Skip to main content

People view various newspaper front pages showing President Barack Obama's victory over Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney on display at the Newseum in Washington November 7, 2012. Fresh from a decisive re-election win, Obama returns from the campaign trail on Wednesday with little time to savor victory, facing urgent economic challenges, a looming fiscal showdown and a still-divided Congress able to block his every move.       REUTERS/Gary Cameron
Getting bigger by the day.
In Wednesday's edition of this feature, toshiaki listed the margins of victory of presidential elections going back to Nixon:
−0.51% 2000 GWB
0.17% 1960 JFK
0.70% 1968 Nixon
2.06% 1976 Carter
2.46% 2004 GWB
3.52% 2012 Obama
4.48% 1948 Truman
5.56% 1992 Clinton
7.27% 2008 Obama
7.72% 1988 GHWB
8.51% 1996 Clinton
9.74% 1980 Reagan
10.85% 1952 Ike
15.40% 1956 Ike
18.21% 1984 Reagan
22.58% 1964 LBJ
23.15% 1972 Nixon
President Barack Obama won't surpass Truman, but a 4 percent margin of victory is still within reach.

Per Dave Wasserman's running tally. Compared to Wednesday's numbers, Obama gained a tenth of a point Thursday and Mitt Romney lost two tenths: Obama 50.91, Romney 47.36. Obama will be the first president two reach 51 percent of the popular vote in two elections since Dwight D. Eisenhower. Not even Ronald Reagan managed that feat.

There are still a million-ish votes that haven't been reported from New York and New Jersey, and another 545,000 in California. As I write this Thursday night, it doesn't look like Wasserman has tallied all of the 260,000 or so California votes reported Thursday.

Three new states and D.C. have certified their votes:

CT becomes 19th state to certify its election results, although I'm not sure they're public with their final count: https://t.co/...
@Redistrict via web

Obama won the state 58.09-40.75, pissing off a lot of hedge fund managers in Stamford.

DC becomes 20th to certify tally: @BarackObama 267,070 @MittRomney 21,381. Largest raw vote jump in U.S. (10.5%): https://t.co/...
@Redistrict via web

D.C. has Republicans?

Maine becomes 20th state to finalize results: @BarackObama 401,306 (+3,263) @MittRomney 292,276 (+1,598). https://t.co/...
@Redistrict via web

American Crossroads (Karl Rove's outfit) tried to claim that Romney could pull off an electoral vote in Maine (which apportions one EV to each of its two congressional districts). In early October they had Obama winning the state by just 48-44, and losing in the 2nd congressional district 49-44.

Well, Obama won the state by about 15 percent (56.27-40.98), and won the 2nd CD 55-43. Rove is so incompetent, I can't believe people still think he has super powers.

Wisconsin becomes 21st state to certify its results: @BarackObama 1,620,985 @MittRomney 1,410,966. Nearly 7% spread: https://t.co/...
@Redistrict via web

Wasn't close.

Final WI numbers: @RepPaulRyan won #WI01 reelect 200,423 to 158,414, but by my calc, Romney/Ryan only carried it 195,835 to 179,872
@Redistrict via web

Damn, a lot of Obama voters didn't bother casting votes downballot. Not that it would've made a difference in the final outcome, but it demonstrates a continuing problem with educating our base on the importance of voting for Dems all the way down the ballot.

And on a final note, want to get pissed off at gerrymandering some more?

U.S. House popular vote: By my count, Democrats have taken a 652,362 vote lead while winning just 201 seats: https://t.co/...
@Redistrict via web

We need to see more initiatives pass like the ones in Arizona, Florida and California that mandate non-partisan line drawing. Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, in particular, have offensive gerrymanders unrepresentative of their state's electorate.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  California has been strongly in dem control for (13+ / 0-)

    decades, yet when partisan gerrymandering stopped this cycle, we picked up seats.  
    Turns out, all the contrivances to keep safe seats actually hurt dems.

    These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert to fleece the people, and now that they have got into a quarrel with themselves, we are called upon to appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel. Abraham Lincoln

    by Nailbanger on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:18:59 AM PST

    •  That's because non-partisan lines… (8+ / 0-)

      …don't work to needlessly protect incumbents. Sacrifice one Howard Berman and pick-up 5 other seats.

