E!! » polls

Opposition to “Stimulus” Bill

E!! — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 20:47:37 +0000

Yesterday 18 free market and limited government leaders released a letter urging the Senate to reject “the Bill.”

And Rasumussen reported that more Americans oppose the $1.2 trillion (including intest) bill than support it. Here are some blurbs:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 37% favor the legislation, 43% are opposed, and 20% are not sure.

Two weeks ago, 45% supported the plan. Last week, 42% supported it.

Opposition has grown from 34% two weeks ago to 39% last week and 43% today.

Sixty-four percent (64%) of Democrats still support the plan. That figure is down from 74% a week ago. Just 13% of Republicans and 27% of those not affiliated with either major party agree.

Seventy-two percent (72%) of Republicans oppose the plan along with 50% of unaffiliated voters and 16% of Democrats.

Meanwhile Congressional Republicans doubt whether the bill will save or create the 3 to 4 million jobs Obama and the Dems claim.

The bill is full of pork and nonsense and needs to be scrapped.

Pew and Rasmussen Were Most Accurate Polls

E!! — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:22:43 +0000

It should be acknowledged that The Pew Research and Rasmussen Reports polls had the presidential race right at 52 to 46 percent, a 6 point spread.

The polls at Gallup and Reuters/Zogby had the race at an 11 point spread which is outside the margin of error so problematic. ABC/Washington Post and CBS had Obama up by 9 which is just at the +/- 3 point margin of error.

NBC/WSJ and IBD had a spread of 8 which isn’t bad, and CNN and FOX had the spread at 7 points which is/was close enough for me.

Source: Continue reading...

Rove’s Tally

E!! — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 04:45:33 +0000

Karl Rove has called it for Obama. He’s got the electoral vote count totals at 338-200 because (he says)Obama wins in NV, CO, NM, MI, OH, FL, VA, PA, and NH while McCain only wins in MO, IN, and NC.

Of course, evil Republican genius* that he is, Rove could just be trying to lull Obama voters into a false sense of security (i.e. staying home).

*For those not aware, this is a liberal term of endearment for Rove.

Poll Closing Times

E!! — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 04:31:42 +0000

Most people who follow election day results know that poll closing times drive news coverage throughout the afternoon/evening. Below are how the closing times fall (all times are Eastern) along with some notes. Electoral votes are in parenthesis where indicated.

6:00 – Most of KY and IN – Indiana is a battleground state this year.

7:00 – Remaining precincts in KY and IN + VT, half of NH, VA, SC, GA, FL – This is the “first wave” of election results. Kentucky (8), South Carolina (8), and Georgia (15) are red states. Vermont (3) is blue. Eyes are on Indiana (11), New Hampshire (4), Virginia (13), and Florida (27). I’ve seen polls in these states that have the candidates virtually tied and polls that have Obama up by 3 to 5 points. I predict FL and NC for McCain; not sure on NH and VA.

7:30 – OH, WV, NC – Ohio is huge with 20 electoral votes. West Virginia (5) is red, but North Carolina (15) is in play. I predict McCain will win NC, but Ohio is anybody’s guess. Obama could win without Ohio, but I’m not sure McCain can.

8:00 – ME (4), the other half of NH, MA (12), CT (7), PA (21), NJ (15), DE (3), MD (10), D.C. (3), MI (17), TN (11), AL (9), MS (6), IL (21), MO (11), SD (3), KS (6), OK (7), TX (34) - The battleground states on this list are NH, PA, MI, and MO. Mchigan will go blue. I think Missouri will go red. I would have called PA for Obama up until a week ago, but now I’m not so sure. PA is second in importance behind Ohio, and no matter what McCain can’t lose both of them and win the way things are looking.

8:30 – AR (6) – Arkansas is red.

9:00 – RI (4), NY (31), LA (9), WI (10), MN (10), parts of ND (3) and SD (3), NE (5), WY (3), CO (9), NM (5), AZ (10) – The only real question marks here are Colorado and New Mexico. All the polls say Colorado will go to Obama and the margin seems to make that likely. The race in New Mexico is closer. Strangely enough, the way these things work, McCain really needs New Mexico’s five electoral votes. (And I noted that he spent some time there today so his campaign concurs.) I ran quite a few scenarios earlier including one in which McCain won NH, IN, OH, VA, NC, FL, MO, and lost PA, MI, CO, NV, and NM…which resulted in a tie: 269 electoral votes each. Moving NM’s 5 to Obama’s column resulted in a 274-264 Obama win.

10:00 – IA (7), MT (3), ID (4), UT (5), NV (5) - Iowa is blue. The rest are red except Nevada which is in play this year. Based on registration rolls, many people are calling Nevada for Obama, but the predicted Dem wins in the primaries (for the same reason) didn’t happen. So, we’ll see.

