One of the big pushes from Romney surrogates in Michigan is that due to sites like Daily Kos and a Santorum robocall, that 100-120,000 democrats voted in the Michigan primary to create mischief like the case with McCain in 2000. The source that is used is exit polling from CNN. I do not begrudge the surrogates for using exit polling as a source. On a lot of things, it is good. I think the polling was close with a lot of factors. That aspect I am doubting. I also highly suspect that it is being used as quasi-justification for awarding that extra delegate to Romney after the fact.
Even if the 100,000 democrat crossover is true, I don't have a lot of sympathy for it. This year. The reason being is that the party chose an open, or a closed in name only primary with same day choice of ballot. There's no party registration in Michigan either. I've long argued against an open primary when there is no contest on the other side. It only works when there is a competitive race on both sides. Presidential primaries are much different than August counterparts when both sides usually (although not always) have contests of their own.
So why don't I think 60,000 votes out of the 377,000 cast for Santorum came from democrats? Actual election returns. If you look at Michigan maps, especially 2004, you'll see how many counties votes for democrats and how many voted for republicans, along with which ones. A lot of the democrats in Michigan are concentrated in a few areas. This can be seen with the congressional districts. Most of the democrat districts, especially under the new allocation, are 60% or more democrat. All of those districts except the 13th district, votes for Romney, not Santorum. Most of the Republican held districts voted for Santorum.
GOP held Districts:
CD 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 - Santorum
CD 8, 11 - Romney
Dem districts:
CD 5, 9, 12, 14 - Romney
CD 13 - Santorum
That alone doesn't tell the whole story. There are pockets of democrats in the republican districts and pockets of republicans in the democrat districts, but it is not hard to find samples in democrat areas. One thing is clear, most of Santorum's votes were from Republicans. Most of Romney's votes were also from Republicans. Democrats don't win Livingston County in primaries. Democrats don't win Ottawa County in primaries.
I'll start with Pontiac and Auburn Hills. Why? Pontiac is a democrat stronghold in Oakland County. It's 80% democrat every election. It also was ground zero for an open state rep election and charter issue as well, so there is a reason for the democrats to vote there besides mischief. Here's the results for that state rep district, strictly in Pontiac itself, followed by Auburn Hills, a democrat leaning area, but not nearly on the same scale. Republicans often get 45% of the vote there, although McCain bombed and Obama broke 60% there.
Pontiac:
Tim Greimel (D) - 88.10% - 5,746
Bob Gray (R) - 11.90% - 776
Auburn Hills:
Bob Gray (R) - 50.53% - 1,338
Tim Greimel (D) - 49.47% - 1,310
Gray overperformed in Auburn Hills, probably due to the presidential primary. Here's the primary results in both areas there.
Auburn Hills: (population about 21,500)
Romney - 743 - 40.23%
Santorum - 639 - 34.88%
Paul - 279 - 15.23%
Newt - 117 - 6.39%
Obama - 782 - 93.65%
Dem Uncommitted - 53 - 6.35%
Pontiac: (Population about 59,000)
Santorum - 575 - 41.01%
Romney - 364 - 25.96%
Paul - 317 - 22.61%
Newt - 92 - 6.56%
Obama - 4881 - 97.72%
Dem Uncommitted - 114 - 2.28%
Most dems stayed home in their primary, even with just Obama there with "uncommitted". About 15-20% of Pontiac often votes Republican and about 45% of Auburn Hills often votes Republican. The Republicans in Pontiac are more likely working class social conservatives and small business owners. Those in Auburn Hills tend to vary. Auto executives are there, and it is also Tom McMillan's old stomping grounds before he went to the Rochester area. Both Romney and Santorum received more votes in Auburn Hills than Pontiac. Ron Paul was another story.
Here's one of the most Republican areas of Oakland County. Brandon Township. I'm going to follow that with nearby Oakland Township. They are both republican strongholds in Oakland County. There were not a lot of crossovers here. Both of these areas are consistently over 60% Republican areas.
Brandon Twp:
Santorum - 802
Romney - 775
Paul - 275
Obama - 135
D Uncommitted - 22
Oakland Twp
Romney - 1736
Santorum - 870
Paul - 271
Obama - 188
D Uncommitted - 17
Both of those are North Oakland Republican strongholds. The areas there are both republican areas voting for different republican candidates. One's a little more rural than the other, but neither are Bloomfield Hills where there is more of a homer factor.
Macomb County results varies some as well. The strongholds there are less like Pontiac and are whiter, with some republican pockets, and a lot of union independents. There wasn't a real pattern one way or the other.
Warren (about 60% dem):
Romney 4229, Santorum 4074, Paul 1337, Obama 3066, D uncommitted 638
Roseville's percentages were about the same as Warrens
Washington Twp (GOP Stronhold)
Romney 1932, Santorum 1347, Paul 355, Obama 376. D uncommitted 66
Utica (50/50)
Santorum 217, Romney 213, Paul 77, Obama 89, D uncommitted 28
Ray Twp (GOP Stronghold)
Santorum 261, Romney 250, Paul 74. Obama 53, D uncommitted 11
Overall Santorum won these areas:
GOP - Armada, Memphis, Ray, Richmond City and Twp
Dem - Center Line, Eastpointe,
Swing - Lenox, Utica
Santorum didn't win Roseville, Warren, or Mt Clemens which are democrat, nor Republican areas like Washington Twp, Shelby Twp, or Macomb Twp.
Obama had the most votes in Center Line, Eastpointe, Roseville, all narrowly.
Romney actually beat him in Mt Clemens. Both Santorum and Romney beat him in Warren. I think both candidates had their share of crossovers in these parts of Macomb County. Social liberals more to Romney and Social conservatives more to Santorum. I certainly didn't see a big push though one way or another, despite dem consultant Joe DiSano's advocacy of mischief.
Looking at another democrat stronghold. Washtenaw County.
Ann Arbor had less than 10% turnout outside of the 2nd Ward which is more republican than most of the city. That is a high money area, and went for Romney. The rest of Ann Arbor was mixed across the board, but hardly enough to manner. Some went to Santorum, some Romney, some Paul. Some of those were probably crossovers, but at less than 10% turnout, they could just as easily been those few republicans in the city.
Ypsi went narrowly for Santorum, but Obama had more votes there. The "rural" Ann Arbor Township precinct went for Santorum. That's also the Dominos Farms location. Whitmore Lake area went for Santorum. Augusta Twp (south of Ypsi) did as well. Probably not crossovers. Saline went for Romney. Probably not crossovers there either. These areas are matching about what I'd suspect.
I've look at different election areas across the state. I'm noting really out of the ordinary with vote patterns. 100,000 votes or even 65,000 in crossovers is very significant. If someone can point out where they would come from, I'd appreciate it. I don't see it. Not with Bay County and Saginaw County going for Romney, and if I was going to expect crossovers, it would be there.
I may be wrong and missing the forest for the trees here, but I don't see it. Exit polls are usually close, but not 100% in all aspects, and sometimes that is due to people lying. Voting results are what tell the truth.
Monday, March 05, 2012
Sunday, March 04, 2012
Ridiculous laws of the week - Pt 2
Here's another bad law:
How many people who aren't attorneys know what common law even is? It's judge made law. Law in Michigan is based on the English Common Law system. Common law is modified by judges when there is no statutes. Criminal law statutes are often based on common law and codified. That's good so people can supposedly know when they are breaking the law. Common law is often used in torts, contracts, and property cases. That's nothing unusual and the common law is often based on old customs to reduce surprises. In criminal cases, this is bad because theoretically, we need to be sure what the law is so we don't end up in prison.
This law was actually attempted to be enforced against the late Dr Jack Kevorkian. I'm not a fan of Dr Death at all, but this was a ridiculous attempt by the prosecutor's office in Oakland County. This ended in acquittal, likely a case of jury nullification, which is not always a bad thing.
The 1994 Supreme Court, much more liberal than the current court due to the Blanchard and Milliken judges, said that "assisted suicide" wasn't a right (which is understood) but also a "common law crime based on custom" opening this up. Common law crimes federally were abolished in 1812 although things vary among the states.
Crimes need statutes, penalties, and jurisdiction. The old saying is that ignorance of the law is no excuse, but it shouldn't take an attorney to understand if one is breaking the law, especially for a felony. Just because something isn't usually enforced does not mean it isn't on the books and could be enforced at a later date if prosecutors are out to get someone.
750.505 Punishment for indictable common law offenses.
Sec. 505.
Any person who shall commit any indictable offense at the common law, for the punishment of which no provision is expressly made by any statute of this state, shall be guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison not more than 5 years or by a fine of not more than $10,000.00, or both in the discretion of the court.
How many people who aren't attorneys know what common law even is? It's judge made law. Law in Michigan is based on the English Common Law system. Common law is modified by judges when there is no statutes. Criminal law statutes are often based on common law and codified. That's good so people can supposedly know when they are breaking the law. Common law is often used in torts, contracts, and property cases. That's nothing unusual and the common law is often based on old customs to reduce surprises. In criminal cases, this is bad because theoretically, we need to be sure what the law is so we don't end up in prison.
This law was actually attempted to be enforced against the late Dr Jack Kevorkian. I'm not a fan of Dr Death at all, but this was a ridiculous attempt by the prosecutor's office in Oakland County. This ended in acquittal, likely a case of jury nullification, which is not always a bad thing.
Dr. Jack Kevorkian today was found not guilty of violating Michigan common law against assisted suicide, closing two cases that his lawyers said were by far the most significant of the five acquittals he has won at three trials.