      Teh stoopidTM, it hurts. Buy smart, union-printed, USA-made, signs, stickers, swag for everyone: DemSign.com. Get your We are the 99% Yard Sign.

      by DemSign on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:42:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I strongly agree with this... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        helpImdrowning, Larsstephens

        @Ryan winning he seat...we really need to do a lot of work educating our voters...who the dems are. Example of this is my wife...All she wants to do is vote the president and doesn't know or even care that he needs a supporting cast....and most of her friends are same...

        Damn, a lot of Obama voters didn't bother casting votes downballot. Not that it would've made a difference in the final outcome, but it demonstrates a continuing problem with educating our base on the importance of voting for Dems all the way down the ballot.

        "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis, 1935 --Talk of foresight--

        by tuma on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:53:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I purposely didn't vote downballot (0+ / 0-)

          I voted for Congress and my state rep, but for the first time ever there were judges on my ballot (it was my first time voting in my current state). I don't believe judges should be elected, especially in partisan elections, so I left it blank. They were all unopposed anyway, or endorsed by both the Democratic and Republican parties.

    •  Gerrymandering hurt the Dem Party (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rosarugosa

      But it helped the reps that did it back in 2000.

      That's the whole point of an independent commission.  Doesn't matter what party, if you let legislators draw their own districts, the most likely result is that everyone but the most unpopular will have nice, safe seats.

    •  Yes, the Dems bent over backward so far (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Nailbanger

      that they produced Republican-lite gerrymanders.

      Partly it was an incumbent-protection scheme. But partly it exemplified the widespread (but possibly fading) phenomenon of Republicans out-negotiating Democrats.

      The gerrymander now seems to be the #1 threat to democracy. (At least until the next outrageous Supreme Court decision.)

  •  Pour it on! (6+ / 0-)

    The Republican brand: "Consequences, schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich"

    by D in Northern Virginia on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:19:00 AM PST

  •  Still winning . (7+ / 0-)

    "Drop the name-calling." Meteor Blades 2/4/11

    by indycam on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:23:34 AM PST

  •  I predicted 51.2% (10+ / 0-)

    so that is the target I am looking for and it is starting to look very realistic.

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:23:49 AM PST

    •  I've been saying 51.1%-47.2%... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Andrew C White

      ...for a week and a half.  As fast as Obama's number has been rising, there might be an outside chance for 51.3% or even 51.4%.  What are the chances that, in the swing states alone, Mitt will drop to under 47.00%

      •  Pretty tough... (0+ / 0-)

        to see Romney dive under 47.00% in the 12 swing stated Wasserman listed.  Right now it's:

        51.324% Obama
        47.240% Romney

        There isn't the buzz that PA, OH or VA are sitting on a pile of ballots like CA, NY and NJ are.  Even the ones they do have are probably the type of provisionals that GOP SOS and County Clerks are happy to leave in the dumpster in an election already lost.

        That said, as you can see above, the gap is 4.08% in those 12 states.  It's very unlikely that Obama is going to drop under 4% in those states.  Also looking at the ones left:

        7.65% Minnesota
        6.68% Nevada
        5.81% Iowa
        5.41% Pennsylvania
        5.37% Colorado
        3.87% Virginia
        2.96% Ohio
        -2.04% North Carolina

        There are a few things to root for:

        * getting VA up to 4%

        Have no idea what's outstanding, and where.

        * getting Ohio to 3.00%

        I seem to recall David saying that's the areas out aren't collectively good Obama areas.

        * getting NC under -2%

        We've seen 0.04% movements in closing out states.

        MA: 23.20% --> 23.14%
        KS: -21.94% --> -21.72%

        MA moved away from Obama, while Kansas was a pretty decent size move towards Obama.

        Those would be fun.  It seems a stretch that there's enough left in the tank in Iowa to bump it over 6.00%, but that would be pretty funny as well.  :)

        Anyway, an overall update for Kos based on where David is at now:

        50.917% vs 47.351% = 50.92% vs 47.35%

        Slowly but surly.

