Our registration surge isn't worth 3%, or anywhere close

[Awsi Dooger]

My ongoing frustration on DU are the claims a poll deficit does not matter because our new voter drives are easily worth 3% or greater, that we'll get 75% of the new voters, that Dems are registering millions of new voters in swing states and lapping the GOP, etc., etc...

It's ignorant bullshit, plain and simple. We are setting ourselves up for a significant letdown. Kerry needs to win this election on preference, not a hidden bailout corps. The GOP may not match our recent pace, but they have been registering voters in numbers often above our own since 2000. That well publicized report of a 250% Democratic increase compared to 25% Republican is being quoted as if it were a nationwide trump card, and not what it was -- a comparison of isolated Dem strongholds and Rep strongholds in Ohio during comparable periods of 2000 and 2004, namely January until October.

Let's look at the critical state of Florida as an example. There will be more than 6 million votes cast in Florida this cycle. Three percent would be 180,000 of 6 million. Does anyone seriously believe we will have gained 180,000 more registered and actual voters in Florida than the GOP? How about 60,000, which would be 1%? If so, read on, this article from the Miami Herald on Monday. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/9829332.htm Focus specifically on the final paragraph I pasted:

"Democrats in Florida still outpace Republicans, with the Democratic groups touting success in helping to register ''tens of thousands'' of new voters. But Rove, in an interview last week, brushed off suggestions that the patchwork approach -- the independent Democratic groups are legally prohibited from working with the campaign of Sen. John Kerry -- could compete with the GOP machine.

"Republicans, Rove said, began seriously working on voter registration efforts following the 2000 election.

''We're not getting our clock cleaned, it's a fight we've been fighting for three years,'' he said, contending that since 2000, Republicans have registered thousands more voters in Florida than Democrats have.

"Statistics from the Florida secretary of state's website suggest Rove is right: Since 2000, Republicans have added 270,192 voters to the rolls, as of August. Democrats added 264,762 in the same time."

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ISUGRADIA]

7. Let's calm down a bit

I'd like to see some hard numbers quoted too to back up claims that there are millions of new registered voters. Yeah, there have been a lot of people getting registered, but this is how it is every four years.

I'd be more comfortable if people could show actual state numbers showing phenominal growth. I worked in an election office and it it was not uncommon to see tons of new registrations from people moving within a city, the county or in state alone. I'm not discounting the fact that there very may be millions of new ADDITIONAL registered voters nationwide but I'd like to see the numbers showing this on a statewide basis somewhere.

Don't flippantly discount someone's questions without looking at the big picture.

[demokatgurrl]

52. One thing in the post that I don't doubt a BIT

is that the Repukes have been working on registration and recruiting since 2000. We Democrats always get caught with our pants down, in more ways than one. They are regimented, organized, unified, almost clones but they get the job done.

[Barney Rocks]

2. yes. This is very important

to be aware of. Also, the republicans really perfected their "get out the vote" technique in 2002. It is going to be even more effective this year. I am not sure if I trust the polls--but if the Republicans are up by a percent or 2 going into the election, we are going to have a very hard time of it.

Their registration is roughly equal to ours (when we look at the whole picture) and they have really perfected their get out the vote method--whereas we will be relying on first time or non-traditional voters who are notoriously difficult to get to turn out to the polls. Our best hope is that we keep winning the debates and that our momentum takes us into a good lead--one that is too large for the Republicans to overcome on election day.

[Awsi Dooger]

35. Excellent point regarding GOTV

By all accounts, Rove and Co. genuinely expcted to win comfortably on election eve 2000. They were stunned at our GOTV advantage when evaluating that election and immediately made adjustments of their own, first testing them in the 2001 governor's races then significant advances that paid off in 2002.

I completely agree with your 2 point rule. In 2000 we could estimate a 2 point poll deficit for Gore was illegitimate and could be wiped out with GOTV and slight flaws in the polls, underplaying Dem strength. This year I'm not comfortable dismissing anything greater than 1 to 1.5 points on election eve, especially the most reliable polls.

[HFishbine]

56. "Their registration is roughly equal to ours"

Link? Source? Ass smoke?

[Barney Rocks]

62. Sorry--I have read it several times.

I don't have a link. I don't even know if I can believe it or not--but I have heard it--and I believe that it is good to accept the very worst scenario. Because that way we will not be overconfident about our get out the vote effort.

I should add that just applies to new registrations in this year (not overall party affiliation--where we beat the Republicans handily).

[HFishbine]

68. Okay

Another "I read it somewhere but I don't have a source" assertion. I get where you're coming from.

Do I smell smoke?

[Barney Rocks]

89. only if your house is on fire.

Sometimes a person remembers reading something, but can't remember where. I read a lot of things and I do not have a photographic memory. I apologize for that--but it is not a valid cause to be mean to me.

[HFishbine]

95. You're right

There's no need to be mean. I apologize. However, when you make assertions that go against substantiated facts (such as Republican registrations are about equal to Dems) and don't provide anything other than "I remember reading something," your assertions are suspect.

[Barney Rocks]

96. I will accept your apology in

the spirit in which it seems intended.

What I mentioned is not necessarily "my assertation" it is just something that I have read. Like I always say, just because you see it in the paper does not mean that it is true. However, I do like to look at the most difficult scenario possible--which just means we need to focus on getting out our vote. I hope that we agree on that. I am sure that we agree on more things than we disagree on.