11:00 – WA (11), OR (7), CA (55) – “Yawn”: The most boring poll closing since all are blue.

12:00 – AK (3), HI (4) – Alaska is red; Hawaii blue.

Las Vegas Residents Vote Early, Report Partisan No-Nos

E!! — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:39:11 +0000

A Vegas voter posted this on Bob Beers’ blog yesterday:

Disgusted with Dems Says:
October 31st, 2008 at 3:01 pm

I went to one of the early voting locations today and when I refused the Copening propaganda her supporters thrust at me in the parking lot, I was called a “b*tch” as I walked away. How dare they treat voters with such disrespect.

In this next case, emailed in by my one of my readers, a partisan person was sanctioned:

I voted this morning at the Lake Meade/Tenaya location. Probably the most excitement was a guy from the Obama campaign that had on a yellow T-shirt that said “voting questions – ask me” or something like that. He was sitting along the line of people waiting to vote.

I didn’t think anything of it, until I noticed that all the poll workers had on blue/white/red shirts. About that time, the guy was escorted out of the area. He took off the shirt and then was milling around with the ‘poll observers’. I was ready to grab my cell phone for a picture if anything exciting happened, but nothing did.

I waited about an hour to vote. My hubby was on Channel 3 – they were interviewing people about the early voting process – was it easy, what did we think, etc.

There is not supposed to be any partisan canvassing at the polls. Also, in re: to situation 1 above, here is what item 3 of the Nevada Voters’ Bill of Rights, as outlined in NRS 293.2546, says about voting:

3. Each voter has the right to vote without being intimidated, threatened or coerced.

That first voter should have complained to the poll workers so they could have asked those Copening people to take their handouts and nasty remarks elsewhere.

Polling, Margins of Error, and Why None of it Means Doodly Squat

E!! — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 05:11:39 +0000

IowaHawk brings the funny yet again. Read the whole thing. (Parental Guidance suggested.)

UPDATE: My stomach still hurts from laughing at this other IowaHawk post. Sheer genius.

Nevada: Election Snapshot on 10/27/08

E!! — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:27:06 +0000

With just 8 days left until the polls close for the 2008 presidential election, the Las Vegas Review Journal is reporting that nearly 190,000 voters had turned out through Saturday in early voting in Nevada’s largest county (Clark). Of the 186,849 voters to show up at the polls, 103,719 were Democrats and 52,850 were Republicans. Of mail ballots received so far, there have been about 14,000 Republicans ballots vs. 12,500 Democrat ballots. Combining both mail ballots and early voting, Dems represented 54 percent of all Clark County voters while Republicans represented 31 percent.

What remains to be seen is how the rest of Nevada’s counties - many of which lean Republican – turn out. Washoe County, which contains Reno-Sparks, is particularly of interest. According to the Washoe County website, 51,209 voters have turned out to the polls as of yesterday. 26,214 of those were Democrats, compared to 16,838 Republicans. The final count will likely be a lot closer, though. A late September Reno Gazette Journal piece said that total Washoe County registration stood at 87,971 registered Republicans and 84,705 registered Democrats, with a backlog of about 5,000 registration applications still awaiting processing at that point. If we assume that most of that backlog were Democrats, Washoe may be ”a wash” because the numbers will be nearly even.

For the break down of voter rolls of Nevada’s 15 remaining counties, see the Sec. of State’s website. The sum up is this: when the numbers from Clark and Washoe counties are set aside, the rest of Nevada leans Republican. September stats showed Republican registrations at 75,402 vs. Democrat registrations at 49,687 in these counties. The GOP to Dem ratio used to be a lot bigger in northern Nevada, but the large influx of liberal leaning California residents has chipped away at it over the last decade.

According to this RJ piece last week, Nevada Democrats increased their total voter registration edge over Republicans to 111,559 this year – huge in comparison to the edge of about 4,100 voters a year ago. The RJ says the total of all registered voters in Nevada stands at nearly 1.5 million, including 625,333 Democrats and 513,774 Republicans. For Democrats, that’s 43 percent of the voters; and for Republicans it’s about 36 percent.

Note: The numbers of active voters on the Sec. of State’s webpage are a lot lower than the RJ is reporting so I called Matt Griffin, our state Elections Deputy, to verify. I’m waiting on a call back and will report.* The SOS website says that as of September 2008 there are 498,143 registered Democrats; 417,477 registered Republicans; 168,606 Non-partisans; 44,481 Independents; 6,388 Libertarians; 3,699 Others; 3,282 Greens; and 200 Natural Laws (what the heck is a “Natural Law” voter?)

Assuming these numbers are correct, those identifying with parties other than the Big Two total 226,656 with the Independent/Non-partisan voters totaling 213,087. That being the case, it looks like it’s the Independent/Non-partisan votes that will make the difference in Nevada.

