Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Election 2018 Thread (An Adult Finally Has the Gavel)


PleaseBlitz

Recommended Posts

BTW, am I the only one who thinks it should be illegal to release the early vote counts before Election Day?  (Heck, should it even be illegal to count the votes before Election Day?)

 

Aren't we playing with something that could heavily influence the turnout on Election Day?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-ohio-12th-special-election/

 

Everything You Need To Know About The Ohio 12th Special Election

 

Quote

We’ll repeat the same thing we’ve been saying for every special election: Pay attention to the final margin, not necessarily who wins. A 1-point win for Republicans would obviously be nice for Balderson, but such a bad performance relative to the district’s partisan lean would still bode poorly for overall Republican chances in November.

 

Thankfully, we may be past the point where pundits have massive overreactions to special elections. Midterm season is well upon us — Election Day is 13 weeks from today — and it seems like there’s a new poll released every day to feed the nonstop narratives. Those distractions will help put the 12th District result into proper context: an interesting data point, but still only one of many.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Larry said:

Q:  Is this a special election simply to fill a seat that's going to up for election, again, in three months?  

 

Seems like it's not even worth taking down the lawn signs, after the election.  

 

 

A:  Yes.

 

The seat itself is basically meaningless.  But the election, in August, three months before the real deal, is going to be viewed as a harbinger of things to come.  If the Dem wins or narrowly loses in a district that traditionally leans Republican by 14 points, that will be a good sign for Dem's chances in November.  If the Republican cruises to a comfortable victory, that will be a good sign for Republicans. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Larry said:

BTW, am I the only one who thinks it should be illegal to release the early vote counts before Election Day?  (Heck, should it even be illegal to count the votes before Election Day?)

 

Aren't we playing with something that could heavily influence the turnout on Election Day?

 

They don't release vote counts until after polls close, releasing the number of early votes cast does no harm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, twa said:

 

They don't release vote counts until after polls close, releasing the number of early votes cast does no harm.

 

But I'm reading reports about what a huge vote margin the Dems have, in the early voting.  

 

Not the number of votes received, but how much the Dems are leading by.  

 

To me, that's way too much information being released.  

 

Maybe there's a reason why they have to count the votes early.  (Maybe they need to download and reset the machines, when they close down the polling place at the end of the day.)  But that information needs to be really restricted.  Like, I'd really prefer it of the number of people who have that info is in the single digits.  (Maybe nobody but the supervisor of elections).  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

But I'm reading reports about what a huge vote margin the Dems have, in the early voting.  

 

Not the number of votes received, but how much the Dems are leading by.  

 

To me, that's way too much information being released.  

 

Maybe there's a reason why they have to count the votes early.  (Maybe they need to download and reset the machines, when they close down the polling place at the end of the day.)  But that information needs to be really restricted.  Like, I'd really prefer it of the number of people who have that info is in the single digits.  (Maybe nobody but the supervisor of elections).  

 

 

Why?  I'm just not understanding your objection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Why?  I'm just not understanding your objection.

I’m assuming it’s due to the potential to influence elections - i.e. more people of a certain party stay at home or more turn out to vote based on the early voting totals.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update to my earlier post...I realize vote totals aren't released until after polls close, wish the same was nationwide during presidential elections. It'd be great if California didn't see results from New York prior to their opportunity to vote. It does impacts whether some go out to the polls or not.

 

What I was referring to was live news reporting based on exit polling data throughout the course of a day on election day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

I’m assuming it’s due to the potential to influence elections - i.e. more people of a certain party stay at home or more turn out to vote based on the early voting totals.  

 

Is there any data to back this up?  I'm not even sure if the party winning or losing would stay home or turn out based on early voting totals.

 

In any event, my understanding is that the people that watch this stuff carefully don't think the early totals matter much at all.  From the 538 article posted above:

 

Quote

Democrats also might trot out early voting statistics, which appear favorable to O’Connor: As of July 26, 54 percent of early votes had been cast by Democrats compared with 31 percent by Republicans. But in Ohio, a voter “registers” for a political party by simply voting in that party’s primary election — an unreliable indicator for one’s true partisan feelings. Plus, the early vote is accounted for in polls, so we shouldn’t give it any weight above and beyond that. In fact, the decision to vote early may be correlated with other vote-deciding factors like enthusiasm, so the election day vote could look substantially different. As a result, early voting data has often led would-be predictors astray. (Remember this if and when O’Connor jumps out to a big lead in the initial returns Tuesday night.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Why?  I'm just not understanding your objection.

