Some figures I worked out from early Iowa voting numbers. Spirit lifting.

[requiem99]

Unfortunately I do not have the original numbers to work with, so I went from memory (but they are close, and if someone provides me with exact numbers I will revise my figure)

Here is how the voting looks in Iowa so far, with 7 percent of the state voted already, these BALLOT TALLY NUMBERS are NOT actual numbers they are FROM MEMORY from a post the other day here on the DU, but they are within a thousand or so, and I specifically gave republicans the highest 20k number I could because I knew they were in the 20s somewhere, they might even be lower. I know Dems were in the low 50s but I don't remember exactly what, it was 52-56k. The actual figures below the ballot tally are correct, but of course, based on the ballot tally.

D - 55,494
R - 29,559
I - 21,233

Votes for Kerry = 64,362
Votes for Bush = 41,921

These numbers assume only 88 percent of democrats vote for kerry and 92 percent of repubs vote for bush, and a LOW estimate 62 percent undecideds going to Kerry. It does not factor in Nader or 3rd parties.

This is 60.55 percent of the vote folks. Even with Nader factored in, if we get NEAR this turnout on election day across the board we are looking at one of the biggest blowouts in election history.

I was happy with the way things were going before, but now I'm confident. WE ARE TAKING OUR COUNTRY BACK.

Someone feel free to correct any mistakes I've made in this post.

[Nightjock]

1. Sweet!

[swag]

2. I think Iowa is going to go Kerry, as is the USA

but the early voter tallies should be used with caution.

Dems are said (by those who say such things) to use "early voting" more than Reps and Reps are said to use "absentee voting" more than Dems.

Some people even still use election day.

Other than that, I would say that you're dead on, those tallies are spirit-lifting, especially since no matter how you slice them, they reflect an extraordinary level of Democratic enthusiasm in this election.

Thank you very much,

S

[requiem99]

3. Actually traditionally its Repubs who vote early more often, I believe.

[swag]

4. Oh, p.s.

As of Friday, close-of-business, 18% of the Oregon vote was in. Even with the massive increase in Oregon voter roles, that is 4% more than at the same (fifth) day of ballot collection during the 2000 cycle, which Al Gore won.


BUSH OUT! KERRY IN!

VENCEREMOS!

[requiem99]

5. Do you have the D/R vote numbers? I'll do the math on those too!

[swag]

6. No, I'm afraid Oregon doesn't report on D/R returns

though it does report D/R on registrations (though only through August):

http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/elechp.htm

But I'm more interested in your state right now, since Oregon seems such a given that Bushco has little more than a token campaign presence here any more.

I look forward to more of your reports.

[requiem99]

7. Oh I'm not in Iowa, I'm in KY. If I can find out the KY numbers I'll post.

[requiem99]

8. Kick! Someone give me exact Iowa numbers so I can shore it up!

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

9. So are these actual vote tallies? Exit polling? Tallies of # of voters

from each party who have voted so far? ??

[requiem99]

10. Close.

The actual, exact tallies of early voters (and maybe absentee ballots, too?) for Iowa was posted about 1 week ago. The numbers were VERY similar to these, 50k+ dem, mid-high 20s for rep, and low 20s for Ind. Of course, this is ONLY party affiliation and the fact that they DID VOTE, it does not say who they voted for.

Anyone search for me and get me exact numbers please? I can't search! :(

[requiem99]

11. If my analysis is wrong, why hasn't someone pointed it out? If it isn't...

Why aren't we seeing any comments? I won't kick this much more, but I do believe I have hit on something big here.

[requiem99]

12. Final kick to make sure the night crew sees this. I'm off to bed!