Early And Absentee Voting Won Florida For Obama
This, from the Associated Press, is just fascinating:
More Floridians voted for John McCain than Barack Obama on Election Day, but the Democrat sealed his victory in the state by winning more early and absentee votes.An Associated Press study of 94 percent of the state's total shows that the Republican beat Obama by almost 5 percentage points on Nov. 4, but Obama trumped McCain by 11 percentage points in early and absentee balloting. Overall, Obama beat McCain 51.4 percent to 48.6 percent in Florida, becoming only the third Democrat in 11 presidential elections to carry the state.
In other words, early and absentee voting put Obama over the top in this key Bush state. Keep in mind that the Obama campaign was very aggressive in pushing supporters to vote early, with Obama or his wife Michelle, or Joe Biden, or other surrogates pushing the message at virtually every rally.
Chalk this up as just another way that the Obama campaign revolutionized modern campaigns -- from now on, no serious presidential campaign will dare not attempt a sophisticated early-voting strategy. And it's yet another reminder, as if you needed one, of just how well-planned and executed the Obama campaign really was.
Dude. Did you mean this?
In a way, the Republicans were kinda sorta right about their GOTV efforts. Only problem, Obama got his out way earlier.
November 20, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
We know what you meant: will try -> will neglect
I'm thinking the next Congress will fix some of the voter-suppression crap that's been going on. Early mail voting everywhere (aka no-fault or permanent absentee voting). Restrictions on ID requirements. No more bullshit about who can and can't carry a voter's ballot to the mailbox.
November 20, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Black Caucus has been trying to introduce Election reform bills for 8 years. Maybe someone will listen now.
It would sure be nice.
November 20, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
My guess, they're probably ready to throw in it in to the mix from the get go. With Obama hitting the floor running with Health Care, Climate, foreign affairs, the economy, the Repubs will be so scattered they won't even have the energy to fight these reforms.
November 20, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks all, error fixed.
November 20, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hunh?
I'm no statistician, but I don't see the significance of this.
If Obama had an aggressive early-voting strategy and McCain did not, then you would EXPECT to see Obama with a larger margin among early votes.
But it doesn't follow (as your headline suggests) that if Florida DIDN'T have early/absentee voting, McCain would have won. The final percentages might have been exactly the same, with everyone just voting on election day.
MAYBE the outcome would have been different -- i.e., without early voting, some Obama voters would not have voted at all or would have voted for McCain -- but the AP's study doesn't (and can't) prove that.
November 20, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Willie Brown on local TV remarked a couple Sundays ago that the most incredible thing about the Obama campaign was that it took grassroots tactics that campaigns have used for years in cities and counties to the national level.
I was a precinct captain for Gavin Newsom in his first race for Mayor (and his second, a coronation) as well as for Mayor Brown in 1999.
Newsom found himself in a run off with a late breaking popular rival Matt Gonzalez (Nader's VP candidate)
A SurveyUSA poll taken a week b4 the election showed Gonzalez ahead. What it didn't take into account was the fact that Newsom had contacted over 85,000 voters in person or by phone in the months leading up to the first primary; identified his voter base, and the weekend after the first primary had delivered absentee ballot applications to the door of each one. GOTV precinct workers followed up for the next two weeks ..all this before the SUSA poll
Gonzalez won on election day but in SF the absentee ballots are counted first so that before the first poll vote was counted everyone knew Newsom had already won
That's the significance.
November 20, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
True it can't be proven what the result would have been otherwise, but the strategy of getting the votes "in the bank" early defuses last minute October surprises or the onslaught of negative ads 48 hours before "election" day. If nothing else this will force all candidates to take a longer view of when and where and how to spend money.
November 20, 2008 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
From my perspective, the difference was that it gave people working more than one job, or who had extra long hours, or who just did something so exhausting that standing in line at 7:00 would have been unendurable a torture-free opportunity to vote. People were glad to stand in line for an hour or two or five on their day off. It was getting into line at 7:00 and staying there until 9:40 after working since 6:00 that morning all day that was too much for a lot of them.
It also gave people who had registration problems, or other problems caused by the ten year Republican vote suppression campaign, a chance to find out there was a problem and fix it before it was too late.
And it pulled the teeth out of some of the Republicans favorite tricks to use when they control the board of elections, like, say, sending three machines to a black precinct and a dozen to a white one. If half the precinct's already voted by election day, that stuff doesn't work.
And, of course, it allowed Obama's army of volunteers to spend all day working without having to worry about voting first.
