From turnout guru Michael McDonald, who is in a position to know:As someone who works in the quarantine room on election night at Edison Media Research, I can tell you that we will not make a call if a race has the potential to be in a recount situation. In a close race, we review the recount procedures and consider what we believe to be the outstanding absentee and provisional ballots before we are willing to make a call. It is not the job of the media to prejudge the election process when there is a possibility for recount procedures to take place. Think: Florida 2000.
The big picture: the Obama campaign has every right to a recount if they want one, and the networks aren't presuming to make that judgment for them. There is also a small but tangible chance of a material human error in the vote tabulation.
If the Obama campaign makes a formal statement that they concede Missouri, then I would expect the media would call the election outcome. My guess is that they will wait until the results are certified to make a decision if they will request a recount. As we have seen in Minnesota, there can be human errors lurking in the results reported to date.
11.17.2008
Why The Networks Haven't Called Missouri
@ 12:40 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
72 comments
@Nate: Your link to Michael McDonald doesn't work.
My mom lives in Missouri. I'd be so proud for it to turn blue.
FIRST!
Remember when that used to be special?
TYPO: "small but tangible change"
Should be chance, not change.
Now the question is whether to recount or not to recount.
On one hand, democracy requires a recount; the citizens of Missouri, and dare I say America, deserve to know whether it went blue or not. Even though it won't make a difference in the Electoral College result, the truth must be ascertained, and really the cost of a recount is minuscule compared to thousands of other government expenditures.
On the other hand, this may rub the public the wrong way. It may come across as petty and vindictive. Maybe not the most bi-partisan move either.
Possible solution: pay for all recount costs out of pocket, and give a public address stressing the importance of democracy blah blah blah.
@Nate: still broken link to McDonald, though you changed the error....
McCain's lead in Missouri has just come down from 4,986 to 4,716 votes.
From my impressions of the Obama campaign on election day, they had pretty good records of what voters showed up at the polls and how they were doing on that front. So if the results don't jive with what they have, then I'd request a recount. Alternatively, I vaguely remember reading something about lack of volunteers at some St. Louis polls, so that could have accounted for the margin. But also, I think it's remarkable how blue Missouri got, seeing that it's one of those red states that was probably always going to be red no matter what, and simply the fact of the nation electing a republican the last two times might have masked that tendency. Missouri is definitely getable next time, if Obama does a good job, along with Montana and possibly Georgia. If Sarah Palin is on the ticket (which I doubt, but they may need a "sacrificial lamb for '12) then I'd say the whole country is gettable (except for Alaska).
As an ex-Missourian, with strong sentimental ties to it, I would appreciate the state coming to it's senses and turn back to blue where you belong. I know the economy has changed, and blue collar jobs are evaporating like a snowball in the tropics, but don't make me come back there and knock heads...the Blounts and Talents are not going to help you. Vote democratic!
As a proud Nevadan (Yay Nevada blue!) who just relocated to Missouri for graduate school, I'd be so happy to see it go blue this year as well.
Here is the working link URL:
http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm
this link should work.
I wonder if Missouri was one of those states where there were very strict ID requirements to vote? If there were, I bet they disqualified at least 5,000 Democratic voters in the urban areas.
The only calculation for Obama should be "What will make it easier to win Missouri in four years--to call for a recount or to not call for a recount."
How sweet would that be to see Missouri go blue and this election be written as a landslide in the history books.
It would be a great ending to this exciting election.
Hey Nate, if you're reading this.
Are you going to write an article on weight adjustments?
Maybe you could run a simulation with the new adjustments to see how things would have worked out and post the results.
Probably the only way Obama's going to win the state is if a whole lot of ballots are found in Kansas City or St Louis which weren't counted properly the first time around.
Sidebar question: Why aren't the networks giving Obama the 1 EV he earned in Nebraska?
There won't be a Missouri recount and there shouldn't be one. Obama asking for a recount would make him look overly partisan and petty. Besides which, there's no reason to believe it would change the outcome. 4000-5000 is way more than a recount typically changes.
Rachel Maddow on Friday had the whole election night projection visual thing going in announcing that NBC had given Obama the Omaha EV, so that's one network that has.
Off topic, but can't find a good thread.