The 1994 Supreme Court, much more liberal than the current court due to the Blanchard and Milliken judges, said that "assisted suicide" wasn't a right (which is understood) but also a "common law crime based on custom" opening this up. Common law crimes federally were abolished in 1812 although things vary among the states.
Crimes need statutes, penalties, and jurisdiction. The old saying is that ignorance of the law is no excuse, but it shouldn't take an attorney to understand if one is breaking the law, especially for a felony. Just because something isn't usually enforced does not mean it isn't on the books and could be enforced at a later date if prosecutors are out to get someone.
Saturday, March 03, 2012
Early coronation attempts from some tea parties are not the way to go
I want to preface this post by saying that I'm neither pro, nor anti tea-parties. Plural because they are heavily local based. When one is right, I'll support it. When it's wrong, I oppose it. The same goes for RNC, MIGOP, PACs and local parties. I'm not a paying member of any tea party organization. I'm not tied to any tea party leadership. I have been a visitor to Retakeourgov meetings in the past and think they are a very well run organization. Neither they, nor Brighton Tea Party from what I've read, took part in this. A lot of other tea parties did not either, at least 21 of them. Hence, why I used the word SOME in the title with regards to this.
FromMidland News Herald
I knew about this in December, a week before my warning about big fish wannabes in small ponds. I heard then that this was a setup for Gary Glenn back then. I'm not posting this to discuss the positives and negatives of Gary Glenn as a candidate. My problem would remain the same if this was set up for any of the other candidates running, especially at this point. I also don't care for this being marketed as a "stop Stabenow" attempt as we already have a good process for that called the August primary.
This was my warning in December.
Some folks consider me a big name. I'm not that big. I'm just big enough to be a pain in the arse when I choose to be. Big names come and go real quick. In some respects, I was a bigger name 10 years ago and got in a nasty office politics battle. It was a learning experience and one I never forget. The winners were nobody. The losers were everybody. The six of us lost. The other side got a Pyrrhic victory as the best people (us) were no longer there and the organization wasn't even close to being the same. Been there. Done that. Don't want to see it on our side again. Don't want to be brought into it, but quite capable if I am forced to do so.
According to Michigan for Conservative Senate, 43 tea parties made the decision. At least 21 did not, and some have said that the number was over 60 that did not.
What's wrong with this from a tactical standpoint?
1. Infighting. Michigan for Conservative Senate calls this a Tea Party endorsement in its press release. That's not going to sit well with a lot of people.
2. Process. Some were excluded in the decision. How was the process? Was Glenn that much better than Hoekstra, Durant, Konetchy, Hekman, Marino, or Boman?
3. Timing. This was announced right before the presidential primary. How much press did "Michigan for Conservative Senate" receive for this? Some, but not nearly what it would be in May. This limits the help for Glenn. Few were paying attention to the senate race.
4. Timing pt 2. We have no idea who is a viable candidate or who can win. If you're going to gamble like this all in, you better be ready to both win the primary and take out the dangerous incompetent one - Debbie Stabenow. The filing deadline is May. That's the first we'll see of someone getting weeded out and/or dropped out candidates. Things can change quickly. Spence Abraham was up 20% over Stabenow in September of 2000. He lost. The campaign is just beginning.
As voters, we need to look at the candidates, where they stand, who they are, and do our due diligence in making a decision this August. Take this endorsement for what it is. A pick made from some representatives of some tea parties. No more. No less. It's not a consensus for all of them. I just hope it doesn't lead to unneeded trouble.
FromMidland News Herald
MT. PLEASANT - Members of a coalition of Tea Party groups Saturday endorsed Gary Glenn of Midland for the Republican nomination to challenge incumbent Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow.
Glenn is president of the American Family Association of Michigan, and has long been active in conservative social causes. He’s best known as one of the authors of the so-called Marriage Protection Amendment to the Michigan constitution, which banned gay marriage in the state.
“I simply told the truth about where I think this country is headed,” Glenn told representatives of about 48 activist groups from across the state gathered at downtown Mt. Pleasant’s Centennial Hall. “If Barack Obama and Debbie Stabenow are re-elected, they threaten to take away our birthright of freedom, and turn our country into the United Socialist States of America.”
I knew about this in December, a week before my warning about big fish wannabes in small ponds. I heard then that this was a setup for Gary Glenn back then. I'm not posting this to discuss the positives and negatives of Gary Glenn as a candidate. My problem would remain the same if this was set up for any of the other candidates running, especially at this point. I also don't care for this being marketed as a "stop Stabenow" attempt as we already have a good process for that called the August primary.
This was my warning in December.
This is a dangerous game that can easily become more about personalities than about issues. Certain people like to see themselves as power brokers. You get on the right PAC boards and you become "an important person." You can puff yourself up to sound even more important, and can have some yesman who follow you, tell you how great you are, and then try and take your spot in the future. There's also yesmen "leaders" who will automatically "lead" their group to follow whatever some big name wants. That's what I refer to as big fish in little pond syndrome. I've seen it over 11 years of involvement in PACs, C4's, Party, and office politics. Guess what. Most of those who think they are big names, really aren't that important. The ones who puff themselves up in the room, usually aren't important, and deep down, they know it.
I hope the tea parties (plural) stay about ideology, and less about personalities. THAT is their strength. Once they become about personalities and favorites, it's all downhill from there. The cost is respect.
Some folks consider me a big name. I'm not that big. I'm just big enough to be a pain in the arse when I choose to be. Big names come and go real quick. In some respects, I was a bigger name 10 years ago and got in a nasty office politics battle. It was a learning experience and one I never forget. The winners were nobody. The losers were everybody. The six of us lost. The other side got a Pyrrhic victory as the best people (us) were no longer there and the organization wasn't even close to being the same. Been there. Done that. Don't want to see it on our side again. Don't want to be brought into it, but quite capable if I am forced to do so.
According to Michigan for Conservative Senate, 43 tea parties made the decision. At least 21 did not, and some have said that the number was over 60 that did not.
What's wrong with this from a tactical standpoint?
1. Infighting. Michigan for Conservative Senate calls this a Tea Party endorsement in its press release. That's not going to sit well with a lot of people.
2. Process. Some were excluded in the decision. How was the process? Was Glenn that much better than Hoekstra, Durant, Konetchy, Hekman, Marino, or Boman?
3. Timing. This was announced right before the presidential primary. How much press did "Michigan for Conservative Senate" receive for this? Some, but not nearly what it would be in May. This limits the help for Glenn. Few were paying attention to the senate race.
4. Timing pt 2. We have no idea who is a viable candidate or who can win. If you're going to gamble like this all in, you better be ready to both win the primary and take out the dangerous incompetent one - Debbie Stabenow. The filing deadline is May. That's the first we'll see of someone getting weeded out and/or dropped out candidates. Things can change quickly. Spence Abraham was up 20% over Stabenow in September of 2000. He lost. The campaign is just beginning.
As voters, we need to look at the candidates, where they stand, who they are, and do our due diligence in making a decision this August. Take this endorsement for what it is. A pick made from some representatives of some tea parties. No more. No less. It's not a consensus for all of them. I just hope it doesn't lead to unneeded trouble.
Thursday, March 01, 2012
I'm infamous
Dawson Bell at the Free Press is reporting that I had the closest call on primary predictions for the congressional districts. I sometimes "troll" on the
Michigan Liberal site and posted my predictions there. I always like Mark Grebner's posts even when I don't agree with him. Those are worth a read there because he knows his stuff. Too bad there wasn't prize money for the predictions.
I was close, but not quite right with my underestimation of the absentee voting.
Michigan Liberal site and posted my predictions there. I always like Mark Grebner's posts even when I don't agree with him. Those are worth a read there because he knows his stuff. Too bad there wasn't prize money for the predictions.
I was close, but not quite right with my underestimation of the absentee voting.
Absotute Bullshit from the credentials committee
Flat out. This is legalized cheating. This is something that Richard Daley or Boss Tweed would pull. He's smiling from his grave. ACORN's cheering too.
From The Detroit Free Press
This is the biggest example of why there's animosity between tea party groups and some committees within state party. If Santorum won the statewide popular vote, would you change the delegates after the fact? We all know the answer to that. Stick with the rules you made before the election. This is going to set off a firestorm among the grassroots, and also have repercussions in other states.
How is this going to factor down south (if they do the same for Santorum) or with states on Super Tuesday? Not very well. It will again feed into the perception (and reality here) that the elites are pushing Mitt Romney on us no matter what. It's bullshit. State committee as a whole needs to reverse this decision for their credibility, and stick with the original results. Procedures are important, and it's bad precedent, reminding me of a couple of convention votes (and cheating) from the old days before Saul Anuzis implements actual voting machines in voting. By this lame attempt to save face with a Romney "win" in Michigan, the credentials committee is getting egg on the entire state party, reflecting back on all members of party leadership down to district and county level. It's not worth one delegate.
This bullshit needs to be reversed ASAP. Kudos to Mike Cox and Eric Doster (election law attorney) for voting against this.
From The Detroit Free Press
The Mitt Romney-Rick Santorum Michigan primary results just got a little more contentious.
Michigan’s two at-large delegates to the Republican National convention will be awarded to Michigan native Mitt Romney, following a vote last night by the state party’s credentials’ committee.
The vote came despite the party’s rules that the two at-large delegates are supposed to be awarded on a proportional basis based on the statewide popular vote. Romney won the statewide vote by a 41% to 38% margin over former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.
The rest of the state’s delegates will be split evenly between Romney and Santorum because each won seven congressional districts across the state.
