Hmm

It's still too early to tell who is going to turn-out at the polls this year. But this certainly isn't expected. With several polling companies basing their models on projected turn-out - it matters. If Obama can part the Red Sea but not turn-out enough of his voters, he'll lose.

Analysts have predicted that new voters, young voters and Hispanic voters will turn out in record numbers in this election. But as Nevadans continue to flock to the polls, turnout among those three groups is lagging, at least in the early going.

While turnout statewide was nearly 25 percent through Sunday, it was just 20 percent among Hispanic voters, 14 percent among voters under 30 and 15 percent among those who didn't vote in the last three elections, according to an analysis of state early voting records through Sunday prepared by America Votes, an organization that works to mobilize voters.

The data provide a glimpse into the composition of the more than 300,000 Nevadans who had taken advantage of early voting over the first nine days of the 14-day period. The information comes from proprietary databases that political action groups purchase from commercial vendors, cross-referenced with the public data the state releases showing who has voted.

Comments

[mary]

CNN is showing an Obama rally. Two things: I don't understand why he keeps changing his voice, his cadence, depending upon where he is giving his speech. His campaign is apparently sponsoring a walk to the voting place, he said you can register and vote at the same time. He made a huge deal about voting now and asked how many were going to take the walk and vote and he said "good, we have to get that vote out".

Guess the walk is because he had a rally in colorado and they opened the polling place across the street and not many used it. (according to bloggers) But, his making a big deal about going on "the walk to vote" sort of substantiates what the bloggers were saying.

[Fred Beloit]

It must be emphasized, Jame Gumm, (One) that those nums of your are Demo and Repub registrations, not actual votes, and (two) so what.

[jharp]

For our resident redneck pollster, mark (never have taken a statistics class) l.

To remind you of a few days ago when you were posting your idiotic poll analysis.

PLEASANTVILLE, N.Y., Oct 29, 2008 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- America's most trusted and accurate student survey has predicted the winner in 12 of the past 13 elections.

Just days before Americans choose our next president, voting has concluded in the Weekly Reader Student Presidential Election Poll. And the nation's students resoundingly say that Barack Obama will be the country's next leader. In the 14th Weekly Reader election survey, with more than 125,000 votes cast from kindergarten through 12th grade, the result was Obama 54.7% and John McCain 42.9% (with "other" candidates receiving 2.5% of the student vote). The Obama victory in the classroom electoral vote was even more resounding: The Democrat won 33 states and the District of Columbia, garnering 420 electoral votes, while McCain took 17 states and 118 electoral votes.

[Fred Beloit]

Gee, I just thought of three. (Three) if early vote information is going to be publicly released before the election to be used by people with agendas, like you, to discourage the other party from voting on election day, there shouldn't be any early voting.

[Fred Beloit]

Say, harpo, shouldn't you be busy writing a letter of thanks to Pres Bush, who, you have claimed, is responsible for such matters as oil and gasoline prices? It is now $2.32 in some stations down here. You too Worst, you rude ignoramus and ingrate, start scribbling.

[mark l.]

I'm guessing/hoping that there is a 'shadow' group of voters who are refusing to answer polls...

anecdotally, I'm hearing that the number of people refuisng to respond to pollsters is twice the usual. Roughly 3-4% do not wish to participate, and that number is now between 7-8%.

These are not people who say they will not vote, just people who refuse to answer and the pollster moves on, their number don't get included with the results.

If these people could be considered conservative/introverts as they are unwilling to particpate in polling, then the inference I'm getting is that they have a general distrust of media/polls/big govt and heavily favor mccain.

another issue is that many polls do not consider weighting the response for individuals who are married and have a preference for mccain or obama. a household may have one number, but two voters. The liklihood of someone being at home during the times pollsters call would seem to favor singles, as married couples are more likely to be outside their home with their kids, with liklhood increasing based on income.

I can't help but think there is a landslide about to occur, and the numbers that foretell it are slidng thru the cracks.

[mark l.]

"In the 14th Weekly Reader election survey, with more than 125,000 votes cast from kindergarten"

hmmm...125k, nice sample.

2004?
"Voting was open to kids in first through 12th grade. Students could vote in class, via the Internet or by dialing an 800 number. Toschi says 327,707 kids in all 50 states cast ballots."

http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2004-10-24-reader-poll_x.htm

I had no idea that the class sizes of america have shrunk by 60%. methinks they went exclusively with urban areas.
any explanation offerred for why the sample size is 1/3 of the 2004 vote?

even stranger?
gallup has mccain win married voters. 63% of the electorate in 2004. margins are much narrower, by inconsitent with the weekly reader. Let me guess, teachers tabulate the vote.

[mark l.]

jharp-

have you looked at the demos where obama is sliding?

these aren't teeny tiny groups, they are are the big demographic busters.

newton has this law where an object in motion will remain moving in the same direction at the same speed, unless a force is exerted upon it. What's obama's push? more importantly, if mccain has found a means to push the polls in his direction, why would he let up?

the redistribution issue is as old as monday, but the effects won't fully manifest til fri/sat in polling.

[mark l.]

can't believe i'm about to pick apart the internals of the weekly reader poll but well worth mentioning some of the variance-

obama won nevada 82-16...

nuff said. teachers unions, playing with little children's votes is not a very democratic thing to do, but it is a very socialist belief.

unless you have a good explanation, that privdes for the nv margin, I would suggest that like everything that democrats touch that 'works' turns to doodie, so now have they corrupted the last vestige of taking american kids pulses.