        •  This confuses me (0+ / 0-)

          from the diary:

          As I write this Thursday night, it doesn't look like Wasserman has tallied all of the 260,000 or so California votes reported Thursday
          If 260K votes came in from CA yesterday, Obama's % should have bumped up more than a tenth of a percent.
          Do you have a take on this?
        •  Ohio tossing a lot of provisional ballots (0+ / 0-)

          IIRC, Husted wanted to add an additional burden for the voter to complete the form correctly. The local judge was suppose to take this up on Oct. 17 but I think I read that an upper court stayed his ruling. Hence, Husted is tossing provisional ballots. Also, Ohio, like Florida, has a high per centage of provisional ballots.

          BTW, anyone hear that Christian Slater had to vote a provisional ballot, which was tossed.

          Provisional ballot voting is a scam and is disenfranching thousands of people.

          "I feel like I'm still waiting to meet my true self. I'm assuming it's gonna be in a dark alley and there's gonna be a fight." ---Rachel Maddow

          by never forget 2000 on Sat Dec 01, 2012 at 09:21:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Gerrymandering (2+ / 0-)
    And on a final note, want to get pissed off at gerrymandering some more?
    Actually, gerrymandering is only a distant third among the factors that account for the vote-seats discrepancy. The incumbency advantage, and the differential geographic dispersion of Democrats and Republicans, are the big factors.

    The Monkey Cage had some great coverage of this in the days after the election. Here and here, for example.

    Grew a mustache and a mullet / Got a job at Chick-Fil-A

    by cardinal on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:26:40 AM PST

    •  Oops, forgot the (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PatriciaVa

      best one.

      To summarize: be careful what you wish for. If every state adopted non-partisan redistricting commissions, for whom geographical compactness of the district was the prime criterion for drawing lines, it would introduce a substantial and permanent Republican bias into the process.

      Grew a mustache and a mullet / Got a job at Chick-Fil-A

      by cardinal on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:37:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  So most states are gerrymandered in favor of (0+ / 0-)

        Democrats now?

        Kinda makes a mockery of small 'd' democracy, eh?

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:54:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  "Gerrymander" generally refers (0+ / 0-)

          to intentional manipulation of the lines for partisan ends; so, by that definition, there are actually more Republican gerrymanders than Democratic ones at the moment. But the point is that, were we to move to a system that values geographic continuity above all else (and that's not the only way to draw non-partisan lines, but it's the most obvious), then it would favor Republicans across the country.

          Grew a mustache and a mullet / Got a job at Chick-Fil-A

          by cardinal on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 12:00:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  How do you figure? (0+ / 0-)

            If you look at a map, larger metropolitan areas tend to go for Dems and the vast nothingness that's left of the rest of the country votes red. I've lived in Irving, TX since 2003. My congressman Kenny Marchant, I couldn't spot on a wanted poster. I have no idea what the guy looks like. For the most part the area was predominantly minority and yet somehow, every other year the guy keeps getting elected. If they didn't keep splitting the district up so that they shared it with the whitest areas of Tarrant County (Ft. Worth) and the 32nd with the whitest areas of Dallas that minorities get pulled over for just being in the neighborhoods, there's no way would he would keep getting elected.

            •  Look at a precinct-level (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              maryru

              map of voting patterns in DFW, and it will become clearer. Remember first that the most efficient district for a party is one in which the party has about 55-65% of the vote. Anything beyond that, and you're wasting votes that could swing other districts.

              So back to the maps. Democrats cluster in tight geographic areas: North and East Fort Worth, much of Dallas proper, etc. The older suburbs are more mixed, and the newer suburbs (far NE Tarrant, etc.) are heavily Republican. But, since Republicans form a widely dispersed ring around the dense Democratic areas, it's far more likely that Democrats will be packed together in inefficient districts, whereas Republican majorities are likely to be smaller and thus more efficient.

              Scholars have examined the entire US and shown convincingly that Democrats cluster in ways that would bias non-partisan maps against us. See the links within the stories I linked above.

              Grew a mustache and a mullet / Got a job at Chick-Fil-A

              by cardinal on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 12:47:39 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Right now his lead is about 4.5 million votes. (6+ / 0-)

    Getting it over 5 million would be sweet.

    Ultimately, the only thing that matters with respect to preserving choice is who will be nominating the next Supreme Court Justices.