[LittleClarkie]

86. I took the day of the election off

And I will be going to a GOTV meeting on the 16th to learn how I can help on that day. There is alot of emphasis on GOTV here in Milwaukee.

[sandnsea]

3. It's also turnout

In Oregon, in 2000 there were 765,000 Dems and less than 700,000 Pubs registered. No way that election should have been as close as it was. It's also turnout. Registration is up 4%, I don't have recent numbers. So we have the votes anyway, if we just get our voters out in the same ratio as Pubs, plus the newly registered voters.

In Florida, there were 3.8 million registered Dems in 2000 and 3.4 million pubs, and 1.3 no party affiliation. In the August primaries it was 4 million Dems, 3.7 million pubs and 1.7 no party. So it's all about turnout, it always is. I hope Democrats really get a hold of that.

[sonicx]

4. 3 percent is obviously too high

don't take it seriously. :)

Also, the race in real life is pretty much tied and has been for a while (fuck gallup, newsweek, and rest). The republican stuffed polls gave the sense that Kerry was down big - he never was. Kerry probably knew this because he does his own polls.

None of it matters tho, becuase Kerry and the liberal groups that support him aren't going to let up either way.

edit: One more thing. Please keep in mind that a poll deficit or surplus of 3% basically means a tie. Also, depending on what poll you look at, there are usually about 5 or 6% undecided. Kerry will get about 2/3s of that. (Ones with very low undecideds really push people to lean.)

[Awsi Dooger]

28. Yeah, just that I work with numbers and get frustrated when they're abused

I agree the race is tied and has never been outside 3-4 points in either direction all year. Both sides clutch a 44-45% base, Nader maybe 1.5% and around 10% to grapple for. Therefore, the absurd 8 point deficit would require a miraculous 9-1 stranglehold of the undecideds.

sonicx, I generally concur with your assessment of the 2/3 to Kerry break of the undecideds. Most of my computer projections have it somewhat lower, around 62%, depending on Bush's approval rating on election eve. Women are always a majority of the undecideds and they will favor Kerry. The very late, voting booth undecideds tend to overemphasize personality and likeability in their choice. Until last Thursday I was extremely worried they would go even or break to Bush, but these debates should really help Kerry in how he's viewed personally.

[Hamlette]

54. I don't think Nader will get 1.5%

in 2000 he was polling between 4 and 6% and only got 1.5%

The polls are wrong. In 2000 Gallup had Bush up by 9% (or was it 13?) one week before the election.

I have never lived through an election where people were more riled...on our side. Maybe they are on the GOP side too but I can't help but think they are demoralized by Bush and it will be harder for some of them to go to the polls. I think Dems are less likely to sit this one out.

[dfdemar]

73. Don't get your hopes up yet

Remember how much the Republicans hated Clinton? In 1996 and 1998 the Reps were banking on right wing hate of Clinton to give them a victory at the White House and the Legislature. They were sorely disappointed.

[Hamlette]

80. true BUT

Clinton's approval rating was way better than Bush's.

Anyone have the numbers? For 1996?

[IIgnoreNobody]

5. What actions do you suggest to help win the election for Kerry?

and other Dems?

Just wondering.

[Awsi Dooger]

21. Excellent question

Every four years I host debate watching parties, including 19 people at my home last Thursday, mostly apolotical. The men are invariably stubborn and inflexable and Republican, as per stereotype.

Therefore I always quiz the women much more than the men. Last Thursday the women were extremely impressed by Kerry and amazed he was so much different than they expected or had been portrayed. I specifically asked them if he needed commercials with more segments of Kerry speaking alone, covering hs background and proposals. All eight said yes, even the one woman who is completely pro-Bush.

My general belief is we have overlearned the so-called Willie Horton lesson from '88, desperately responding to every criticism instead of formulating the debate in our own terms. You don't win wars while on the defensive or retreat, without vastly superior weaponry. Opposing an incumbent with every rose garden advantage and fear as an ally does not qualify as a position of vastly superior weaponry, regardless of the obvious caliber gap between the two men.

[Machiavelli05]

6. its over

youre right. we're doomed. In fact, we're so doomed its probably pointless to even show up on election day...
Just take the day off, play video games and watch porn instead.

[Barad Simith]

12. There will be plenty of time for voting AND video games AND porn

Just keep your priorities straight, and do them in that order.

[Awsi Dooger]

19. Doomed? I'm pointing out our pillow is a mirage

Which it is.

In 2002, I received similar grief on DU prior to the midterms when I stressed that virtually every major senate race was on GOP turf, states that trend several points Republican to dozens of points Republican, and therefore the polls were inevitably too favorable to Democrats in those states. I have studied poll numbers and voting trends relentlessly since '96, dozens of Excel spreadsheets. Results drift toward the partisan bent of the state, in comparison to what the final polls indicate.

Our registration advantage is obscenely overstated on DU. That is pure fact.

[On the Road]

41. Thank You fot That Insight, Awsie

Results drift toward the partisan bent of the state, in comparison to what the final polls indicate.

I had never framed it that way, but it jibes perfectly with my recollection of past results.

[Machiavelli05]

81. The senate races in 2002

were closer than many of the states were in 2000 pres, Dems could have won many of those - had Bush not been so popular. (Note: Bush is not so popular now)

[bush equals idiot]

94. Craig Crawford on CNBC, on Countdown.

Last night he said he was astounded at the number of new registered voters in Florida. He said there were about a MILLION.

Do you think the majority of those are going for Bush? Please.

