” states from early are called by 8:15 p.m., the projected electoral vote should be approximately 76 for Trump and 55 for Clinton.)
As with many other details of election law, each state gets to choose their voting hours on election day. Thus, unlike a place like the United Kingdom where all polls close at the same time and when results are announced is a matter of how long it takes to count the vote, there is a slow progression across the country as the different states close. A complicating factor is that some states are split down the middle by time zones. In most of the states with multiple time zones, the polls close based on the local time (i.e. the polls in the eastern part of the state close an hour earlier than the polls in the western part of the state) rather than all polls in the state closing simultaneously. Another complicating factor is that all states only require that you be in line to vote at the time that the polls close; so, in larger precincts, there can be a long line delaying the report of votes from that precinct. As noted in Part One, part of the projection process is looking at what precincts are still outstanding. In a close state, the long lines at urban precincts (which are likely to favor Democrats) can make it hard to figure how strong the Democratic vote in a state is for an extended period.
In terms of interest, not every state is the same. A lot of states and districts are considered “safe” for President or Senate or Governor or U.S. Representative. Of course, if something surprising happens in those areas, it could be a sign of a wave developing, but most of the attention will be focused on the “battleground” areas that will decide a close election. What follows in the rest of this part and the rest of this series is a review in chronological order of closing time (using Eastern Standard Time) at what to look for as the evening progresses.
After over one year of hate-filled rants from Donald Trump, the fiasco that was the Republican convention in Cleveland, the on-going scandals involving Donald Trump, Trump’s refusal to disclose his taxes, three presidential debates, and recent Republican threats to throw a tantrum for the next two to four years if they don’t win, there is little more that can be said about why the only choice in this election is to vote for the Democratic ticket. The continued loss of rationality and respect for facts in the Republican Party is a long-term problem that needs to be fixed because democracy requires, at least, two viable alternatives to work. But this year, the choice is clear. Even if you think that a Democratic candidate for a particular office is less than perfect, those candidates are still way better than what the Republican Party is offering. While there is still more to be done over the next three days to get every Democratic voter to the polls, Tuesday night is now looming ever closer. So, for the next several days, some thoughts about what to look for on Tuesday night. While the remaining posts in this series will take a chronological look at Tuesday night, this post is more about the basics and the mechanics.
For the media, there are two main tools for calling the election. While these tools have changed slightly over time, the fundamentals have basically stayed the same. The first tool is the “exit” poll. The second tool is the unofficial vote count.
For the past four months, Donald Trump has been leading chants of lock her up. Who knew that the her was Chris Christie’s deputy chief of staff. Earlier today, a federal jury found that Christie’s deputy chief of staff and his hand picked appointee to the New York Port Authority were found guilty of violating multiple federal laws in connecting with shutting down I-95 near Fort Lee, New Jersey. Throughout the trial, the federal prosecutor’s laid out a convincing case that Chris Christie was aware of and approved of the decision to shut down I-95. Of course, Chris Christie is also the person in charge of Donald Trump’s transition team if the country goes insane on Tuesday. In what universe can anybody who knows anything about what is happening in this country think that Donald Trump — he of the multiple conflicts of interests who has never followed the rules in his life — and Chris Christie can be trusted to clean up corruption in government. That’s putting the fox in charge of the hen house.
While it is probably too late to hope for one more piece of investigative journalism into the charade that is Donald Trump before the election, I can’t wait until some journalist after the election does a thorough analysis of Trump’s FEC reports. Between designating Trump Organization employees to do work on campaign, assigning vacant Trump Organization office space to house the campaign, and holding multiple campaign events (doubling as free advertisement for the Trump Organization) at Trump Organization holdings, the FEC reports have shown and will continue to show a large amount of expenditures going to the Trump Organization. How much (particular as a percentage of the amount that Trump “contributed” to his campaign) of the total campaign funds ended back in Trump’s pocket will be interesting to see. Who knew that a business could make a profit running for president?