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:29:33 AM PST

  •  You got that shit straight about gerrymandering NC (6+ / 0-)

    Kos.

    It's amazing.  I live in Wake County and I now have a Republican-elect Representative.  WTF?  From David Price to some tea-baggy?  

    Sighhhhhhhhhhhhh

    Obama in 2012: Because There Might Not Be Much Left by 2016

    by funluvn1 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:30:37 AM PST

  •  Rove absolutely *does* have super powers... (9+ / 0-)

    I'd like to see you raise $400 million, earn a 1% return on that investment, and still be treated like an expert, Kos.

  •  Truman was before Nixon. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Todd E, shaggies2009, Smoh, vidanto

    Just saying . . .

  •  Gerrymandering? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dave in Northridge, CwV, Overseas, vidanto

    If ya think OH, NC, PA and VA are gerrymandered- take a look at Texas!

    This "Trickle Down" thing has turned out to be somebody pissing on my leg and tellin' me it's rainin'.

    by swtexas on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:31:32 AM PST

  •  This is true in NC, too (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mdmslle, helpImdrowning
    Damn, a lot of Obama voters didn't bother casting votes downballot. Not that it would've made a difference in the final outcome, but it demonstrates a continuing problem with educating our base on the importance of voting for Dems all the way down the ballot.
    NC Tally
    Obama  2,178,391
    Romney 2,270,395
    Margin        92,004

    Governor
    Dalton   1,931,580 (11.3%, or 246,811 less than Obama)
    McCrory 2,240,707 (1.3%, or 29,688 less than Romney)
    Margin      309,127

    There's little evidence of many Obama/McCrory voters, just a lot of Obama voters who didn't go on down the ballot.

    Again, it's not enough for Dalton to have won, but the margin could have been in the 50-60,000 range instead of 300,000+.

    Who knows how many other races were effected? At least one, where a Dem state senator trails by 21 votes out of 87,000 cast.

    Filibuster reform now. No more Gentleman's agreements.

    by bear83 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:33:05 AM PST

    •  This is where we are helped… (0+ / 0-)

      …by straight party voting.

      Of course North Carolina is super-confusing:

      In North Carolina, voting "straight party" (using the term from an NC ballot) does not include a vote for the President and Vice President of the United States. North Carolina voters therefore must make separate selections for the President/Vice President and the straight-party option.

      This idiosyncrasy on the North Carolina ballot is described by some as "a ballot flaw" that may confuse voters, potentially resulting in voters failing to cast a vote for President and Vice President when doing so was their intent. It was introduced in the 1960s to shore up Democrats at the state level as Republicans were gaining strength at the national level.

      Teh stoopidTM, it hurts. Buy smart, union-printed, USA-made, signs, stickers, swag for everyone: DemSign.com. Get your We are the 99% Yard Sign.

      by DemSign on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:48:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm surprised Romney has conceded. (6+ / 0-)

    There are still votes to count.

    Karl Rove may yet be proved correct on Ohio.

    Obama is going to be shocked when he finds out it was all a dream.

    Paul Ryan will set up his weight bench on the front lawn of the White House.

    Let's see how McCain and Graham feel about John Bolton for Secretary of State.

    I think we're celebrating too early.

    Rove could still steal Ohio with his ORCA program.

    Don't bother responding. I am out to lunch.

  •  Kos, you are... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen, mdmslle, shaggies2009, vidanto

    having the biggest case of schaudenfrauden of anyone  of us Kossacks-and you deserve it!

    "Well Clarice, have the lambs stopped screaming?"

    by buffie on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:34:03 AM PST

  •  Of course D.C. has Republicans (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mdmslle, tuma

    Those right-wing lobbyists destroying our country from within need to live close to their subjects on Capitol Hill.

