The new Primary Thread

[Impaler[WrG]]

The results that the media reported were state delegates (there are about 10,000 of them), where Clinton has a 6% edge. And the state delegates are grouped in such a way to give Obama a 13-12 edge in national delegates. But we have no idea what the popular vote total is (though I'd bet on a narrow Clinton victory).

Thats correct, theirs no direct correlation between state delegates and popular vote totals, the turn out for the Democrats was said to be in excess of 110,000 which is an 11:1 ratio and an order of magnitude greater then any previous Nevada Caucus. As delegates are assigned to each Caucusing location before hand on expected voter turn out and population in those areas, thus without actual cumulative vote counts from Caucusing locations we can't say who won the popular vote. Nor can we predict it from Exit Polling as the Exit polls completely fail to show Obama's wins through out Rural Nevada ware he obviously did won, they also can't tell us ware Edwards supporters went when he wasn't viable.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Ramo
McCain is looking better after winning SC, but he still has a problem with Republicans; in all five states thus far, he has consistently lost them. He's going to get hurt in upcoming states with closed primaries. After blowing everyone out in NV, and racking up delegates in MI and WY, Romney should be considered the Republican frontrunner. But the media hates Romney and loves McCain, so he's screwed.

Romney IS the GOP frontrunner. He has twice as many delegates as McCain, has won one more state than McCain, and is favored by both social and fiscal conservatives, whereas McCain is lambasted as a GOP heretic.

That being said, the media does seem like they want to do a McCain coronation. They almost come out and say they think he'll win the nomination, and then stick a little statement like "But this crazy race is still WIDE open" at the end of it all to try and qualify it. I have included an example below.

[Sarcasm detectors activated]

"With his victory in the state of South Carolina (the most important state in the Union even though it tried to leave it twice), John McCain is to be elected as America's long-awaited Messiah and yes, as their new God. Never mind that some other schlub won a big state out west somewhere, John McCain has already won everything. It will be hard for anyone else to defeat his amazingly fantastic momentum. All hail God-Emperor McCain Augustus! But this crazy race is still WIDE open!"

[Sarcasm detectors deactivated]

Gotta love the media. So with all of that said and done, Romney is the GOP frontrunner, but this crazy race is still WIDE open.

[Impaler[WrG]]

I think its more the National Polling numbers which put McCain ahead right now (his lead is exploding in national polls). Romney's victories have only been in places ware he had massive advantages (native son, Mormon voters etc). A loss in Florida now would not be sufficient to derail McCain before Super Tuesday ware he is only candidate with a realistic chance of winning decisively, others can at best tie him and keep the race going longer.

[Dinner]

In the national polls McCain is the only Republican to beat Obama and only narrowly loses to Clinton.

[chequita guevara]

Has there been any discussion here of the voting irregularities in New Hampshire? I've been hearing that in precincts where electronic machines were used, the exit polls showed disparities, but where paper ballots were not used, they match up.

[snoopy369]

Are exit polls considered reliable enough to be able to identify irregularities?

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Are exit polls considered reliable enough to be able to identify irregularities?

What can identify irregularities? (of electronic machines?)

JM

[snoopy369]

I'm not suggesting that anything can, just that using a somewhat unreliable element (remember 2000?) to identify irregularities may just be identifying irregularities in the exit polls. A lot of it comes down to a) other variables or b) how close/far off are things, but all in all I don't tend to believe in the paranoid fantasies of some, so I'm not likely to believe that there is any sort of organized attempt to subvert the voting process without an awful lot of evidence...

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Oerdin
In the national polls McCain is the only Republican to beat Obama and only narrowly loses to Clinton.

Bold prediction time: McCain's actually in trouble. He's lost both contests in his home region (to a flip-flopping New Englander, of all people) --and, as Ramo points out, he has yet to be the Republican candidate for whom most Republicans cast their votes. In NH, the open primary worked in his favor, giving him the votes of independents who used to be GOP members -- back before it became the party of big government, fiscal irresponsibility, and unilateral military adventurism. In South Carolina, it looks like the state's unusual concentration of veterans put him over the top -- a trick that could work for him again in Virginia on Feb 12, but first he has to get through...