[WI_DEM]

83. where does the original poster say anything about us being doomed?

It was a serious post which raised a good question.

[Birthmark]

8. Tee-hee.

So, the inference appears to be that those who registered Republican in 2000-2003 are just as likely to vote as those that are registering in 2004 to toss Bush out on his ass? Good luck with that. :bounce:

[Awsi Dooger]

18. Between dismissive chuckles, here's a fact for you to consider

Republicans vote Republican in greater percentage than Democrats vote Democratic, particularly for president. It's usually 4-5 points greater loyaslty and that doesn't even count the DINO states. Therefore, a 1-1 ratio in newly registered voters is likely to favor them, not us, regardless of when they registered.

[sonicx]

22. yes and

America has more democrats. I doubt the dem/repuke new voter reg. ratio is one to one, at least not in swing states.

no, i don't think it's 2 to 1 either. :)

The biggest problem with democrats is that, as you said, many vote repuke and also we don't turn out as high percentage wise (number wise we do).

I think we'll be doing alot better with turnout this year with the Democratic Party, side liberal 527s, and other groups(liberal and left-leaning 'non-partisan') spending a lot on that.

the DINOs and shrub-supporting dems will be interesting to see this year. I hope Kerry gets about 85-86% dem support. Gore did that much. And I hope we win independents by a little (Gore lost this). That should give us the popular vote. no idea about EC (right now we are behind in that).

[Awsi Dooger]

25. Thank you, very astute post

I'm not denying or downplaying our registration frenzy at all, merely the net advantage, which is heralded in Monty Python terms on DU. Many times I have mentioned the impressive all-day registration drives I've seen outside Las Vegas grocery and department stores.

Earlier today on DU I estimated our edge would be 55/45 among new registers who would actually vote. I hope I'm low, but my Excel spreadsheets are pretty good, and this trusty Mac threatens to blow up whenever I try to make it 60/40.

[Birthmark]

43. Again, I say, tee-hee.

First, I'd need evidence that the ratio is actually 1:1. That's not what I'm reading. Second, I still need to know why I should assume that someone who registered three years ago is just as likely to vote as someone who registered for the purpose of voting in *this* election. Until you can answer those two questions, I shall indeed be dismissive. Sorry. I'm not a hand-wringer at heart. :)

[indyjones1938]

51. Two facts

1) Republicans are statistically more likely to actually go the polls on Election Day than Dems. Usually, those old guys who proudly trump the fact that they've voted in every election since Ike or FDR are Republicans. Add to this the fact that two swing states (PA and FL) have extremely high senior citizen populations.

2) Anecdotal evidence on this site and elsewhere suggests that a good portion of "new registrants" probably won't make it to the polls on Nov. 2nd. Just because someone stops at a voter registration booth outside their grocery store and takes 2 minutes to fill out the forms doesn't mean they'll take the time and effort to go to the polls on November 2nd. The most reliable voters are senior citizens, who registered to vote 50 years ago when Ike was president and the Republican Party wasn't full of neocons and fascists as is the case today.

In terms of net advantage of new registered voters, Dems probably hold a very slim majority. Whether that will translate to showing up at the polls remains to be seen.

And finally, never underestimate the laziness and apathy of the Murrican sheeple.

[HFishbine]

60. "Republicans are statistically more likely to actually go the polls"

Link? Source? Ass smoke?

[indyjones1938]

66. What the hell?

It's commonly accepted knowledge. No link necessary. Get your head out of your ass and go read up on election statistics.

Republicans, statistically, are more likely to actually go to the polls than Democrats. This is why the Democratic registration advtantage nationally has been negated in past elections.

In fact Chris Matthews was just discussing this yesterday with Katie Couric. Republicans are more reliable voters. Therefore, the higher the turnout on November 2nd, the better it is for Kerry.

[HFishbine]

67. "go read up on election statistics."

Sine you're indicating they are "out there," perhaps you can provide a link that supports your, so far, unsubstantiated assertion that Republicans "are more likely to actually go to the polls than Democrats." I'm looking for a hyperlink, not a colonoscope.

[Birthmark]

63. Here's another question for you.

When has there been a worse President? With all the people out of work, they'll be plenty of time to make it to the polls. Stop worrying. Kerry 55-43 over Bush. :)

[Timefortruth]

79. It is in the article quoted above:

"Statistics from the Florida secretary of state's website suggest Rove is right: Since 2000, Republicans have added 270,192 voters to the rolls, as of August. Democrats added 264,762 in the same time."

[saracat]

9. well. I can't quote the numbers, but I do know the media has been

reporting that this is the largest voter registration in twenty one years! One county in my state Arizona, which leans Dem(the county) Pima, added 250,000 voters! I find it hard to believe that they are mostly repug. But there are repugs registering too, no doubt about it. The main thing is wether they vote. You can register till the cows come home but getting them to vote is another matter. that is why we are doing so much VBM chasing.Let us pray it works.With VBM ,they have no excuse not to vote!

[ISUGRADIA]

11. Pima County 250k: This is why I wonder where the press gets their numbers!

From the secretarty of state's webpage in AZ:

2002 Primary Registration Pima:

Dem 149,000 41%

Rep 129,000 36%

Lib and Other 82,000 23%

TOTAL 360,000

PIMA COUNTY CLERK latest update their webpage:

Dem 172,000 40%

Rep 142,000 33%

Lib and Other 116,000 27%

TOTAL 430,000

So 70,000 increase according to my numbers. Clerk's page says it is updated weekly but no date on these numbers.