    Teh stoopidTM, it hurts. Buy smart, union-printed, USA-made, signs, stickers, swag for everyone: DemSign.com. Get your We are the 99% Yard Sign.

    by DemSign on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:35:08 AM PST

  •  What was with the polls? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bluegrass50

    One still-insufficiently heralded piece of news is how virtually ALL of the polls underestimated Obama in particular and Democrats in general in race after race and state after state.  Even on issues: Prop 30 here in California (Jerry Brown's tax increase initiative) looked headed for certain doom in the polls; it won in a blowout (10 point margin, 55-45).
    We can talk about voter turnout models, blah-blah, but the discrepancy between polls and results is too big and too consistent -- and included RV polls -- for that to explain.  I am NOT a conspiracy theorist, but I do wonder if there is something systematic about polling methods in the modern environment that causes Democrats to be significantly under-sampled. If so, then we (and all those math-phobe pundits) should bear that in mind when reading polls about, for example, what voters think about various solutions to the so-called "fiscal cliff."

  •  too bad the "media" will never really (0+ / 0-)

    report the final results in context.

    The "narrative" will continue to be that the President won a "narrow" victory no matter what the final tally.

    I also love the Repub narrative that there "was no change in the House" and that the Senate "did not change"

  •  Getting people to vote down-ticket ... (9+ / 0-)

    ...ought to be a major push, and not just down ticket as far as congressional districts. Attorneys general, secretaries of states (!!!!!), legislatures (and elections for county and city leaders where these are partisan) need more attention. These get less and less attention as local newspapers cut their staffs and reduce their coverage. But getting a deep bench of progressives at all level of government is essential to our long-term objectives, even with our growing demographic advantages.

    One key to this is running a 200,000-precinct strategy. Anywhere there are a few hands full of Democrats in a precinct, they should be given the tools and encouragement to organize themselves and boost their numbers. Not just any Democrats, of course. We'll never win all of these, obviously, but if we can increase turnout, we can win more than we're winning now and, in the aggregate, have a positive impact on contests we're not now winning.

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:37:58 AM PST

    •  Amen MB (5+ / 0-)

      Here's a result that is still giving me pain:

      In Nevada, 88,000 more  people voted for Obama than the Dem candidate for senator.  Our Dem candidate Berkley lost by only 12,000 votes.  So those 88,000 were enthusiastic about Obama but didn't connect the dots enough to send a Dem senator that could work better with Obama.  I know in some years people liked split voting, but for this year?

      We have a lot of educational work to do.  This is not unique to Nevada.

      I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

      by Satya1 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:03:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  A friend of mine worked the Audit (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Satya1

        in Clinton CT and saw several ballots that were Obama for Pres and Linda for Senate! It wasn't a rumor or a mistake, there are some seriously misinformed (or schizophrenic) people out there.
        That 200 000 precinct strategy can't come soon enough.

        If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

        by CwV on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 12:00:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe some people... (0+ / 0-)

        ...liked Obama more than they liked Romney (not hard!) and didn't like Berkley as much as Heller for some reason.

        These voters may have found Romney to be so objectionable (perhaps due his flip flopping or two faced positions or perhaps because he doesn't seem like presidential material) that they couldn't vote for him in spite of their generally conservative leaning. The fact someone voted for Obama doesn't mean they are "enthusiastic" about him, maybe they just feel he's the lesser of two evils.

        It seems possible, perhaps even likely, that if the Republicans had put up a decent Presidential candidate, many of these voters might have voted Republican on both the Senate and Presidential lines as they obvious don't have a general aversion to voting for a Republican.

        These people may actually need conversion, not education.

        It would be, I think, a serious mistake to read too much into Obama's two victories. In both cases, the candidate he was running against was pretty weak. McCain was too old and seemed disconnected and was viewed as a turncoat by many diehard conservatives (and the election was not one that Republicans were likely to win anyway due to the recent meltdown). Romney was, well, Romney. The Republicans may continue to pick really bad candidates, but it isn't something to count on.

        •  Which is all the MORE reason for a... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          maryru, Albanius

          ...200,000-precinct strategy.

          Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 02:10:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I honestly don't think so (0+ / 0-)

          In fact I think that is a stretch for explaining the entire 88,000.  A few thou I can see - easily.  In fact 6,000 more voted for Romney than the Repub candidate.  But 17% of the Obama voters didn't want to vote Dem for senator?  It would be interesting to do a study on that across other states.  It's a very high percentage.

