For Clinton, election likely to be won or lost in October

[webfact]

For Clinton, election likely to be won or lost in October

By JULIE PACE and HOPE YEN

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Each night, Hillary Clinton's data experts head to a conference room on the 11th floor of her Brooklyn headquarters, to start counting votes.

 

The sessions in the "early voter boiler room," as it's been dubbed by campaign aides, stretch into the early hours of the morning. The team pores over turnout patterns in states where advance voting is already underway, projects how many votes Clinton and Republican Donald Trump have already received, and updates crucial targeting lists of the voters she still needs.

 

For Clinton, October is when she's likely to win or lose the election, not Nov. 8. By the third week of this month, Clinton's campaign hopes to have a solid enough sample of the early vote to know whether the Democrat is on track to win the White House.

 

"Many battleground states are already voting so every day is Election Day," said Matt Dover, Clinton's voter analytics director.

 

In several competitive states, including North Carolina, Iowa, Colorado, Florida and Nevada, at least 45 percent of the total vote is expected to come in early. Initial metrics show good news for Clinton in North Carolina, a must-win state for Trump. There are modestly positive signs for the Republican in Iowa, but that's a state the Democrat can likely afford to lose.

 

The Republican National Committee, which oversees early voting and turnout operations for Trump, is also encouraging supporters to take advantage of opportunities to cast ballots before Nov. 8. The party has significantly stepped up its analytics and voter targeting operations since being outmatched by Democrats in the past two presidential elections, but the 2016 race is the first test of its strength in a national election.

 

Despite improvements, the RNC system was always intended to be a complement to whatever operations the eventual GOP nominee brought to the table. Trump arrived in the general election with intense enthusiasm among his core supporters but few ways to harness it into trackable voter data.

 

Unlike Clinton, whose travel schedule is being built around voter registration deadlines and the start of early voting in key states, Trump's battleground stops haven't been pegged to those benchmarks. However, there is a noticeably more robust registration effort at Trump rallies and the candidate himself is making explicit early voting appeals to supporters.

 

"Get those ballots in because the only way this is going to be taken away (is) if we're foolish or if we let people take it away from us," Trump said Monday during a rally in Colorado. "I hate to interrupt my speech with these minor details but they're very important, right?"

 

Republicans traditionally do well initially with mail-in absentee balloting before Democrats surpass them during in-person early voting. That makes the start of in-person voting a key indicator as to whether core Democratic constituencies, such as young people and non-whites, show up.

 

"For me, voting early is a matter of convenience, and if I don't do it I'm unlikely to vote at all," said Joseph Wozniak, 23, of Macon, Georgia. A recent college graduate who declined to say who he is supporting in the election, Wozniak is working on early vote efforts for the non-partisan organization Democracy Works.

 

Thirty-seven states allow voting with little restriction before Election Day, either in person or via mail. By the third week in October, 34 of those states will be voting.

 

Iowa was the first of the battlegrounds to start in-person voting last Thursday. Of the 39,435 people who have cast ballots, 58 percent were Democrats and 25 percent were Republicans — but that was much closer than in 2012.

 

In North Carolina, buoyed by strong voter interest, Clinton appears to hold an edge with Democratic ballots submitted so far currently leading Republican ones, 40 to 35 percent. At this point in 2012, Republicans had opened a wide lead over Democrats in ballots, due in part to strong support among older whites.

 

For 2016, Clinton officials pointed in particular to a 13 percent increase in African-American and a 40 percent jump in Latino mail-in ballot requests. To them, it's a hopeful sign that non-whites and young people will be engaged this election, part of a shift in campaign strategy to more strongly mobilize less reliable, sporadic voters first. Still, the campaign said it will have a much clearer picture once in-person voting begins in the state on Oct. 20.

 

Similarly in Florida, absentee balloting began only Tuesday, but already more than 2.5 million people — nearly one-third of the total number of votes cast in 2012 — have requested ballots. In-person voting doesn't begin until Oct. 24, so state Democrats are now strongly urging voters to vote by mail — including in a letter from President Barack Obama paid for by the party.

 

"In Florida, voting is easier than ever because now you can vote by mail," he writes. "It's the fastest and most convenient way to make your voice heard."