If the 250,000 is over four years, the spurt has not been recently. Plus is this amount based on population growth rather than new people who had never been registered being brought into the process? I do npt expect answers but just wanted to demonstrate where the press may not always be trusted.

[saracat]

13. They didn't say but the counting is far from over and I doubt the

webpage is up to date! I could swear they said this last year but I could be wrong. But I gotta tell ya, I was at a Kerry meeting tonite and the stream of voters coming in to register was unreal. The Maricopa and AZ state HQ were open till 2AM ( registering till midnight)and they were deluged.

[ISUGRADIA]

14. The 250,000 may very well be true, I'm not trying to be dificult, fyi

I just have seen enough local media in action to know how numbers and figures can be messed up. If there has been that much growth in this one county that would be phenomenal (and great!). Me being the doubting Thomas just always like to see it in hard numbers somewhere.

I tend to think the press is sloppy, they quote numbers without having them confirmed.

[saracat]

16. I didn't think you were, and I agree! But I do think whatever

the numbers are, they will be awsome. I just read that Pennsylvania's most Republican county is registering dems two to one over repugs!

[rullery]

10. This will be a close election, so we must work hard to GOTV.

Whether the polls show Bush ahead or Kerry ahead, it is by small margins. Most people have already made up their minds, and only a few may change. Therefore we must work as hard as we can, to encourage our people to actually get out and vote! In all my 68 years, I have never seen an election where so much is at stake. It will determine the direction that America will take for many years to come. We may choose to remain a free society; or else give in to the fear mongers, who would strip us of our rights and impose totalitarianism upon our people. Not since 1860 has there been such a momentous election in our country.

[necso]

15. I don't see many cards left.

We could play the populist card... But this has consequences.

[necso]

36. Let me tell you

what (many of) the boys that I run with worry about.

1) Immigration. They see it as an economic issue -- and I see it the same way.

2) Job losses to Mexico, China, etc. They want these to stop. If this means breaking or renegotiating agreements -- fine with them. (And it really frosts their gourd that Mexican truckers are allowed into the US -- or so they tell me.)

3) All this crap flowing in from overseas and our money going to people who mean us no damn good.

4) Guns. Those that aren't Dems think that we want to take their guns away. Those that are Dems aren't too thrilled with the AWB -- but figure that it is dead anyway -- and they will fight any further encroachment on what they see as their rights.

5) Law and Order. We have lots of crime and a huge jail population. There are plenty of places where it is not wise to go, and huge sums of money are being made by unsavory types. Of course, few are willing to legalize the activities on which these huge sums are made. So it's pretty hopeless -- prohibition times a thousand.

6) Social Order. While this is a poor choice of words, there is a real desire for a society in which people can expect from others, basic things like decency and respect. And there is a higher level too, of things like schools educating kids and roads being repaired -- just of having things work the way that they are supposed to.

7) Breaking the Climate of Fear. Right now our government is telling everybody to be afraid -- but just go about our business as usual. What? Are we are a bunch of cowards? Are we stupid -- or lazy? Hey, we would like to be treated like adults and like men -- and we might even be willing to do a little something extra if it made sense.

Now I could go on at considerable length. But populism is about appealing to the things that average people actually think, talk and worry about -- in terms that they can relate to. And it is also about offering solutions that appeal to these people -- and that they can easily understand and relate to their (perceived) problems.

And, of course, the problem with populism is that the "solutions" that the people will accept aren't always working ones -- to say nothing of how charged just talking about many of these issues has become.

Now, me, I figure that we lose pretty much everything if we don't come up with a win, so I am pretty open minded at this point.

But let tell you one thing more. I have heard from more than one person that the left and right say radically different things but that it all comes out the same in the wash. The left argues for the AWB and the right argues against it -- net effect, away it goes. The left argues that restricting immigration is racist and the right mumbles twenty different things including actually doing something -- net effect, nothing gets done.

And again, nothing here is critical of our candidates. But if we need three points, then we could go where the Neos can't (to a large extent) go -- populist. After all, the neos aren't Nationalists and they certainly aren't Economic Nationalists.

Personally, I figure that we will fight it out much the same as we are doing now -- for better or worse. And I am voting the straight ticket no matter what is said or done -- and no matter what happens... before the election. The way I see it, this country is headed in the wrong direction and we have to stop it -- simple as that.

[SoCalDemocrat]

17. LOL

"Does anyone seriously believe we will have gained 180,000 more registered and actual voters in Florida than the GOP? "

Tell you what, if we get half of the million black votes back that were disenfranchised in 2000, I'd say we're well on our way to crushing Bush in the Florida election.

http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voterreg/index.shtml

On Aug 2nd, 2004 registered in Florida
4,066,068 Democrats (+360,987 DEM)
3,705,081 Republicans

On Feb 9th, 2004 in Florida
3,916,207 Democrats (+329,263 DEM)
3,586,944 Republicans

Oct 10th, 2000 in FL
3,803,081 REP
3,430,238 DEM (+372,843 DEM)

Who knows what's happened since Aug. The news reports that we're outpacing the Republicans on registration. Good! Looks like we made up the ground we lost since 2000. Registration gap between the two sides is about equal. What we need to do is make sure those votes are counted in FL!

The team that gets more of their side to turn out and vote is going to win this election.

[Awsi Dooger]

23. You LOL, then make one of the most ludicrous assertions of all time

"million black votes back that were disenfranchised in 2000"

Exactly what I'm talking about. Why do people pull numbers out of their ass and beyond?