This is the biggest example of why there's animosity between tea party groups and some committees within state party. If Santorum won the statewide popular vote, would you change the delegates after the fact? We all know the answer to that. Stick with the rules you made before the election. This is going to set off a firestorm among the grassroots, and also have repercussions in other states.
How is this going to factor down south (if they do the same for Santorum) or with states on Super Tuesday? Not very well. It will again feed into the perception (and reality here) that the elites are pushing Mitt Romney on us no matter what. It's bullshit. State committee as a whole needs to reverse this decision for their credibility, and stick with the original results. Procedures are important, and it's bad precedent, reminding me of a couple of convention votes (and cheating) from the old days before Saul Anuzis implements actual voting machines in voting. By this lame attempt to save face with a Romney "win" in Michigan, the credentials committee is getting egg on the entire state party, reflecting back on all members of party leadership down to district and county level. It's not worth one delegate.
This bullshit needs to be reversed ASAP. Kudos to Mike Cox and Eric Doster (election law attorney) for voting against this.
Post election Michigan analysis - Romney v Santorum
There's a lot of spin going on about this election. Santorum's claiming he won on election day. I think he's right. Pundits are claiming that Santorum collapsed from a 15 point lead on the last day. I think those are largely wrong. He never had a 15 pt lead here. There's also a lot of pissing and moaning about crossover Democrats (around 10% or so) and exit polls having Romney "Winning" republican voters.
As for crossovers, they may have mattered in the 13th district, but that's about it. ALL of the other major democrat districts went for Romney. 5th (narrowly - and Santorum won the Republican county), 9th (Levin), 12th (Dingell), 14th (Clarke/Peters). Romney won the 8th, 10th, and 11th held by Republicans, but the rest went for Santorum. Romney won the vote in Bay and Saginaw Counties. It's Tuscola that nearly cost him in the 5th.
Apparently, the at large was supposed to be split, but state party wants to change the rules for Romney so there isn't a tie here. (eyeroll). If Jason Gillman's right, This is the type of bullshit that pisses people off. It's the same reason I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever about Santorum courting Reagan Democrats, or getting crossover votes. Romney's supporters chose this system. They wanted the open or closed in name only primary. They wanted it because they were worried about a Pawlenty or someone else upsetting their favorite candidate and thought that Romney would ironically appeal to independents and democrats. I pushed for caucus when this was decided, and I support that now. I don't think democrats should vote in Republican primaries. However, I'm not going to get pissed off when it happens when it is preventable and the powers that be choose not to prevent it. T.S. Don't change things after the fact because your boy didn't get the win. This is why people get mad at party leadership. Bill Schuette and his guys behind the scenes need to back off. Go back to busting potheads or something. Santorum did best in the most republican counties, with the exception of Livingston, Atrim, and Emmet. Santorum won Ottawa, Allegan, Missaukee, Hillsdale, Barry, Branch, St Joe, Sanilac, Lapeer, Osceola, Wexford, and Kent. That ain't due to democrats.
The biggest lesson from last Tuesday was this. The election wasn't Tuesday. It was from 30 days before Tuesday that ended Tuesday. I also made one major miscalculation in my predictions. I knew seniors would go for Romney as did the absentees. The absentee vote was key. I don't know the exact percentages, and won't because some counties combine absentee votes with normal precinct votes in their reporting. Others don't. Here are some samples.
Macomb County:
Romney Election Day 23,188
Romney AV 14,650
Total: 37,838
Santorum Election Day 22,999
Santorum AV 7,219
Total: 30,218
Total AV's - 21,869 (32.13% of the vote between the two of them not counting others)
That was enough to flip the 10th District to Romney. Absentees probably flipped the 5th as well although I can't get good AV reports there.
Romney won Kalamazoo County 9671-9008. It was absentees that once again made the difference there. Even in areas Santorum won, he lost absentees. Some areas in K-zoo combined absentees. Some didn't. The REPORTED AS ABSENTEE vote went 2479-1052 for Romney. That alone was 19% of the vote and does not include about 1/2 of the municipalities so the closer AV number between the two of them was probably 25-30% Take away just the reported as absentee votes, and Santorum won K-zoo County 7956-7192.
Unfortunately, I can find good AV precinct data in interior Northern MI counties that voted for Romney narrowly, but from what I have seen so far, the AV's are at least 25% of the vote, and might be closer to 30% statewide. If that is the case, then the polling samples were way off earlier. The polls had 17% absentee estimates. Why the discrepancies?
Exit polls had Santorum winning those ages 30-64, Romney winning Seniors, and Ron Paul winning the 20-somethings. There isn't a lot of surprises. Santorum did best with those "most conservative" and those who strongly emphasized the life issue. It was the pro-life vote. That's in-line with most polling up through the elections. The senior sample thought should be higher. This is speculation, but the pollsters probably missed the snowbirds. A lot of the voters were probably in Florida. Florida already had their primary and Romney won. A lot of the snowbirds probably made an early decision and sent it in. Pollsters didn't reach them because they wern't home or at least the home where they are likely registered. Why would they be registered in Michigan? Property tax homestead exemptions. The millage rates are much lower with homesteads than a vacation home here.
Absentees are often 30%+ in a general election. Anyone running campaigns in Michigan need to remember that and start early. Romney did and won because of that. Santorum became a 'legitimate candidate' in Michigan on February 7th (hat trick win), after the voting already started in Michigan. His whole Michigan campaign was in three weeks. It's amazing he even competed here with two strikes against him (money and early voting).
Long story short. Don't forget the absentees.
As for crossovers, they may have mattered in the 13th district, but that's about it. ALL of the other major democrat districts went for Romney. 5th (narrowly - and Santorum won the Republican county), 9th (Levin), 12th (Dingell), 14th (Clarke/Peters). Romney won the 8th, 10th, and 11th held by Republicans, but the rest went for Santorum. Romney won the vote in Bay and Saginaw Counties. It's Tuscola that nearly cost him in the 5th.
Apparently, the at large was supposed to be split, but state party wants to change the rules for Romney so there isn't a tie here. (eyeroll). If Jason Gillman's right, This is the type of bullshit that pisses people off. It's the same reason I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever about Santorum courting Reagan Democrats, or getting crossover votes. Romney's supporters chose this system. They wanted the open or closed in name only primary. They wanted it because they were worried about a Pawlenty or someone else upsetting their favorite candidate and thought that Romney would ironically appeal to independents and democrats. I pushed for caucus when this was decided, and I support that now. I don't think democrats should vote in Republican primaries. However, I'm not going to get pissed off when it happens when it is preventable and the powers that be choose not to prevent it. T.S. Don't change things after the fact because your boy didn't get the win. This is why people get mad at party leadership. Bill Schuette and his guys behind the scenes need to back off. Go back to busting potheads or something. Santorum did best in the most republican counties, with the exception of Livingston, Atrim, and Emmet. Santorum won Ottawa, Allegan, Missaukee, Hillsdale, Barry, Branch, St Joe, Sanilac, Lapeer, Osceola, Wexford, and Kent. That ain't due to democrats.
The biggest lesson from last Tuesday was this. The election wasn't Tuesday. It was from 30 days before Tuesday that ended Tuesday. I also made one major miscalculation in my predictions. I knew seniors would go for Romney as did the absentees. The absentee vote was key. I don't know the exact percentages, and won't because some counties combine absentee votes with normal precinct votes in their reporting. Others don't. Here are some samples.
Macomb County:
Romney Election Day 23,188
Romney AV 14,650
Total: 37,838
Santorum Election Day 22,999
Santorum AV 7,219
Total: 30,218
Total AV's - 21,869 (32.13% of the vote between the two of them not counting others)
That was enough to flip the 10th District to Romney. Absentees probably flipped the 5th as well although I can't get good AV reports there.
Romney won Kalamazoo County 9671-9008. It was absentees that once again made the difference there. Even in areas Santorum won, he lost absentees. Some areas in K-zoo combined absentees. Some didn't. The REPORTED AS ABSENTEE vote went 2479-1052 for Romney. That alone was 19% of the vote and does not include about 1/2 of the municipalities so the closer AV number between the two of them was probably 25-30% Take away just the reported as absentee votes, and Santorum won K-zoo County 7956-7192.
Unfortunately, I can find good AV precinct data in interior Northern MI counties that voted for Romney narrowly, but from what I have seen so far, the AV's are at least 25% of the vote, and might be closer to 30% statewide. If that is the case, then the polling samples were way off earlier. The polls had 17% absentee estimates. Why the discrepancies?
Exit polls had Santorum winning those ages 30-64, Romney winning Seniors, and Ron Paul winning the 20-somethings. There isn't a lot of surprises. Santorum did best with those "most conservative" and those who strongly emphasized the life issue. It was the pro-life vote. That's in-line with most polling up through the elections. The senior sample thought should be higher. This is speculation, but the pollsters probably missed the snowbirds. A lot of the voters were probably in Florida. Florida already had their primary and Romney won. A lot of the snowbirds probably made an early decision and sent it in. Pollsters didn't reach them because they wern't home or at least the home where they are likely registered. Why would they be registered in Michigan? Property tax homestead exemptions. The millage rates are much lower with homesteads than a vacation home here.
Absentees are often 30%+ in a general election. Anyone running campaigns in Michigan need to remember that and start early. Romney did and won because of that. Santorum became a 'legitimate candidate' in Michigan on February 7th (hat trick win), after the voting already started in Michigan. His whole Michigan campaign was in three weeks. It's amazing he even competed here with two strikes against him (money and early voting).
