Tag Archives: Nevada

A recount primer

By tmess2 | Published November 6, 2020

We are now moving into the universe where aside from spinning fictional conspiracy theory, Donald Trump is, for all practical purposes, down to recounts to keep his slim hopes of avoiding an orange jump suit alive.

As with everything else about this election that we have talked about over the past three weeks, the basic rules for recounts are set by state law.  So looking at the states in which Trump is most likely to ask for a recount, here are the rules.

Arizona — In Arizona, the margin must be less than 0.1%.   Any such recount is automatic, and a candidate is not able to request a recount.  Assuming a final vote total of slightly under 4 million votes, the margin would have to slip under 4,000 to have a recount.  Apparently, in Arizona, the recount is done by rerunning the ballots through counting machines. Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 General Election | Also tagged , , , , , Comments Off on A recount primer

Election Night Preview — Part 4 (10 PM to 11 PM EST)

By tmess2 | Published October 30, 2020

It is very highly unlikely that we will have a projected winner when the clock strikes 10 on the east coast.  Mathematically, it’s possible as by 10:01 p.m. polls will officially be closed in states with 450 electoral votes.  But, practically speaking, it would take all of the toss-up states that have closed before then to have enough votes counted that the networks felt comfortable projecting them, and they would all have to go the same way.  Even in years like 2008, enough of the Democratic vote is in states in which polls close at 10 or 11 p.m. EST, that it would take flipping states like Texas and Georgia to have a shot at reaching 270 before 11 p.m.

Looking at 2016, the first battleground state — Ohio — was called at 10:36 p.m.  Depending on how things play out with mail-in ballots and early voting, some of the battleground states might get called faster, but others are likely to be called much later.

In this hour, we will have partial closures in Idaho, North Dakota, and Oregon.  In North Dakota and Idaho, the majority of the population is in the part of the state that closes.  As such, we will get a good idea about the state from the precincts that have closed.  On the other hand, only a tiny part of Oregon will close at 10 p.m. and all of the key races will have to wait another hour.   For North Dakota and Idaho, none of the races are expected to be particularly close.  So those contests should be called shortly after 11. Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 General Election, General Election Forecast | Also tagged , , , Comments Off on Election Night Preview — Part 4 (10 PM to 11 PM EST)

Ranked Choice Voting and the Primaries

By tmess2 | Published December 29, 2019

As the year comes to a close, we are approximately five weeks from the first votes of the 2020 election.  This post is to highlight one of the new features of this election — that several states will be using ranked choice voting.  (As described further below, Nevada will be using ranked-choice voting to allow early voters to participate in the caucuses.   Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas, and Wyoming will be using ranked-choice voting in a party-run primary.  Maine will be using ranked-choice voting in a state-run primary.)

In the past, we have had something similar to ranked choice voting in some of the caucus states.  Typically, many of the caucus states allow attendees to realign after the first vote if their preferred candidate does not receive enough votes to qualify for a delegate.  Of course, when this process occurs at a caucus, the attendees have some idea of where the candidates currently stand and have the ability to negotiate delegate slots in exchange for moving as a bloc.  (Even at the handful of remaining caucus, the ability to make deals will be greatly reduced.  In the past, it was possible — for example — for Richardson supporters to move to Edwards in exchange for a pledge that one of the delegate slots would go to a Richardson supporter who would be a free agent at the county convention.  Under the new rules, the national delegate allocations are locked after the precinct convention significantly reducing the value of such delegate deals.)

