Alaska Race May Make for Long Election Night

[Joanne98]

By NATE SILVER

Those of us hoping to get a good night’s sleep on Nov. 2 might not be pleased with the latest developments in the Alaska Senate race, where polls suggest a drop in support for the Republican nominee, Joe Miller. That could enable either Lisa Murkowski — the incumbent who lost the Republican primary to Mr. Miller but is running a write-in campaign as an independent — or perhaps the Democrat Scott McAdams, to win the race instead.

Most polling places in Alaska do not close until midnight, Eastern time. And vote-counting is always slow in the vast and remote state, which also has a high rate of absentee voting. The presence of a viable write-in candidate will create further delays, since these ballots will need to be reviewed by hand — election night counts may report the total number of write-in votes, but not how many of these were valid ballots cast for Ms. Murkowski. And once an initial count is in, a series of legal challenges may arise over different standards for counting the write-in votes. It’s plausible that the identity of Alaska’s new senator might not be known for weeks or even months.

The clearest path to victory had seemed to be Mr. Miller’s — since he does not have the handicap of being a write-in, like Ms. Murkowski — or, like Mr. McAdams, a Democrat in a state with few Democrats. But polls suggest that voters have grown less fond of Mr. Miller. A Rasmussen Reports poll issued late last week gave Mr. Miller 35 percent of the vote, down from 42 percent a month ago. Another survey, from Public Policy Polling, also had his vote-share decreasing, and found that 58 percent of Alaskan voters have a negative impression of him, up from an already-high 52 percent after his primary win.
The news last night that Mr. Miller’s security detail had handcuffed and detained a reporter, Tony Hopfinger, after a town-hall-style meeting held by Mr. Miller is unlikely to reverse those trends, and may accelerate them. (A statement by Mr. Miller defended the actions, characterizing the reporter as “potentially violent.”)

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/18/alaska-race-may-make-for-long-election-night/#more-2261

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. I...vote...err...odd?

[Kdillard]

2. Fingers crossed for McAdams. This would be a nice surprise if the Dem

Could pick this up. I don't know if the support Miller is losing would go for McAdams or Murkowski. It is encouraging that he is not even polling at 40 right now.

[louis-t]

3. How many Dem voters does ole Nate think there are in Alaska?

"Different standards for counting the write-in votes"? Do the repugs use their feet to count votes? "Wait Helen, I have to take my shoes off, I ran out of fingers." I guess they need time to burn the write-in votes they don't like.

[Blue_In_AK]

7. Nate doesn't really take into account

that 60% of Alaska's voters are not affiliated with either major party. Our state legislature is almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, so it's hard to argue that this is as red a state as people want to make it.

[louis-t]

14. Thanks, I didn't want to assume, but

I thought as much.

[LynneSin]

4. I wish McAdams the best but right about now Dems should be chatting with Murkowski

I mean her own half-governor tossed her under the bus, does she want to be associated with that party?

[Blue_In_AK]

6. Best possible scenario would be Murkowski drop out,

but that's not going to happen. Her ego won't let her. What I'm hoping for is that whatever sane voters Miller has decide to move over to Murkowski so that the moderates and Dems who were planning to vote for Lisa out of Millerphobia will come to their senses and realize that her "no" votes are no different than Joe Miller's "no" votes would be. She is not a liberal, nor even a moderate since 2008. She has voted with Mitch McConnell 90% of the time. That's hardly a progressive record, so we McAdams supporters are trying to get that message out.

I just heard a caller on Shannyn Moore's show say he had just today decided to vote for McAdams rather than Murkowski because he went to one of Scott's events and actually listened to what he had to say. Scott's an excellent candidate, and I think we can be proud to support him.

[LynneSin]

8. I think the DSCC should drop about a million into Alaska - this could be a win we need

:D

[Inuca]

10. I don't think she would turn D

but I don't think she would be the "best behaved" R either. I am sure she is seriously pissed, and not only at Miller. She was not rabid to start with, she may become more in the Snowe/Collins mold. Not a huge improvement, but still... I have too much respect for the Senate (in spite of everything) not to enormously mind somebody like Miller getting in (and ANgle, and... quite a list). Murkowski is not an embarassment to the Senate.

[LynneSin]

13. We're going to need every republican ally we can get

This is not me endorsing Murkowski. I think McAdams has a good chance of winning this. This is me going with Plan-B, since Miller looks to be imploding. I have to think Alaska is getting awfully tired of these nutjobs for politicians.

[Dogtown]

5. aren't ALL the nights long this time of year?

eh?

[auburngrad82]

9. Is there a chance that Murkowski can pull enough votes from Miller to get McAdams elected? nt

[Blue_In_AK]

11. That's the hope.

Also that enough Dems and moderates who were so scared of Joe that they were going to write in Lisa will feel freer now to vote for Scott since Miller will be less of a threat.

Miller only won the primary because Lisa didn't campaign hard and there was a ballot-bait initiative on the primary ballot regarding parental notification for teenage abortions that brought out the fundies in droves. I also know of some progressives who voted for Miller in the primary to keep Lisa from winning, so his primary numbers were inflated.

[LiberalFighter]

12. Why would anyone sane stay up to see the outcome of an election in Alaska?

I thought the consensus for Alaska was that it wasn't going to go Democratic. And unless that race determines the outcome of the Senate control I wouldn't give it a second thought except to create a slam against the winner at a later date.

Now I might notice if someone reports that the Democratic candidate upset the projected winner the following the day. Which is a possibility if enough Alaskans have integrity to question a candidate that prevents the media from observing and reporting on the news by illegally arresting them. It is illegal. Right?