 

In Obama's historic 2008 race, he ran up such big early voting advantages in four battlegrounds — Colorado, Florida, Iowa and North Carolina — that his rival, John McCain, couldn't catch up, despite winning the Election Day vote in those states, according to AP data.

 

If all goes according to the Clinton campaign's plan, early ballots soon enough will start to unequivocally point in the same direction.

___

AP writer Jonathan Lemire contributed to this report.

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-10-06

[boomerangutang]

from the OP: "In Obama's historic 2008 race, he ran up such big early voting advantages in four battlegrounds — Colorado, Florida, Iowa and North Carolina — that his rival, John McCain, couldn't catch up, despite winning the Election Day vote in those states, according to AP data. "

 

Boomer opines: Votes is votes.   Each early vote counts the same as each election-day vote.

I voted early for California.  I voted for Stein, even though it's clear HRC will win the state; the most electoral-rich of all 50 states.   I think she'll get in the upper-teens there.

 

NPR.org's latest tally of the electoral map.  Even if Trump were to win every state which is close (at this time), he still loses the big enchilada - because HRC has a comfortable lead.   

 

 

[Pinot]

538 has it as Clinton 76% vs. 24% Trump. HRC should put it on auto-pilot. 

 

Keep doing what you're doing, Trump. Worst candidate in history. Looking forward to seeing the Republican party lose big time on election day. Worst political party in history. 

[OMGImInPattaya]

33 minutes ago, Pinot said:

538 has it as Clinton 76% vs. 24% Trump. HRC should put it on auto-pilot. 

 

Keep doing what you're doing, Trump. Worst candidate in history. Looking forward to seeing the Republican party lose big time on election day. Worst political party in history. 

What did they have on Brexit? 

[Pinot]

Just now, OMGImInPattaya said:

What did they have on Brexit? 

 

Seen the GBP lately? That's what low-info, misguided xenophobia voting will get you. 

 

But there aren't any do-overs and the US won't need it. 

 

A couple of days ago it was the wingnuts hanging their hats on the big Julian Assange expose. Now they're hoping beyond hope for a Brexit result. 

 

Like Hitler telling the German people the new secret weapons will turn the tide of war. 

 

And good luck with the Brexit thingy. Oh how the mighty have fallen. 

[OMGImInPattaya]

4 minutes ago, Pinot said:

 

Seen the GBP lately? That's what low-info, misguided xenophobia voting will get you. 

 

But there aren't any do-overs and the US won't need it. 

 

A couple of days ago it was the wingnuts hanging their hats on the big Julian Assange expose. Now they're hoping beyond hope for a Brexit result. 

 

Like Hitler telling the German people the new secret weapons will turn the tide of war. 

 

And good luck with the Brexit thingy. Oh how the mighty have fallen. 

What did all the "smart money" have on Brexit? What did all the media bobbleheads have on Brexit? What did all the chattering classes and sophisticates have on Brexit? What did all the polls have on Brexit?

[iReason]

Do the Lemmings know that Aerosmith song "Dream On"?

 

They were dreaming (again) until Assange's "October Surprise" became a laughing stock. 

 

http://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/predict

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

 

The Bloviator dwells in the RED. Consistantly.

Dream on...

Edited October 6, 2016 by iReason

[Rancid]

Seems Hillary will win. She just has to keep the dogs at bey a little longer, keep covering up her health issues, her email corruption scandal, the Clinton Foundation shady deals, her history as a war monger. However as she is being endorsed by almost every media outlet in the country one could fairly assume there won't be much media attention on her sins and faults.

 

Was also reading that almost every billionaire in the US supports Hillary, seems the days of the Democrats being the working mans party are long over. The fact the elite salivate about Hillary should be telling enough in itself.

[iReason]

Just now, Rancid said:

Seems Hillary will win. She just has to keep the dogs at bey a little longer, keep covering up her health issues, her email corruption scandal, the Clinton Foundation shady deals, her history as a war monger. However as she is being endorsed by almost every media outlet in the country one could fairly assume there won't be much media attention on her sins and faults.

 

A bunch of rancid, erroneous, completely lacking of any legal basis, (paranoid) Alex Jones nonsense.

 

Purely cursory emotions.

 

Period.

 

Dunning Kruger.

Edited October 6, 2016 by iReason

[CaptHaddock]

1 hour ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

What did they have on Brexit? 