About 5.9 million votes were cast in Florida during 2000, 2.9+ million each for Gore and Bush. To assert more than a million black votes were disenfranchised in Florida 2000 is laughably uneducated on the population numbers of the state itself, not just the voter rolls.

[sonicx]

24. he missspoke. the million disenfranchised black voters were nationwide.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/06/20/ING2976LG61.DTL

Much of it may have been poor voting equipment in black areas.

[Awsi Dooger]

27. I tried to give him the benefit of a doubt

Before posting I looked for ANY hint he didn't mean Florida alone. There was none. Every single paragraph other than the final sentence contained a reference to Florida, no other state or the nation as a whole. Even the link was a Florida link.

[HFishbine]

58. Speaking of pulling numbers out of one's ass

Perhaps you can back this up from your original post: "they (Republicans) have been registering voters in numbers often above our own since 2000."

[Lexingtonian]

20. I'll beg to differ

Each of the last 3 Presidential elections has seen Democratic strength improve about 3%, which is 3+ million voters. In November 2000 some 108 million people voted; this year the talk is of turnout of 115 million plus and 120 million not considered outside the realm of possibility.

Reports out of Las Vegas have one 10 person team of Hispanic Democrats clearing 30,000 new registrations and expecting to break 40,000 by the Nevada deadline. 1% of Nevada turnout in 2000 was about 7,000 votes- so this one group has singlehandedly increased the Nevada electorate by 3-5% who will largely vote Democratic. Hearing of 270K new registrations in Cleveland and 250K in/around Tucson sounds about right; talk has been of 1 million new registrations in Florida this year.

The Republican registration drives basically took place over the spring and summer- from January or March until August- so that all the newest Republican voters could get brought on the same page via their Convention. The massive Democratic efforts began on September 2- when the 527s shifted their money and focus away from the ad war defense of Kerry, essentially. Most polling organizations use several month old lists of registered voters for their call lists, which might explain some or all of the Republican bias (variable, but about 3% in the mean) they all developed over the summer and can't seem to get out of their modelling.

You're right that the new registration numbers are not sufficient to bring about a Kerry Presidency on their own. But it's a big part of the counter to the Christian Right turnout effort Ralph Reed is running.

[Awsi Dooger]

26. Agreed, I should have been more clear I meant a NET gain of 3%

That is what several DUers are apparently counting on, a 3% hidden advantage nationwide, and state by state, gained solely via new voters. I did not pull those assertions in my initial post out of air, they were actual projections I saw on DU today -- our registration worth at least 3% nationwide, a 75/25 split among new voters, and millions of new Demoocrats registered in the swing states alone.

I fully expect our raw vote total to rise by 4+% this time, not just 3%. And your example of Nevada, my home state, is a good one. Obviously it is much easier to raise voter percentage and potential advantage in a small populus state than someplace like Ohio or Florida, particularly if you focus on Las Vegas, by far the most populated and Dem leaning area in the state. If we are expecting 2-3 point net gain in the large states that's just kooky, IMO, based on sheer numbers.

And thank you for pointing out the GOP registration drives were hardly non-existent, merely differently strategized and timetabled than ours. I mentioned that in another post Monday, but didn't want this one to ramble beyond need.

[Florida_Geek]

29. Grrr... Because you named Florida, how about the 40,000 Muslims that

voted for Bush in 2000 that is reported to be voting for Kerry. Or the Cuban Americans that voted for Bush in 2000 BUT NOW plan to vote for Kerry because of Bush's new Cuban travel restrictions. Or the 10,000-15,000 Blacks in Duval county that somehow "double punched" their votes for Gore in 2000 and had their votes tossed out. Or the number of expat Florida voters that are voting Kerry in 2004 because they see the results of Bush's foreign policy.

[Awsi Dooger]

30. See, you agree with me, those are changes in preference for the most part

Not registration advantage.

And remember, it was a full 14 of Florida's counties that featured multipage or butterfly ballots in 2000, not merely Duval. The 10 presidential candidates allowed for creative masochism in designing the ballots, causing voter confusion and tens of thousands of overvotes, which were much more devastating to Gore than lost undervotes.

Some would say intentional theft-enabling ballot designs, but I would not be among them. The voter roll disenfranchisement and everything post-November 7 was pure theft, but I'll always believe the ballot designs were pure idiotic fluke. This year there are 8 names on the Florida ballot. Gore would undoubtedly be president today if that had been the number in 2000.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. I Live In Florida And Have Lived Here Since 1970

I am not all confident about this state's prospects...


I scoffed at those that said Hurricane Charley would change the political dynamic but I wouldn't scoff at someone who said the cumulative effects of Hurricanes Jeanne, Charley, Frances, and Ivan have changed the political dynamic..

Also, I am sobered by the fact that Jeb Bush won his reelection campaign in 02 by a 57% -43% margin...

[Florida_Geek]

38. Did he or did touchscreen magic do it for him

Remember the smaller class size admendment won by a couple percent and Jebbie was against it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. If You Can Manufacture A Landslide We're Really In Trouble...

There's lots of room for mischief in close races but I don't think you can manufacture a landslide...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. Folks Like To Shoot The Messenger...

We aren't going to overwhelm the Republicans with new voters...Our goal is to change enough minds of the existing electorate to win a plurality or majority of the popular vote. This usually but not always translates into an Electoral College win...