Long story short. Don't forget the absentees.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Unofficial Michigan results by congressional district - Romney 16, Santorum 14
3rd Update 3-1 - Changing the rules after the fact gives Romney the extra delegate.
2nd Update 2-29 - Apparently the at large delegates will be split 1-1 because they were close. That means Romney and Santorum actually tied in Michigan.
Update 2-29 - According to MIRS, Santorum won 1-4, 6, 7, 13. Romney won 5, 8-12, 14.
I'd still like to see the Tuscola numbers. Surprised at 13 from the absentee numbers I saw, but knew it was close.
MIRS numbers:
Congressional District Vote Breakdown (according to the Michigan Republican Party).
1st: Romney, 32,252. Santorum*, 32,325.
2nd: Romney, 29,912. Santorum*, 39,900.
3rd: Romney, 31,999. Santorum*, 33,491.
4th: Romney, 27,117. Santorum*, 29,528.
5th: Romney* 21,691. Santorum, 20,837.
6th: Romney, 26,738. Santorum*, 31,126.
7th: Romney, 28,925. Santorum*, 30,133.
8th: Romney*, 32,930. Santorum, 25,234.
9th: Romney* 24,060. Santorum, 17,221.
10th: Romney*, 31,319. Santorum, 29,278.
11th: Romney*, 41,733. Santorum, 24,577.
12th: Romney*, 19,623. Santorum, 17,675.
13th: Romney, 7,946. Santorum* 9,481.
14th: Romney*, 18,157. Santorum, 10,844
-------------------------------
First off, ignore the Sec of State's website for delegates. It's supposed to be by the NEW districts, and not the old districts. CNN did a great job with the county map.
I ran some numbers. The obvious districts ones I'm going to just call. Districts 2 and 6 went for Santorum just based on looking. Districts 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14 went for Romney. I can't get a read on the 13th, so I'm going to assume it's Romney's unless I find results that say otherwise due to the 10,000 vote Romney spread in Wayne County. (Updated - Wayne County Precinct results are in. MIRS called it for Santorum.
District 1:
Santorum by about 590. Mason County wasn't included, but Santorum won it so I'll call it for Santorum.
District 3:
Santorum by about 1669
District 4:
Santorum by about 1982 (Saginaw's clerk numbers for district splitting)
District 5:
Depends on Tuscola County. Too close to call. ALL of Tuscola gives Santorum a 968 vote edge. With it, Santorum wins by 511. Without it Romney leads by 457. I can't call it. MIRS called it for Romney.
District 7:
I have Santorum up 930 not factoring in Scio Township. 1/2 of Scio Township is in the 7th, and it's the less democrat part, relatively speaking (Dexter side). Romney took the Washtenaw portion of the 7th by 865, not counting Scio. It's close, but I'm going to call the 7th for Santorum. - (Scio is in. Even with all of Scio included, Santorum wins by about 300-400)
District 13:
MIRS called it for Santorum. Crossovers may have won this one since I think Romney won (barely) the more republican areas due to absentee votes.
So right now as it stands:
Romney wins overall, CD 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14. Total of 16
Santorum wins CD 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 13. Total of 14.
--------------
What did I learn from this? Romney didn't win this election today. He won this election largely 30 days ago. Santorum may actually have won "today." The election wasn't only today though. Absentee voters skewed the polls off slightly, and turned what I expected to be 1% either way into an approximate 3% victory. Seniors according to an exit poll voted for Romney by 16%. Absentee voting went higher if the patterns I saw in Kent, Washtenaw, and Macomb Counties went statewide. I had a bad feeling when I saw a low turnout today at the polls, combined with heavy absentees for Romney. Romney polled well with seniors which concerned me because in elections, they often run the show and bring their pick the victory. That's not to any party's advantage in Michigan despite Obama's bad polling among seniors. Seniors would also be the folks who remember George Romney as governor where I'd only know the name from political history.
The other thing I thought was a mistake by both candidates was not visiting Livingston County. This is the 3rd most republican county by percentage in the state, and it was ignored. Romney won it, which isn't surprising because he DID visit Milford next door and has at least been here before. Santorum had a chance to introduce himself here and didn't do so. Many voters here relied on the news when defining Santorum. Many also did with Romney, but a lot of folks have met him or met someone who has met him, especially Oakland transplants. Advantage Romney.
This puts Romney in a good position for Super Tuesday, but nothing's set in stone yet. There's still a primary. Personally at this point, I'd like to see a brokered convention. I never thought I'd say that. I don't expect it to happen, but I think we'd get a better overall GENERAL election candidate from a convention than what we are saddled with today. Romney's organization saved his ass here today. It's his biggest campaign strength. The problem is that there's only so much that can be done with this flawed a candidate. Santorum didn't become a player until Iowa and then those three wins in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri (I think). He then did what he did in Michigan in only a month while taking a scorched earth blast from Romney. Will he recover or not? I don't know. I don't know if Newt's still in the game either.
After today, I'm rooting for the brokered convention. That's my new endorsement, long shot as it may be. Until the final decision is made, I'll be happy to go back to covering state level and local level stuff.
2nd Update 2-29 - Apparently the at large delegates will be split 1-1 because they were close. That means Romney and Santorum actually tied in Michigan.
Update 2-29 - According to MIRS, Santorum won 1-4, 6, 7, 13. Romney won 5, 8-12, 14.
I'd still like to see the Tuscola numbers. Surprised at 13 from the absentee numbers I saw, but knew it was close.
MIRS numbers:
Congressional District Vote Breakdown (according to the Michigan Republican Party).
1st: Romney, 32,252. Santorum*, 32,325.
2nd: Romney, 29,912. Santorum*, 39,900.
3rd: Romney, 31,999. Santorum*, 33,491.
4th: Romney, 27,117. Santorum*, 29,528.
5th: Romney* 21,691. Santorum, 20,837.
6th: Romney, 26,738. Santorum*, 31,126.
7th: Romney, 28,925. Santorum*, 30,133.
8th: Romney*, 32,930. Santorum, 25,234.
9th: Romney* 24,060. Santorum, 17,221.
10th: Romney*, 31,319. Santorum, 29,278.
11th: Romney*, 41,733. Santorum, 24,577.
12th: Romney*, 19,623. Santorum, 17,675.
13th: Romney, 7,946. Santorum* 9,481.
14th: Romney*, 18,157. Santorum, 10,844
-------------------------------
First off, ignore the Sec of State's website for delegates. It's supposed to be by the NEW districts, and not the old districts. CNN did a great job with the county map.
I ran some numbers. The obvious districts ones I'm going to just call. Districts 2 and 6 went for Santorum just based on looking. Districts 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14 went for Romney. I can't get a read on the 13th, so I'm going to assume it's Romney's unless I find results that say otherwise due to the 10,000 vote Romney spread in Wayne County. (Updated - Wayne County Precinct results are in. MIRS called it for Santorum.
District 1:
Santorum by about 590. Mason County wasn't included, but Santorum won it so I'll call it for Santorum.
District 3:
Santorum by about 1669
District 4:
Santorum by about 1982 (Saginaw's clerk numbers for district splitting)
District 5:
Depends on Tuscola County. Too close to call. ALL of Tuscola gives Santorum a 968 vote edge. With it, Santorum wins by 511. Without it Romney leads by 457. I can't call it. MIRS called it for Romney.
District 7:
I have Santorum up 930 not factoring in Scio Township. 1/2 of Scio Township is in the 7th, and it's the less democrat part, relatively speaking (Dexter side). Romney took the Washtenaw portion of the 7th by 865, not counting Scio. It's close, but I'm going to call the 7th for Santorum. - (Scio is in. Even with all of Scio included, Santorum wins by about 300-400)
District 13:
MIRS called it for Santorum. Crossovers may have won this one since I think Romney won (barely) the more republican areas due to absentee votes.
So right now as it stands:
Romney wins overall, CD 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14. Total of 16
Santorum wins CD 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 13. Total of 14.
--------------
What did I learn from this? Romney didn't win this election today. He won this election largely 30 days ago. Santorum may actually have won "today." The election wasn't only today though. Absentee voters skewed the polls off slightly, and turned what I expected to be 1% either way into an approximate 3% victory. Seniors according to an exit poll voted for Romney by 16%. Absentee voting went higher if the patterns I saw in Kent, Washtenaw, and Macomb Counties went statewide. I had a bad feeling when I saw a low turnout today at the polls, combined with heavy absentees for Romney. Romney polled well with seniors which concerned me because in elections, they often run the show and bring their pick the victory. That's not to any party's advantage in Michigan despite Obama's bad polling among seniors. Seniors would also be the folks who remember George Romney as governor where I'd only know the name from political history.
The other thing I thought was a mistake by both candidates was not visiting Livingston County. This is the 3rd most republican county by percentage in the state, and it was ignored. Romney won it, which isn't surprising because he DID visit Milford next door and has at least been here before. Santorum had a chance to introduce himself here and didn't do so. Many voters here relied on the news when defining Santorum. Many also did with Romney, but a lot of folks have met him or met someone who has met him, especially Oakland transplants. Advantage Romney.
This puts Romney in a good position for Super Tuesday, but nothing's set in stone yet. There's still a primary. Personally at this point, I'd like to see a brokered convention. I never thought I'd say that. I don't expect it to happen, but I think we'd get a better overall GENERAL election candidate from a convention than what we are saddled with today. Romney's organization saved his ass here today. It's his biggest campaign strength. The problem is that there's only so much that can be done with this flawed a candidate. Santorum didn't become a player until Iowa and then those three wins in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri (I think). He then did what he did in Michigan in only a month while taking a scorched earth blast from Romney. Will he recover or not? I don't know. I don't know if Newt's still in the game either.
