Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think my early ballot is public record until it's counted which it is not counted before Election Day so they're guessing based on history. But if you say it's public record, tell me where I can look it up so I have the same info the people reporting the early voting stats have.
That of course is going to differ by state. Start with your local board of elections, or whatever it's called in your state. Ask who keeps these records, and how soon they are publicly available.
I can tell you that political parties can pull these lists, and do. When I was doing GOTV (last time about 15 years ago), we got lists that were updated daily as to which voters had submitted their ballots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
I also doubt exit polling of early in-person voters over multiple days.
What do you doubt? That they occur? Or that they are accurate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
And how do they know the crossover voters for either party? What the new voters who didn't vote in the primaries are going to do? Where Bernie Sanders ex-voters went? Who the NeverTrump people are? And how many of those people are early voting? See any predictions for the number of people who won't turn out to vote?
Polling. Combined with a pollster's best judgment of how current polling relates to past historical patterns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
The rest of your answer excluding your condescending "And that really shouldn't be news to you," is believable except I can't see them doing it on all early voters because of the time and money involved and the unprecedented number of early votes cast this year. I'll check out the link. Thanks.
Didn't mean to be condescending. I really am astounded that people don't understand that whether or not you've voted is a public record. And because it is, campaigns/pollsters will use that info because they are unendingly eager for any bit of information that will help them get the tiniest edge on the competition, and public records are low-hanging fruit. And it is remarkable how good these companies are getting at combining disparate bits of information into a picture of your behavior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
We'll know soon if the early voting conclusions were correct but I suspect the election results may not be known tomorrow if too many old models are being used to make predictions.
Yes, early voting could well change how predictions are made. It hasn't so far, but as it becomes more common, new patterns might emerge.
There are companies who aggregate all your purchasing records, Facebook post and what you Goolgle. They know what you want before you do. They know what you like and don't like. They also will sell that info to anybody with the means to buy it.
If a political party has that info, and who voted, they know who is winning.
Votes are NOT counted until AFTER the polls close.
These so called experts ONLY KNOW how many from a party voted. NOT WHO they voted for.
The goal is to make Trump supporters think they already lost, therefore there's no need for them to vote tomorrow. It's really another tactic to give Clinton the edge.
^^^ This.
It's been happening all throughout this election cycle.
Votes are NOT counted until AFTER the polls close.
These so called experts ONLY KNOW how many from a party voted. NOT WHO they voted for.
Where did I state they knew who people voted for? They know how many votes were cast.
I said they match voters against other kinds of data. They can make a pretty good guess. Data mining is a good business. Some polling companies telephone people who EV and ask who they voted for. Who knows if they get a truthful answer.
What you fail to mention is that voter affiliation does not equal a vote for one candidate or another. Let's take a solid red state like Kentucky. Did you know the majority of people there are registered democrats, yet they cross party lines and almost always vote for the Republican nominee for President.
Many swing states have a large majority by far of registered democrats but people vote for who they think will make the best President, not lock step along party lines.
If all you needed to do was count party affiliation, then no Republican would ever win the Presidency. We don't even need to have elections if that were the case. All they'd have to do is look at voter registration and decide by that who wins.
All you need to say is "Reagan democrats" This election will be the same.
"Why Is The Media Pretending To Know Who Early Voted?"
In each and every state, whether an individual has cast a ballot is a matter of public record, as is that individual's party affiliation. This has been the case since about forever. You must be a very new voter.
29 states require a voter to declare a party affiliation as a condition of voting in a presidential primary.
They know who voted early and their party affiliation. This does not include a percentage of people who will vote the other party. Nor will it include independents.
It's called statistics.
Voting districts all have voting patterns; some are heavily reliable for the Republicans or the Democrats, while others are always up in the air, swinging from one party to the other. Some have reliably heavy turnouts, while others are reliably light, while others are more unpredictable.
Those are just some of the statistical factors that can be examined.
When early voting is extremely heavy in a Democratic district, that's a sign, just as it is when another that's always Republican is heavy. When a district that has always had light voting suddenly votes heavily early, that's a sign of a strong Get Out The Vote activity.
All this stuff can be factored against historical outcomes and can be indicative of the election. Every early voter is one who comes off the roles at the polling places, so if there's a 35% early vote in a solidly Republican district, for example, that means there will be approximately 35% fewer Republican voters at the polls Tuesday, as they've already voted.
When this is factored into the historical voting pattern, it's a semi-good picture of what the Republican vote will be in that district, as voter turnout is also predictable to a pretty good degree.
Statisticians know a lot more us and the way we vote than most folks realize, and statistics these days is much more sophisticated and complex than even in the past.
Of course, errors exist, and surprises always happen, but they too are accounted for in statistical studies. Miracles really don't exist as often as we would like to think; Obama's 2008 election, as the first African-American President was one, and they are truly rare in our politics.
Although Hillary will make history, win or lose, we have been preparing ourselves for a female President since 1988, when Geraldine Ferraro ran for VP, the first woman ever to be nominated to such a high position. Nominating a woman is no novel thought now, and our primaries show this. There were female candidates in both parties.
2016 is not 2008. There won't be any miracle this year to throw statistics out the window. If Trump was going to win, the statistical evidence would already be there, and it isn't. It never got close.
What you fail to mention is that voter affiliation does not equal a vote for one candidate or another. Let's take a solid red state like Kentucky. Did you know the majority of people there are registered democrats, yet they cross party lines and almost always vote for the Republican nominee for President.
Many swing states have a large majority by far of registered democrats but people vote for who they think will make the best President, not lock step along party lines.
If all you needed to do was count party affiliation, then no Republican would ever win the Presidency. We don't even need to have elections if that were the case. All they'd have to do is look at voter registration and decide by that who wins.
What you just said is untrue.
Kentucky is the exception, not the rule. Kentucky and Maryland are the only 2 states in the entire country where Democrats are over 50%
Everywhere else, the number is high 30's low 40's. There is also a large chunk of states that allow people to registered as independents.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