 

Votes like Brexit and Scottish independence are one-offs and so, especially hard to model, unlike US presidential races for which there is a lot of historical data.  That said, Brexit polls were tied going into the vote with 9% undecided, a large percentage.  This US race has never been in a tie; Hillary has been ahead every single day.  Currently only 4% are undecided and that percentage will continue to decline until election day.

 

So, you may cling to your cinderella long-shot hopes, if you wish, but the smart money has known for a long time that it will be HRC. 

[Strange]

43 minutes ago, iReason said:

A bunch of rancid, erroneous, completely lacking of any legal basis, (paranoid) Alex Jones nonsense.

 

Purely cursory emotions.

 

Period.

 

Dunning Kruger.

 

Yeah, not really. 

 

Head in sand much?

[OMGImInPattaya]

28 minutes ago, CaptHaddock said:

 

Votes like Brexit and Scottish independence are one-offs and so, especially hard to model, unlike US presidential races for which there is a lot of historical data.  That said, Brexit polls were tied going into the vote with 9% undecided, a large percentage.  This US race has never been in a tie; Hillary has been ahead every single day.  Currently only 4% are undecided and that percentage will continue to decline until election day.

 

So, you may cling to your cinderella long-shot hopes, if you wish, but the smart money has known for a long time that it will be HRC. 

I'm not clinging to any long-shot hopes...just sayin' the polls are close and that it's a toss-up; and that smug people can end up with pie on their face. It's to be expected that Hillary would be ahead as she's been a government hack for over 30 years and represents the status quo. Trump is the insurgent candidate and a challenge to the establishment and would be expected to be behind....as Hillary herself shrieked..."Why aren't I 50 points ahead." Why indeed.

[Pinot]

32 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

I'm not clinging to any long-shot hopes...just sayin' the polls are close and that it's a toss-up; and that smug people can end up with pie on their face. It's to be expected that Hillary would be ahead as she's been a government hack for over 30 years and represents the status quo. Trump is the insurgent candidate and a challenge to the establishment and would be expected to be behind....as Hillary herself shrieked..."Why aren't I 50 points ahead." Why indeed.

 

You're "just sayin'" bullshit.  It's no where close to a toss-up. You're delusional if you believe this is a toss-up. Trump is the candidate of the low-info racist element of American society. Insurgent is one way of mis-directing what this element represents to America. Why isn't HRC further ahead? Never discount the intelligence level and mob mentality of some. The majority of Americans are horrified it's even this close. 

 

Madam President...get used to it. 

[bannork]

Can't wait till this circus is over, dragged out for far too long. Trump reminds me of an errant uncle the family hasn't seen for years who suddenly turns up at the Xmas party. He's fun for the first half an hour, cracking jokes and being outrageous but then as the drink takes hold he gets more obscene and obnoxious till he's just a complete bore.

Let the dull auntie in the corner wish everyone a happy 4 years and get on with the party.

[dunroaming]

3 hours ago, CaptHaddock said:

 

Votes like Brexit and Scottish independence are one-offs and so, especially hard to model, unlike US presidential races for which there is a lot of historical data.  That said, Brexit polls were tied going into the vote with 9% undecided, a large percentage.  This US race has never been in a tie; Hillary has been ahead every single day.  Currently only 4% are undecided and that percentage will continue to decline until election day.

 

So, you may cling to your cinderella long-shot hopes, if you wish, but the smart money has known for a long time that it will be HRC. 

 

True.  However I do think that with brexit people took the opportunity to vote against the establishment rather than for the outcome.  It was based on a lot of anger and fear mongering.  In this American election I suspect a similar motivation which would account for the unexpected rise of the Trumpsters.

 

It was widely expected in the UK that the remainers would win and many of the remain supporters didn't bother to turn out and vote.  If they knew then what they know now then the result would probably have been very different.  Anyway they didn't and it's no good reflecting on it now.

 

I have always said that the democrats would win, not because of Clinton but because the republicans wouldn't be able to field an electable candidate.  I still stand by that.  However I do  think that it will be a case of voting against the nightmare of Trump winning and not voting for Clinton because they support her.  I don't personally know any republicans that will vote for Trump because they feel he doesn't represent the party and it would be the death nail for any future nominees.  By the same token I don't know any democrats that actually want to vote for Clinton but the thought of Trump winning is so untenable that they have no real choice.