Ranked choice voting requires voters to decide in advance whom they would support if their candidate is not viable.  For the most part, there has not been large support for moving to ranked choice voting in general elections in this country.  For a variety of reasons, the two major parties are more dominant in the U.S. than in most other countries.  (For example, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia all held parliamentary elections last year.  In those elections, the two main parties had a combined vote total of 67-76% of the vote.  By contrast, in the 2018 house elections, the two main parties had over 98% of the vote.  Even at the low point of the 1992 election, the two main parties combined for over 80% of the vote.)  The absence of significant votes for third-party candidates means that — most of the time — the winning candidate in U.S. elections gets a majority of the vote in their district.  (Again for comparison, in the 2019 elections abroad, the winning candidate only had a plurality in about one-third of the districts in the United Kingdom, and about two-thirds of the districts in Canada and Australia.  By contrast, combining the House, the Senate, and state-wide races, the winning candidate in the 2018 elections in the U.S. only had a plurality in 28 contests — less than five percent of the races. ) Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Primary Elections | Also tagged , , , , , Comments Off on Ranked Choice Voting and the Primaries

Virtual Voting and the 2020 Nomination

By tmess2 | Published August 31, 2019

As Doc Jess noted yesterday, the Rules and By-Laws Committee (the party entity with responsibility for reviewing state party delegate selection plans) has found problems with the virtual caucus proposed by Iowa.  The concerns, however, extend beyond Iowa.  According to news reports, the RBC has also made a similar decision concerning Nevada’s delegate selection rules.

As I noted several weeks ago, there are now seven states left that do not use a state-run primary  with Iowa, Nevada, and Wyoming being the last pure caucus states and Alaska, Hawaii, Kansas, and North Dakota using party-run primaries.  In the revised delegate selection rules, Rule 2.G suggested that the RBC would consider plans that allowed internet voting as a form of absentee voting if the proposed plan included sufficient security assurances.  In its recent decision, the RBC apparently decided that — under current conditions — such assurances are not possible.  It is, however, understandable why Iowa and Nevada put forth proposals that relied on internet voting.  Rule 2.K.8 requires that parties using a party-run process create some alternative means of voting for those who are unable to participate in person on the day established for the caucus/party-run primary.

In light of these two provisions in the national rules, it’s not just Iowa that has included the possibility of electronic voting.  The draft plans in Alaska, Iowa, and Nevada include provisions for electronic voting.  The plans in Hawaii and North Dakota  opted to use mail-in voting instead of electronic voting.  (Alaska’s plan also includes absentee voting, so they might just need to eliminate the electronic voting.)  The plan in Kansas notes absentee/advanced voting as a possibility without further details.  If I am reading their plan correctly, Wyoming permits surrogate voting (which looks to be a proxy vote permitted in limited circumstances).  (I am not sure that proxy voting is allowed by the national rules — although it looks like Wyoming has used it previously from the comments submitted on their plan.  However, Wyoming’s plan has other problems that will probably require them to redraft their plans.) Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Delegates | Also tagged , , , , Comments Off on Virtual Voting and the 2020 Nomination

Delegate Selection Rules — Nevada

By tmess2 | Published March 24, 2019

The tour of the draft plans from 2020 caucus states continues this week with Nevada’s draft plan.  For 2020, as it has been for the last several cycles, Nevada — along with Iowa — is one of the two caucus states in the “carve-out period” prior to Super Tuesday.  Most of the caucus states — other than potentially Washington — are small states which means that, after Super Tuesday, their influence is at the margin with most of the attention going to the large primary states.  However, the four carve-out states each have about a week of national attention giving them a significant role in narrowing the field. 

In looking at the draft plans for the caucus states, there have been two major issues that the states have had to address in light of changes to Rule 2.K of the DNC Delegate Selection Rules.  First, what procedures does the state intend to take to increase participation in the caucuses?  Second, how are the votes at the caucuses translated into the allocation of delegates? 