After today, I'm rooting for the brokered convention. That's my new endorsement, long shot as it may be. Until the final decision is made, I'll be happy to go back to covering state level and local level stuff.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Michigan Results for February 28th Primary posted here
8:07
Polls have closed here outside of a couple of Yooper counties in central time.
I'm going to try and keep up with the results and post them here. Keep in mind the following.
The winner may or may not finish first statewide. The winner is who wins most of the congressional districts. I expect this to be a nailbiter. My prediction is Romney by 1% statewide thanks to absentees with Santorum being the actual winner by congressional district. I hope I'm half right and Mr Scorched Earth gets upset completely. Santorum likely got walloped with absentees. That's tough to get past, although possible. Mike Cox survived that in 2002 against Gary Peters.
There's also two state rep districts. The 29th and 51st. I'll post those results as I see them. My gut tells me we'll split those districts with the 29th going dem and the 51st staying with us. That's just a gut feeling.
Locally, there's a fire millage as well.
-----------------------------------
8:40
So far:
6%in
Santorum up 40-38% Statewide
Oakland County: (19 precincts in)
Romney - 3577
Santorum - 2623
Largely Waterford, Hazel Park, partial reports of W Bloomfield and Milford.
State Rep 29th
Bob Gray - 169
Tim Gremiel - 145
------------------------
9:00
I think Romney's going to take this.
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/county/map/r/mi - CNN Map
He's doing much better up north than I expected and doing very well in South Macomb which I didn't expect (North is closer). Low turnout skews the results to absentees and seniors. That's Romney's ace in the hole.
---------------------
9:19 - Joe Graves is up.
STATE LEGISLATURE 51ST DISTRICT
VOTE FOR 1
(WITH 7 OF 52 PRECINCTS COUNTED 13.46%)
Joseph Graves . . . . . . . . . 1,459 51.21
Steven M. Losey . . . . . . . . 1,244 43.66
Cary Neuville-Justice . . . . . . 127 4.46
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 19 .67
Total . . . . . . . . . 2,849
Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 3
Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 53
Tim Griemel is up 2-1 over Bob Gray in the 29th.
Overall, Mitt up 41-38 with 31% in. I'll start guessing Congressional districts when more results are in.
-------------------
10PM
Statewide - Romney up 40-36%. They haven't called it, but Romney will win.
The Secretary of State also made a mistake using OLD districts for reporting by district. It's the NEW districts that matter.
District 1 - Close. Northern Lower is unexpectedly (to me) going for Romney with the UP going for Santorum.
District 2 - Santorum
District 3 - Close. Calhoun is split with Romney up less than 1%. Barry/Ionia heavily Santorum
District 4 - I think Santorum will take this one.
District 5 - Close.
District 6 - Santorum
District 7 - Close.
Districts 8-14 - Romney
If Santorum hangs on to 3, 5, and 7, it will be 16-14 Romney in delegates.
Also, Tim Gremiel is going to take the 29th district, and Joe Graves is up 800 votes in the 51st.
------------------
11PM
Howell fire millage passes easily.
Joe Graves and Tim Gremiel are the winners for their state rep races. Graves was in particular good news on an otherwise bad news day for conservatives.
The media made it official and called it for Romney. I was looking closely at Macomb results. Absentees were the key. Election Day starts 30 days before the actual election day.
I'll get into the number crunching for congressional district tomorrow.
Polls have closed here outside of a couple of Yooper counties in central time.
I'm going to try and keep up with the results and post them here. Keep in mind the following.
The winner may or may not finish first statewide. The winner is who wins most of the congressional districts. I expect this to be a nailbiter. My prediction is Romney by 1% statewide thanks to absentees with Santorum being the actual winner by congressional district. I hope I'm half right and Mr Scorched Earth gets upset completely. Santorum likely got walloped with absentees. That's tough to get past, although possible. Mike Cox survived that in 2002 against Gary Peters.
There's also two state rep districts. The 29th and 51st. I'll post those results as I see them. My gut tells me we'll split those districts with the 29th going dem and the 51st staying with us. That's just a gut feeling.
Locally, there's a fire millage as well.
-----------------------------------
8:40
So far:
6%in
Santorum up 40-38% Statewide
Oakland County: (19 precincts in)
Romney - 3577
Santorum - 2623
Largely Waterford, Hazel Park, partial reports of W Bloomfield and Milford.
State Rep 29th
Bob Gray - 169
Tim Gremiel - 145
------------------------
9:00
I think Romney's going to take this.
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/county/map/r/mi - CNN Map
He's doing much better up north than I expected and doing very well in South Macomb which I didn't expect (North is closer). Low turnout skews the results to absentees and seniors. That's Romney's ace in the hole.
---------------------
9:19 - Joe Graves is up.
STATE LEGISLATURE 51ST DISTRICT
VOTE FOR 1
(WITH 7 OF 52 PRECINCTS COUNTED 13.46%)
Joseph Graves . . . . . . . . . 1,459 51.21
Steven M. Losey . . . . . . . . 1,244 43.66
Cary Neuville-Justice . . . . . . 127 4.46
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 19 .67
Total . . . . . . . . . 2,849
Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 3
Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 53
Tim Griemel is up 2-1 over Bob Gray in the 29th.
Overall, Mitt up 41-38 with 31% in. I'll start guessing Congressional districts when more results are in.
-------------------
10PM
Statewide - Romney up 40-36%. They haven't called it, but Romney will win.
The Secretary of State also made a mistake using OLD districts for reporting by district. It's the NEW districts that matter.
District 1 - Close. Northern Lower is unexpectedly (to me) going for Romney with the UP going for Santorum.
District 2 - Santorum
District 3 - Close. Calhoun is split with Romney up less than 1%. Barry/Ionia heavily Santorum
District 4 - I think Santorum will take this one.
District 5 - Close.
District 6 - Santorum
District 7 - Close.
Districts 8-14 - Romney
If Santorum hangs on to 3, 5, and 7, it will be 16-14 Romney in delegates.
Also, Tim Gremiel is going to take the 29th district, and Joe Graves is up 800 votes in the 51st.
------------------
11PM
Howell fire millage passes easily.
Joe Graves and Tim Gremiel are the winners for their state rep races. Graves was in particular good news on an otherwise bad news day for conservatives.
The media made it official and called it for Romney. I was looking closely at Macomb results. Absentees were the key. Election Day starts 30 days before the actual election day.
I'll get into the number crunching for congressional district tomorrow.
Less than two hours left. Don't forget to vote! Go Santorum!
The internal polling must be close. I say because Romney's surrogates - specifically Bill Schuette/Rusty Hills/Randy Richardville here are going crazy right now all at once. They are mad because Santorum is going after social conservative Reagan Democrats, many of which are union members. I know these types of people very well. My family has a large number of them. In order to win in November, you need these votes to win. Period.
Romney supporters largely wanted the open primary. Irony is that it might - we don't know yet - might come back and bit him in the arse. Because independents and democrats according to polls do not like Romney, they are going crazy. You chose the system. We could have had a caucus. You chose the system. This is coming from a guy who voted for Paul Tsongas (D) in 1992. This is from a guy who bragged about voting in democrat primaries in the past. Now that it hurts him, he's whining. This was a process backed by the same people going crazy today. The Bill Schuettes of the party. Many of us wanted a caucus. Some wanted a convention. They wanted the open primary, and they got it. They chose the rules of the game.
Personally, I wouldn't be unhappy with a brokered convention if someone new gets the nomination. Of those left currently in the race, I think Santorum is the best choice. He's pro-life, does not support Romneycare, is pro-2nd Amendment, did not raise fees or taxes, and has in the past voted for a balanced budget. He also supports manufacturing and energy development. Romney became pro-life when he ran for president, signed a gun ban, raised fees, enacted Romneycare, and flip flops so often that people flat out do not trust him. How again is this guy the "electable one?"
In addition, I have a bit of resentment in how Romney was pushed on us. We were told, over, and over, and over again from the pundits and politicians that he's "the ONLY electable one" without one shred of real evidence why he is electable and HOW he appeals to independent voters. None. All I've been getting is a shitload of robocalls about how the other guy sucks. Now one robocall sent to union members about how Romney supported the Wall Street bailout and opposed the auto one, and they go ape. Santorum is consistent and against both bailouts. That's not a secret. He said that on multiple occasions and took heat for it. Romney's taking heat too from the same people he was supposed to "appeal to" as he's "the electable" one.
Team Scorched Earth is getting scorched, and they don't like it. Too bad.
Romney supporters largely wanted the open primary. Irony is that it might - we don't know yet - might come back and bit him in the arse. Because independents and democrats according to polls do not like Romney, they are going crazy. You chose the system. We could have had a caucus. You chose the system. This is coming from a guy who voted for Paul Tsongas (D) in 1992. This is from a guy who bragged about voting in democrat primaries in the past. Now that it hurts him, he's whining. This was a process backed by the same people going crazy today. The Bill Schuettes of the party. Many of us wanted a caucus. Some wanted a convention. They wanted the open primary, and they got it. They chose the rules of the game.
Personally, I wouldn't be unhappy with a brokered convention if someone new gets the nomination. Of those left currently in the race, I think Santorum is the best choice. He's pro-life, does not support Romneycare, is pro-2nd Amendment, did not raise fees or taxes, and has in the past voted for a balanced budget. He also supports manufacturing and energy development. Romney became pro-life when he ran for president, signed a gun ban, raised fees, enacted Romneycare, and flip flops so often that people flat out do not trust him. How again is this guy the "electable one?"
