Howard Dean is first.

   Why do I get the feeling all these graphs are being introduced to get us ready for the results of  some kind of  magical recalculation that shows Edwards somehow won? Last time I looked Kucinich had over 31% of the votes and the next registered candidate had less than HALF that.  If Kucinich doesn't win I'll tear up my DFA membership.

Look at the title of this blog--it shows how the DFA organizers voted.  They obviously know that John Edwards is not only the most progressive candidate, but also the most electable.

Hey Mark,

 Don't worry Mark. No shenanigans here. You will be plenty happy with the final results.

one thing is being shown, and i predict will be shown, that no significant number wants hillary. ok, there's my negative for the day...wanna beat the DLC, beat hillary.

We still have to see the First choice results. How are you giving these results? You make it sound like you took first choice, minus Gore and calculated his 2nd choice and added them in to the declared first choice. That is not an accurate vote at all if that is what you did.

Please clarify.

Hey Linda,

That's exactly what Ilya did above... but for this blog post only. This is a special post to show how DFA leaders and DFA-link activists feel about the declaired candidates.

We will be posting the full results later and you will be happy to see that Al Gore did very very well... everywhere.  

7. Thank you Charles. It's not that I'm concerned about that, although of course it's nice to see support, but I don't see how it can even be argued for seeing what a group supports when they are taking results from two different election totals.

No where does that math justify giving a total.

let the numbers fall where they may. i personally like seeing them in as many ways as possible. that's the real fun of this sort of thing. i downloaded a game (and i'm not into games) that lets you run presidential campaigns based on what's really happening in politics. don't know if i'll play it for a year, but its fun on the front end.

Phil, do you know a Wilford Stone from Cedar Rapids? He just won the dinner with Senator Harkin.

Linda,

I'm sure our Draft Gore efforts will have significant and considerable numbers. I'm just hoping for some persuasive results.

linda, you could look at this one snap shot as an if>then: if gore doesn't run>then his supporters say they'd back X.

Interesting results.  We did a forum in our community and a LOT of Kucinich supporters came.  I'd say about 75% solid Kucinich.  However, the majority of them said that they could not vote their heart this time as the country was in too deep doo doo.  Our winner by more than half again was also Edwards.  With Hill WAY down the slope.

hey, barb. i spread that bird thing all over the art community around here. people really liked it.

Anybody heard from Paine?

nope.

House Votes to Override Bush’s Veto of Water Projects
By DAVID STOUT
Published: November 6, 2007

WASHINGTON, Nov. 6 — The House voted 361 to 54 this evening to override President Bush’s veto of a $23 billion water projects bill, apparently sealing Mr. Bush’s first defeat in a veto showdown with Congress.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/washin...

Great mprov.  Happy to share that.  I was at a party and a lady and our host were discussing her two parrots.  So I told her about the video and said that I would send it on to our host to forward to her.

Well, our host had just (the day before the party) gotten a hernia.  So I got an email from him telling me that he had sent it on to the young lady and that it was really cruel to send that video to someone with a hernia without a proper warning!  He said ROTFLMGutsO!

from the previous thread

38.

Poppy Elle
Tue, 11/06/07
6:51 pm

fyi - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Republ...

17.  YES ! !  Is this the first of Bush going down in flames?

Obama Rejects Bill Clinton's Criticism


Tuesday November 6, 2007 8:01 PM

By NEDRA PICKLER

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Barack Obama said Tuesday that former President Clinton is making a leap to compare treatment of his wife in the presidential race to the ``swift boat'' criticism of John Kerry in 2004.

The former president had encouraged an audience in Nevada Monday not to let ``trivial matters'' take away the election from the Democrats as they have in the past. He cited the television ads during the 2004 presidential campaign that questioned Kerry's patriotism and campaign commercials in 2002 suggesting that Sen. Max Cleland, D-Ga. was soft on terrorism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/st...

Military may ease standards for recruits
Posted on Tue, Nov. 06, 2007
By LOLITA C. BALDOR
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON --
Faced with higher recruiting goals, the Pentagon is quietly looking for ways to make it easier for people with minor criminal records to join the military, The Associated Press has learned.
The review, in its early stages, comes as the number of Army recruits needing waivers for bad behavior - such as trying drugs, stealing, carrying weapons on school grounds and fighting - rose from 15 percent in 2006 to 18 percent this year. And it reflects the services' growing use of criminal, health and other waivers to build their ranks.

Overall, about three in every 10 recruits must get a waiver, according to Pentagon statistics obtained by AP, and about two-thirds of those approved in recent years have been for criminal behavior. Some recruits must get more than one waiver to cover things ranging from any criminal record, to health problems such as asthma or flat feet, to low aptitude scores - and even for some tattoos.

The goal of the review is to make cumbersome waiver requirements consistent across the services - the Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force - and reduce the number of petty crimes that now trigger the process. Still, some Army officers worry that disciplinary problems will grow as more soldiers with records, past drug use and behavior problems are brought in.

http://www.miamiherald.com/692/story/297...

22. looks like we'll be returning to our traditional military.

mprov, I understand that's what they trying to claim, but the reality isn't there. You can' take First Choice results, deduct one person and take that persons voters 2nd choice results and add them to the left behind 1st choice and claim that as any real number. That's all. And that is what they did on this post as Charles said. That doesn't show where the voters are...or 60 percent of their organizers. They aren't giving the actual 2nd choice.

5 & 13
I still don't know where all this Hillary support the CM talks about is coming from...I talk to a lot of people...Progressives, Dems & Repubs and I haven't found it...must be a secret list...lol

Results from San Francisco mayor's race could take days
By LISA LEFF Associated Press Writer
Article Launched: 11/06/2007 10:38:20 AM PST

SAN FRANCISCO—Voters in San Francisco on Tuesday have the uninspiring civic duty of casting ballots in a mayoral election whose outcome is considered a foregone conclusion yet may not be confirmed for days or weeks.