 

So it looks like this will be very much a case of voting no to one candidate or the other rather than yes to either.  What a mess.

[boomerangutang]

I'm a bit surprised that Trump still polls in the 40's. I gotta admit he's tapped into a vein of American support.

 

It brings to mind the scenario:  Imagine there is a large group of soldiers, all young men.  In most circumstances, they'll be decent.  For example, if it's graduation day, and their families are there, and so on.

 

However, if the scenario gets frantic and let's say they're in a position to pillage a village and rape all the pretty young women, with no repercussions, they'll do it.  (some people reading this will say "maybe others would pillage, but the soldiers I know would never do that" ......that's BS).

 

For the most part, soldiers are young men and they have the same hormones swirling through their blood as other young men everywhere.  Most of the time, they're decent, even if somewhat drunk and loud and boasting.  Yet, they all have another side to their character, and that can come forth in the type of scenario I mentioned above (sacking a city with no superior officers nearby, for example).  It's happened throughout recorded history, with every type of race, nationality, religious affiliation.   

 

Trump fans the flames of less-than-decent characteristics.  I'm not saying his fans are sacking cities, but they're definitely tuning into the darker parts of their characters.  They're giving vent to various degrees of racism, isolationism, jingoism, cheating, aggression, name-calling, anger, vindictiveness, randiness, gay-bashing - some more than others.   Opponents of Trump are responding.  That's why I've been calling Trump "The Divider" in most of my posts about him.  Everything he does and says revolves around divisiveness.   When a person (HRC) is harassed day after day, and called childish names, and accused of things she didn't do (formed ISIS, for example), then some of her nastier character comes forth ('basket of deplorables' comment, for example).  Though even at her worst, HRC is head and shoulders more decent than Trump.

 

Because I truly care about the future of the US and the world in general, particularly in the perspective of environmentalism and the avoidance of nuclear war, ......I'm concerned about keeping Trump out of the halls of power.  That's why I've posted so often on these threads.   It's also strained some of my friendships (again, echoes of The Divider).  Not only me, but a good friend from L.A. who's a lawyer for movie stars and owns a large hotel in the city, says he is also clashing with his long-term friends because of the divisions Trump creates.  My lawyer friend and I see eye to eye.  There are tens of millions of us.  Without Trump, these sorts of divisions would barely be ripples.  

 

Maybe it's good to have Trump mouthing off with all his ridiculous garbage.  It's like lancing a big orange pustule.  Let it all out.  When it's in the open, it's easier to deal with, isn't it?

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

Ok, as you're so sure, I'll email the White House and tell them to start stocking up on ladies Depends, XXXL size  

 

That's low class.  We expect as much from a Trump fan.

[dunroaming]

17 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Maybe it's good to have Trump mouthing off with all his ridiculous garbage.  It's like lancing a big orange pustule.  Let it all out.  When it's in the open, it's easier to deal with, isn't it?

 

That is very sound reasoning. 

[CaptHaddock]

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

 

 By the same token I don't know any democrats that actually want to vote for Clinton but the thought of Trump winning is so untenable that they have no real choice.

 

So it looks like this will be very much a case of voting no to one candidate or the other rather than yes to either.  What a mess.

 

You should get out more.  Many of us Dems including all of my friends and acquaintances are quite happy with Clinton, having been happy with WJC and Obama.  We look forward to further progress in health care reform, labor law, higher taxes on the rich, and, especially, a liberal Court for the next generation.  No one I know is holding his nose.

Edited October 6, 2016 by CaptHaddock

[Publicus]

5 hours ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

I'm not clinging to any long-shot hopes...just sayin' the polls are close and that it's a toss-up; and that smug people can end up with pie on their face. It's to be expected that Hillary would be ahead as she's been a government hack for over 30 years and represents the status quo. Trump is the insurgent candidate and a challenge to the establishment and would be expected to be behind....as Hillary herself shrieked..."Why aren't I 50 points ahead." Why indeed.

 

Brexit was a referendum question concerning membership of the European Union. In Europe.

 

This is an election of Potus involving candidates and their respective personality to include intelligence and acumen, political parties, 50 states in the USA, the Electoral College, Republicans, Democrats and Independents voting either party line or an ideology, religious crackpots versus science, cultural and social racists versus rational beings, climate change, war and peace and much more besides.