In addition, I have a bit of resentment in how Romney was pushed on us. We were told, over, and over, and over again from the pundits and politicians that he's "the ONLY electable one" without one shred of real evidence why he is electable and HOW he appeals to independent voters. None. All I've been getting is a shitload of robocalls about how the other guy sucks. Now one robocall sent to union members about how Romney supported the Wall Street bailout and opposed the auto one, and they go ape. Santorum is consistent and against both bailouts. That's not a secret. He said that on multiple occasions and took heat for it. Romney's taking heat too from the same people he was supposed to "appeal to" as he's "the electable" one.
Team Scorched Earth is getting scorched, and they don't like it. Too bad.
Internal Poll - Santorum up 5 in MI?? Last PPP Poll Santorum up 1, Last Mitchell Poll Romney up 1
Take a leaked internal poll from an anonymous source for what it is worth. I do not know how true this is.
From Buzzfeed
From the source:
Santorum- 33%
Romney- 28%
Gingrich- 12%
Paul- 6%
--------
I think the Ron Paul numbers are a little low there, but that could be due to me being in my 30's and a 2nd Amendment backer, knowing a lot of both 20 somethings and gun owners who will support him. I also do not expect either side to win by 5 pts. I might be wrong.
Recent polling overall moved from Mitt heavily to Santorum, heavily back to Mitt, and at the end slightly towards Santorum finishing about dead even. Low turnout I think favors Mitt because of the absentees. PPP has Santorum up one in today's poll, Mitchell has Romney up 1. That means this one should go to the wire.
Last area code numbers: (PPP). 17% Overall absentee, 83% overall election day estimates.
231 - Absentee 71-29 Romney, Election Day 43-33 Santorum
248 - Absentee 56-26 Romney, Election Day 43-29 Romney
269 - Absentee 44-37 Romney, Election Day 40-31 Santorum
313 - Absentee 45-27 Romney, Election Day 40-25 Santorum (Surprising with Grosse Pointe)
517 - Absentee 57-30 Romney, Election Day 46-40 Santorum
586 - Absentee 73-27 Romney, Election Day 53-32 Santorum
616 - Absentee 63-27 Romney, Election Day 51-26 Santorum
734 - Absentee 50-31 Romney, Election Day 31-30 Santorum (surprising)
810 - Absentee 67-24 Romney, Election Day 42-25 Santorum
906 - Absentee 100% Romney, Election Day 45-26-18 Santorum, Paul, Romney
989 - Absentee 46-27 Romney, Election Day 43-30 Romney (surprising)
I predicted yesterday Santorum taking the delegate win with Romney winning overall by 1 due to Oakland County results and the absentees. We'll see what happens.
From Buzzfeed
From the source:
Santorum- 33%
Romney- 28%
Gingrich- 12%
Paul- 6%
--------
I think the Ron Paul numbers are a little low there, but that could be due to me being in my 30's and a 2nd Amendment backer, knowing a lot of both 20 somethings and gun owners who will support him. I also do not expect either side to win by 5 pts. I might be wrong.
Recent polling overall moved from Mitt heavily to Santorum, heavily back to Mitt, and at the end slightly towards Santorum finishing about dead even. Low turnout I think favors Mitt because of the absentees. PPP has Santorum up one in today's poll, Mitchell has Romney up 1. That means this one should go to the wire.
Last area code numbers: (PPP). 17% Overall absentee, 83% overall election day estimates.
231 - Absentee 71-29 Romney, Election Day 43-33 Santorum
248 - Absentee 56-26 Romney, Election Day 43-29 Romney
269 - Absentee 44-37 Romney, Election Day 40-31 Santorum
313 - Absentee 45-27 Romney, Election Day 40-25 Santorum (Surprising with Grosse Pointe)
517 - Absentee 57-30 Romney, Election Day 46-40 Santorum
586 - Absentee 73-27 Romney, Election Day 53-32 Santorum
616 - Absentee 63-27 Romney, Election Day 51-26 Santorum
734 - Absentee 50-31 Romney, Election Day 31-30 Santorum (surprising)
810 - Absentee 67-24 Romney, Election Day 42-25 Santorum
906 - Absentee 100% Romney, Election Day 45-26-18 Santorum, Paul, Romney
989 - Absentee 46-27 Romney, Election Day 43-30 Romney (surprising)
I predicted yesterday Santorum taking the delegate win with Romney winning overall by 1 due to Oakland County results and the absentees. We'll see what happens.
Election Day
I can't speak for the rest of the state but I was able to walk in, vote, and leave. Voter number 25 in my Green Oak precinct. I voted for Santorum. There was no campaign activity that I saw either, although there was some grumbling overall about the number of robocalls out there.
Besides the presidential primary, we have:
State Rep elections for the old 29th and 51st districts. Good luck to Bob Gray and Joe Graves.
A millage election in the zone covered by Howell area fire authority.
-----------------
Updated - 1:20. Looks like low turnout in other parts of Livingston County as well. Parents were 89-90 around 12:30 in a heavily GOP precinct in Genoa Township.
Besides the presidential primary, we have:
State Rep elections for the old 29th and 51st districts. Good luck to Bob Gray and Joe Graves.
A millage election in the zone covered by Howell area fire authority.
-----------------
Updated - 1:20. Looks like low turnout in other parts of Livingston County as well. Parents were 89-90 around 12:30 in a heavily GOP precinct in Genoa Township.
Ridiculous laws of the week - part 1
Back when I was in undergrad, one of my favorite websites was a sports related site called "Jerk of the Week." The site is no longer with us and covered the major sports and gave "jerk points" for every action that made it. I thought about a jerk of the week for politicians, but instead decided on focusing it on one of my biggest sources of political related heartburn - bad laws.
Those who have read Atlas Shrugged know this quote.
One of the biggest problems with this country and state is the fact that there's too many laws. Many are archaic, or not even needed in the first place. A lot of those laws are also administrative regulations and not even statutes. I said last year that you are probably a criminal and don't even know it. It is Atlas Shrugged coming to life. This is the fault of both parties equally to get to this point.
Here's the first law I'm going to start with. It's one that almost everyone has broken at some time or another.
If you win a $50.01 bet, you can go to jail for a year and be fined $1000. On the other hand, you can go to the Casino or play Keno at the bar after five glasses of whiskey and it be perfectly legal. You can play the Lottery, and it's legal. You go to a friend's house for a game of poker, and it better be for chips.
I understand the push to limit actual gambling dens, but do you really need to ban a friendly game of poker? I'll answer it. No you don't. Stop making criminals of good people.
There's plenty more where that came from.
Those who have read Atlas Shrugged know this quote.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kinds of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of lawbreakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
One of the biggest problems with this country and state is the fact that there's too many laws. Many are archaic, or not even needed in the first place. A lot of those laws are also administrative regulations and not even statutes. I said last year that you are probably a criminal and don't even know it. It is Atlas Shrugged coming to life. This is the fault of both parties equally to get to this point.
Here's the first law I'm going to start with. It's one that almost everyone has broken at some time or another.
750.314 Winning at gambling.
Sec. 314.
Any person who by playing at cards, dice, or any other game, or by betting or putting up money on cards, or by any other means or device in the nature of betting on cards, or betting of any kind, wins or obtains any sum of money or any goods, or any article of value whatever, is guilty of a misdemeanor if the money, goods, or articles so won or obtained are of the value of not more than $50.00. If the money, goods, or articles so won or obtained are of the value of more than $50.00, the person is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than $1,000.00.
If you win a $50.01 bet, you can go to jail for a year and be fined $1000. On the other hand, you can go to the Casino or play Keno at the bar after five glasses of whiskey and it be perfectly legal. You can play the Lottery, and it's legal. You go to a friend's house for a game of poker, and it better be for chips.
I understand the push to limit actual gambling dens, but do you really need to ban a friendly game of poker? I'll answer it. No you don't. Stop making criminals of good people.
There's plenty more where that came from.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Michigan Primary Preview - What to look for
This primary is different than a lot of them. The winner isn't who gets 50.1% of the vote statewide this time. It's the winner of each of the new congressional districts (you can see which district you are in on the sidebar) The statewide winner gets two delegates. The statewide winner probably gets two delegates, which counts the same as one district.
You could see Romney 51-49 or Santorum 51-49, and the other guy getting more delegates and actually winning. Because of the districts, areas I have to watch, in no order by district.
District 1 - The UP does things their own way. They will likely decide this district. The Lake Michigan coast I expect to go Romney and inland I expect to go to Santorum.
District 2 - Muskegon could make an impact, but Ottawa County will probably decide this unless it is close. Kentwood and Wyoming could also be players here.
District 3 - Kent County is the bulk of the district. If it's close, watch Calhoun County, Barry County, and Ionia County.
District 4 - Clinton County is a new addition here and the fastest growing county in the state. Midland is an anchor, along with a lot of the Saginaw Suburbs. There's also a large number of rural areas in this district.
District 5 - Southern Genesee County has their own state rep election to replace Paul Scott. Crossover independents and democrats could very well decide this district. Watch places like Flushing, Davison, Bay County, and Standish.
District 6 - All of Allegan County is now in the district. That's the big anchor here. Kalamazoo and Berrien Counties also can impact this.