Regarding Obama coattails, check out Kuff:
Precinct analysis: The Obama effect
I guess I mean a real network that loves Jesus and America. Any one cone to mind? ;-)
I think the media needs to stop leading the people in who they need to vote for and let people do the research and find out for themselves who the right person is. But the media is so left, that will never happen.
www.generalsmarchingorders.blogspot.com
i hope they do ask for a recount and the recount goes in obama's favor. i bet a friend obama would get over 370.
Obama getting closer to 67 mil votes, and Nate now out on his 6.1% differential by over 10%!!!!
http://election.cbsnews.com/election2008/president.shtml
NATE WE WANT AND DESERVE AN EXPLANATION!!
Nate, are you planning to do an analysis of how the model did compared to other meta-polls? I'm presuming that hopwever good it is, you're planning to improve it for next time round.
Over 10% out is SIGNIFICANT!
In other news, it looks like Obama will get a significant chunk of change to play with:
linky
Obama getting closer to 67 mil votes, and Nate now out on his 6.1% differential by over 10%!!!!
http://election.cbsnews.com/election2008/president.shtml
NATE WE WANT AND DESERVE AN EXPLANATION!!
Don't be a moron. Nate predicted Obama with 52.3% and he actually received 52.7%. He predicted McCain with 46.2% and he actually received 46.0%.
another mike, the counting isn't over yet. McCain's going below 46 and Obama is going above 53. Over 10% out is, in statitics, significant. and Nate is already over 10% out.
Nate,
Interesting to consider this post with your previous one, and note the difference in approach of the MSM.
I do not believe it is attributable to any higher moral ground in considering their impact by making projections too soon. More likely, the outcome of having been so badly burned in 2000 and 2004.
McCain is now at 45.99%.
and falling.
it shouldnt matter in america how it looks even if Obama has alreaady been declared the winner.
after the last two general elections where votes and voters were trashed i say recount.
any news out of AK?
If Obama paid for recount it might help, but it is *not* petty and vindictive to insist that votes are counted properly. It may not be necessary in this election, but vote manipulation has been so widespread in the last 8 years that it is time for a clean sweep. Here are notes from Election Protection Coalition 11/2/08:
"reports of voter intimidation, scams or misinformation are also emerging in Ohio and Missouri"
"Early voting problems .. Missouri"
The people who waited for hours in unfavorable conditions deserve to have their votes counted, no matter what the outcome.
The bigger the landslide the more leverage Obama will have, and he will need it given the current mounting crises in letting gamblers gut the economy and rewarding their enablers, and similar behavior around climate change effects.
For those thinking the press is leftist, suggest reading previous blog with comments. It's a manufactured issue.
The Kansas City Star is saying Obama netted about 370 votes after adding in provisional ballots and "other adjustments", as they put it, in Kansas City itself.
It brought the count down to about 4,700 in McCain's favor.
WV-sparz. Do what you want with that.
Actually, it *is* petty and vindictive to insist that votes not be counted. I realize we're talking about a recount, so this is not a perfect match, but it is typical of the misdirection that misleads that has become so common.
I would support a recount if he could do it in a low key way that doesn't cause any major disturbance with the Republicans. But the last thing he wants to do is waste his political capital on a point of principle, when there are real fights right around the corner. But I agree that, from the perspective of Democracy, its important to have an accurate vote tally.
Obama is already at 61% approval --- Bush never reached 60% until 9/11 artificially inflated his approval ratings. Nice early start. And a great contrast to Bush's 24%.
oh and on topic: in a way I think a recount should be done just because this is democracy ... but from a political perspective - I'd think Obama would just want to drop it and move on.
Regarding final returns, the largest numbers (which of course doesn't mean the most accurate) come from David Leip's U. S. Elections Atlas. As of mid-afternoon Monday, Obama had 67,029,946 votes to McCain's 58,479,207.
After taking "other" votes into account, this comes to 52.68% for Obama vs. 45.96% for McCain, a margin of 6.72%.
While I'm as interested in any discrepancies as SHERWICK, I'd say that Nate did a great job and a public service putting this site together and doesn't "owe" us an explanation or any other damn thing.