 

Brexit was one thing, the election of Potus is a radically and completely different beast. So put the brain in gear and get connected to reality. That however is far too much to ask of the Trump fanboyz. So...

 

Carry on.

[dunroaming]

7 minutes ago, CaptHaddock said:

 

You should get out more.  Many of us Dems including all of my friends and acquaintances are quite happy with Clinton, having been happy with WJC and Obama.  We look forward to further progress in health care reform, labor law, higher taxes on the rich, and, especially, a liberal Court for the next generation.  No one I know is holding his nose.

 

I am happy to be corrected and it is true that I have limited access to US democrats where I am.  I am obviously not a democrat or republican and just an interested observer.  Who wins the next US election will have an bearing on all of us.  However I can only comment on what I see, hear and read and consequently my comments are based on that.

[Scott]

An inflammatory troll post has been reported and removed along with replies.  

 

Continue at your own peril.  

[stander]

Mike Pence on how Hillary Clinton’s disdain for voters disqualifies her from being President: ‘You cannot lead people you loathe’

[Chicog]

1 minute ago, stander said:

Mike Pence on how Hillary Clinton’s disdain for voters disqualifies her from being President: ‘You cannot lead people you loathe’

 

Given his track record, that's rather a pot calling the kettle black kind of statement, isn't it?

 

[OMGImInPattaya]

39 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Brexit was a referendum question concerning membership of the European Union. In Europe.

 

This is an election of Potus involving candidates and their respective personality to include intelligence and acumen, political parties, 50 states in the USA, the Electoral College, Republicans, Democrats and Independents voting either party line or an ideology, religious crackpots versus science, cultural and social racists versus rational beings, climate change, war and peace and much more besides.

 

Brexit was one thing, the election of Potus is a radically and completely different beast. So put the brain in gear and get connected to reality. That however is far too much to ask of the Trump fanboyz. So...

 

Carry on.

Your're not in high-school civics class anymore laddie...you don't have to produce a mini-tome for every post. My point was that the polls are close and that it's still very much a toss-up. Like your heroine said..."Why aren't I 50 points ahead." Why indeed...running against a first-time candidate for the highest office in the land, who is supposedly so unqualitied and unpopular...that's the more interesting question.

Edited October 6, 2016 by OMGImInPattaya

[Neurath]

40 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

My point was that the polls are close and that it's still very much a toss-up.

Might be your point, but it's not how the facts stand. Maybe that will change in the next four weeks, but it's hard to see how short of HRC being unmasked as Fembot sleeper being controlled remotely by voracious aliens from Gliese 581c. You'll have to ask Alex Jones.

[OMGImInPattaya]

1 minute ago, Neurath said:

Might be your point, but it's not how the facts stand. Maybe that will change in the next four weeks, but it's hard to see how short of HRC being unmasked as Fembot sleeper being controlled remotely by voracious aliens from Gliese 581c. You'll have to ask Alex Jones.

I've got Alex on speed-dial so easy for me to check  

[Neurath]

3 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

I've got Alex on speed-dial so easy for me to check  

You've got him on speed-dial, but he's most assuredly on speed - lot's of it. Leads to psychosis I'm told

[Publicus]

1 hour ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

Your're not in high-school civics class anymore laddie...you don't have to produce a mini-tome for every post. My point was that the polls are close and that it's still very much a toss-up. Like your heroine said..."Why aren't I 50 points ahead." Why indeed...running against a first-time candidate for the highest office in the land, who is supposedly so unqualitied and unpopular...that's the more interesting question.

 

We're not 50 points ahead because we're approaching being ten points ahead.

 

Face reality.

[Bob9]

8 hours ago, Rancid said:

Seems Hillary will win. She just has to keep the dogs at bey a little longer, keep covering up her health issues, her email corruption scandal, the Clinton Foundation shady deals, her history as a war monger. However as she is being endorsed by almost every media outlet in the country one could fairly assume there won't be much media attention on her sins and faults.

 

Was also reading that almost every billionaire in the US supports Hillary, seems the days of the Democrats being the working mans party are long over. The fact the elite salivate about Hillary should be telling enough in itself.

Well said - and aint it the truth.

 

But you forgot to add:  Keep demanding that women vote for her because she is a woman, and get Obama to demand that blacks vote for her because he is black.