With 17 challengers, but only nominal opposition in his re-election race, Mayor Gavin Newsom is expected to easily win a second term after running a comparatively inconspicuous campaign, according to political analysts.

Because of concerns about the reliability of the city's voting machines, though, elections officials say they would have to hand-inspect every ballot, a procedure that could keep them counting—and Newsom from declaring victory—until the end of the week.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/...

...folks, speaking of adding up. If this tiling venture succeeds, that will suprise even me.

...time for Versabond and placing........ugh!


ciao!

I'm really enjoying Lou Dobbs today.  He just told putziepoo to get off his duff and do something for the American people.

Lou got angry while I was gone.  Good for him.  

Now if only Blitzie would grow some cajones. 

Dennis Kucinich made history with his impeachment resolution.   Here is a list of some honorable Democrats that are NOT on any DLC list:

H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment Against Dick Cheney, is sponsored by the following Members of Congress: Jan Schakowsky, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Keith Ellison, Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Albert Wynn, William Lacy Clay, Dennis Kucinich, Yvette Clarke, Jim McDermott, Jim Moran, Bob Filner, Sam Farr, Robert Brady, Tammy Baldwin, Donald Payne, Steve Cohen, Sheila Jackson Lee, Carolyn Kilpatrick, Ed Towns, Diane Watson.  

All these representatives of the people know the reasons why representatives of the majority of the people should not hobnob with DLC corporate power against the best interests of the common population, which is nearly 3/4th of the United States population.  None of the H. Res.333 supporting members have been found selling working people out for big money and corporate prestige, but are satisfied with the prestige received from the common people they represent, who are relying on them as their representatives  to represent them, NOT CORPORATIONS.   

DO NOT BE FOOLED,  these H. Res. 333 representatives know the difference; therefore, the DLC members know the difference; the DLC members have greedily chosen to trade representation of the common people  for representation of corporations, instead; after having been elected by the common people, which makes DLC representatives actually "traitor representatives" to the majority common population.  The only way being a traitor to the majority common population can be handled is by the majority common population handling it;  either by voting, or the way the Italians handled fascism with Mussolini and his wife.  It is that simple.  WE THE PEOPLE can not leave the DLC takeover to someone else to handle.  WE THE PEOPLE will have to handle the DLC ourselves one way or the other.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

Do not be afraid and NEVER GIVE UP on the Democratic Party, WHENEVER YOU GIVE UP, YOU GIVE UP ON GOD.  Whenever you give up, even God can't help.  There are only TWO bonefide political parties in the United States of which the Democratic Party is one.   The Democratic Party represents democracy for ALL THE PEOPLE.  The DLC is a subjunct organization attached to the Democratic Party.  Christian people should never give up on democracy for ALL THE PEOPLE.  We Christians must make our stand  in the name of Jesus on the Word of God for democracy in the United States and against the DLC knowing that the Bible says, "Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all,  to stand.  Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with TRUTH,  and having on the breastplate of righteousness [THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST]; and, your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of PEACE; above all, taking the shield of FAITH, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked." - Ephesians 6:13-16   Do all you can do, then stand firm, NEVER GIVE UP, and watch the power of God regain democracy for ALL the people in the United States, not just democracy for only 1/4th of the population, AT THE EXPENSE OF 3/4th OF THE POPULATION.  Bush doesn't represent Jesus.  Jesus represents PEACE.  Dennis Kucinich represents PEACE and DIPLOMACY.  

This is a good read...

The California Wildfires, and Right-Wing Smoke
| Ernest Partridge |

What is a tried-and-true southern California "conservative" Republican to do when a hundred-foot wall of flames comes roaring up the slope toward his private home? Boldly stand his ground, garden hose in hand? Or does he step aside and allow "big government" professionals, paid and equipped by his taxes, to do their job? The attitude of his hero, Ronald Reagan, is crystal clear: "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" It's a hard-case dilemma: stand by your principles and perish, or yield those principles to stark necessity and thus survive.

Kinda like the dilemma faced by a Christian Scientist with acute appendicitis.

And when "big gummint bureaucrats" impose a mandatory evacuation, does our conservative defy the order? When one of our neighbors in Lake Arrowhead did just that two weeks ago, the fire marshall replied, "Very well, but please leave us your dental records, so that we can identify your charred remains when this is all over." Sometimes reality can be a real bitch.

Of course, if the same stubborn conservative is then trapped by the flames, the fire fighters will come to his rescue, thus expending time and resources that would be better directed to a coordinated attack on the fire.

In tranquil moments, when there are no fires, conservative principle prevails. Thus, in wealthy, rock-ribbed Republican San Diego county, "tax reformers" had their way as police and fire department budgets were slashed. And when the fires came two weeks ago, the local and county officials frantically called upon federal, state, and outside municipal fire fighters to come to their aid, which they did. The cost of that necessarily delayed response was thousands of acres and hundreds of homes. Still more acres and homes were spared, thanks to the equipment and personnel paid for by the taxes of others. Thus the proud, "government-free," "self-made" San Diego conservatives became, in effect, parasites.

Blame the enviros -- global warming had nothing to do with it. The right-wing wasted no time placing the blame for the fires on their favorite target: the environmentalists. Quoth Rush Limbaugh: "The Sierra Club will not let you get in there -- none of the environmentalists will -- and get rid of the dead junk that is at the bottom of these forests that is just like kindling wood.... In order to thrive, we have to alter our environment, and, if altering the environment means clearing out some dead brush to make fire less of a gigantic possibility than it already is, then we have a responsibility to do that." And Glenn Beck at CNN: "the environmentalists, the same ones that going to tell me it's my fault because I have an SUV, these same damn environmentalists are the ones that have stopped people in California from clearing brush on their own property."......