November 20, 2008 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
The society is facing problems with such laws. This has to go legal and it’s needed to be sorted at the earliest.
real estate
July 19, 2009 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quite true. I think the point to take away from this is early voting is a fact of campaign life now, and candidates better be prepared to deal with it.
Also, maybe, you can infer that early voting can reduce the voter-suppression effect in states where there are long lines in low-income neighborhoods and no lines in the uppa crust districts.
November 20, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you; I thought it was only me.
November 20, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Same deal in NC. Obama also won early voting in NC big and then hung on there even though McCain won on Election Day
http://www.democracy-nc.org/improving/2008/turnout.shtml
November 20, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
IF Obama voters voted early, then "winning the numbers" on November 4th is moot because Obama folks ALREADY voted.
November 20, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know that you're just quoting the AP, but this is totally wrong: ". . . becoming only the third Democrat in 11 presidential elections to carry the state." Not counting Gore, the last three Dems to win FL were Obama ('08), Clinton ('96) and Carter ('76). That means Obama is the third Dem to win FL in the last NINE presidential elections. Going back further, you have Johnson ('64), Truman ('48), FDR ('32, '36, '40, '44) and others. Am I missing something?
November 20, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's technically true, since in the last 11 Presidential Elections, a Democrat has won the state of Florida in only three of them (as you said, Carter '76, Clinton '96 and Obama '08). Obama would mark the third time in the last 11 Presidential Elections.
The last 11 Presidential Elections:
2008
2004
2000
1996
1992
1988
1984
1980
1976
1972
1968
(Those in Bold were years where the Democratic Candidate won the state of Florida.)
November 20, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am lost; who the hell cares who won on Nov 5th, IF the people who voted early don't have to line up on November 4th? Some folks like to line up, others like me could care less. IF the people who voted early voted on Nov 4th, Obama would still have won. Who the hell cares? What was the point?
November 20, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
FL's (and NC's) early voting certainly was crucial. Yet, on election afternoon, Sean Hannity was already calling for the end of all early voting laws and initiatives because it so clearly results in voter fraud and ballot box stuffing (NOT!). Typical BS from him. But, then again, in my opinion he lies and his listeners swear by it. Anything that results in increased voter registration and/or turnout is necessarily a bad thing for right wingers. Remember all the motor-voter registration measures that they always shot down? Look for there to be another effort by the neocons to short circuit any future early voting measures. Hannity represents just the beginning of the neocon/right wing propaganda campaign aimed at building up opposition to a very worthwhile effort to make sure as many properly registered voters have a reasonable opportunity to vote.
November 20, 2008 6:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The auto industry has always been a punching bag for the GOP!
November 20, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is always the danger of assuming that coincidental events are related.
You could also interpret this as showing that Obama supporters were so excited to cast their vote for him that they couldn't wait until election day! Or so impatient to vote AGAINST bush. Or more afraid they would get caught up in election-day voting problems and wanted to make sure their votes counted.
November 20, 2008 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's just it. I don't think that these numbers are any surprise. Obama had the voter enthusiasm, and so naturally his supporters voted as soon as they could. The surprise is, as Nathan says above, that Florida went Democrat. (Of course enthusiasm for Obama and the FL win are related.)
Someone tell me why I am thinking wrong about this, but why would early voting actually change the outcome?
November 20, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Early voting is related to late October Surprises, that's all.
This whole thing about "won on election day but lost on early voting" is just silly. Early voting is good if it gets more legit voters to vote or reduces waiting times on election day (this year if you believe news reports, it did NOT make for shorter net wait times to vote). It is bad to the extent that it supports illegal voting or problematic vote counting (I heard that 3000 votes were thrown out in one county because people did not remember to include an inner jacket, for instance).
Voting should be relatively easy, extremely secure, and widely available to legit voters, while not being a large burden on counties and states.
Early voting is a mixed bag this year, in my view.
November 20, 2008 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Repukes specialize in making scurrilous attacks on character at the last minute, when it's too late to mount an effective response. They also specialize in suppressing Democratic votes through election-day shenanigans.
The thing is, their election-day bullshit in 2004 was so egregious that people on our side didn't want to risk having to go through that again. This has had the effect of depriving the Repukes of their last-minute-smear strategy.
Ha, ha, ha.
November 20, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
what difference does this make?
a vote is a vote.
ask mccain if "winning" the vote on election day felt good.
sheesh
November 21, 2008 12:31 AM | Reply | Permalink