 

For the same reason why you don;t reveal who's winning, at Noon on election day.  

 

Making that announcement alters the composition of who votes, and who doesn't.  

 

Maybe it shouldn't.  But it seems to me like it would.  (Our electorate seems to be willing to decide not to vote on just the flimsiest of excuses.)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Is there any data to back this up?  I'm not even sure if the party winning or losing would stay home or turn out based on early voting totals.

 

In any event, my understanding is that the people that watch this stuff carefully don't think the early totals matter much at all.  From the 538 article posted above:

 

 

Personally, I have no data whatsoever... more just an observation of humanity.  Rabid voters wouldn’t likely be affected, but I’d think it’s at least possible that others would be.  After all, in some cases, it doesnt take much of a swing to decide an election.  

 

 

I would assume the experts don’t think it matters (for prediction purposes) because it’s not necessarily indicative of the end results and doesn’t necessarily change voting behavior.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would probably be better not to identify which party, but I don't think it really matters since it is speculative.

it gives the geeks something to talk about.

 

add

Does it really have any more impact than polls?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moreover I would hope voting for President wouldn't be the only reason you are there to vote.

 

Governors/Senators/Representatives/Propositions etc should get you to the polls. The idea that people stayed home because some news stations reported that Dewey won is silly (to me) when there are a dozen more important things to be voting on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, twa said:

Does it really have any more impact than polls?

 

Polls are conducted by private organizations, based on data which respondents voluntarily give them.  

 

(Although, yes, both of them influence the vote.)  

 

(In my opinion.)  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

For the same reason why you don;t reveal who's winning, at Noon on election day.  

 

Making that announcement alters the composition of who votes, and who doesn't.  

 

Maybe it shouldn't.  But it seems to me like it would.  (Our electorate seems to be willing to decide not to vote on just the flimsiest of excuses.)  

 

I'm honestly wondering if it actually has an impact and, if so, what direction that impact is in.  Are you saying that if the early vote totals indicate Democrats are winning, less Democrats will turn out because they think it's in the bag, or less Republicans will turn out because they think it's a lost cause?  I feel like it could go either way, or both ways at the same time for various people or groups.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I'm honestly wondering if it actually has an impact and, if so, what direction that impact is in.  Are you saying that if the early vote totals indicate Democrats are winning, less Democrats will turn out because they think it's in the bag, or less Republicans will turn out because they think it's a lost cause?  I feel like it could go either way, or both ways at the same time for various people or groups.  

 

I certainly agree that I can't predict which way releasing the vote totals might affect the election.  

 

I just feel like it's releasing information that shouldn't be released.  

 

(Heck, part of me says they should announce the final, total, vote, and no other data.  No precinct-by-precinct totals.  No breakdown of early/election/absentee.  Just the final total.  If nothing else, it might make it tougher for the Parties to decide which way they want to change the laws, to favor their side.)  (But that's probably wishing for too much.)  

 

(And yes, I know that I have also, in the past, called for a whole lot more information to be released.  Like, releasing the vote totals for each individual machine, and a listing of each individual ballot (but without the voter's name.  But put a ballot number on it, so that after the election is over, I can go to the elections website, type in the number from the receipt I got when I voted, and see my individual votes counted.)  Yes, I'm being contradictory.  I am a Florida Old Fart.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see your side.  Personally, I'd err to the side of transparency in elections (not including information that would allow voters to be identified, of course), but I see your point.  That being said, I'm not a "feels" type of person, I'm a "data" kind of person.  I haven't seen any data that indicates that releasing early vote numbers has any impact one way or the other.  Not saying it doesn't exist, I just haven't seen any yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Larry said:

Q:  Is this a special election simply to fill a seat that's going to up for election, again, in three months?  

 

Seems like it's not even worth taking down the lawn signs, after the election.  

 

Yeah a waste of money imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...