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x319090

linda, i have the feeling that we'll see the numbers split a number of ways that will make a number of people/groups mad at the comparison. personally i don't think this has the weight being assigned, i.e., that gore would decide to/not to run based on this small sample. also, those, like my friend dan who posted earlier, aren't likely to change their mind on supporting their candidate based on this.

the reality that i see is that this thing is hillary versus everyone else including gore. if we could pull a consensus candidate and all the others back him/her, then we beat hillary. problem is everyone saying "not my guy, i'm for him/her."

you know i want gore, but what if he refuses. sitka may be right about thursday night? who knows.

btw, i have to go to los angeles for the next 2 days and one of the businesses i'll be inspecting is a guy who does lights for CBS tv and movies. he says the writers strike has fowled up the whole south end of the san fernando valley. too funny. he also says they only picket 9 to 5. funnier still.

Agree, Linda SF, we're not getting the second and third choices.  If this poll does nothing else but show the net and the ÇM that Hillary is a loser and will not win the progressive/indie vote, then it will have been somewhat successful.

We can be sure Clinton watched this poll.

We're not gonna go along with a poor nominee anymore.  At least I won't.  Her high poll ratings in IA are alarming which is just as strange as Dodd doing so poorly in the pulse poll. 

32.

mprov
Tue, 11/06/07
7:35 pm

personally i don't think this has the weight being assigned, i.e., that gore would decide to/not to run based on this small sample.


--->>>OH, I complete agree with that. Oh, my, I never ever considered this barometer for Mr. Gore. And he knows full and well what is out there.
....hubby's puffying....glues awaiting....LOL...It may be on my face soon, but....LOL........All be well.

Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Electoral Intiative's Backers Identified
Well, now we know who the early donors are to the proposed ballot initiative that would change how California's 55 electoral votes are divvied up in the race for the White House.

Some of the names are familiar ones, and it's quite fair to call this is a Republican effort. That being said, the report filed today with state elections officials only accounts for about $539,000 worth of contributions over the past two weeks. Yes, that may only be seed money... but it's a long ways away from the reported $3 million claimed recently to have been committed. And it's also a long ways away from enough cash to get the measure on the ballot in 2008.

So who are some of the donors? The larger contributions come from people like Glen Holden, an insurance investor and former ambassador to Jamaica under the first President George Bush; Duane Roberts, an Orange County businessman who's also given money this year to GOP presidential contenders Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, and John McCain; money manager Robert Day, listed on Forbes' 2006 list of "The World's Richest People"; venture capitalist Floyd Kvamme, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2001 as co-chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology; Jerrold Perenchio, former CEO of Univision who's also been a financial backer of Governor Schwarzenegger; and Bill Leonard, an elected member of the California Board of Equalization and former Assembly GOP leader.

And as publicly reported before, seed money has also been contributed by U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Vista) -- from both his own checkbook ($50,000) and from his campaign account ($9,500).

The single largest contribution so far to the campaign known as California Counts: $80,000 from the California Republican Party.

http://www.kqed.org/weblog/capitalnotes/...

Please, could we leave religion out of politics?  Thanks.  The rest of the post was very nice, however.

mprov,  the only way we can beat Hillary is to have a consensus candidate and most everyone finds too much wrong with all the rest.

I'd go for ABH.  Really!  We have to get behind s/o.  Look how well it's worked for the repugs and how poorly it's worked for dems.  Have we learned nothing? Don't we know how to fight off what we don't want?

 The pulse poll IMO is misleading. Let's do an IRV if Gore doesn't say anything one way or another  on Thurs and then leave him off the poll.  We need to stop Clinton.  IMO

Wait...who said that Edwards was the most progressive candidate?

Ha, because I believe we were looking quite strongly down on him in 2004, no matter who his campaign manager is now.

And while Gore, Kucinich and Gravel are no Howard Dean, I'm certainly not going to vote for candidates with no susbstance...regardless of who their campaign manager is, or their electability/grassroots support.

DFA is supposed to manufacture electability and grassroots support, and feel good doing it.

IT'S FLORIDA ALL OVER AGAIN!

And here I thought it was a legitimate poll, not a manipulation of the votes to suit the DFA. If you never intended to count the "Other" votes, why didn't you state it out in front

I am embarassed because I solicited my friends and relations to vote on your site only to find that it was a fraud.

I AM A "PROGRESSIVE". You can't hijack the word when you don't represent the meaning, just a certain candidate. I will work for Gore, vote for Gore and no other. You will no longer get my attention nor my cash.

Sue Stinson

"DFA is supposed to manufacture electability and grassroots support, and feel good doing it."

interesting comment.

Hey! Dennis Kucinich won! Post the poll results, not the DFA-orgs list,  are you trying to chaet the results?.  You should announce the real winner in a statement fair and square.  

oe Trippi (b. 1956) is a long-time American Democratic campaign worker and consultant. A mainstay in presidential politics, Trippi has worked on the presidential campaigns of Edward Kennedy, Walter Mondale, Gary Hart, and Dick Gephardt. Most notably, he served as campaign manager for presidential candidate and former Vermont governor Howard Dean.  ======DFA

He is currently working for the presidential campaign of former Senator John Edwards. =========== Conflict of interest?????????????????

Nuff Said, You Are Not Ethical. 

sue, charles was up front about this from the beginning.

Joe Trippi
campaign manager
Dean for America 2003-2004

Trippi, writing on John Edwards's blog:

I really thought that the 2004 presidential campaign would be the last I would be involved in. I have always wanted to make a difference, but for me I thought those days were over.

A few weeks ago, John and Elizabeth Edwards made their decision to continue, not just John Edwards' campaign for President, but their work together to make a difference for their country.

And that made me realize that I wasn't done trying to make a difference either. Not by a long shot. So today I am joining the John Edwards campaign.

Too much is at stake. The war in Iraq continues, and more of our troops will lose their lives. Working Americans are losing ground. Poverty continues in the wealthiest nation on the planet. And nearly nothing is really being done to reduce global warming.

John Edwards is leading the way and making a difference on all of these issues. He's offering big ideas backed by real plans to change our country. And so his campaign is the place where I will work to make whatever difference I can.

Lets make a difference together, for each other, and for our country. Too much is at stake to give anything less than everything we've got.