I bleed Democratic but I refuse to create an an alternate reality for myself where all polls are worthless because of new technologies such as cell phones and caller i.d.s ....

If the majority of polls show a Kerry lead you can celebrate.... If the polls show a lead greater than two or three percent for Bush we're in trouble....


Don't forget that these polls which we love to trash have a pretty decent track record.... They have been outside the infamous margin of error only once in the past sixty or so years...

[RafterMan]

32. Well said.

Further, it never hurts to fight like you're playing catch-up.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. Thank You- I Meant The Final Pre Election Polls...

I am very concerned about this race....

[Awsi Dooger]

37. Thank you, your first paragraph says it better than I have

In perhaps two dozen attempts on DU:

"We aren't going to overwhelm the Republicans with new voters...Our goal is to change enough minds of the existing electorate to win a plurality or majority of the popular vote. This usually but not always translates into an Electoral College win..."

The only thing I would change is boost your confidence in the popular vote. Even this year it's at least a 1/5 favorite the same candidate wins both the popular vote and electoral college.

[indyjones1938]

44. Very, very well put

"We aren't going to overwhelm the Republicans with new voters...Our goal is to change enough minds of the existing electorate to win a plurality or majority of the popular vote."

It is very true that there are massive Democratic GOTV and registration efforts going on this year, on a scale never before seen. But the Republicans have a very powerful GOTV machine as well (plus the fact that registered GOP are more likely to go to the polls than registered Dems). 10-1 Dem registration advantages like in that one Ohio county are the exception rather than the rule. In most areas, new Dem registrations are about equal, or just slightly ahead of new GOP registrations. I have also seen areas in swing states where new GOP registrations are slightly ahead of new Dem registrations.

Another problem we have to deal with this year is the Christian Coalition factor. In 2000, an estimated 2,000,000 Christian fundies and would-be Bush voters stayed home, mainly because of the Bush DUI story. This year, Ralph Reed (former Christian Coalition head) is a top Bush adviser and is spearheading an extremely powerful GOTV effort among the Christian Right. It's a scary and hard to believe fact, but over a third of Americans identify themselves as Born-Again Christians. These people truly believe that Bush has been chosen by God to lead the country and people like Kerry and Ewards are doing Satan's work.

Reed is planning a massive saturation campaign in the last 72 hours of the campaign through fundie churches in swing states like Ohio and West Virginia. His goal is to get every Christian in WV and OH to the polls, by any means necessary. Any Dem voter registration advantage in these swing states (and others) could easily by offset by a massive Christian Coalition campaign. Knowing this, I think Kerry should've ceded WV long ago and focused on NV, NH and CO instead. :puffpiece:

And in the end, I think national trends, momentum and media coverage will decide the election more than GOTV efforts. Look at Iowa during the Dem primaries. Gephardt had a formidable ground organization, heavily backed by labor unions; Dean had immense GOTV operations and energy, but in the last 72 hours it was Kerry and Edwards who developed momentum and rode the wave to the #1 and #2 spots.

And of course (:tinfoilhat:) a major national development (OBL, falling oil prices, Saddam trial, terrattack, terralert, whatever) could sway the election to Bush and render our GOTV efforts null. Conversely a Kerry campaign "surprise" (a la GWB DUI 2000) could sway the election to Kerry and render the GOP GOTV null.

I think that if Kerry is equal with Bush in national polls on Nov. 1st, or behind by 2% or less, he will probably win. Because those few undecideds left are going to break for Kerry when they enter the polling booth. A poll the other day showed that only 13% of "undecideds" approve of GWB. Not sure what the other 87% are waiting for, but they're either not going to vote or they're going to break for Kerry.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

46. The Final Pre Election Polls With The Exception Of Zogby, Harris, and CBS

all had a small lead for Bush* but within the margin of error...

Zogby gets lots of credit but Harris came closer to nailing it. Harriss had it 47-47. Zogby had it 48-46... It ended up 48-48**




**Both Gore and Bush had 48% if you rounded off.. I am not forgetting Gore won by 500,000 votes...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. The Electoral College Map

Your suggestion on focusing on certain states and not others has merit but the challenge is that your opponent can do the same thing.... For instance when we stop contesting certain states and focusing on more winnable states our opponents can follow us into those states and make winning more problematic...

The Electoral College map favors the Republicans... I am convinced without an Electoral College the Dems would be in an infinitely better position..

[progressivebydesign]

88. It's not a MESSAGE, it's an OPINION.

I think when people post things that are just ripe for disagreement, and they set off a chain reaction, people like to fall back on that "don't shoot the messenger".

Well.. a MESSAGE is someone posting hard links, reliable sources for something, and presenting it, regardless of whether people here want to read it. OPINION is someone starting a thread, such as this with nothing more than THEIR opinion of what might happen. In that case, the "don't shoot the messenger" doesn't apply in the least.

When someone puts out an OPINION, they deserve to have it challenged, rebutted, and shot down.. if there are actual FACTS to disprove their assertions. BIG DIFFERENCE.

[Supersedeas]

40. a hidden bailout corp--is that what voter registration means to you?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

42. I read it as "hidden ballot corps" but no matter, the point is....

that the polls have generally shown Bush with a slight advantage, and we need to counter that by getting out our voters. Getting them to the polls.
There will be no hidden voters with cell phones miraculously appearing on Nov. 2 to make up any poll defecits.

BTW This is one of the best posts I have read here in a while.