District 7 - Monroe County replaced Calhoun County. This district became more populist with that move. Hillsdale and Branch are small counties, but impact heavily due to its GOP percentage. Jackson County is the anchor. Spring Arbor and Summit Townships lead the way there.
District 8 - I'm biased, but I think both candidates make a major mistake by not going to Livingston County. It's the third most Republican County in the state by percentage. I think this hurts Santorum more than Romney since Romney went to nearby Milford. North Oakland also has a little different personality than the "Oakland County" portrayed in the media. Ron Paul could make an impact in Lansing and some of the rural areas as well.
District 9 - Part of Romney's old home area is in the district. It also has a lot of democrat areas in South Macomb. I expect Romney to win here due to the Oakland part of the district, but South Macomb could throw a monkeywrench into some plans.
District 10 - North Macomb will have a lot to say about this district, but so does the thumb, especially if it votes as a block.
District 11 - Probably Romney's best district unless West Oakland and Western Wayne County surprises me. If Novi, South Lyon, and Northville go Romney, it's over in this district. Auburn Hills will have a state rep race as well tomorrow. Good luck to Bob Gray.
District 12 - Who wins here. Ann Arbor area crossovers or Downriver/Dearborn crossovers?
District 13 - Redford, Garden City, and Westland have a lot of power tomorrow. Detroit is unpredictable.
District 14 - Grosse Pointes, Farmington Hills, and West Bloomfield will probably decide this district. Detroit is also unpredictable.
Looking at the state results at the Secretary of State's office only will give you part of the story. An "Oakland County" result will only give part of the story. One think polling hasn't done is subdivide Oakland County by the district. North Oakland and to a lesser extent West Oakland each have their own characteristics. The same goes for Wayne and Macomb Counties, and Kent to a lesser extent.
My predictions I made last week and will stand by today are this:
MI-1 - Santorum. Romney will likely win the areas near the Lake Michigan Coast, but will probably get beat bad with the more populist inland. He'll probably lose the UP as well.
MI-2 - Santorum. Romney lost here in 08
MI-3 - Santorum, but close. The new third drops Kentwood and Wyoming. Barry and Ionia Counties should be friendly to Santorum, as should the rural parts of Kent County. Calhoun County will be key as well.
MI-4 - Santorum. I think this is just a bad matchup district for Mitt.
MI-5 - Santorum - Romney's closing some ground here, but I think he hangs on.
MI-6 - Santorum - Romney lost here in 08.
MI-7 - Santorum - Another bad matchup for Romney. More so with Monroe County.
MI-8 - Romney - Tough to predict, but Santorum may have a missed opportunity in not going to Livingston County. Romney didn't either, but campaigned in nearby Milford.
MI-9 - Romney - Big.
MI-10 - Santorum - Macomb is volitile, and so is the thumb. I think the thumb will break heavily against Mitt, while Macomb will be close.
MI-11 - Romney's best district.
MI-12 - Romney. Ann Arbor crossovers will save him.
MI-13 - Santorum. I'm going against the grain, but Redford and Westland is probably tougher turf for Romney than the major GOP vote in Wayne County (MI-11 or the Grosse Pointes in MI-14)
MI-14 - Romney. The Pointes, Farmington Hills, and West Bloomfield will go for Mitt.
I'm not that confident in my predictions about 3, 5, (both Santorum) 8, 12,(Romney) and 13. (Santorum). I'm going to guess Romney wins by 1% due to absentees and a big win in Oakland County, but Santorum takes the delegates.
Santorum - 18
Romney - 12
We'll see what happens.
You could see Romney 51-49 or Santorum 51-49, and the other guy getting more delegates and actually winning. Because of the districts, areas I have to watch, in no order by district.
District 1 - The UP does things their own way. They will likely decide this district. The Lake Michigan coast I expect to go Romney and inland I expect to go to Santorum.
District 2 - Muskegon could make an impact, but Ottawa County will probably decide this unless it is close. Kentwood and Wyoming could also be players here.
District 3 - Kent County is the bulk of the district. If it's close, watch Calhoun County, Barry County, and Ionia County.
District 4 - Clinton County is a new addition here and the fastest growing county in the state. Midland is an anchor, along with a lot of the Saginaw Suburbs. There's also a large number of rural areas in this district.
District 5 - Southern Genesee County has their own state rep election to replace Paul Scott. Crossover independents and democrats could very well decide this district. Watch places like Flushing, Davison, Bay County, and Standish.
District 6 - All of Allegan County is now in the district. That's the big anchor here. Kalamazoo and Berrien Counties also can impact this.
District 7 - Monroe County replaced Calhoun County. This district became more populist with that move. Hillsdale and Branch are small counties, but impact heavily due to its GOP percentage. Jackson County is the anchor. Spring Arbor and Summit Townships lead the way there.
District 8 - I'm biased, but I think both candidates make a major mistake by not going to Livingston County. It's the third most Republican County in the state by percentage. I think this hurts Santorum more than Romney since Romney went to nearby Milford. North Oakland also has a little different personality than the "Oakland County" portrayed in the media. Ron Paul could make an impact in Lansing and some of the rural areas as well.
District 9 - Part of Romney's old home area is in the district. It also has a lot of democrat areas in South Macomb. I expect Romney to win here due to the Oakland part of the district, but South Macomb could throw a monkeywrench into some plans.
District 10 - North Macomb will have a lot to say about this district, but so does the thumb, especially if it votes as a block.
District 11 - Probably Romney's best district unless West Oakland and Western Wayne County surprises me. If Novi, South Lyon, and Northville go Romney, it's over in this district. Auburn Hills will have a state rep race as well tomorrow. Good luck to Bob Gray.
District 12 - Who wins here. Ann Arbor area crossovers or Downriver/Dearborn crossovers?
District 13 - Redford, Garden City, and Westland have a lot of power tomorrow. Detroit is unpredictable.
District 14 - Grosse Pointes, Farmington Hills, and West Bloomfield will probably decide this district. Detroit is also unpredictable.
Looking at the state results at the Secretary of State's office only will give you part of the story. An "Oakland County" result will only give part of the story. One think polling hasn't done is subdivide Oakland County by the district. North Oakland and to a lesser extent West Oakland each have their own characteristics. The same goes for Wayne and Macomb Counties, and Kent to a lesser extent.
My predictions I made last week and will stand by today are this:
MI-1 - Santorum. Romney will likely win the areas near the Lake Michigan Coast, but will probably get beat bad with the more populist inland. He'll probably lose the UP as well.
MI-2 - Santorum. Romney lost here in 08
MI-3 - Santorum, but close. The new third drops Kentwood and Wyoming. Barry and Ionia Counties should be friendly to Santorum, as should the rural parts of Kent County. Calhoun County will be key as well.
MI-4 - Santorum. I think this is just a bad matchup district for Mitt.
MI-5 - Santorum - Romney's closing some ground here, but I think he hangs on.
MI-6 - Santorum - Romney lost here in 08.
MI-7 - Santorum - Another bad matchup for Romney. More so with Monroe County.
MI-8 - Romney - Tough to predict, but Santorum may have a missed opportunity in not going to Livingston County. Romney didn't either, but campaigned in nearby Milford.
MI-9 - Romney - Big.
MI-10 - Santorum - Macomb is volitile, and so is the thumb. I think the thumb will break heavily against Mitt, while Macomb will be close.
MI-11 - Romney's best district.
MI-12 - Romney. Ann Arbor crossovers will save him.
MI-13 - Santorum. I'm going against the grain, but Redford and Westland is probably tougher turf for Romney than the major GOP vote in Wayne County (MI-11 or the Grosse Pointes in MI-14)
MI-14 - Romney. The Pointes, Farmington Hills, and West Bloomfield will go for Mitt.
I'm not that confident in my predictions about 3, 5, (both Santorum) 8, 12,(Romney) and 13. (Santorum). I'm going to guess Romney wins by 1% due to absentees and a big win in Oakland County, but Santorum takes the delegates.
Santorum - 18
Romney - 12
We'll see what happens.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Thanks for the robocalls, Mitt Romney.
I got home yesterday and found five robocalls on my answering machine. So far, I've gotten three of them today with another four-five hours left. At least half of them were calls of the "vote for me, he sucks" variety. If Romney wants to portray himself as a fiscal conservative, I have two words for him. Fee increases. One more word. Romneycare.
I have not received one robocall from the campaigns or superpacs supporting Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, or Ron Paul. Nor even the usual offenders with leftist group American Family Voices. The only offender lately has been Romney's campaign or Superpac. The robocalls are usually bad this time of year, but the worst part is that this is ALL from ONE campaign - at least here in Green Oak Township, Michigan.
I'll be doing my best to teach Mitt a lesson by voting against him Tuesday and voting for Rick Santorum. In the meantime, could everyone please shut the hell up with these robocalls. I can't stand those things.
I have not received one robocall from the campaigns or superpacs supporting Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, or Ron Paul. Nor even the usual offenders with leftist group American Family Voices. The only offender lately has been Romney's campaign or Superpac. The robocalls are usually bad this time of year, but the worst part is that this is ALL from ONE campaign - at least here in Green Oak Township, Michigan.
I'll be doing my best to teach Mitt a lesson by voting against him Tuesday and voting for Rick Santorum. In the meantime, could everyone please shut the hell up with these robocalls. I can't stand those things.
Don't forget the special elections! Joe Graves and Bob Gray are running for state house
While all the hype for the February 28th Special election is for the presidential primary, there are some other elections going on that day. Two of the most important are in the state house where there's two vacancies. These are the OLD districts, not the redistricted areas which do not take affect electionwise until August.
