man, it's near 11:00 and don young has it in the bag and stevens looks to be squeaking by. we're going to look like the dumbest damned dirty apes in the country tomorrow morning.
Given the history of deep corruption in Alaska, and the voting numbers that were manipulated in 2004 under Loren Leman, shouldn't some of you finer bloggers be out there taking a look at the voting process?
With the close race for Stevens, we should review it. Alaskans voted in an arrogant criminal? Really?
With Burkowitz polling ahead of Young before the election, it sure is peculiar that Young should defeat him so handily.
The name SARAH means "Little Princess" and that is what Sarah Palin seems to have been all her life. She has always gotten what she wants with a beguiling smile and coquettish wink of her eye. That technique has worked in Alaska up until now, but the rest of American was able to see through this to the lack of substance beneath. Hopefully when she returns home the great folks of Alaskan will have taken notice and they too will see through the facade of a Beauty Queen run amuck.
Maybe when polling and election numbers aren't close to lining up, we should take a closer look to make sure the integrity of our vote is not being compromised.
The Begich campaign, learning from the 2004 Knowles-Murkowski battle, have taken down real numbers from just about every precinct in Alaska. We'll see...
philip, did you see this at the ADN politics blog?
"'More from Young' (12:05 p.m.)
From Megan Holland at the Egan Center--
From Don Young:
'Ethan did me a favor. He made me work a little harder. And, it's hard to have a race, very honestly, when you're not very challenged. Now, I will say this: Diane Benson would have been a much stronger candidate. Now, I say that right up front.'
'She had a cause that you'd have to really work on.'"
clark & anon @ #16 - you have to remember that there are still 40,000 uncounted votes. It is conceivable that Ethan can pull ahead, but not likely.
I think that Mark will pull ahead.
I did a 2006 district by district analysis of Diane versus Tony/Ethaan for PA, and a precinct by precinct 2006 of the same matchup for the Benson campaign. Essentially, she did better than Tony/Ethan in the bush and in parts of Fairbanks and the Kenai Penninsula-Kodiak.
That's the main reason I was saying last winter through early summer that Diane's presence on the ticket would have helped Mark better than Ethan's presence would. I still stand by that. Had Diane Benson been on the ticket yesterday, Mark would have been able to announce victory already.
Don's comment is interesting. He skulked at attention in 2006. He seemed to relish it this year, from the moment Parnell announced, on through to the end.
But, knowing Don, I'm not sure his ADN comment is so much a tribute to Diane as it is a slap in the face to Ethan.
"Maybe when polling and election numbers aren't close to lining up, we should take a closer look to make sure the integrity of our vote is not being compromised."
I think it is more likely that the pollsters are trying to manipulate public opinion, or are only releasing the numbers that would tend to bolster their candidate. Polls are really useless for the public, except in how they tend to change the publics perception of a candidate. They are useful for candidates during a campaign.
In 2006, raw data election results were manipulated three times by someone in Loren Leman's offices in the year and a half after the election before before they were turned over to the Alaskan Democratic Party...
So, what's more reliable? Random polling by paid pollsters or a history of republican corruption? In this state, I say the latter.
19 comments:
They are coming back. How long before Palin abdicates her throne for the media?
Time to start implementing that recall plan for the toothless Barracuda!
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/election.president/index.html
~~~~~~~ "Today, I was a candidate for the highest office in the country I love so much, and tonight, I remain her servant," he said.
McCain's running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, was standing with him, but she did not speak.~~~~~~
He finally figured it out eight weeks to damned late! Keep the dummy quiet!
Correction: ". . . too damned late!"
How about those state elections? Local Mat-Su candidates were duds. Need to get someone who can actually put up a race!
man, it's near 11:00 and don young has it in the bag and stevens looks to be squeaking by. we're going to look like the dumbest damned dirty apes in the country tomorrow morning.
I think I can see the virgin Mary in that toast...
yes, virginia. we're sending two octegenarians who are totally engulfed in scandal [seven felony convictions!] back to DC!
fucking jaw dropping.
Philip,
GREAT POST. It's a day to celebrate before we start the hard work of the next 4 years. CONGRATULATIONS, and thanks for all you do.
PS. Keep visiting EmptyWheel and join us in the conversation.
Given the history of deep corruption in Alaska, and the voting numbers that were manipulated in 2004 under Loren Leman, shouldn't some of you finer bloggers be out there taking a look at the voting process?
With the close race for Stevens, we should review it. Alaskans voted in an arrogant criminal? Really?
With Burkowitz polling ahead of Young before the election, it sure is peculiar that Young should defeat him so handily.
"With Burkowitz polling ahead of Young before the election, it sure is peculiar that Young should defeat him so handily."
Maybe we shouldn't have elections, we can just have polls and be done with it.
I see your favorite leader Rahm E, is the likely chief of staff.
The name SARAH means "Little Princess" and that is what Sarah Palin seems to have been all her life. She has always gotten what she wants with a beguiling smile and coquettish wink of her eye. That technique has worked in Alaska up until now, but the rest of American was able to see through this to the lack of substance beneath. Hopefully when she returns home the great folks of Alaskan will have taken notice and they too will see through the facade of a Beauty Queen run amuck.
Maybe when polling and election numbers aren't close to lining up, we should take a closer look to make sure the integrity of our vote is not being compromised.
baja,
The Begich campaign, learning from the 2004 Knowles-Murkowski battle, have taken down real numbers from just about every precinct in Alaska. We'll see...
been too busy to post a new article...
philip, did you see this at the ADN politics blog?
"'More from Young' (12:05 p.m.)
From Megan Holland at the Egan Center--
From Don Young:
'Ethan did me a favor. He made me work a little harder. And, it's hard to have a race, very honestly, when you're not very challenged. Now, I will say this: Diane Benson would have been a much stronger candidate. Now, I say that right up front.'
'She had a cause that you'd have to really work on.'"
I'd be curious to see what Ethan's numbers versus Diane's numbers (in 06) are in the bush.
clark & anon @ #16 - you have to remember that there are still 40,000 uncounted votes. It is conceivable that Ethan can pull ahead, but not likely.
I think that Mark will pull ahead.
I did a 2006 district by district analysis of Diane versus Tony/Ethaan for PA, and a precinct by precinct 2006 of the same matchup for the Benson campaign. Essentially, she did better than Tony/Ethan in the bush and in parts of Fairbanks and the Kenai Penninsula-Kodiak.
That's the main reason I was saying last winter through early summer that Diane's presence on the ticket would have helped Mark better than Ethan's presence would. I still stand by that. Had Diane Benson been on the ticket yesterday, Mark would have been able to announce victory already.
Don's comment is interesting. He skulked at attention in 2006. He seemed to relish it this year, from the moment Parnell announced, on through to the end.
But, knowing Don, I'm not sure his ADN comment is so much a tribute to Diane as it is a slap in the face to Ethan.
"Maybe when polling and election numbers aren't close to lining up, we should take a closer look to make sure the integrity of our vote is not being compromised."
I think it is more likely that the pollsters are trying to manipulate public opinion, or are only releasing the numbers that would tend to bolster their candidate. Polls are really useless for the public, except in how they tend to change the publics perception of a candidate. They are useful for candidates during a campaign.
In 2006, raw data election results were manipulated three times by someone in Loren Leman's offices in the year and a half after the election before before they were turned over to the Alaskan Democratic Party...
So, what's more reliable? Random polling by paid pollsters or a history of republican corruption? In this state, I say the latter.
Post a Comment