          Congress has never been more polarized.  It's measurable by political scientists like Mann and Ornstein.  There used to be a time when people could easily do split ticket voting.  But parties have coalesced around certain positions.  Romney embraced the Ryan budget, the showcase of Repub policy, as did many Repubs in Congress.  Repubs in Congress are voting in unity like never before.  Why would someone vote against the conservative Romney and not vote against his conservative policies by leaving the Senate choice blank?  Unless they're really uninformed?  Voting against Romney and for a Repub senate candidate is not making sense in these times unless those voters aren't paying attention..

          Whether they don't understand how Congress interacts with the Prez or they don't understand the polarized positions of the times and their preferences among them, there's political education needed.

          In your last paragraph, you're preaching to the choir.

          I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

          by Satya1 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 06:27:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, and more effective "Brand Democrat" also (0+ / 0-)

      "..The political class cannot solve the problems it created. " - Jay Rosen

      by New Rule on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 12:10:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Re: the downballot issue in Wisconsin -- (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rosarugosa

    It wasn't an accident.

    Wisconsin's straight-party balloting option was killed last year as part of the Voter ID legislation.

    :-(

    If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

    by AnnieJo on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:38:02 AM PST

    •  I've also heard (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rosarugosa

      that if they hadn't put a big chunk of Waukesha County into Ryan's district he would have lost re-election. He was absolutely crushed in Janesville.

      I'm no philosopher, I am no poet, I'm just trying to help you out - Gomez (from the song Hamoa Beach)

      by jhecht on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:57:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It always comes back… (0+ / 0-)

        …to Waukesha. sigh

        Teh stoopidTM, it hurts. Buy smart, union-printed, USA-made, signs, stickers, swag for everyone: DemSign.com. Get your We are the 99% Yard Sign.

        by DemSign on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:59:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  There was actually already a strip (0+ / 0-)

        of Waukesha County in his district previously.  From what I've heard, the additional Waukesha chunk wasn't actually enough to flip the election.

        But it sure made it more out of reach than it otherwise would have been.

        If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

        by AnnieJo on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 12:08:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  making it back home to VOTE (5+ / 0-)

    It took a lot for us to get back to our home district in order to cast our votes and be counted this election day...  took begging and borrowing a car because ours drowned in the hurricane and public transportation still hadn't been restored to my Flooded hometown...  making sure we had enough GAS to get there and back to our evacuation abode...  took finding out where the heck our polling place had been moved to and then making the drive back home, which got more dangerous as we hit the 'flooded zone"...

    we didnt HAVE to go vote because Pres Obama was a shoo in in NYC and so was Gillibrand and our local dem congressional candidate.  we COULD have blown it off, stayed where we were and waited for the results to start coming in BUT our votes, while not needed for the electoral college count, were needed for the popular vote count and we felt it was important that President Obama won the popular vote by as large a margin as could be had....  so we went home (for a few hours) and voted...  then rode around our flooded shoreline, shed a few tears, tried to find out if and when our power and lights and water and heat would return then got back in the borrowed van and went back to where we evacuated to.

    we are back home now, generators and gigantic dehumidifiers drone on endlessly outside ALL our windows as we continue to recover from Sandy and Nothing makes me smile more then reading of the ever increasing number of popular votes our President got.. and that 2 of them belong to me and (apolitical) Hubby  :)

    "You've got to be an optimist to be a Democrat, and a humorist to stay one" - Will Rogers

    by KnotIookin on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:42:56 AM PST

    •  If only despite Sandy votes counted twice (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KnotIookin

      legally, I mean your vote had been given second purely symbolic weight, as a kind of reward for civic
      sacrifice beyond the call of duty......what a wonderful popular electoral vote map it would be...a percentage of the red and blue with a golden halo over it.
      We now return to our regular partisan divisions.
      A born New Yorker....

      "Are you bluish? You don't look bluish," attributed to poet Roger Joseph McGough, for the Beatles' Yellow Submarine (1968).

      by BlueStateRedhead on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:09:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Thank you for your determination to vote. Hope (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      helpImdrowning, KnotIookin

      things start to get better for you on the home front soon.

      if a habitat is flooded, the improvement for target fishes increases by an infinite percentage...because a habitat suitability index that is even a tiny fraction of 1 is still infinitely higher than zero, which is the suitability of dry land to fishes.

      by mrsgoo on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:47:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Can we get gerrymandering fixed before 2020? (0+ / 0-)

    Texas redid theirs in 2005, we should push for fixes in states before the next census in 2020.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting

    by sacrelicious on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:47:10 AM PST

  •  Going further back... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BlueStateRedhead, helpImdrowning

    Obama's margin of 3.55%+ is larger than the popular vote margins of victory in 1916 (Wilson), 1876 (Tilden PV winner), 1880 (Garfield), 1884-92 (Cleveland PV winner in all three), 1844 (Polk), and 1836 (if you combine the votes of all the Whigs, since Van Buren never faced off against any more than one Whig on any state ballot).