We're told that Trippi will be a senior adviser and a member of the media team. We suspect he'll play a large role in developing Edwards's internet strategy. "

Internet Strategy= manipulating poll results towards edwards 

there was some prof from usc on msnbc this morning that made an interesting point:

candidates that target areas dominated by the other party can more easily gain delegates due to the lower voter turnout.

those of you who live in areas like this should think about it.

Incredible.

Throughout the voting, you could click on a live link to see results to date.  Kucinich pulled out ahead early and shortly before the poll closed was shown with a total that exceeded the SUM of votes for Obama and Edwards. 

And now---19 HOURS AFTER THE POLL CLOSED---the overall results are STILL not being shown--because "We are currently tallying up the results and will release them later on Tuesday, November 6th"---but a bunch of charts are posted showing that the organzers favored Edwards, with Kucinich third among announced candidates ?

This stinks to high heaven and casts a BIG DOUBT on the even handedness of DFA.

The opinion at least of this now former contributor to DFA and a major donor last year to Gov. Dean.

Ok, I understand that DFA didn't want to send recruitment letters to any undeclared candidate. But they allowed write-in votes. Only AFTER the voting started and they realized how high gore would go did they then decide that an undeclared candidate's votes would be redistributed to 2nd choice candidate.

This is what I understand from watching this unfold. Fact is, voting integrity requires that new rules not be made up after the vote begins. While true that write-in candidates on real ballots have to be legitimate and certified in some circumstances, that was not clearly the case here when the voting began.

Second, this is not a vote by "members of DFA" since a large number (how many?) came for the first time just to vote. It's not clear that these folks will stick around to help DFA or not. A vote for endorsement ought to be undertaken by a smaller number of DFA members such as the DFA-Link email list.

joe trippi has zero to do with DFA.

Look, DFA, I warned that the blog and DFA would have this blow up on the net.

You continue to act as if you did nothing wrong here. Just look at the "new" unknown people now coming here to complain...and this will mutliply over the net.

For the record, Joe Trippi has no role with DFA and DID NOT manipulate the vote. There are some problems with the vote, but that isn't one of them.

 Pulse Poll: Counting votes and Fake votes  by Tim Watson  Add to favorites View on DFA-Link
Promoted Tuesday, 11/06/07 @ 04:00 pm. Published Tuesday, 11/06/07 @ 04:00 pm
   

Viewing: Front
Organizers and the DFA Link Community: How they voted  by Ilya Sheyman Add to favorites View on DFA-Link
Promoted Tuesday, 11/06/07 @ 06:15 pm. Published Tuesday, 11/06/07 @ 06:04 pm

Hey, lets put up the results for only 2 hours and 4 minutes!!!! Fair enough right?  Also, lets put up if we had IRV to make it look like Edwards almost won that one too!  Go Edwards,yay! Everyone, I think Edwards really might have one the DFA Poll!!  HEY EDWARDS PROBABLY WON, WAIT I'M CONFUSED..... I BETTER GO WATCH FOX NEWS AND KILL MYSELF!!

hmmm, some people are obviously NOT reading the fact that there were a LOT of bogus votes that were tossed out.  And those bogus votes came during the "surges" in votes.

Easily traced bogus emails, I might add.

HQ,

You can tapdance the results any way you'd like, and although it may be entertaining, it has no validity.  This was a self-selected internet vote in which organized groups pushed their candidates. The rules changed in the middle (on write-ins).  This is neither a statistically valid sample (of any group) nor a poll of DFA "membership".  It has all the validity of "who is your favorite Beatle" posted on MTV's web site.

I wouldn't care, except the results are going to be used to benefit the winner or winners (if they end up to be state by state, which is likely) and DFA, and organization which is trying to be taken seriously in the political realm, is going to get a black eye.

That's what I think. YMMV. 

And now---19 HOURS AFTER THE POLL CLOSED---the overall results are STILL not being shown--because "We are currently tallying up the results and will release them later on Tuesday, November 6th"---but a bunch of charts are posted showing that the organzers favored Edwards, with Kucinich third among announced candidates ?

I love everyone's eagerness about the results - and we will be coming out with full results asap - and, I think, Tom, you'll be very pleased with them. 

Why are you seeing the bunch of charts about organizers? Because, that part of the analysis is done. As you can see, we split up some of the analysis, with me handling the DFA-Link community piece, Tim the tech piece, etc.  They're going up on blog for america as as we finish em. It's 8 pm on the east coast, we just had some fantastic pizza delivered, to keep us going into the 14th hour of crunching these number, and you should get more complete results really soon.

-Ilya 

"Hey, lets put up the results for only 2 hours and 4 minutes!!!! Fair enough right?  Also, lets put up if we had IRV to make it look like Edwards almost won that one too!  Go Edwards,yay! Everyone, I think Edwards really might have one the DFA Poll!!  HEY EDWARDS PROBABLY WON, WAIT I'M CONFUSED..... I BETTER GO WATCH FOX NEWS AND KILL MYSELF!! "

Ok!

I do like seeing the breakdown by DFA. And let's all wait until the final vote is shown (you might want to do that soon though, before this gets out of hand).

Here's a couple of questions for you.

Are the recruitment letters going to be made on the basis of the total vote by state?

And I guess anyone who came gets to vote regardless of whether they have even HEARD of DFA or not.

Don't you think this is misleading as a "vote for endorsement by members" as stated in the original vote, ILYA?

dam this blog clock. Why can't that be fixed?

I do like seeing the vote of DFA organizers, who are presumably the most committed group. Edwards wins two to one over the next closest, Obama.

I salute a great effort by Progressives across America coming to DFA to vote, and of course Kucinich would do well with such a group.

good work by them using his e-mail list (which any candidate could have done)

my guy Gore did pretty well too since the rules changed during the vote

I assuming if he enters the race the rules might have to be bent back the other way if he hit 50% in any state

rich, any news on your state's vote today. i was just looking but couldn't find anything.

saw that the dem governor candidate in kentucky was leading 60+ to 30+ with 25% in.