[AdrianS]

What I have noticed is that it is mostly, almost exclusively, the MSM that, with their pseudo polls with skewing and slanting, have been suggesting that Barack Obama might win.

However, much to the contrary, and given that of the 12% Blacks in America — an estimated less than 5% will vote for Obama (less than 14 million Black adult voters in a country of more than 305 million!) — McCain has a better than most chance to win big time on next Tuesday.

Over the last several months, we have learned that Obama is a radical, repugnant, and incessant liar. Obama is a thug much like the many, many “friends” and “mentors” he hangs with — Rezko, Farrakhan, Rev. Wright, Khalidi, communist Frank Marshall David and others. Now we learn that Obama is definitively a socialist and extremist leftist. Obama gets upset when TV hosts point this out — why? — because it’s the truth. Barack Hussein Obama is a loser.

The tens of millions, and more, voters that have learned the ugly truths about Barack Obama are NOT going to vote for him. They will defeat Obama.

Obamalies or Lies Obama Tells:
http://www.nextgenerationcorp.com/NextGenBlog/?p=73

The best hope we have for our economy, our military, our health, and our freedom is to vote for John McCain — honorable, with integrity, and a true patriot.

God Bless America.

[barney frank]

I can play with the poles of children?

sign me up.

[Fred Beloit]

Speaking of students and teachers:
"That intellectual thugs now rule the hallways of academe and threaten our civil liberties was perhaps nowhere more dramatically illustrated than in the Duke lacrosse rape case two years ago."
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/how-critical-race-theory-molded-obama/

[jharp]

I, mark l, unlike you, understand polling.

And I understand the weekly reader poll is not scientific. I only posted the results because of your moronic claim that the weekly reader poll meant something.

And in the scientific polls Obama is kicking McCain's ass. By 12 % in your must win win PA.

"I'm hearing that the number of people refuisng to respond to pollsters is twice the usual."

You're an idiot. Hearing voices in your head is not scientific evidence. Nor is there any evidence to support your ludicrous claim.

None. Nada, Zero, Zilch. Zip.

However there is plenty of scientific evidence that it's gonna be a landslide.

[Fred Beloit]

Is that the same Duke that legitimized the study of a non-existent phenomenon, ESP? Why yes, yes it is. Why would any HS senior opt for such a school one wonders?

[Fred Beloit]

"However there is plenty of scientific evidence that it's gonna be a landslide."
I'm gonna save your prevaricated prognostication for posterity, harpo. By God I'll rub your nose in it a thousand times if you are wrong.

[Fred Beloit]

They were right then, we are right now. He was bright pink. Not as much though as the Hollywood Ten, your pantheon.

[Fred Beloit]

harpo: "I, mark l, unlike you, understand polling."
That is what you said about Bush and gas prices, harpo. Let's get going on that thank you note to Bush, OK?

[Fred Beloit]

98, sonny. Hehehe, it's in the jeans...er genes.

[Fred Beloit]

Say, wait a minute, old timer. You,YOU, are the geezer who brought up FDR.

[Fred Beloit]

I'm beginning to think you are a woman, Jame Gumm (d'un certain age, as the French would say), because you are so proud of your Anglo-Saxon). But FDR did not bring us out of the depression. World War II and its attendant economic impact did.

[rightwingprof]

Dan, you missed the really interesting article.

http://rightwingnation.com/2008/10/29/interesting-and-unexpected/

[Lala]

FDR (along with the fellow travelers) made the depression worse

UCLA Newsroom > Research > News Releases
FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate
By
Meg Sullivan
| 8/10/2004 12:23:12 PM

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx

[mark l.]

"I, mark l, unlike you, understand polling."

please, by all means, give me you interpretation of the 82-18 number in the weekly reader poll from nevada, among a sample of 125k nationwide.

I'd love to hear you provide the excuses for a state teacher/education system that would distort a children's poll, for who knows what reason.

[mark l.]

here's a test for you, harpo:

examine external debt relative to gdp,

wiki will provide you with some help, cia world factbook might be a better source.

which european country do you find that is even close to our, realtively low debt?

bonus pts, if you can explain why all these wonderful socialist countries external debt is, at minimum, twice(200%) the size of their gdp, where the US external debt/gdp is at 100%.

you have a plethora of socialist countries to pick from, which one has managed the debt with the most wisdom?

[mary]

wow, reading a lot of posts lately about how "they" are hiding Joe the Senator. Have you noticed Michelle has gotten the "billy clinton treatment". Now tonight we hear Billy Clinton is doing the live portion of the BO musical comedy half hour.

If fox is showing the tape, how come no one has watched it ahead of time and broken the news?

[mark l.]

let me provide a far simpler test of your polling knowledge:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/108040/Candidate-Support-Race.aspx

gallup provides for white voters(77% of 04 electorate) choosing mccain by a 6pt(50-44) margin.
bush won this by a 17pt(58-41) margin in 04.

assuming all other demographic groups turnout at the equivalent margin and numbers as 04,
what margin of victory would this provide obama with?
numbers please.

compare and contrast to their current polling numbers.

please explain any discrepancy. if you explain it...I would defer my amatuer knowledge of statistics to you.

This should take you approximately 5 minutes to do, mathwise.

[jharp]

"please, by all means, give me you interpretation of the 82-18 number in the weekly reader poll from nevada, among a sample of 125k nationwide."

It's not a scientific poll you friggin birdbrain.

The results mean nothing.

[mark l.]

here's a test for morons:

how many states are there in the US?
does barak obama serve on the banking committee?

sad when your candidate go both of them wrong.