As to the first issue, the 2016 plan in Nevada — recognizing that casino and hotel employees in Las Vegas form a significant bloc of potential caucus participants and that the 24-7 nature of that business would mean that some would-be participants would be working during the time set for the precinct caucuses — also scheduled at-large caucuses at a different time from the regular caucuses to allow shift workers to attend a caucus at a time that did not conflict with their job along with tele-caucuses for those in the military.  The plan assigned each of the at-large caucuses a number of delegates based on expected participation at that location and two delegates to the tele-caucus.  Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Delegates, Primary Elections | Also tagged , , Comments Off on Delegate Selection Rules — Nevada

2018 Mid-term Election — Rocky Mountains

By tmess2 | Published October 30, 2018

While it’s not an exact East-West line, the Rocky Mountain region has seen a lot of change in recent years.  While not the same in every state, the southern part of the region has trended a little more toward the Democrats while the northern part has, maybe, gotten even redder.

In Montana, we have a weird combination of races.  For Senate, even with President Trump firing with both barrels due to Senator Tester shooting down Trump’s misguided cronyism at the Department of Veteran’s Affair, Senator Tester seems to have a somewhat comfortable lead in the Senate race.  On the other hand, WWE-wannabe Greg Gianforte seems to be holding on (by a less comfortable margin) in the U.S. House race.

In Wyoming, the Democrats really have very little chance at picking up any of the races.  A successful outcome would be holding the Republicans beneath 55% in any of the three main races.

Colorado is moving from purple to lean Democrat.  It looks like Jared Polis has a solid lead in the race for governor.  Right now, the Republicans have four of the seven house seats.  It looks like the Democrats are likely to gain at least one seat (Sixth District) and are only slight underdogs to gain a second seat (Third District).

New Mexico like Colorado is gradually becoming blue.  The mid-term environment allowed the Republicans to win the race for Governor in 2010 and 2014, but, with an open seat this time, it looks very likely to be a Democratic pick-up.  And with two Congressmen running for governor, the Democrats are solid favorites to hold their two seats and a very narrow underdog to sweep the state and pick-up the Republicans only seat.

Arizona is the big question mark of the election.  Once the bastion of traditional conservatism, the Republican Party has had to try to skirt the fence between traditional Republicanism and the new far right nationalism represented by Trump.  This impossible task has created an open Senate seat when Jeff Flake saw the tea leaves on the wall for the Republican primary.  While not a sure thing (as the Republicans are throwing every piece of dirt along with the kitchen sink), Arizona is the best opportunity right now for the Democrats to gain a Senate seat.  On the other hand, the incumbent Governor seems to have threaded the needle and should win re-election barring a very strong Hispanic turnout.  Arizona’s House delegation is currently 5-4 in favor of the Republicans.  However, the Democrats are likely to flip that by picking up the Second District.  There are two longer shots.  The interesting story in Arizona is the Fourth District where the Republican candidate is so outrageous that his own family has cut ads against him.  Unfortunately, that district is so red that Satan himself could win running as a Republican.

Moving north, Utah is the home of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and the church has a large influence over state politics.  The Mormons have had some trouble with Trump’s unrepentant bigotry and sexism.  (Not that the Church itself has not had a history of having trouble with those issues, but it has made effort to improve its language if not its practices.)  It looks like the Republicans will be sending Mitt Romney to the Senate to pester Trump.  In the House, the Republicans drew the district lines to split the Democratic strength in the Salt Lake City area into two districts.  Even with lines favoring Republicans, the Democrats are slight favorites to take the Fourth District back (which would give them a grand total of one seat in Utah).

Everything is on the line in Nevada.  In the Summer of 2017, Senator Dean Heller looked like the most vulnerable Senate Republican.  Unlike Senator Flake, Senator Heller managed to have state leaders convince potential primary challengers to find another race.  Nevada is really two states.  You have three districts in the southern half of the state (all taking in part of the Las Vegas area) and one district covering the northern half of the state.  The Democrats currently control all three of the Las Vegas area seats (some by narrow margins) and the Republicans dominate the rest of the state.  The Congressional delegation seems likely to stay the same.  On the other hand, both of the state-wide races are too close to call with Republicans having a narrow lead.  Again, this race is likely to come down to turnout.  If the hotel unions in Las Vegas can get their members to vote, Democrats might sweep at the state level.  If not, the Republicans will likely escape by the skin of their teeth.  The Senate race is the second best chance for a Democratic gain, and it is hard to see how we get to 51 without winning Nevada.  It’s possible, just not likely.