Any word from Andrew White's race in New York? Hope he and his slate won. Taking back our country one town at a time.

Finding fake votes...how much confidence to we have that DFA discovered all of those?

I don't think anyone's manipulating the vote at all for outcomes. But we can't even get the blog clock fixed!!

any news from this poll that doesn't report Gore's good showing (considering the obstacles, especially)  isn't in keeping with the tradition of Howard's truth telling

rethink it HQ's if you think you can bury that story by making those votes just disappear

those are tens of thousands of potential DFA supporters

pretty big group to just kiss off

If you can give us the breakdown of how the DFA community voted, why can't you just give us the results of the poll?  It's pretty obvious that Kucinich won this thing, and I'm not sure why it has taken all day to "tally up the results."  This is an insult to Dennis Kucinich.  Unfortunately, I think he's used to that.

Ilya,

Thanks for the updates and answering questions. BTW, pass the pizza! Have fun crunching.

Phil,

I may be wrong  but I think a state letter of recruitment goes out to the winner in each state. No 50% threshold needed.

what I don't understand about the clock is how earlier I was off by 18 minutes and now 6

can anyone explain that (other than traffic is down on the NSA server right now)

mprov
Tue, 11/06/07
8:19 pm

that was the expected result

Phil Specht
Tue, 11/06/07
8:28 pm

It's being routed through CIA for national security purposes. If I disappear in midsentence, please call som

well, at least your posts are showing up at the bottom of the thread, phil...

jackson routneato speculation, jackson.  Can't wait for ALL the final results!

    Tuesday 06 November 2007

    Tough new voter identification laws, fervent anti-immigrant rhetoric, officials who won't follow federal election law, challenges to college student voter registrations, electronic voting machine failures - these are problems that voting rights groups and Democrats will be monitoring as a handful of states vote on Tuesday, Nov. 6.

    "No election is ever run perfectly," said David Becker, People for the American Way's Democracy Campaign director, which is staffing a national hotline, 1-866-OUR-VOTE, that will be active on Tuesday to help voters if they run into problems at their polls. "Even if elections are run responsibly, things happen.... We have to be vigilant."

    As always in odd-numbered years, there are a handful of state and local races around the country. While not as high-profile as races for Congress or president, these contests can experience numerous voter suppression tactics and deceptive election practices. Some political observers say obstacles that will surface today may be a precursor for 2008.

    "It's high time that everybody understood that good election practices is good policy," said Jack Young, Virginia Democratic Lawyers Council co-chair, who is organizing his party's election monitoring in that state as it elects a new legislature. "The Democratic Party's effort is 'Promote the vote.' This is part of the same effort to get Democratic voters to the polls, see that they vote and that their votes are counted."

    "This stuff of Republicans trying to jam phone lines, or telling people to vote on Wednesday, is un-American," he said, referring to tactics used by the GOP partisans in New Hampshire in 2002 and in Ohio in 2004. "Chris LaCivita, who did the Swift Boats against Kerry, and New Hampshire, is in Virginia. We will be watching him."

    Voting rights activists and attorneys say they will be monitoring possible problems in more than a half-dozen states. Some, such as the impact of new voter ID laws, have the potential to affect hundreds of thousands of people. Others, such as forcing college students to prove their voter registration information is correct, may affect hundreds.

    Among the states and possible problems being monitored are:

    Georgia: the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has reported that more than 160,000 voters could cast ballots that later will be disqualified because those voters lack one of several forms of required photo ID. These voters tend to be the youngest and oldest voters, who often don't have driver's licenses, or low-income voters who don't own cars. The paper reported that half of these 160,000 voters are in the Atlanta region, while the rest reside in southwestern rural counties. Under the state's tough voter ID law, these voters would get a provisional ballot on Tuesday but would have to return to their county election office and present additional identification for their vote to be counted.

    Georgia: More than 900 college students at Georgia Southern University, in Bulloch County, may see their voter registrations challenged by "a new citizens group formed to challenge newly registered students," according to PFAW's Becker. "They are targeting people who are least capable of providing the kinds of documents they will need," he said. "Students will have to prove they are eligible, instead of those people who are challenging them prove they [the students] are not eligible."

    Michigan: The Detroit Free Press has reported that state officials estimate 340,000 of the state's 7.2 million voters don't have a state photo ID or driver's license, which will complicate their efforts to vote. Unlike Georgia, however, Michigan residents can sign an affidavit swearing they are the person on the voter roll and receive a ballot. The Detroit branch of the NAACP has called the new law, which goes into effect for the first time Tuesday, "another version of a poll tax" that seeks to intimidate and deter voters.

    Indiana: The state will hold municipal elections on Tuesday. Its new voter ID law, considered the toughest in the county will be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court later this fall. As a result, proponents and opponents will be looking for impacts on voting that might be cited in the high court litigation. That eventual ruling could enshrine or ban the spate of new tough voter ID laws, in states such as Indiana and Georgia.

    Indiana: Some counties have consolidated local precincts into "vote centers," or multiprecinct polling places. While proponents say this will help both parties bring voters to the polls and help with tallying votes, in other states - notably Ohio in 2004 - the centers lead to delays and lower turnout, especially when poll workers could not find names on newly consolidated voter lists. Electronic voting critics also say these centers pose a greater risk for insider tampering with vote counts.

    Kentucky: Republican Secretary of State Trey Grayson, who faces a tough re-election contest, has banned provisional ballots - which were created under the federal Help America Vote Act after the Florida presidential election debacle in 2000. These ballots are given to people whose names are not on voter rolls but who say they are registered. They are then checked and counted if the registrations are valid.

    Grayson said HAVA only regulated federal elections - not state contests - which means he is not required to offer that option to voters. "Grayson technically does not have to provide provisional ballots in a nonfederal election," PFAW's Becker said, adding that most states - including Virginia and New Jersey that are voting on Tuesday - will offer voters provisional ballots, even though there are no federal races.

