Posted on 08/29/2010 12:36:24 PM PDT by Brices Crossroads
As I write this, Joe Miller leads incumbent Lisa Murkowski by 1668 votes, or 1.9% of the votes cast, 50.9% to 49.1%. There remain an undetermined number of absentee, questioned and early votes yet to be tallied. (Raw totals suggest about 23,000 total, but no one knows how any are valid votes or how many are GOP ballots. I would imagine that no more than 15,000 are GOP votes and not all of them will be counted since many are questioned votes, so the universe of ballots is relatively small)
I did some quick research, and I find no evidence that ANY election with a margin of 2% has EVER been overturned by a post election statewide tally of absentee ballots or early votes. The absentee ballots generally would track the election day results fairly closely. They could marginally favor one or the other side, but not significantly, certainly not to the extent of erasing a 2% statewide lead. (It is barely possible that one could come close to erasing a 2% lead but only with a massive PRE-ELECTION absentee Ballot/Early Vote operation such as Mark Begich undertook successfully in 2008, a high turnout Presidential election year. No such operation was undertaken this year and the turnout in a primary is much lower.)
If any Freepers who are electoral historians have any evidence that controverts this assertion, I would be glad to hear it. Two per cent is not a lead that can be overcome by votes that are drawn from the state at large, which produced the 2% margin.
In fact, I think 2% is a lead that is probably not among the 1000 closest statewide elections in the last thirty years. The notion that it could be overturned by absentee and early votes cast from the same pool seems to me farfetched, if not virtually impossible.
Ping!
What was the difference between Al Franken and Norm Coleman (not the same, that was a general election)??
On your assumptions, Murkowski would have to win the absentee ballots by about a 60% to 40% margin.
The ball is just getting rolling on this travesty. They will do all they can to make sure Miller loses. The Secretary of State in Alaska needs to step up and certify the results as soon as all absentee ballots are counted.
“What was the difference between Al Franken and Norm Coleman”
Coleman led by 700 on election day. After all the battles, Franken won by 312 OUT OF THREE MILLION CAST.
Here you have Miller with a lead over twice as large as Coleman’s in a pool of voters (92,000) that is less that ONE THIRTIETH the size of the Minnesota electorate. and bear in mind, that Franken knew he had a close election and he made preparations BEFORE election day. Not so, Murkowski.
Are we talking races with a Democrat 2% behind?
If we use the 15,000 GOP absentee ballot number. She would need to win by a 55.7% to 44.3% margin. That’s a swing of -1.9% to +11.4% for a total improvement of 13.3%. My guess is that people who bothered to file an absentee ballot in a primary would be more motivated for the upstart candidate as opposed to the status quo.
In Alaska, the LT GOV does sec state duties.
Yes. The last time Alaska voted for a U.S. Senator, in fact. Begich “over” Stevens.
On the primary night thread. I called this race when just under 20% of the vote was in. A 2% margin is impossible to overcome without fraud.
All these SOBs are doing is stalling. Intentionally trying to hurt his fundraising.
The good news is They are raising his name ID.
Color me and ALL honest Alaskans unimpressed.
Murkowski and the rest of these lying and corrupt Bs will do ANYTHING to win.
ANYTHING.
But, hey ...
“Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain.”
“Move along, nothing to see HERE citizen.”
Coleman led by 255 at certification of that election.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Minnesota,_2008#Results
And if you read too much there you will realize that the Libertarian and Constitution party members in MN probably gave us Obama care.
If Miller led Murkowski in AK by the same percentage as Coleman led Franken MN, his lead would be less than 7 votes.
“On your assumptions, Murkowski would have to win the absentee ballots by about a 60% to 40% margin.”
That is effectively impossible. Miller is probably going to win them, since many of his votes are absentee. In any event, there is no way she will win by a margin even close to that.
In 2008, Begich erased a 1% lead by Stevens but there were a total of over 90,000 absentee, early and questioned ballots, including 9500 early votes, and Begich had spent a lot of time getting early votes out. In this election, there are probably not more than about 15,000 GOP ballots to be counted, only one-sixth the number Begich had to work with. And it was the early votes that was his real silver bullet, and in this race there are only 663 total (if that is 75% GOP, then that is about 500 votes, only one-nineteenth the number Begich had to draw from.)
http://the-reaction.blogspot.com/2008/11/alaska-counting-ballots.html
So Lisa Murkowski has a much larger lead to erase and many, many fewer potential votes to do it. And she had nothing like the PREPARATION that Begich had before the primary.
“Are we talking races with a Democrat 2% behind?”
Yes. I can’t find a single one.
Yes you did! And I remember wondering if you were merely optimistic, or just plain nuts. LOL
:)
Keep in mind that the size and sparce population density of Alaska might lead to a higher percentage of absentee ballots which could tip an electioned with a larger margin than in other states with a lower percentage of absentee ballots.
Still Murkowski believes Miller won and she wont be able to overturn it. If that were not the case she would be keeping her power drier about becoming a third party candidate.
This is up now at Conservatives4Palin:
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2010/08/republican-party-hack-lisa-murkowski-is.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.