Finally, there is Idaho.  Two House seats and the Governor’s race.  All currently held by Republicans.  Getting to 40% in any of the races would be a moral victory for Democrats.

Looking at referendums, Arizona has two interesting referendums that are likely to boost turnout on both sides.  On the one hand, there is a proposal to prevent future tax hikes on services.  On the other hand, there is a proposal to require Arizona to have renewable energy represent 50% of the state’s energy by 2030.   Colorado has a slew of referendums including changes to campaign finance law, establishing redistricting commissions, and limits on fracking.  Idaho does have a Medicaid expansion proposition as does Montana.  Montana also has a proposal to limit who can collect ballots.  (I don’t know if this is a problem in Montana, but it is in some parts of the country where some political organizations pressure voters to apply for and mail in absentee ballots for the organization’s candidates.)  Nevada has a renewable energy proposition as well as a motor voter proposal.  Utah has a trifecta of progressive proposals — Medicaid expansion, medical marijuana, and a redistricting commission.

In short, this region has only a handful of Democratic pick-up opportunities in the House — two probable and maybe two or three others.  On the other hand, it does have two potential pick-ups in Governor races, and three key Senate races with a potential net gain of two Senate seats for the Democrats which are key to the Democrat’s chance at winning control of the Senate.

Posted in Elections, General Election Forecast | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Comments Off on 2018 Mid-term Election — Rocky Mountains

Primary Season — Late Spring

By tmess2 | Published April 29, 2018

Because each state gets to set its own primary date, primary season is a gradual thing.  Putting aside a handful of exceptions (and run-offs), most primaries fall into two clusters.  The first cluster occurs in May and June (starting on May 8 and ending on June 26).  The second cluster occurs in August and September (starting on August 2 and ending on September 13).  During both clusters, most primaries occur on Tuesday, and there is at least one state on each Tuesday (other than May 29).

On May 8, there are primaries in Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, and West Virginia.  Key primaries are the Republican Senate primary in Indiana and West Virginia.  Both are states won by Trump in which Democratic Senators are running for re-election.  In Indiana, you have three candidates running for the Republican nomination.  It’s not clear that it really matters who wins or that there is much difference between the candidates.  West Virginia is a different matter.  The Republicans are scared to death that Don Blankenship could get the nomination.  Blankenship is the former CEO of one of the state’s larger coal miner and did time in prison related to miners who died due to unsafe mining practices.  The national GOP has (through super-pacs) been running adds against Blankenship.  In Ohio, the key races are for Governor with both parties having primaries in the race to replace term-limited John Kasich and Ohio’s 12th District in which there is both a regular primary and a special election primary (most of the candidates are the same in both, so both parties should have the same winner for both primaries, but there is always the chance in a close race that there could be a split result).

On May 15, there are primaries in Idaho, Nebraska, Oregon, and Pennsylvania.  The big story is likely to be the new congressional districts in Pennsylvania.   Amazingly, there are no incumbent against incumbent primaries although there could be an incumbent against incumbent general election.  Given the newness of the lines, it will be interesting to see how the local interests will influence the candidates chosen.

On May 22, there are primaries in Arkansas, Georgia, and Kentucky, and a run-off in Texas.   In Texas, there are key run-offs on the Democratic side for Governor and the Seventh District.  In both contests, the Republicans will be favored but Democrats have a shot.   The question for local Democrats will be whether to go with the “purer” candidate ideologically or with the candidate who could win over college-educated Republicans who do not like being part of the Party of Trump.