    Maryland: Gaithersburg, a city in Montgomery County, will not be providing bilingual ballot materials, which is required under Section 203 of the federal Voting Rights Act. County election officials cited the same rationale as Kentucky's Grayson - their local election doesn't fall under federal review. However, local politics have seen heated debates on immigration and immigrant rights in recent years, and the anti-illegal immigrant group, the Minutemen, have a Maryland presence. Democrats say not providing the election materials, especially in Spanish, could suppress turnout.

    Virginia: The state also has legislative elections and much of the campaign rhetoric has targeted illegal immigration and public benefits. That factor, when taken against a rising legal Latino population base, creates a "climate for intimidation," according the Virginia Democratic Lawyers Council's Jack Young. "The rhetoric is all an attempt to suppress the vote."

    Young cited three main concerns for Tuesday's vote: efforts to challenge voters' citizenship, possibly bullying of voters to show ID that's not required, and poll workers who are prone to giving voters provisional ballots instead of looking up voters' names.

    "The most pernicious has been efforts by conservatives and the GOP to deny the vote to citizens because of the color of their skin or the pronunciation of their last name," he said. Voters who are challenged should sign declarations that you are a qualified voter. Our answer is to sign an affirmation to you are who you say you are."

    Electronic voting: In some cities and counties, voters will be using electronic voting systems that are known to have problems, such as a possibility of losing tallied votes on computer memory cards. While pre-election tests and audits have shown some systems to be more problem-prone than others, it is hard to predict where trouble will surface.

    Beyond helping people vote on Tuesday, groups like PFAW will be looking for problems or trends that might surface in 2008's presidential election.

    "When there are tight elections, like in Kentucky or Virginia, we will be looking for harbingers of what could happen in 2008, in terms of voter suppression and deceptive practices," said Becker. "When voter suppressors get desperate to hold onto power, they do more brazen things."

    --------

    Steven Rosenfeld is a senior fellow at Alternet.org and co-author of What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election, with Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman (The New Press, 2006).

  -------

steve, do you know a. white's town?

Mohawk DFA-link maybe? 

Found this...

I am running for Office - update
by: Andrew C. White
Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 21:50:43 PM EDT

(Bumped and do check out that update. Andrew just picked up a peach of an endorsement. - promoted by phillip anderson)

My Dear Friends,

I am running for the office of Town Supervisor in the town of Stephentown, Rensselaer County, NY.

It's all Howard Dean's fault.

Here is a link to 2008 National head to head polls, showing Obama, Edwards and Clinton against the major republication candidates

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

blog is all over the place tonight...making me dizzy

Looks like the  link was cut off, here is entire link

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

View on DFA-Link. Andrew White, our wonderful longtime past President, is running for Supervisor of Stephentown

rae if blue it will click through

Sorry I don't know what I'm doing wrong link still cut off, here is end

president/national.html

steve, the county only has a ballot measure, and there doesn't seem to be a city gov web site???

Check your email folks...DFA just emailed results of pulse poll

LOL! And nice spin-doctor, Sheyman.

Not only was Edwards FOURTH last I checked, this man is right. So you only count votes that can afford to pay dues? How Republican of you.

I absolutely mean that.

Nice disclaimer discounting non-runners. I don't like Gore, in the least. But he was second and has the right to run.

Let the People decide. Don't be a hypocrite. 

9:07

Kudos to the DFA crew...excellent job

Phil, Mark, exactly.

Last I checked, not 45 minutes until close, Edwards was something like fourth or fifth, way down.

Like 14%, if that.

Kucinich had 31%, write-in Gore had 29%; Obama was third, as I recall.

You endorse Edwards, you deal with the Texan. NOWHERE did you state amount of contribution weighted your vote. I'm gonna get REAL surly for all people above the Edwards mark, and that's a lot of people.

At least three candidates. If not five. 

Kudos to the DFA crew...excellent job

hey I'm gaining on real time and Reed is losing ground, now I'm really baffled by this clock

Reed come visit God's Country sometime, I owe you a fishing trip

Hey Sherry,

Love the enthusiasm, for people deciding. We love it too. And we love that this is the biggest poll of activists for the 2008 primary with about 150,000 votes! But now to your comments.

1) We don't have any dues. We do have organizers and folks who take off line action, and their results are noticeably different than those of the entire membership. That's why we thought it'd be interesting to give you a look under the hood. 

2) Full results of all the votes are being emailed state by state as we speak. 

Enjoy!

 -Ilya

Sherry Monarko
Tue, 11/06/07
8:57 pm

Sherry,

DFA doesn't collect dues so you're way off base. Before people come here and make wild accusations, get the facts. Noone is cooking the books to make someone win. They are making sure the votes were made by real people not votebots.

And there are some questions as to how to handle the Gore votes. But since he isn't a declared candidate it is a conundrum.

the vote totals look like a progressive organization's vote to me however the vote finally shakes out in the different analysis angles

lets do it again in six weeks

Sue, email me personally.

Just look for "snarko" online. I'm easy to find. 

Ilya,

what do you mean by the "entire membership". Since anyone could come here, sign up with an email address and vote, they are hardly membership. Or are they?

Illya

put the results up at DFA Home somewhere so we can compare

Sheyman, peace and I shut up. Sicilian and loud-mouthed.

9:17

I used to it Phil...seems I've been losing ground for some time now...but I was one step ahead before I was three steps back...lol

If I happen to be your way, I'll pay you a visit. I still owe my brother on the Ohio/Penn. line a visit as well as my other brother in Arizona. At times I think me feet have taken root.

I'm back here...somewherrreeeee............

where's my results???

Phil,

I'm 16 minutes behind. We must be in a different time zone -- twilight zone????

Mprov,

Aren't you in Calif? I'm in Indiana and they haven't gotten here yet. Vermont was first it looks like!

Reed

post the results on browse all from your e-mail since Hq doesn't seem to want to do it

Monica will probably have them on hannah and kos before we see them here lol

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/pulse...[PpCache][state]=VT&data[PpCache][removed][]=9

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/pulse...[PpCache][state]=VT&data[PpCache][removed][]=9

You'll have to come back to find it Phil...doo doo doo doo

I know Kos who's Hannah? 