[Southern Patriot]

45. I'm a "Kerry Traveler" who worked for ACT for a day in FL

The "quality" of voters (ie. the likliehood that they'll even vote) seems pretty weak. I called probably 25-40 newly "registered" voters who had problems with their paperwork.

ACT had to have someone look up their phone numbers on 411.com because they didn't have phone numbers listed. (They cross-referenced by address to get a phone number.) Probably 50% of the numbers were not any good.

I actually talked with approximately 15 people. (No answer at about five numbers.) One was a lady in a nursing home whom the staff said couldn't move around too well. Another was a Russian national who was in FL for another two weeks--- not even a U.S. citizen. Of the rest, I'd say that approximately three to four would probably vote.

IOW, about 10% of the list was really likely to vote.

Later, I went out canvassing. It was the last day to get registered. We had people fill in "pleges" to vote and we had a couple to actually fill in registration forms. Out of a group of six canvassers I really wonder how effective they actually were in GOTV.

We all filled out paperwork quatifying how many "contacts" we'd made; how many people registered; and how many "pledges" we got filled out. The canvassers were absolutely dedicated to getting numbers--- not quanlity.

ACT spends A LOT of money. They lease minivans. Pay staff. Buy Palm Pilots with custom software. Supply nice Dell Comps and threw a cookout while I was there.

I'm just unsure how efficient their effort will ultimately be.

There's a lot of big talk on the street about getting Bush out of office but when election day comes, I'm not sure that these folks will even make the effort to vote.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

48. GOTV is physically getting them there on the big day.

That's the vans, rides etc. that happen on election day itself.
You just need to make sure they get there.
It's how Kerry won Iowa. He made sure every Vietnam vet in the state either was supplying or getting rides to a caucus.
GOTV is delivering all the new voters to the polls.

[Southern Patriot]

59. ACT is planning on following up...

...providing rides to the polls... calling folks who've "pledged" to vote etc.

It's just that when some of them get to polls they're going to have problems and, probably, a significant number, won't be allowed to vote because their paperwork was correct. The list that ACT got from the voter registration folks was thousands of names.

Early voting in FL begins 10/18. If ACT can follow up with the name on their database (from pledges) during this period of time; get them to the polls; and clear-up registration problems then it might be a pretty good effort.

[sendero]

47. 3%

Is an arbitrary number pulled out of a pollsters ass. The reasons that modern polls don't work have been explained here a hundred times.

I don't worry about "3%" and I don't worry about the polls.

The only thing I really worry about is voting-machine fraud, and my personal opinion is that there are enough exit polls organized (and please, exit polls have NOTHING in common with telephone polls) to make it difficult to steal more than a percent or so.

So, we won't know until Nov 2. But nobody is relying on voter registration alone to make up for some manufactured vote deficit. Fact is, nobody is counting votes, the campaign is going after every vote it can get. That is the only way to win.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

55. Three Percent Is Not Pulled Out Of A Pollster's Ass

It's based on inferential statistics and sample size...


I'm not a slave to the polls but I'll stand by the simple and unassailable insertion that pollsters have a pretty good record at predicting presidential results... They have largely been within the infamous margin of error for every presidential election since 1948...

www.ncpp.org/1936-2000.htm

[sendero]

61. And every election...

... that goes by leaves fewer people using landlines, and this election is absolutely going to break the "likely voter" mold with a vengeance. Of all your friends/family, how many don't use caller id to screen calls? If I don't see a friend/family number, I don't pick up the phone and as far as I can tell I am not in the minority here.

Sorry, polls are useful in relative terms, but not in absolute terms, and the future usefulness of landline telephone polls is very much in question.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. As I Said I'm Not A Slave To The Polls

but I respect the science behind it... I agree the proliferation of cellphones and caller ids makes polling more problematic but I'll wait to match the results of the final pre election polls this year against the actual results...


I'll make a prediction.... The final pre election presidential polls will be within the margin of error as they have been with a few exceptions in every election since 1948...

[sendero]

78. I respect the science...

... behind polls, I understand the statistical basis for the results - but the validity of a poll depends on a truly random sampling, one that is impossible to get when only certain classes of people actually answer their phones.

[DaveinMD]

49. we don't need 3 percent

the race is even right now. ARG, LA Times and Newsweek have us with a 3 point lead. WPost and Pew have Republicans with a 4-5 point lead. Gallup has the race tied. This race will be won on turnout.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

53. As Long As We Go Into Nov. 2nd Down 2-3% We'll Have A Shot

However I would feel much better with a lead however small....



Funny thing about Gallup... They have more or less been within the MOE since 48 but they picked the wrong winner in 76 and 00...

[lancdem]

92. I agree

We're within 2-3 percent now. If you average all the post-debate polls, I think Bush comes out with a 1 percent lead or so, which is a tie. But we have three more debates to go, and anything can happen in the next four weeks.

[sherilocks]

57. In Flagler county, a small county in Florida,

they usually vote the way the rest of the state votes. A telling exception was the 2000 election. Gore won here. I just called the elections office and they told me that they have a huge number of new registrations and they will not have a completed tabulation of Dems, Reps, and Ind, until early next week.

I'll check back next week. But Florida is difficult to read. There are old time southern Democrats that will vote Republican. There are a whole lot of independents that bend like grass in the wind. And there is a constant influx of new residents and outflux of people who came and didn't like it. Using Florida as an example of how people will vote in the rest of the states is an exercise in futility.