June 5 is the big day with primaries in Alabama, California, Iowa, Mississippi, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, and South Dakota.  California is the tough one to call given its “first two system.”  Particularly in close districts, it matters how many strong candidates each party has.   In a district (or state-wide for the Democrats) that your party should win, you want a second strong candidate so that you can lock the other party out of the general.  If you are slightly behind in the district, you want one strong candidate to assure yourself of a place in the general (and hope that the other party nominate a divisive candidate that gives you a chance to pick up independents and moderates).  What you don’t want is three strong candidates which create the possibility (as has happened in the past) that your party could get the most primary votes but still not finish in the top two due to your vote being split too much.  (Districts where Democrats could find themselves locked out of the general include the 1st, 4th, 8th, 10th, 39th, 48th, 49th, 50th.  The last three are districts that would be targets in November if a Democrat makes it to the final two.)  Particularly with Governor being an open seat, the other big question will be whether the Democrats can get both of the general election slots (as they did for Senate in 2016) for Governor and Senate.  (The primaries in Mississippi do not include the special election for Senate which will be a “non-partisan” race in November with a run-off if nobody wins a majority.)

June 12 has primaries in Maine, North Dakota, Nevada, South Carolina, and Virginia.  In Maine, you have an open race for Governor.  In Nevada, you have an open race for Governor and two congressional seats (3rd and 4th).   In Virginia, Republicans have a three-way Senate race.  You also have an open seat in Virginia 6th and a very important Democratic primary in District 10 which will be a target race in November.

June 19 is the calm week with the only certain primary being for D.C. but the chance at a run-off in Arkansas.

The spring primaries end on June 26 with contests in Colorado, Maryland, New York (federal offices only), Oklahoma, and Utah.   There could be a run-off in Mississippi, North Carolina (depending on whether any of the federal offices need a run-off), and/or South Carolina.  In Colorado, Governor is an open seat.  Additionally, the 2nd District will be an open seat as the Democratic incumbent is running for governor and the 5th District might be an open seat as the incumbent Republican failed to get enough signatures on his petition.  (That issue is still being fought in court.)  In New York, the interesting race might be the Republican Primary for the 11th district where disgraced former Congressman Michael Grimm is challenging incumbent Congressman Daniel Donovan.  In Utah, the big race is the open seat for the U.S. Senate where Mitt Romney is hoping/expecting to do better with primary voters than he did at the Republican state convention with activists.

While technically not a primary, the special election (as in Mississippi, Texas special elections are nominally non-partisan with a run-off in nobody wins) for Texas’s 27th District will take place on June 30.  All four of the candidates who will compete in the run-offs on May 22 are on the ballot for the special election.  (Whether anybody will drop out after May 22 is to be seen, but you could have the unusual result that a candidate loses on May 22 but makes it to the run-off in the special election due to cross-over votes.)

There could also be run-offs in some states in July depending upon the results in the primaries noted above.

 

Posted in Democrats, Elections, GOP, House of Representatives, Senate | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

Election Night 2016 — What to Look For (Part Four)

By tmess2 | Published November 7, 2016

fireworksAs 9:00 p.m. rolls around, enough states have been closed long enough that exit polls become less significant, and raw vote count becomes more significant.  If the exit polls and early returns in the state had been clear enough, those states would have already been called.  The question at this point in time is which if any of the contested states and races have been called.  While enough states remain that technically nobody will have yet won the White House, or the majority in the Senate, or the majority in the House, it should be becoming clear whether it is simply a matter of waiting for the polls to close in “safe” states or if it is going to be a long night waiting for the last votes in a handful of states.  While the race is not yet over, the next two hours should determine the winners.

9:00 p.m. (EST) — The remaining polls close in Michigan, Kansas, South Dakota, and Texas.  Additionally, the polls close in Arizona, Colorado, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.  Colorado and Wisconsin are the last of the “at risk” states that are part of Secretary Clinton’s easiest path to 270.  Arizona and Nebraska 2 join Georgia, North Carolina, Ohio, and Maine 2 in the batch of electoral votes that Trump absolutely needs to get to 270.