    It's also larger than Madison's PV margin in his reelection in 1812, when only about half of states allowed electors to be chosen by popular vote.

  •  46% (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BlueStateRedhead

    Is it too soon to begin the Romney 46% death watch?

  •  Given that Nixon had the largest... (0+ / 0-)

    ...margin of victory.  What the fuck does any concern about this mean?

  •  I love being in DC. I just love it. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    democrattotheend

    Those 21,000 republicans are staffers. And lobbyists. And think tank employees. EVERYONE else in the city is sane.

    [heaven]

    For the record, I am not a member of Courtesy Kos. Just so you know. Don't be stupid. It's election season. My patience is short.

    by mdmslle on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 10:57:42 AM PST

  •  Regarding OFA (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rosarugosa, helpImdrowning, maryru

    one of the justified criticisms of this group has been been their failure to encourage their voters to vote on down ballot candidates.  

    It appears that even thought they are funded by the DNC, they see their only client as being Obama.  And that is because they are a command control top down organization, despite the promise that the DNC would follow through on the fifty state strategy.  (which they immediately dropped as soon as Dean got the bum's rush)

    At the California CDP convention, various leaders did a presentation in a workshop which promised that they would work to elect Democrats in California....while I had no personal interaction with them...it did appear they were true to their word.   But they refused to cooperate with and share information with the California Democratic Party, and only gave lipservice to a promise to support down ballot candidates. (the state party of California is strong, democratic in its leadership, with a large number of Democratic Clubs down the chain of command.  But from what I have seen in other states, this isn't the case, and the state parties need serious help from the DNC to get down ballot constitutional officers elected.)

    Now that OFA is no longer necessary to reelect the president, I am curious what the DNC will do in order support state parties, organize in red states, and promote our candidates in the 2014 election.  

    And that is what they call, A GOOD QUESTION.

    •  The CDP convention I referred to occurred (0+ / 0-)

      in 2010....

      and we were able to elect 100% Democratic  state constitutional officers, re elect all of our members of congress, and bucked the trend which happened that year.

      To my knowledge, OFA's participation in our state election was...not much compared to the grassroots Union workers.

    •  Well, here in Texas (0+ / 0-)

      the Texas Democratic Party didn't seem to want OFA's help in 2010

      Barack Obama for President '12

      by v2aggie2 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 08:35:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What ever happened in Arizona? I thought some of (0+ / 0-)

    those uncounted ballots might have actually won us back seats we "conceded."  Any link to final certified results for House and Senate or are they still counting and is it close?

    People, not corporations. Democracy, not totalitarian capitalism. gottavote.org

    by democracy is coming on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:00:36 AM PST

  •  Non Partisan Line Drawing is a big issue (0+ / 0-)

    Here in Florida it got Allen West booted out.  It might be t he ticket to break the GOP roadblock in the House.  We should all push for this everywhere.

  •  Another nice thing about the latest results is (0+ / 0-)

    that the margin of win, 3.55 rounds up to 4% now.  It's a clear 51% - 47% victory.

    I'm not liberal. I'm actually just anti-evil, OK? - Elon James White

    by Satya1 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:12:33 AM PST

  •  uncle gerry (0+ / 0-)

    i too am under-whelmed by the gerrymander argument.  just a quick eyeball of dave wasserman's incredible yeoman's work - races decided by less than 20K votes, pubs won 27, dems 17.  maybe we've got a sniff of something here?  but bumping the 'close race' threshold up to 30K votes, pubs won 31 races by less than 30K, dems actually won 36 by less than 30K votes.  and even at just 20K margin, you're in 53%-47% margin of victory, not exactly a squeaker.

    there are obvious cases of it happening, but let's not delude ourselves into thinking a couple of line-tweaks and we're back to a majority in the house.  maybe a 5 or 10 seat swing, best case.  i like the continue to point out Ds won more house votes, but otherwise we've got waaaay bigger fish to fry.

