Bad news for Obama in Colorado early voting - Hillbuzz

[Lucille]

Bad news for Obama in Colorado early voting

The state of Colorado has released its first set of early voting figures: and it’s bad news for Obama.

Despite a massive push by Obama for early voting, including repetitious pleas during the Democrats’ Convention for Coloradoans to early vote, Democrats and Republicans are tied in terms of early voting so far.

105,277 - Democrats = 49.92%
105,615 - Republicans = 50.08% √
338 = Difference between the two = 0.16%

This means that even with a nonstop push by the Obama campaign for his followers to vote early, Republicans are still ahead in Colorado, if only slightly.

Democrats vote early in higher numbers than Republicans in almost every state. And that’s not including the big persuasive push by Obama. Logic dictates with all the attention Obama’s put on early voting, that Democrats should be clobbering Republicans right now…if they vote early in higher numbers to begin with, and then Obama’s made a big push for early voting on top of that.

That’s not happening.

Republicans have a slight lead in early voting right now.

Where is all the enthusiasm for Obama the media keeps braying about?

And remember: not all of those Democrats are voting Obama. We know 30 Democrats right here in Chicago who voted early — and voted Republican for the first time in our lives. We bet there’s a higher percentage of Democrats voting Republican in Colorado this year than any year in the past.

And that’s something we won’t know the full extent of until Election Day.

 

[A. Havnes]

Too bad they're not voting third party.

 

[liberteebell]

Wtf? Why would they release these figures early? To stir up the masses? To inspire the obomba voters to gotv? To make the mcwar voters give a sigh of relief? This entire election has been a circus. I simply can't wait 'till election day to see what other tricks are up everyone's sleeves.

 

[angelatc]

Why in the world would they release early numbers???

Clicking all the way through the blog to the original news article, I don't see what he is claiming.


http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=102386&catid=339

According to early voting statistics posted by Colorado's Secretary of State on Tuesday, 96,104 mail-in ballots were returned by Democrats. Republicans turned in 99,306. When looking at the number of voters who showed up at early voting centers, 9,173 were Democrats and 6,309 were Republicans.

It does not indicate who they voted for.

 

[Sandra]

They won't count early votes yet.

 

[tonesforjonesbones]

I dunno? It seems that there is something to puttng out the high poll numbers for The Komrade. I can't figure out if it is to relax The Komrade's voters due to overconfidence or to make the McCain voters throw in the towel and not bother. I'm not getting the psychology on it. Tonezzzzzzzz

 

[libertarian4321]

It ain't going to be "Republicans" or "Democrats" that decide the election.

Independents will be the deciding factor, and I suspect a lot of independents will turn against the notion of "4 more years."

 

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

How is Colorado able to release these results ahead of election day? I thought there were laws against it? And why is every single vote for either Obama or McCain? Do they expect us to believe that not ONE out of hundreds of thousands of early voters voted for someone else? Something seems horribly unusual here.

 

[fgd]

The reason these numbers are interesting is that EVERY poll out there thinks that there are 6-8% more Democrats in the electorate than Republicans, and relies that those same Democrats will go vote. These early voting results are simply showing that Republicans are voting at a higher rate than Democrats are, not who they voted for.

 

[angelatc]

How is Colorado able to release these results ahead of election day? I thought there were laws against it? And why is every single vote for either Obama or McCain? Do they expect us to believe that not ONE out of hundreds of thousands of early voters voted for someone else? Something seems horribly unusual here.

THey're only disclosing who requested absentee ballots, not who voted for who.

 

[Monolithic]

uh colorado has more registered republicans than democrats, a lot more actually, about 80,000 more, so of course republicans are going to have more votes there

you do realize a lot of colorados republicans are moderates and voting for obama, right?

jesus christ

 

[NewEnd]

Democrats vote early in higher numbers than Republicans in almost every state.

Wrong. Republicans have always had larger early voting and absentee voting numbers. Always.

 

[RickyJ]

They won't count early votes yet.

They only count them after they are run through the authentic vote filter.

 

[Dianne]

105,277 - Democrats = 49.92%
105,615 - Republicans = 50.08% √
338 = Difference between the two = 0.16%


Those figures have to be bogus, as their is no representation for registered independent voters and we know there has to be at least one in Colorado that voted.

 

[NewEnd]

105,277 - Democrats = 49.92%
105,615 - Republicans = 50.08% √
338 = Difference between the two = 0.16%


Those figures have to be bogus, as their is no representation for registered independent voters and we know there has to be at least one in Colorado that voted.

Actually, 2 days before this story came out, it was shown that already 500,000 ballots had been cast. So this article conveniently forgets the 290,000 independents that had already voted.