17.

mprov
Tue, 11/06/07
7:09 pm


I like that vote.

...The current bill is the first water projects and flood control measure to come out of Congress in seven years. ...

Go back to 95 for link to results

Hey all! I want to give you an update on all the commotion up here at HQ. I have nearly half the staff here staying late into the night working on a number of things, most importantly the pulse poll results. Here's what you'll see very shortly:

- Individually targeted emails (50 states, plus DC), with national results, and the top three candidates for every state and the district. These have been going out for a while. If you haven't recieved yours, please be patient.

-  Strategy analysis post: Organizing strategies undertaken by camapigns, their supporters, and our members. Basically a look at how different groups worked to engage DFA. 

-  Data analysis post: Breadown of our membership based on length of membership. Ilya researched how our organizers voted. I'm taking a look at how new members voted versus member who've been around for a while (by popular demand). 

- Data analysis post:  Second choices. We know the second and third choices for all the candidates (not just the write-ins). Let's see if there's something we can learn from that information. At the least it will demonstrate a candidates' breadth of support. 

As focused as we are on the Pulse Poll, DFA is working on a number of items:

- It's election day as five states elect governors and/or legislators, and as our own Andrew White knows, municipalities are also holding elections across the country. One of our staffers, Matt Blizek, has been out in Mississippi campaigning for Gary Anderson running for Insurance Commissioner. We're trying to track races in nearly a dozen states.

- We partnering with Micheal Moore with over 250 house parties around the country. We have a massive mailing tomorrow for all the people who are hosting these parties.

- We're about to make our first endorsement for US Senate for the 2008 cycle. That announcement comes out tomorrow.

So things are a little busy around here. The pizza was good. I'm still waiting to hear back from Matt, and I'm eagerly waiting news on Andrew. So, we haven't gotten around to fixing the blog clock, but I'll ask Tim about it tomorrow ;-) 

Honestly, I'm happy we've got so much discussion going on this post. Especially those who don't always post around here (me included). I hope you'll all be around for the coming posts on the Pulse Poll and all the other stuff we're working on.   

That's an interesting poll result. Thanks, Reed for the link.

I like the format. Pretty cool how you can see it state by state and have candidates drop out. If we trust the results (blackbox, robo-voting, etc.).

Gotta give credit to Kucinich folks. They worked their lists.

But it is VERY divorced from any political reality which makes DFA look kinda bad. So Kucinich gets almost all the state recruitment letters? That is weird. Kucinich wins Indiana? That is even weirder.

Hi Guys

 It's getting kind of late on tuesday and still no official tally.  I'm beginning to think someone back there doesn't like Dennis.

Peace is Possible  Support Dennis Kucinich

Indy...I don't think DK's support is weird at all. When Ron Paul can raise $4.2 million in a day (more than any Repub candidate has done), it makes me wonder more about the authenticity of the CM polls which have Hillary in the lead.

Hey, I was only bumped one back on that one...I'm movin' up, just when I'm winding down...lol

zzzville

Reed in VT
Tue, 11/06/07
9:35 pm

But I think what this shows is Kucinich and his supporters really worked this poll. To win every state. What the other breakdown shows is that much of his support didn't come from DFA members but from people who came to DFA to vote specifically for Kucinich.

So to have a DFA recruitment letter to members go out to nearly every state is somewhat distorted. I'd like to see the breakdown by new "members" vs. older members. I bet Kucinich didn't win that.

It was a mistake to make this appear to be a DFA endorsement when it was really an Internet-wide poll.

Quick fly by.

Thanks Arshad and friends for your hard work.

Paine, if you're around, you have a message on DFA link. . . .

Vote don't matter to me: they tossed all three of mine, lol!

GO GORE!!

Ok, here's an anomaly.

According to the interactive map, Kucinich won 32% of the vote. But according to the letter to me, he won 36% in Indiana. What gives? It's discrepancies like this that makes me not trust the counting. Something's wrong.

Everyone, check your state vs. your letter and see if they match.

Maybe the discrepancy above is due to dropping Gore's votes for the letter but not on the map?

Indy,

It's the difference between all votes (Al Gore included) and announced candidates" 

In the email it says:

"And finally, the top three announced candidates in Indiana" - that's the full results without Al Gore.

Whereas results on the interactive map include Al Gore. You can drop him and see the results without him in the race. No discrepancy there.

 -Ilya

man, i finally found a place for andrew's race, but they're not reporting yet.

http://www.cbs6albany.com/sections/news/...

the kentucky gov race is narrowing

http://electionresults.ky.gov/KyElectWeb...+%26+LT.+GOVERNOR&RV=0&DV=2840898&TP=3543&TC=120

and i looked at virginia, 1 senate 1 delegate 1 delegate not yet decided, all else repugs.

http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/link.asp?L=2...

Sherry Monarko

Hannah http://hannah.smith-family.com/

DFA's general email list is very very large. The DFA-Link email list is a different.

I read the pulse poll rules up front. The 1st place votes are what were counted for the winner but in order for a declared candidate to receive the DFA National endorsement they needed to have received 66% of those 1st place votes. Note: At least 100,000 votes needed to be cast.

Nobody got the DFA National endorsement so in truth nobody won and nobody lost but it sure was a fun numbers game. Polls, Pollsters and their followers are very interesting. Polls have a tendency to generate a remarkable amount of publicity and enthusiasm for everybody involved.

so i guess big states are last? i can whine too, right???

it feels like its christmas and i'm locked in the garage...

New thread: The Results Are In

mprov,

 Whining can be fun... but you can also check out the new thread at blogforamerica.com :-)

 -Ilya

Virginia results, at least in my area, are coming in slowly.  I'm told the reason is because we have so many write in candidates, which is forcing hand counts of ballots.  If you're wondering, we use mostly machine read paper ballots (SAT Test), but because of the write-ins, everying is being hand counted.