Posted in Elections, General Election Forecast | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , Comments Off on Election Night 2016 — What to Look For (Part Four)

Credential Challenges

By tmess2 | Published April 17, 2016

In most election cycles, the credential committee of the two national convention are hardly mentioned if at all.  Any credential fight is about a handful individuals who failed to win a delegate slot challenging those who did get elected to those slots.  Because the nominee is a foregone conclusion, who actually fills the seat does not “matter” to the central business of the convention and any of these disputes are handled with the only media concerned about the result being the local papers from the delegate’s home town.

This year, with the Republican race looking close, there is at least a lot of noise about challenges to the delegate selection process.  While it is possible that some of these complaints will end up before the two credential committees, my take is that most of the current “potential” challenges will go nowhere or are not really credentials issues.  So far, it seems like there is one potential real credentials issue for the two conventions.

Posted in Cleveland, Delegates, Donald Trump, Philadelphia, PHLDNC2016 | Also tagged , , , 1 Comment

Delegate Math — Week of February 15

By tmess2 | Published February 15, 2016

This week is a weird week in the presidential primary process.  For almost all primary states, both parties hold their primaries on the same date because the date is set by the state legislature.  Even in caucus states, there is a tendency that both parties will choose the same date.  In South Carolina, however, the parties choose the primary date for their party.  So this week, the Republicans have their primary in South Carolina, and the Democrats have their caucus in Nevada.  Next week, the two parties will flip with the Republicans going in Nevada, and the Democrats going in South Carolina.

On the Republican side, the four states in the pre-March 1 window are exempt from the proportionality rule.  South Carolina has chosen to go with a winner-take-most system.  The candidate who finishes first in each of the seven congressional district will win the three delegates for that district.  The candidate who finishes first state-wide gets the twenty-six at-large delegates and the three automatic delegates.   At least according to the polls, Trump seems to be safely in the lead for the twenty-nine state-wide candidates.  If one of the establishment candidates has a chance at winning one of the congressional districts, it is most likely to be the 1st district or the 6th district.  Ted Cruz’s best chance of winning a congressional district will be the 3rd, 4th, and 5th districts.

On the Democratic side, Nevada has some weird rules.  State law designates how many delegates each precinct gets to the county convention and how many delegates each county gets to the congressional and state district conventions.  The counties get one delegate to the state convention for each 150 registered democrats in the county.  The formula for the precinct is more complicated.  In counties with fewer than 400 democrats, each precinct gets 1 delegate to the county convention for each 5 registered democrats.  This ratio gradually changes so that in the largest counties (those with more than 4,000 democrats), each precinct gets 1 delegate to the county convention for each 50 registered democrats.    Because this formula simply makes the county conventions larger and does not alter representation at the conventions that actually choose delegates, it should not have an actual impact on who gets Nevada’s delegates to the national convention.  While Nevada will report raw vote totals, the key in Nevada (as in Iowa and other caucus states) is figuring out how many delegates each campaign will have at each of the county conventions and what that means for delegates at the state convention where delegates will actually be allocated.

At the state convention (in May), the delegates will first meet by congressional district to allocate the congressional district delegates.  Three of the four district will have six delegates to the national convention.  For those three districts, it will take 58.4% of the vote to get four delegates, otherwise it will be a 3-3 split.  The remaining district (the 1st — Las Vegas) has five delegates.  Whomever wins that district will probably get three delegates to two delegates for the runner up (it would take 70% of the vote to get to four delegates).    The convention as a whole will also allocate five pledged party leaders (thus the same formula as for the 1st district) and seven at-large delegates (a four-three split unless the winning candidate gets to 65%).    In short, winning the 1st and state-wide will probably result in a 19-16 delegate advantage.   The only recent polls — from an unknown Republican pollster — suggests a close race.

 

Posted in Bernie Sanders, Delegates, Elections, GOP, Hillary Clinton, Primary and Caucus Results | Also tagged , , Comments Off on Delegate Math — Week of February 15