The shame with ninety-six hours or so left in the campaign is how much Trump’s blather and blatant falsehoods have sucked the air out of the room for the issues that deserve serious debate. “Repeal and replace” without any details about the replace is not a solution to what is wrong with out health care system. Building a wall and deporting everyone is not a realistic plan for dealing with immigration. Trickle down economics is not a program to reinvigorate the middle class. Banning all Muslims is not a solution for terrorism. This country deserved a real campaign. Instead, we are focused on a person who is unfit to be President as a holding place for folks who are tired of gridlock in Washington but do not understand why (hint it’s the party of no) it exists.
Hello from Chester County, Pennsylvania. We’ve been in the news a lot lately. Back in 2008, while working a full time job and putting in a good 30 hours a week on the Obama campaign, I understood our importance…and I said, often and with much conviction, “To win the presidency, McCain needs to win Pennsylvania. To do so, he needs to win the collar counties, especially Chester County. To win Chester County, he needs to win Tredyffrin, and he can’t do that without W-5. To do that, he needs to get past ME, and the little blonde girl says no. NO. HELL NO.”
In eight years, the demographics of the county have changed. The country has changed. But until last night, I didn’t realize how much **I** had changed. I’ve been canvassing for over 50 years, since I was a little kid. I’ve been working elections my whole life. Carried a lit basket for my uncle the candidate at the age of 3. I’ve talked, I’ve persuaded. I’ve won and I’ve failed. And I was never viscerally angry. Until yesterday.
The man in question embodied all that I look down on: someone who believes rumours but not facts. The folks who, when presented with historical proof, deny that those things happened. And I’m talking BIG THINGS, like a top tax rate of 90% under Eisenhower. Like the idea that people in the United States (not all, but some) knew about the camps in Germany in the ’30’s and tried to get America involved earlier. Like the fact that innocent black men are killed by police. You get the idea. So. Last night this guy is explaining that Hillary is a crook. And I asked what crime she was guilty of…and he couldn’t name one. I talked about Trump’s demagoguery, and ginning up the crowds, and he hadn’t seen it. His issues are income inequality and the need to undertake more domestic manufacturing, and he explained that Bernie Sanders was never for those things.
By the time that this posts, there will be one week to go until the end of voting. For a variety of reasons, the national campaign has been even more negative than is normal (although nowhere near the most negative presidential campaign in US history, the campaigns of the 1800s were routinely negative with lots of slanderous accusations). More importantly, the daily release of a new piece of negative information about the presidential candidates have sucked up a lot of the oxygen from state and local races.
While the news media focuses on the national race for president, the reality is that even, for president, there is not a national election. The race for president is actually 51 local races (one in each state and in the District of Columbia). Senate control will be decided by 34 local elections, and control of the House will be decided by 435 local races. It’s impossible for anyone person to know the lay of the land in all of the races (one reason why polling exists), but each of us have some idea of what is happening where we live. Here is what things are looking like in Missouri and Kansas.
In setting up the federal judiciary, the Framers wanted to separate the judiciary from politics to a certain degree. By giving judges and justices an unlimited term, judges would be free from having to decide cases on what is currently popular. Not that the courts would be absolutely immune from politics, but the influence of politics on the courts would be that elections to the “political” branches would be in the choice of new judges and justices to fill vacancies. The courts would be “conservative” in the sense of reflecting the values of the time at which judges or justices were appointed with a gradual change reflecting changes in those values over time through the appointment of new judges and justices. (On the Supreme Court, nine of seventeen Chief Justices served more than a decade, and thirteen of seventeen served more than six years. Of the Associate Justices sixty-eight of one hundred have served more than ten years, and another thirteen have served more than six years.)