I know a lot of in-state folks have called Nevada for Obama already. This little blogger ain’t so sure. Nevada’s independent voters tend to lean conservative and residents of all political stripes favor low taxes, small government and generally being left alone.

The more Obama talks about government programs, the less likely he is to please the Silver State’s electorate. Las Vegas also has hundreds of small businesses whose owners (and nervous employees) may well have been swayed by McCain’s Joe-the-Plumber-esque pitch this past week. And let’s not forget: we are very much a war-hawk/pro-military state, with Nellis AFB just a few miles east of Vegas.

Election Fact: Since 1912, Nevada has voted for the winner of every presidential election, except 1976, when the state chose Republican Gerald Ford rather than Democrat Jimmy Carter.

*Elections Deputy Matt Griffin called me back re: the discrepancy on voter registration rolls. He said the RJ is likely basing their numbers on registered but-not-yet-validated voters, whereas the Sec. of State’s website is citing verified, eligible voters.

LVRJ Poll: Heller Ahead by 14 points

E!! — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:37:13 +0000

NV Congressman Dean Heller is holding his lead over challenger Jill Derby.

Heller voted against the $700 bailout bill (twice) and has consistently complained about the spendy RINO (Republicans in name only) in D.C. Heller represents our second district, which encompasses most of rural Nevada. A little history:

Heller announced his run for the House in 2005. He won the GOP primary for the seat being vacated by Jim Gibbons who was then running for governor. In the primary, Heller received 24,781 votes to Sharron Angle’s 24,353 (squeaker!) and, interestingly, to Dawn Gibbons’ (yes THAT Mrs. Gibbons) 17,328.

In the general election, Heller defeated U of NV regent and Dem candidate Jill Derby by about 5%. Although he lost Washoe County/Reno, he won in the rural areas by a margin of over 2-1 and took the election by over 12,000 votes.

Obama Rolls Anti-Yucca Dice in Nevada

E!! — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 19:24:42 +0000

Here’s an interesting link-up/post on Obama and Yucca Mountain by Edward John Craig @ Planet Gore blog @ National Review Online. After he quotes Max Schulz in the D.C. Examiner, Craig quips, “A northern liberal equating elite opinion with public opinion? Nah . . . never happens.”

Obama on Yucca Mountain

[Edward John Craig writes] Max Schulz in the D.C. Examiner suggests that Obama has a bad read on Nevada voters’ position on Yucca Mountain.

Obama is gambling that his anti-Yucca stance will put Nevada in his column. Conventional wisdom holds that Obama has taken the safer bet. Yet it’s actually a risky strategy, based on the highly questionable assumption that Nevada voters oppose Yucca Mountain as fervently as do the state’s elected officials. The last two presidential elections suggest they don’t.

In 2000, Yucca supporter Bush took the state with more votes than opponents Gore and Ralph Nader combined. Those five electoral votes were the difference between victory and defeat.

Shortly after taking office, Bush pushed Yucca Mountain legislation through Congress, sparking fresh outrage from Nevada’s political leaders. It didn’t matter. In the 2004 presidential election, Bush again won the Silver State. Incredibly, he tallied nearly 39 percent more votes than four years before.

A big problem with Obama’s reflexive Democratic opposition to Yucca Mountain is that he proposes no viable alternatives at a time when Washington is on the hook for an answer to the nuclear waste question.

Failure to come up with a workable solution throws a wrench into plans to revive nuclear power’s fortunes just when voters are increasingly worried about climate change and over-reliance on foreign energy sources.

Without an alternative proposal, Obama’s pro-nuclear comments are merely lip service. That could have ramifications in states other than Nevada. All signs point to a public and an investment climate increasingly supportive of nuclear power.

Obama is a savvy politician who for two years has run a nearly flawless campaign for the White House. He is also known to be a pretty good poker player. But with his opposition to Yucca Mountain, as with his dissembling on offshore drilling, he looks to have played the energy card all wrong. It just might cost him a big pot on November 4.

Clear As Mud

E!! — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:50:16 +0000

SUFFERING FROM YUCCA-SCHIZOPHRENIA

“It seems 58 percent of Nevadans polled oppose the Yucca Mountain project, where the government wants to bury the highly radioactive waste from nuclear plants. But in a different question, 58 percent of Nevadans said they had no problem whatsoever digging up more uranium to refine and use in nuclear power. Thus creating more nuclear waste. Thus creating a greater need for the disposal of said nuclear waste. Thus creating more pressure to build and operate Yucca Mountain. Which 58 percent of Nevadans say they’re against.

Does that make sense to anybody? We didn’t think so.”

- CityLife editor Steve Sebelius, 8/26/08