  •  Wow, what is this fixation on fractional (0+ / 0-)

    percentages about? Is there an issue in here somewhere?

    I am reminded of the tedious obsessions of people I know who make their money on handicapping horse races and other sports. Hmmmm.

    The frog jumped/ into the old pond/ plop! (Basho)

    by Wolf10 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:31:15 AM PST

  •  what a country (0+ / 0-)

    nixon won by the largest margin over mcgovern, america loves fascists and despises liberals, and we wonder why we are in the condition we are in today.

    •  And yet, when polled without the labels (0+ / 0-)

      Americans support liberal positions more than either party does. It's the labeling that throws them off.
      Also remember that Nixon was lying, big time, he had a plan for Peace with Honor, just around the corner (Yeah, right).
      And McGovern had the Eagleton disaster.

      If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

      by CwV on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 12:14:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  North Carolina has the stupidest (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    helpImdrowning

    Congressional district ever...and I am in it.  Mel Watt's district is like the Republican middle finger to Charlotte.

    Do you not see that it is the grossest idolatry to speak of the market as though it were the rival of God?

    by kismet on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:48:51 AM PST

  •  Celebrating a halving of the victory margin? (0+ / 0-)

    What next, throwing parties for a loss?

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 11:53:29 AM PST

    •  No, we're celebrating a solid win. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      helpImdrowning

      Most of the time, when a president faces tough reelection prospects, especially in tough economic times, he loses. You can count the number of close reelection contests in which the president actually wins on one hand--literally five times, 1812, 1916, 1948, 2004 and now 2012. In all these contests, the president won the PV with under a 5% margin (even if only half the states had the PV in 1812), and usually a either narrow victory in the EC or a victory with a smaller percentage of EC votes. Obama's victory is, by several measures, the most solid reelection among these five cases.

      In all other cases, a president is either reelected handily (or at least by a bigger margin) to a second term in the PV, and always (except for GW in 1792) with a padded EC majority, than his first time around, or he loses.

      Note that I'm talking only about elections to second terms by any incumbent, previously elected or not. So I'm not including FDR's reelections in 1940 and 1944.

      •  I don't know. Even George W. Bush got re-elected. (0+ / 0-)

        And he didn't get to run against Mitt Romney, though John Kerry was close.

        Republicans handed the Administration a gift horse and they wisely averted their gaze from his mouth.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 03:42:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Nope (0+ / 0-)

      Just having fun.  It's an important part of life.

  •  My Nana was a DC Republican (0+ / 0-)

    lived up off Cathedral Ave. NW, born (1899) and bred in the toney enclave of Lake Forest, IL. She went to finishing school with Dorothy Bush, mother of Pres. GHW Bush.

    Remember the upper-class parts of the District, Georgetown and around Rock Creek Park and all that.

    I'm surprised that Romney only got 21,000+.

  •  Ohio (0+ / 0-)

    "Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, in particular, have offensive gerrymanders unrepresentative of their state's electorate."
    OH had an issue on the ballot to address this but it was voted down.

  •  If Indiana isn't on your list of offensive (0+ / 0-)

    gerrymanders, you need to add it.

    "When in doubt, do the brave thing." - Jan Smuts

    by bunnygirl60 on Fri Nov 30, 2012 at 02:11:20 PM PST

  •  Wow: the worst ones got the highest numbers. (0+ / 0-)

    Nixon, reagan, bush.

    I would say having the highest numbers isn't something to be proud of.

    Makes me wonder about this country.

    Have we turned a corner with O?

  •  Rove: We need to hold off on calling this race (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maryru
  •  Wisconsin gerrrymandering is the worst (0+ / 0-)

    They reversed it so that instead of the individual wards (precincts) being drawn first at the county level, the GOP redrew it and the state first! And they did it all in secret using taxpayer money across the street.

    Oust Walker May 8th - Vote Arthur Kohl-Riggs

    by Milhawkee on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 07:56:33 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site