The fact that federal judges do not have to stand for election does not mean that judges are not political or aware of politics. To ask that judges not view close legal issues through a certain political philosophy and that judges not be aware of the potential impact of decisions on elections is asking too much. However, the Supreme Court wants the public to perceive that they are above politics and would prefer that the Supreme Court rank somewhat low on the list of important issues in any election. This desire to “lay low” has been reflected in pushing off the arguments on the most controversial cases until after the election (or even later for cases that might currently reflect a 4-4 split). Even in terms of which cases are being granted for review later this year, the Supreme Court was avoiding cases that were likely to generate headlines. That changed yesterday when the Supreme Court issued its order reflecting which cases it had just accepted for full review. While none of the cases on the list are surprises in terms of the Supreme Court granting review, two of the cases are highly controversial — one dealing with transgender rights and the other with sex offenders and the First Amendment — and most expected the Supreme Court to push a decision on reviewing those two cases until after the election, particularly with the election controlling who gets to fill the current vacancy on the Supreme Court.
Today’s news included an “off-the-record” admission from inside the Trump campaign that they are trying to suppress the vote. This admission is not news for many Democrats. It is an open secret in this country that low turnout usually favors Republicans, while higher turnout tends to favor Democrats. In 2016, voter suppression takes three forms.
First, voter suppression can be built into the election system itself. For example, unlike many democracies, the U.S. holds elections on a weekday (not just the general election, but also, in most states, primaries and municipal and special elections). In most, if not all states, election days are not a holiday. That makes it harder for folks to vote. Additionally, there are hurdles to registering to vote (fewer today than in the past). In particular, most states cut off registration weeks in advance of the election and you have to register every time that you move to a new county.
We’re 17 days out from the election, and while the main event seems like a foregone conclusion, the Senate is pretty much a nail-biter. Matt will have the Senate race rankings up tonight and we’ll see the specifics, but first, a little context, and a race that no one is looking at, which may actually delay knowing who controls the Senate until 10 December.
Let’s play. We need a net of 4 seats to take back the Senate, assuming that Secretary Clinton wins the general, and thus Tim Kaine would be the tie-breaker. Based on current projections, we’ll pick up Indiana, Wisconsin and Illinois. Will we hold Nevada? Maybe. If we do we need one more, if not, we need two. The likeliest options should be Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. Should be. Could be. The data indicate that if Secretary Clinton wins by 7 points in Pennsylvania and 6 points in New Hampshire, her coattails will be enough. I have been following New Hampshire from a distance and it appears very close. Ayotte is constantly tied to Trump in ads. For some reason, a lot of politicians don’t seem to get that everyone has a phone, and thus video capabilities, and when you call Donald Trump “a role model” that’s going to make the ads even if you disavow some of his actions. A lot will depend on how much money is poured into the ads in the next couple weeks. The polls have been tied, and just yesterday WMUR said that Hassan is 8 points ahead: is it an outlier or has the die been cast?
Pennsylvania is so tight there’s no daylight in the polls. Brooklyn knows this and that’s why both Clinton and Kaine will be in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia today. Should be noted that Secretary Clinton, Chelsea Clinton, Senator Kaine, President and Mrs. Obama, Vice President Biden and even Bubba the Big Dog have all been here. Upcoming in the next two weeks, Anne Holton (Senator Kaine’s wife), Jill Biden, Jon Bon Jovi and Katy Perry. It seems as though the street closure information is an almost daily occurrence on the traffic reports.
When Justice Antonin Scalia died, Senate Republicans announced that they would not hold hearings because of their belief — not supported by any precedent — that a lame duck president should not get to fill a vacancy during his last year in office. Earlier this week, in a classic gaffe (i.e. he mistakenly told the truth), Senator John McCain announced that Senate Republicans intend to block any nominee that President Hillary Clinton might put forward. While Senator McCain has attempted to walk back this statement, he revealed what many of us have known to be true all along — the Republicans do not have any problem with any specific nominee that President Obama has or that President Clinton might put forward; there problem is with losing the majority on the Supreme Court.
If the Republicans can keep their current Senate majority, the process of blocking all nominees is simple — although with potential political consequences. They simply vote down any nominee. Their problem is if, as current polls suggest, the Democrats regain the Senate majority for the next two years. If that happens, we are potentially looking at the next conflict over the filibuster.