they would have to register before hand, 30 days before the election I believe. you can't just walk in and be like "I'm a Democrat now!" on the day of the election in Penn.

 

Thank you. I believe it more states did this, a better case could be made to eliminate the so called super delegates.

they would have to register before hand, 30 days before the election I believe. you can't just walk in and be like "I'm a Democrat now!" on the day of the election in Penn.

Exactly. In my case, i am an independent, so in IL i can just walk in and pick a side. In PA, i would have had to call and declare myself 30 days prior.

We will know the winner of the Pennsylvania Primary the moment the polls close. More to come....

How is that? You mean the networks will "project" it right away based on their exit polls? If they are saying that now, then Clinton won.

 

How is that? You mean the networks will "project" it right away based on their exit polls? If they are saying that now, then Clinton won.

it's called a tease I'll get you more info in a bit.

Unknown Authenticity, but...

 

Obama not on some ballots?

I just spent a few hours on the phone bank at Obama HQ. Some voters in PA have called in stating that Barack's name is missing from the ballots in their polling places. Two calls came in letting us know that a radio station in the area has picked up this story as well.

If you know anything about it, please contact Obama HQ and ask for the legal staff.

Unknown Authenticity, but...

 

Obama not on some ballots?

At this point, I certainly don't see any reason why we should panic about this. It's an election, it's a complicated thing, especially for the companies building the voting machines. It'd be nice if it was error-free, but there were bound to be a few that cropped up here or there. Show me something that suggests a few tens of thousands of people might have had their votes screwed with, or don't bother. "Some voters" doesn't cut it.

At this point, I certainly don't see any reason why we should panic about this. It's an election, it's a complicated thing, especially for the companies building the voting machines. It'd be nice if it was error-free, but there were bound to be a few that cropped up here or there. Show me something that suggests a few tens of thousands of people might have had their votes screwed with, or don't bother. "Some voters" doesn't cut it.

 

Actually it is amazing we get it right as much as we do. Imagine even a .5% error rate would number in the tens of thousands, and it never gets that bad. But I am certain it was Clinton and her people.

At this point, I certainly don't see any reason why we should panic about this. It's an election, it's a complicated thing, especially for the companies building the voting machines. It'd be nice if it was error-free, but there were bound to be a few that cropped up here or there. Show me something that suggests a few tens of thousands of people might have had their votes screwed with, or don't bother. "Some voters" doesn't cut it.

Just read the comments, the claim is garbage. This claim arose around noon Eastern, but no photos of bad ballots have yet to surface, only photos of campaign literature that looks like a ballot and instructs people how to vote for particular candidates. It's nothing.

Just read the comments, the claim is garbage. This claim arose around noon Eastern, but no photos of bad ballots have yet to surface, only photos of campaign literature that looks like a ballot and instructs people how to vote for particular candidates. It's nothing.

It's nothing, unless a campaign can make it something. How many nothings, become somethings, with the right group spinning away?

 

/damn, where is my lapel pin

Just read the comments, the claim is garbage. This claim arose around noon Eastern, but no photos of bad ballots have yet to surface, only photos of campaign literature that looks like a ballot and instructs people how to vote for particular candidates. It's nothing.

Are you referring to this?

Actually it is amazing we get it right as much as we do. Imagine even a .5% error rate would number in the tens of thousands, and it never gets that bad. But I am certain it was Clinton and her people.

no disagreement from me on that

Are you referring to this?

Yup. I believe there was at least one other that was a little different, but same idea, anyway.

My last prediction is 56-44. My father took care of someone from the Obama camp last night in the ER, and they were pessimistic about the next few days.

Are you referring to this?

Look at the bottom. This is someone's campaign piece. Instructions to vote yes on the questions etc. The Paid for on the bottom. This is not the official ballot. People are confused.

Look at the bottom. This is someone's campaign piece. Instructions to vote yes on the questions etc. The Paid for on the bottom. This is not the official ballot. People are confused.

unfortunately some people dont read the fine print

unfortunately some people dont read the fine print

 

But when they go in to vote, they will see a real ballot with all the choices. These sample ballots are always printed up by candidates.

We will know the winner of the Pennsylvania Primary the moment the polls close. More to come....

...Ok, now that I have you all teased, here's what I mean. I kinda lied. But here we go...

 

I did a statistical breakdown of all the exit polling from all the other primary states. (Apparently I have nothing better to do!!) What my stats show is that if you compare the exit polling to the ACTUAL results, there is only a difference of about .63%. The exit polls have been exceptionally accurate. In the 26 primaries (not caucuses) held to date, only 5 times has the difference between the exit polls and actual results been more than 1.5% apart. That's 26 states times 2 (obama and Clinton). So 5 out of 52 data points... that's pretty darn accurate! If you factor in .63% on both sides, that leaves a margin of error at about 1.5%

 

Typically the exit polls are released the moment polls close. So, unless it shows a 50-50 or 51-49 result, we will know the winner before the results roll in, especially if the polls show her with a 3+ point win.

My final projection

 

Clinton 54

Obama 45

 

 

I'm not sure about figures, but I am confident that, whatever the precise final tally, in the end, one way or another, by one point or by ten, it will turn out that, no matter what the pollsters said before, by virtue of extensive campaigning, the Dems will take this one. Yessiree, Bob.

I'm not sure about figures, but I am confident that, whatever the precise final tally, in the end, one way or another, by one point or by ten, it will turn out that, no matter what the pollsters said before, by virtue of extensive campaigning, the Dems will take this one. Yessiree, Bob.

 

I bet you're right - way to go out on a limb...

 

So what % does Clinton have to get in order for her to convince the DEM party she's still in the race?

So what % does Clinton have to get in order for her to convince the DEM party she's still in the race?

Like at least 15% I'd say, when you consider Obama's probably gonna win by double digits in NC.

Exit Polls Via CNN:

1 out of 7 are new democratic voters (60% voted for Obama)

assuming 2,300,000 voters, that 197,142 votes for Obama and 131,428 for Clinton.

 

Voters who decided in the last week: Clinton 58% - I missed the obama number

Edited April 22, 200817 yr by Athomeboy_2000

http://www.drudgereport.com/

 

the headline is "5pm (et) exit Poll 52 Clinton 48 Obama" no source or anything, but first numbers I've seen.

http://www.drudgereport.com/

 

the headline is "5pm (et) exit Poll 52 Clinton 48 Obama" no source or anything, but first numbers I've seen.

WOW!!!!! I can believe it. But, wow. Even to project that is incredible!

(note that he reported yesterday that Clinton internals had her +11. So, that that for what it is worth)