"If Kucinich doesn't win I'll tear up my DFA membership."

 Please tear up your membership now.  "Kucinich" and "win" are two words that will never appear in the same scentence.  So why don't you stop helping the Republicans and find a candidate who doesn't talk about UFOs? 

Looks like Dennis won to me. I voted for him. I have always voted for him in the primaries. Not this year. My idealism is gone. I am voting for the most electable candidate. In the polls I will state my preference, but when it comes down to the vote, it will be Edwards. I hope that is who DFA endorses. The more press that gets out that Hillary doesn't have this won the better. I repeat, Dennis will not be nominated, the time has not come. I contribute to his campaign because I believe in what he stands for. Right now we need to deal with the reality, if the most electable candidate doesn't get nominated we could could easily lose. I don't need to tell you how disasterous that would be. Let's hope for a brighter future and that the time will come for Dennis Kucinich or someone like him to be president.

I think that Edwards supporters secretly support Dennis Kucinich in their hearts, because he is the REAL PROGRESSIVE Candidate.  Everyone I talk to loves Kucinich.  The thing is, that they don't believe that Kucinich is electable, so they've merely SETTLED for what they believe the more electable alternative.  Once they realize that Dennis IS ELECTABLE, they will switch their support to the Kucinich campaign.  The Pulse Poll tells it like it is.  Kucinich is gaining momentum, and is the first choice of mainstream progressives.

Progressives will get everything they want with a Dennis Kucinich presidency.  If Dennis is the Democratic nominee, he'll even get the Green Party vote, and they won't run a candidate against him!  Think about that!  We can win in 2008 with Kucinich.

Volunteer to help the Kucinich campaign-- visit http://www.Dennis4President.com

By culling a select group of respondents to a poll, say "Group Organizers", that are likely to vote for a certain preordained outcome, a pollster can demonstrate a result vastly different from the original poll.

This is an old poll-manipulation trick.

Thusly, the select group can be made to look like they represent a fair cros section of the poll on the whole.

If all respondees' "Al Gore for number one" choices were eliminated, the then first place finisher would not likely be Edwards. He runs consistantly third or fourth in most all recent polls. 

Hence, Hillary, Obama, or more likely Kucinich might have placed first in such an edited scenario.

DFA took a full day to publish results to a poll that was counted "real-time" for all to see and track. The day was needed to plan damage control and weasel out of thier pledge to back the "winner". Who happened to turn out to be untethered, Dennis Kucinich.

The stripes are revealed in the wash.

-Dutch Merrick 

The time is now or never to get a President elected that isn't bought and paid for by corporate handlers!

Can you say that about Good ole' Boy Edwards?

Kucinich this time or we're toast as a nation. Period. 

knuckle up and vote with your heart.

Seriously. 

Hey, Mike Hengels, Kucinich is asked about UFO's by the corporate media that tells you how to think. When will your Corporate-candidate talk about ending the disaster in Iraq, not nuking non-nuclear Iran or implementing the worldpopular single payer healthcare?

Who's talking, now

Kucinich for Peace and prosperity! 

Congratulations to Kentucky and to DFA !

Relax! There is no conspiracy here.  The poll results that have been shown, are for three different populations.  Think of it this way...

I live in Chicago, which has 3 million people.  Chicago is part of Illinois, but classically has much different voting patterns than the rest of the state of Illinois, so it is not always exactly clear which way the state will vote, as a whole.  Illinois is part of the United States, but our 12+ million residents don't always vote as the more than 303 million Americans do.

 Now, Chicago can influence the total results of Illinois, and the state may, indeed, go the way the city goes, but who knows?  And Illinois may walk the same line as the rest of the country.

So...Chicago is analagous to the DFA leadership; DFA Link members are analagous to the state of Illinois; and the Pulse poll is analagous to the nation as a whole.  

 DFA is reputable; we've all known this for a long time...since 2003 when Governor Dean began his campaign, we've known it.  So, relax.  Nobody needs to tear up their membership card.

You have got to be kidding!  No wonder Democratic activists are perceived as being out of touch.  Kucinich?  Gore?  What planet are you living on?  Please cancel all of my future contributions to this wacked-out organization.  You are not helping us win.

DFA bases most all their membership numbers on those folks who are registered at the DFA-Link. In California we still have some "very large" local groups who still use Meetup as their online organizational tool. The "real" membership numbers in California are very different than what appears at the DFA-Link. Anybody can join a DFA-Link and a DFA-Link group anywhere in the country but that doesn't mean they do anything. Our local group has a lot of folks who don't even have an email address. Grassroots and netroots folks are not necessarily the same. You can be one or both. For this reason, I've never seriously considered their numbers at the DFA-Link very relevant for any kind of analysis and neither should DFA HQ.

Kucinich did a great job of getting the votes out, but we are all very aware (even if we like his positions) that he is not electable.  He is running low in national polls and when the DFA poll hits the media, it will not be taken seriously.  What should be noted is that Clinton did not do well and that is worth some attention..

The support for Gore should not be ignored even though it is long past time for him to say absolutely he is in or out.

Come on folks, we are going to lose this election, unless we get behind someone who can win.  As of today, I don't see any consensus, except that Hillary is not the choice for most DFA members.  Personally, I believe Edwards may have the best shot at winning this election. 

The fact that Kucinich won the DFA poll, followed by man who is not a candidate, followed by a man whose poll numbers have fallen all year, tells me that there are too many members of DFA who have not got a clue about real politics.

Had Obama won or even Edwards, that might be in line with reality.  Dennis Kucinich is an embarassment and the fact that 45,000 DFA voters don't know that is scary.  Apparently many have a rich fantasy life, but rarely visit the real world.

Here Here!  Totally agree with you and your numbers are correct - Kucinich won!  But then again so did Al Gore and look what became of that - alas.

DFA is supposed to be supporting the most "progressive" candidate - that's not Edwards, it's Dennis.  Is he electable - why not?  We must rise up in support of him - we all have a duty - do what you can, when you can.