Super Tuesday -- and it's hard to see how he's going to do much more than keep treading water. He's in a statistical dead heat with Giuliani in California, but Giuliani's better-financed and McCain's independent streak is anathema to CA rank-and-file Republicans (though CA does have an open primary, iirc). Aside from that, looking at it regionally, Giuliani and Romney seem poised to divvy up the Northeast on Feb 5, and Huckabee looks strong in the 3 or 4 southern states in the mix; that leaves McCain the West (where he has yet to win, and which at any rate consists of big, empty, relatively delegateless states) and the upper midwest, where he could do well (Minnesota has an open primary and a big independent streak, while Illinois' GOP is in shambles).

It honestly wouldn't surprise me if he came out of Super Tuesday running fourth in the delegate count, down from his third-place showing at the moment.

(On the other hand, it wouldn't surprise me if Giuliani's decision to take a pass on the early primaries proves disasterous and costs him everything but New York and New Jersey. I know nothing about what kind of shape Giuliani's campaign's in.)

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Are exit polls considered reliable enough to be able to identify irregularities?

They are considered exceedingly accurate. The only time they are off is when there are irregularities. Exit polls are always private. Even the pollsters don't know who answered what.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I'm not suggesting that anything can, just that using a somewhat unreliable element (remember 2000?) to identify irregularities may just be identifying irregularities in the exit polls. A lot of it comes down to a) other variables or b) how close/far off are things, but all in all I don't tend to believe in the paranoid fantasies of some, so I'm not likely to believe that there is any sort of organized attempt to subvert the voting process without an awful lot of evidence...

Most folks don't believe in organized attempts to subvert the voting process even when there's mountains of evidence. The Florida 2000 election was so bad it should have been thrown out. Choicepoint, the company the Florida illegally hired to vet their lists admitted under oath to a Congressional inquiry to improperly adding more than 90,000 names to the ineligible list, and that they were required to do so by the guildines given to them by Florida. Florida required an 80% match to get tossed from the rolls, so if John Smithe was a felon, and your name was John Smith, you got tossed. The majority of the people who lost their right to vote were Black.

I was very skeptical of the vote fraud claims in Ohio, but I have recently been convinced. 125 voting machines were removed from Urban and black districts, while not one suburban white district had a machine removed. Not that that would have even begun to make up for the extreme lack of machines overall. What I don't know is whether the fraud changed the results in Ohio in 2004.

Anyway, what is being claims is that in precincts where electronic ballot counters were used in New Hampshire, Clinton tended to win in numbers not reflected in exit polling data, while in areas that were counted by hand, the numbers matched the exit polling data. I'll see if I can find some sources for this. Ron Paul also apparently lost a lot of votes.

[chequita guevara]

http://www.bostonnow.com/blogs/boston911truthorg/2008/01/09/major-allegations-of-vote-fraud-in-new-hampshire

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/01/new-hampshire-t.html

http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=681

this one seems a little nutty

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

[Alexander I]

Florida's going to be close on the 29th, and should pick the GOP frontrunner, as it's winner-take-all.

Here's the latest RCP averages.

McCain 24.5
Romney 23.5
Giuliani 18.8
Huckabee 15.5
Paul 4.3
(Thompson) 5.7

It's down to the wire between McCain and Romney, and one or the other will likely emerge the frontrunner after Florida. Giuliani is in some serious trouble, since he was relying on Florida alone to ignite his otherwise lackluster campaign. Huckabee is losing some serious steam, though it's not time to write him off just yet.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/fl/florida_republican_primary-260.html

[Dinner]

Thomas is out so it is no wonder he's polling poorly. Giuliani is dead if he doesn't win Florida and he won't.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

But he won't pull out before Super Tuesday, I'm guessing, which still gives him a shot at NY and NJ.

Still, I'm feeling pretty sheepish aboutt my "McCain's in trouble" statement a few posts back