Nate estimated a popular vote of 52.3% to 46.2%, a margin of 6.1%. I'd question the real-world significance of errors which, rounding, come to -0.4% for Obama, +0.2% to +0.3% for McCain, and -0.6% for the margin, especially given that the margin of error for individual polls ranged from 2% to 6% throughout the process. Given that people think, deceive, and act ambivalently, I think it's delusional to believe one can get too much closer, though it might be good to try.
Also, from what I've seen, Nate's numbers were more accurate than any others I found; and while it would be nice to see or speculate on the source of the discrepancies noted, we've got a while before this effort begins for the next election (I hope, I hope!) and Nate deserves both some time away from the relentless number crunching and the space to do so accurately.
Just my $0.02.
I think the networks are right in not calling a state until the counting has played out, thats the error they made (twice) in Florida in 2000. But I fully expect the state to be called for McCain at some point this week. I think in the end there is no need to prolong the MO count in 2008, and President Elect Obama has a lot more important stuff on his plate than contesting an irrelevant count.
If there was some point it would be to take it to the supreme court and sort out the precedents coming from the Gore vs Bush case.
Unless this week's certified numbers in Missouri are closer than expected, the main reason for requesting a recount would be if there are even closer down-ticket races and issues remaining in that state.
Hey Nate, check this out:
Obama and cotton
I doubt he'll request a recount, too much time and effort when he has already won.
Come see my new probably awful blog:
http://youngerpolitics.blogspot.com/
KAP:
Great link, very interesting. Relatedly, check out how many of those deep south blue counties have counties adjacent to them with almost opposite voting stats (e.g. 72O-36M vs. 75M-32O). Guess where the plantation manors were!!!
Where did this definition of landslide come from, anyway? Is it even promoted anywhere other than our own beloved FTE.c? Personally, it seems to me that 360 EVs is the first integer over 2/3... isn't that a good line in the sand?
I think MO recount is a good idea, but I'm a stickler for process. I don't think it'd even be a question if Nate had listened to me and defined landslide at 360 -- or if he had defined it as either 400 (big round number) or the 404 dictated by the 75% line. In any of those cases, the landslidiness would already be known.
When do we get an update on Alaska? Who cares about Mizzou at this point? I want to know more about Alaska and also more about Georgia, and Minnesota.
Democracy requires a recount in an extremely close race if the recount can affect the election result. But in the Missouri case, whichever way the recount goes, Obama remains the president-elect, so it's not worth wasting the money.
This is very different from the situation in Minnesota.
I think Alaska's supposed to finish all the initial counting of ballots by tonight. Then we'll have to see whether this instigates a recount.
@rttinker:
FWIW, Wikipedia's totals for the 2008 election are larger than Leip's Elections Atlas. Obama at ~67.1 million, McCain at ~58.6 million. Not sure who's more correct, just pointing out that larger totals exist.
To those who wonder why the 50-state strategy was not tried before (or for a ong time), you can stop the wonderment. The answer is one word: MONEY
BHO had enough money to establish a strong ground game and advertise everywhere. McCain, the proponent of public financing, had very little choice but to accept public financing and thought the 527s and the Rethuglican Party would help him out. he was wrong. He was also disorganized and couldn't even run a 1 state (Pennsylvania) strategy.
Where did the money come from? Mostly from the Internet. BHO's decision to use the Internet as he did was also a key.
@juris:
Alaska finishes counting (aboot 25,000 more votes) tomorrow.
"aboot" = "about". Didn't know I was typing with a Scottish accent.
As Sherwick pointed out earlier, McCain's percentage has dropped below 46%. He'll probably end up on about 45.8%, but it obviously depends on exactly how many more votes there are to count.
polls_apart:
I'm not sure where Dave Leip is getting his figures from, (although I like the rest of his website). All the networks and Daily Kos have Obama on 66,882,257 and McCain on 58,343,701 at the moment. Dave Leip seems to have higher figures for both of them.
One more Missouri tidbit - the Missouri number of provisional ballots set a record - lowest percentage in a general ever - thanks to somewhere around 1400 lawyers, law students, and legal professionals who volunteered to challenge and observe on election day. I was one of the 1400 and while I wish we had found a few thousand more votes, I feel good about keeping people out of the provisional ballot black hole. In 2012, I'm sure Obama will have this program - Counsel for Change -running again and if you are able and qualified, sign up, you make a difference. We'll turn out a few more people in Jackson County next time and deliver a blue Missouri in 2012.
