Nate Silver on Colorado:

it is the state most likely to be involved in a split result between the popular vote and the Electoral College

Given that the most likely ‘split’ scenarios continue to favor the Democratic candidate in the electoral vote, I suppose Democrats are now fairly relieved that Amendment 36 did not pass.

0 thoughts on “Colorado

  1. … In Contra Costa County, east of San Francisco, registrar Stephen Weir said he too learned from the primary. A fold in the absentee ballots forced him to spend nearly two weeks ironing, by hand, about 16,000 ballots to make them flat enough to feed into vote-counting machines.

    “There were two lessons learned,” he said. “Dump the fold. And the silk setting worked great.”

    Mary Pat Flaherty, “High Turnout, New Procedures May Mean an Election Day Mess”, Washington Post (Thursday, 18 September 2008), p A-1.

  2. How funny. The National Popular Vote compact until now has been a horrible Democratic conspiracy to let our indulgent, secular urban places elect the president.

    For the third time, NPV sits on Schwarzenegger’s desk.

    And America’s next embarrassing popular vote reversal probably would favor the Democrats.

    I know electoral reformers all over California are calling Schwarzenegger’s office to ask him to advance democracy. They should share this little projection with him too.

  3. The probability of a tie in the electoral college keeps going up.

    Still “only” around 3%, but up. And just to make it even more interesting, about 80% of the simulations that result in an electoral-vote tie have McCain winning the popular vote!

    (See 538)

  4. Don’t forget that Barr is trying to make sure that the Republicans and Democrats are playing by the rules in Texas. Up to now, Barr is the only one who has his name on the ballot for President in Nov. In the eventuality that the race is close enough, Texas going to Barr would be a big shake-up and Colorado would be a swing state that could decide the winner.

  5. “With North Carolina coming down to the wire, an obscure voting statute is coming into play. In the Tar Heel state, a straight-ticket vote does not include the presidential or statewide judicial candidates. Voters must make those votes separately to have their vote counted.

    For the judges, their offices are officially non-partisan so that can be disregarded. But on the presidential level, where the campaigns are decidedly partisan, the law could have a definite impact on the outcome.

    For many voters, the process is confusing. After all, why would a straight ticket vote not include all candidates from a particular party?

    As Mike Baker of the Associated Press Raleigh bureau points out, the law was created by the Democrats.

    From Baker’s story: [now-dead link to

    “Democrats created the straight-ticket law in the 1960s. More conservative than the national Democratic party, state Democrats feared that relatively liberal candidates at the top of the ticket might reduce their appeal among straight-ticket voters, so they made sure the presidency would be a separate question for voters.”

    This could hurt Barack Obama’s chances in the state, as many first-time voters leave the voting booth under the impression they had voted for every Democrat on the ticket, including Obama….”

    Doug Heye, “Not-So-Straight Ticket: Old Democrat voting rule may hurt Obama in NC,” National Review Online (October 31, 2008)

  6. “It will take a loose interpretation of the law for Maryland to award its 10 Electoral College votes to President-elect Barack Obama today.

    “Maryland’s presidential electors, according to state statute, are to convene in the State House in Annapolis on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December to translate the state’s popular vote into the electoral votes that actually elect a president.

    “There’s only one problem: The State House is closed. The 229-year-old capitol has been a hard-hat area since April for a major piping project…”

    – John Wagner, “State House’s Closure for Repairs Puts Hitch in Electoral College Vote,” Washington Post (Monday, December 15, 2008), p B-1.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.