Clearly, the best thing the we can do, is make sure that every Kerry/Edwards supporter gets to the polls to vote and that their vote is counted. Not sit back and read the tealeafs we think we see in the other kind of polls.

[troublemaker]

64. Our late surge is, however, indicative of momentum, and politics is

a momentum game. A new resistration from this week is more likely to represent a real vote than a registration from a year ago.

I agree that disregarding the polls is a classic sucker's game. But recent registrations is a valuable indicator of trend.

[TexasSissy]

69. I heard the RNC chairman speech on CSpan (Gillespie?) say...

that they had been working on signing up new voters and that they'd signed up a whopping 3 million voters. I was impressed. Until I heard on TV that the Dems had signed up way more than that.....200% more, in fact.

I don't know personally, of course. But most young people and poor people (the kind of people likely not to be signed up in the first place) are usu. Democrats in philosophy. So that tends to support the Dems. claim of signing up way more than Republicans.

But whether the new voters will actually go vote is another matter, even if we did sign up a lot more.

[mzmolly]

70. You are correct, as of today Bush is winning the election.

Were on track for coming back, but it's not by any means a cake walk. I was a Dean supporter, I heard about how these "young cell phone voters" weren't being polled, so I shouldn't worry :eyes:

Sorry, but ... fool me once.

We've got work to do.

[kentuck]

71. 1% would be tremendous !

Because they would have families and friends coattail them to the polls, more than likely. The more important number may be those that are registered but never voted in the last election. If the total turnout is larger, I htink that bodes well for the Democrats.

[funkybutt]

72. new regs PLUS the "unlikely voter"

CAN win this election for us. I've been tabling and doing voter registration for months now. People are going to show up in RECORD numbers, i believe!

[ltn72]

74. registration

Both the Dems and the Pubbies are hammering registration. What must be avoided is stuff like what happened in Cleveland, with more people over 18 reportedly registering than there are in the county.

[On the Road]

75. Your Point about GOP Registration is Well Taken, HOWEVER...

here's a quote from the best article I've read this year on election polling:

And there is one final factor to consider that isn’t captured in the polls at all: the ground war. Democratic 527s such as America Coming Together are conducting massive voter-registration and mobilization campaigns that could easily add 2 or 3 percentage points to Kerry’s vote. As the Service Employee International Union’s Andy Stern has observed, this field operation is “the greatest field-goal unit in history” -- if Kerry can keep the race close, voter mobilization will give him the last few points he needs.

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=8694

-------------------

Registration alone will not win. But combined with mobilization, it will provide an advantage over the GOP.

[grace0418]

76. It's the combination of a number of factors really

My opinion is wholly unscientific, I admit that. But I've been involved in many elections and I've never seen the kind of interest and participation present now. Yes, it's on both sides to some extent, but my friends who register people to vote (I personally know 5 people, 3 in swing states, who register new voters) tell me that people CONSTANTLY say that they are registering to vote Bush out. Without prompting, and time and time again, they say things like "I've never been interested in politics before, but I realize that I've got to do something because Bush has got to go." Yes the GOP is always organized, we've heard that ad nauseum. But the exciting story for me is that the DEMS are working together this time. Just because there aren't as many stories and statistics about it doesn't make it untrue. Hell, that's nothing new, I don't have to tell you all that the media is owned by the right wing.

And since when does anyone believe a word that comes out of Karl Rove's mouth? Good lord people!

But it's not just the new registrants, it's the people who are voting outside their party, and the people who are registered but too lazy to vote usually, and the young people getting involved...

It's going to be a landslide people. Just keep working every minute and keep the faith.

[Nightjock]

85. Thank you! A voice of reason!

[dfdemar]

77. Registration isn't worth jack shit

if they don't vote. Problem is, Republicans are statistically more likely to vote than Democrats. There's all sorts of other crazy little demographics like Democrats are less likely to vote when it's raining, etc,...

[WI_DEM]

82. I think in 2000 we showed that our GOTV effort was worth at least

2-3% on election day--since most polls had Gore down by that much going into election day.

[rinsd]

84. It's the turnout....

You can register all the new people in the world but it doesn;t matter if they don't go to the polls.

That isn't meant to discourage getting people registered. It's great PR for the party.

But I have to partially agree with you that turnout is more important. Filling out a registration form at Walmart is one thing. Standing on line at the polls is another. The stories of last minute registers at the deadlines is heartening though.

[grace0418]

87. Trust me, the turnout will be there...

I saw more people at the March primaries voting this year than I have at any other election. I've NEVER had to stand in line for primaries before. I'm telling you, past statistics don't mean anything in this election. The DEMS are coming. And we will be opening up a can o' whoop-ass.

[West Coast Democrat]

90. A combination of GOTV and new voter registration does make the difference

When has it ever not made the difference?

Sure, Republicans have been working on the same things, but most of their supporters are not in swing states. They will try to make a better showing this time because of the embarrassment of losing the popular vote, but we shouldn't just assume their voter registration efforts have negated ours.

[Nightjock]

91. This is just a "sky is falling" in disguise

EVERY other story I hear and read says the political science map will change because of the turnout on our side this year.

But, unlike republicans, free speech is allowed in the Democratic Party. So go ahead and worry yourself crazy. I will continue to work hard even though I believe,wait!... I KNOW... Kerry will win in a landslide.

[vireo]

93. GOTV maps

Here's an excellent resource for targeting your GOTV efforts and also testing some of the truisms which have been discussed re turnout and partisanship: http://www.fairdata2000.com/VoterRegistration/