WV - parer - what happens when Cheney hunts with knives.
Tyler, I live in Missouri. The close count is a miracle in itself. Maybe it is not politically correct to say this, but it is still true. Had Obama been white he would have won here convincingly. The close count indicates that even Missouri's population (urban areas) is changing.
@SHERWICK
Your analysis is flawed. The vote margin is a relatively small difference between relatively large numbers. As such, any discrepancies are magnified. As an extreme example, imagine that the projection was 50.1%/49.9%, and the actual was 50.2%/49.8%. According to your analysis, that's a 100% error.
Look at the margin of error on the individual state projections. They're on the order of 3-4%. The margin of error on the national vote is going to be smaller, but still on the order of 1-2%. Nate's projection is well within that margin.
["ailize" - I ailized the numbers and this is what I came up with.]
On another note, the votes coming in the past few days have been very pro-Obama. Since last Wednesday, Obama's lead has grown by more than 400,000 votes and is now more than 8.5 million nationwide. Today so far there have been ~64,000 votes reported for McCain, and ~122,000 votes for Obama. Presidential votes recorded are now more than 4.3 million above 2004. It will take about 4.9 million to equal the 2004 voter participation mark. We will see.....
You can tell it's political dead season when the fate of 11 unimportant electoral votes makes up 2 of the last 3 topics. Beats speculation on the cabinet I suppose.
A Mandate for Health Reform?
Aside from Alaska, where are all these votes coming from is what I want to know.
On another note, turnout has been pretty heavy, although not insane in the first day of early voting for the Senate race. AA turnout in my home county seemed a little lower than during early voting for the presidential race, but not much of a dropoff. Interesting.....
Unofficially, the 2 million early voters appear to have supported Obama by something around 5-6% in GA, and election day turnout of 1.9 million was 19% in favor of McCain. That's what I have seen on some local Georgia political blogs, but I have no confirmation on that.
Turnout in GA was 600,000 greater than in 2004 and was almost 20% higher so I don't think there was voter surpression.
Although, typicially enough, Eric Johnson, the head of the Republican-controlled GA Senate says that he wants to review and roll back early voting. Fat chance--GA needs Department of Justice clearance to change election rules, and under an Obama administration that seems most unlikely to be granted ;)
syr93:
Most of the votes are coming from California, which still has 1.8 million votes to report, according to the SOS:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com
There have also been some late votes coming in from Maryland and Minnesota.
It's sad that we're still waiting for the 2004 turnout percentage to be reached, when this election was supposed to have such a huge turnout. We should reach that level, but turnout won't be up by much more than 1%, which would still mean only about 57% of the voting age population. What would the queues be like if there was a turnout like there usually is in places like Germany and Italy, of about 80?
My link went a bit wrong there. It should have been:
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/c-status08/total_unprocessed_ballots08.pdf
thanks for that link Andy! :)
"It's sad that we're still waiting for the 2004 turnout percentage to be reached, when this election was supposed to have such a huge turnout."
A big part of this is lower turn out from Republican voters. A lot of the GOP base was a no-show on election day! Democratic turnout was really good, however. Although I do think we were a little underwhelmed by the youth/AA turnout; it was good, but only moderately higher than average. (I think the youth percentage of the vote was only 1% higher than 2004).
Something to consider...
Under MO law if the vote difference is 1% or less then the "losing" candidate may request a recount and must pay for it. If the vote difference is less than 0.5% then a recount is automatic. Right now MO stands at less than 0.2%. According to MO law, the recount should be automatic.
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信,
^^ very nice
徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
情趣,情趣,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣商品,情趣商品,按摩棒,跳蛋,情趣按摩棒,充氣娃娃,保險套,飛機杯,潤滑液,情趣內衣,性感內衣,g點,持久液,按摩棒,跳蛋,情趣按摩棒,充氣娃娃,保險套,飛機杯,潤滑液,情趣內衣,性感內衣,g點,持久液,按摩棒,跳蛋,情趣按摩棒,充氣娃娃,保險套,飛機杯,潤滑液,情趣內衣,性感內衣,g點,持久液,按摩棒,跳蛋,情趣按摩棒,充氣娃娃,保險套,飛機杯,潤滑液
Post a Comment