Re: “Native American Sovereignty FTW”

God forbid a sovereign nation maintains their sovereignty, eh Yuppie? That might be awkward.

Re: “Google Takes the Road Less Traveled”

Ah Joel, if only font selection was enabled. Then I could type in exclusively Wingding on both Heraldo and the Mirror.

Re: “FINAL REPORT”

As always, quite possibly wrong, but....

Aren't probably 10,000 late-absentee votes outstanding? We should end up with 60-65% turnout, right?

Absentee skewed 2-to-1 for Jackson early.

If she can maintain that edge she'll win by over 2000 votes.

Re: “THIRD REPORT”

What's the expression, "the internet is written in pen, not pencil?"

Anyway, my numbers were wrong for total voters, and it's such a fine margin that it matters hugely.

Final report shows 48% for the primary, 80% Nov08, and 63% for Nov 06.

Time to go write my penance on the blackboard 100 times, in cursive.

Re: “THIRD REPORT”

TRA-it's possible I'm mistaken, I'm just a first-name-on-the-internet after all.

But I believe the 78K is registered voters, and in the past elections (scroll down on the election page) we've had 49K cards cast.

Check the finals from Nov 08 for example,

So 78K would be 100% voter participation. Only 29K voted in the primary this time.

So, if 49K vote (might be a little high but it's reasonable) then Paul needs to get about 53.5% of what's left to win.

Hope that helps.

Re: “THIRD REPORT”

How do you know which precincts are in and which aren't? Actual phone call or can I tease it from the data?

FWIW, Paul needs to get a good turnout (49K) and 53-54% of the remaining vote to win.

Re: “THIRD REPORT”

TRA, you are misreading the # of voters.It was 49K final tally in November 2008.

But you may still be right.

If the trend holds (55/45), which is possible, Gallegos needs a turnout of around 40,000. 49,000 voted in 2006 November as well.

So, we'll probably get more than 40,000 --will the trend hold?