If Dem turnout in Mass is high...And Brown still wins...Would you have questions....

[Junkdrawer]

about the conduct of the election?

I would.

[EFerrari]

1. I have them regardless of who wins. n/t

[Junkdrawer]

8. Unaudited elections have always bothered me. But when to raise a stink....

regarding a particular election is always tricky.

But I think that the "Brown Wins" scenario was always predicated on an unmotivated Democratic base sitting out the election.

However, if there's a large Democratic turnout AND Brown still wins...

[cali]

20. no, it's not solely predicated on dems sitting it out. it's also predicated

on indies going for brown in a big way and for his getting a chunk of the dem vote.

[Junkdrawer]

24. So you're saying that voters who voted for Kennedy and Obama....

are getting in line and voting for Brown?

Really?

[cali]

25. I'm saying that polls indicate that he could pull in up to 20%

of the dem vote. and I'm saying that indies outnumber dems.

[Junkdrawer]

26. I'm having a hard time believing that....

nothing personal....

[cali]

27. nothing personal taken. there's also anecdotal stuff like Greywarrior

saying that she has family and friends who are dems who are voting for brown.

[quiller4]

36. I was hearing people tell me that they voted for Obama and were

going to vote for Brown. I'm talking about blue collar voters and they were complaining that Congress and Obama were too liberal and they really wanted to slow the pace of change.

[cali]

44. wish you'd post this as an op.

[virgogal]

21. Ditto !

[cali]

2. depends on where it's particularly high.

there are places where high turnout is good for brown.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

3. The assumption that high turnout helps us is hard to see

37% Dem
11% Pug
52% unaffiliated

So the more base-centric the election the better for us... right?

We dominate among affiliated voters. High turnout means high participation by unaffiliated voters.

So it has never been obvious to me that high turnout is a help in this race.

We usually benefit from high turnout but MA is a demographic anomaly. I don't know.

[DURHAM D]

9. I should already know the answer to this...

But, were the unaffiliated allowed to vote in the Dem primary?

[seaglass]

15. Yes, it's unenrolled and you can vote in either then revert back to U status. n/t

[FreakinDJ]

4. "Could it be Diebold?

[Tippy]

11. YOU got it...MA does use Diebold machines...

< http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7650 >

[Common Sense Party]

17. Didn't help the GOP in Nov 2008...

[Tippy]

30. I think they laid low on 2008,,,,,

IN 2004 if you remember OHIO...The evidence was in. Milke Connell who worked for Bush/Cheney?/Rove
had been sopened by the JD...But he died in a mysterious plane crash..Before OHIO in 2004 there was GEORGIA in 2002, Before that FLORIDA in 2000

Cybergate..
http://simonworrallauthor.com/?p=186

[FreakinDJ]

31. Needs a "Less then 3% Margin" to steal with Diebold

without attracting too much attention

[BeyondGeography]

5. The other side can GOTV as well

We should have an advantage in a Dem. stronghold such as Mass. but if independents turn out big for Brown, who has been winning them 2-to-1 in every poll, we shouldn't automatically scream diebold.

[liberalpragmatist]

6. Given that the elections administrators are Democrats...

... somehow I doubt it.

[Junkdrawer]

10. The whole point of the Electronic Voting Reform movement...

is that the vendor can flip an election WITHOUT the help of the election supervisors.

[Codeine]

7. Not really.

A shitload of indy voters in Mass. No reason to assume they'd break for Coakley.

[bobburgster]

12. I would have one question.

How can people be so stupidly gullible after only one year of Obama?

[Tailormyst]

13. No

I except the high turnout to benefit him. Sadly, I see alot of people voting out of fear, anger and frustration, rather then really thinking things through. Those can be powerful motivators.

[marshall]

14. It depends on whether there is a clear winner

The path will be less troublesome if there is an absolutely clear winner--one that is definite regardless of irregularities or fluctuations in the turnout.

[Junkdrawer]

16. More unrecs please...

God knows that we should NEVER question those voting machines.

It makes us look like poor losers.....

:sarcasm:

[thereismore]

18. Count the damn paper ballots by hand. Just like in Minnesota. Then let the winner win. nt

[arthritisR_US]

29. that's the only thing that would make me trust an election result. n/t

[JVS]

19. No.

[Bombtrack]

22. My question will be, will the Coakley primary voters listen to the Capuano voters next time? EOM

[Tim01]

23. Somebody here already posted their family members voted repub for the first time ever.

So, no. I wouldn't be surprised at all.

[arthritisR_US]

28. absof*ckinglutely! n/t

[elocs]

32. I know its hard to accept, but sometimes Republicans actually win elections by getting more votes

than the Democrats. Frankly, I get tired of the whining by some whenever a Democrat loses a close election that it was stolen. It's like the prima donna NFL receivers who always cry for a penalty flag every time they miss a pass. We lose credibility when we want a flag thrown for every close Democratic election loss.

[Junkdrawer]

35. I know its hard to accept, but sometimes elections are stolen....

And, if you care to look, there's copious evidence that happened in 2000, 2002 & 2004.

As I said above, the question is always when to cry "Foul"....

[elocs]

37. The key word is "sometimes", not every time.

I don't buy the assumption or argument that every close Republican win is a stolen election. Unbelievably, some voters actually prefer the Republican candidate. I still assert that our credibility is hurt when we always claim the close elections are stolen.

[Junkdrawer]

38. I agree. Crying "Foul" everytime is silly. But sometimes it's not. n/t

[elocs]

39. There's that pesky word: "sometimes". We need to have discernment about this.

I remember years ago one of the Florida NFL teams lost a game on a questionable call near the end of the game. The coach did not cry about it or make excuses, but simply said that his team had been ahead and had ample opportunities to put the game away and that it never should have been close enough at the end for them to have lost on a questionable call. I always remember that.

[Tippy]

40. Name me one NFL team who has tossed a flag and lost it's credibility.....

[quiller4]

33. No. That is kind of what I expect from the GOTV phoning I did. n/t

[emilyg]

34. No.

[apocalypsehow]

41. No. And UnRec. n/t.

[ddeclue]

42. NO. nt

[A-Long-Little-Doggie]

43. They are saying on WBZ4 that Brown is helped by high turnout!

That is what the dickwad John Keller is saying. What is interesting is that he was saying just this weekend that low turnout was good for Brown. Looks like he got the new talking points, now that it is clear that the turnout is high, and is setting us up.

[Junkdrawer]

45. It's just not smelling too good...

BTW: No exit polls. Cute, huh?