Bob Gray is running in the old 29th District, covering Pontiac and Auburn Hills. This is a longshot, but if there is any chance at all of winning, it is due to the republican presidential primary being on the same day. If most of Pontiac stays home, we have a shot. This election is to replace Tim Melton who resigned to take a job at an educational organization.
The other election is highly contested between Joe Graves and MEA Union official Steve Losey in the old 51st district. This is to replace the recalled Paul Scott who was scalped by the MEA last year. All their work could be for nothing if Joe Graves wins the replacement election. This is in Southern Genesee County.
If you're a Republican in Pontiac, Auburn Hills, Argentine Twp, Mundy Twp, Fenton, Linden, Grand Blanc, or Atlas Twp, this election is extra important with the state rep races. Joe Graves and Bob Gray are on Tuesday's ballot.
Bob Gray is running in the old 29th District, covering Pontiac and Auburn Hills. This is a longshot, but if there is any chance at all of winning, it is due to the republican presidential primary being on the same day. If most of Pontiac stays home, we have a shot. This election is to replace Tim Melton who resigned to take a job at an educational organization.
The other election is highly contested between Joe Graves and MEA Union official Steve Losey in the old 51st district. This is to replace the recalled Paul Scott who was scalped by the MEA last year. All their work could be for nothing if Joe Graves wins the replacement election. This is in Southern Genesee County.
If you're a Republican in Pontiac, Auburn Hills, Argentine Twp, Mundy Twp, Fenton, Linden, Grand Blanc, or Atlas Twp, this election is extra important with the state rep races. Joe Graves and Bob Gray are on Tuesday's ballot.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Talk is Cheap, especially from politicians
I actually skipped the debate. Again. One reason is that I already made up my mind and no "words" will change that. The other reason is that all debates do is show talk and not action. These are politicians. The only time talk matters is if that is all there is to go on, and if politicians flip and flop all the time showing pandering. I don't mind true conversions on issues, but everyone knows I have little tolerance for opportunists or vagueness.
My concern especially this year among Republican primary voters is over reliance on debates and talk. Rick Perry dropped out because he's bad in debates. What does that really mean? It means he can't give 30 or 60 second soundbite answers to questions. That's it. Some are better at it than others. I don't speak fast. That's hurt me at times and helped at others. It doesn't change the fact that I have my strengths with some issues and weaknesses at others. What Perry's debate weaknesses do not reflect on is his 12 years as Governor of Texas.
Tim Pawlenty dropped because didn't gain traction due to him being "boring." Why the Hell should that even matter? Does that reflect on his two terms as Governor of Minnesota?
As primary voters or even general election voters, we need to stop worrying so much what politicians say, or if they are interesting. We need to focus on what they do. We need to do the research.
Mitt Romney has a four year record as Massachusetts Governor.
Rich Santorum has a 16 year record in Congress.
Newt Gingrich has a 21 year congressional record.
Ron Paul has a 23 year congressional record.
Actions count, and actions aren't hard to find. http://thomas.loc.gov has a long record of roll call votes from Santorum, Gingrich, and Ron Paul, as well as Obama from his senate years. Don't take some cherry picked advocacy group's word for it either. Look them up yourself from the times they were in office.
Romney was in office from the 2002 election till 2006 when he declined to run for re-election. It's not hard to find a governor's record either. It's a little harder to find things straight from the source since Romney's stuff was scrubbed, but there's plenty of articles about things he's done as governor.
I don't need to be given a rah-rah speech or to be lead. There's only a handful of people I will follow and presidents aren't one of them. I need someone who I can trust to sign the right legislation, appoint good people to the executive departments, appoint good judges and justices, and not screw up foreign policy. We're the board of directors looking to hire a CEO. No more no less. Don't lead me. Do your job, and stay out of my way.
My concern especially this year among Republican primary voters is over reliance on debates and talk. Rick Perry dropped out because he's bad in debates. What does that really mean? It means he can't give 30 or 60 second soundbite answers to questions. That's it. Some are better at it than others. I don't speak fast. That's hurt me at times and helped at others. It doesn't change the fact that I have my strengths with some issues and weaknesses at others. What Perry's debate weaknesses do not reflect on is his 12 years as Governor of Texas.
Tim Pawlenty dropped because didn't gain traction due to him being "boring." Why the Hell should that even matter? Does that reflect on his two terms as Governor of Minnesota?
As primary voters or even general election voters, we need to stop worrying so much what politicians say, or if they are interesting. We need to focus on what they do. We need to do the research.
Mitt Romney has a four year record as Massachusetts Governor.
Rich Santorum has a 16 year record in Congress.
Newt Gingrich has a 21 year congressional record.
Ron Paul has a 23 year congressional record.
Actions count, and actions aren't hard to find. http://thomas.loc.gov has a long record of roll call votes from Santorum, Gingrich, and Ron Paul, as well as Obama from his senate years. Don't take some cherry picked advocacy group's word for it either. Look them up yourself from the times they were in office.
Romney was in office from the 2002 election till 2006 when he declined to run for re-election. It's not hard to find a governor's record either. It's a little harder to find things straight from the source since Romney's stuff was scrubbed, but there's plenty of articles about things he's done as governor.
I don't need to be given a rah-rah speech or to be lead. There's only a handful of people I will follow and presidents aren't one of them. I need someone who I can trust to sign the right legislation, appoint good people to the executive departments, appoint good judges and justices, and not screw up foreign policy. We're the board of directors looking to hire a CEO. No more no less. Don't lead me. Do your job, and stay out of my way.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Unintended Consequences of Obama and Sebelius's mandate
There are many opinions about contraceptives. The media is going crazy about this issue. The fact is that nobody is trying to ban them. There is a battle over requiring religious organizations to pay for it. That's not only wrong due to separation of church and state, but it's going to cause a lot of people to lose coverage. It shows how stupid and shortsighted bureaucrats can be, as well as Obama for signing off on that.
A blind man could see this coming. From Yahoo - The Ticket
Here's the bottom line. Thanks to the Obama administration's stupid decision, a lot of people will have their health care dropped. Religious organizations will not violate their beliefs. Do not ask them to do so. They will shut down before giving in, just as many adoption agencies did because of gay adoption policies in Massachusetts. If you want these people covered with any health coverage, then you better tell Obama to reverse the policy period. The choices aren't to cover contraceptives or not. The choice is health coverage period or not. By picking that culture war fight, everybody loses.
In addition, how many hospitals are religious-run. In Michigan, a large number of hospitals are Catholic owned. Providence is one of the biggest in neighboring Oakland County. Is this the first step to mandate abortion coverage? Yes, I know about the Hyde Amendment, but with Obamacare on the horizon, what's in store now?
I shouldn't expect anything less from the Peter Principle in Chief.
A blind man could see this coming. From Yahoo - The Ticket
On a chilly winter day earlier this month, 120 college presidents--mostly of Protestant schools--from around the country met in Washington for an annual meeting sponsored by the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities, a group that represents 136 American schools and more than 400,000 students. One topic kept coming up in the discussions: How to combat President Barack Obama's proposed mandate for religious employers to provide health insurance that offers free contraception, a decision that would affect all of their institutions--and could violate some of their deepest-held beliefs.
During the conference, 25 of the presidents held a separate policy meeting to discuss the proposed directive, which was first established in the Affordable Care Act in 2010 and was upheld this year by the Department of Health and Human Services. The mandate, later softened by the Obama administration, would have required non-church religious institutions like schools and hospitals to offer health insurance plans that include free access to contraceptives and abortifacient drugs. Many of these presidents made trips to the offices of their representatives to urge them to fight against the decision.
Much of the news coverage of the battle over the contraception mandate focused on the outcry from the Catholic Church, but employers affiliated with Protestant denominations--especially religious colleges who offer insurance plans to students--waged an equally outspoken crusade against the decision. A coalition of more than 60 faith-based groups co-signed a letter to President Obama in December urging him to broaden exemptions to the mandate, and the council's president, Paul Corts, twice sent letters to the administration urging them to reconsider.
After the Obama administration first announced the mandate, colleges associated with Protestant churches and schools founded as expressly Christian institutions fought for exemptions, warning that the mandate could force them to deny health insurance to students who rely on the school's health care plans.
Here's the bottom line. Thanks to the Obama administration's stupid decision, a lot of people will have their health care dropped. Religious organizations will not violate their beliefs. Do not ask them to do so. They will shut down before giving in, just as many adoption agencies did because of gay adoption policies in Massachusetts. If you want these people covered with any health coverage, then you better tell Obama to reverse the policy period. The choices aren't to cover contraceptives or not. The choice is health coverage period or not. By picking that culture war fight, everybody loses.
In addition, how many hospitals are religious-run. In Michigan, a large number of hospitals are Catholic owned. Providence is one of the biggest in neighboring Oakland County. Is this the first step to mandate abortion coverage? Yes, I know about the Hyde Amendment, but with Obamacare on the horizon, what's in store now?
I shouldn't expect anything less from the Peter Principle in Chief.
Don't insult my intelligence
Everyone that follows Michigan politics knows that Romney is the choice of most of the establishment. Nowhere is that more apparent than our congressional delegation. Only Justin Amash and Candice Miller have not endorsed Romney. Some of them are worried that Romney isn't doing well here. He may yet win Michigan, but it's going to be closer than they wanted. He may lose in the end. That will be decided the 28th.
Politico has a story about the concerns with Romney's campaign. I'm not exactly enamoured with the quotes from Dan Benishek and Bill Huizenga. I've met all of them on different occasions and like them, but they don't get it when it comes to Romney.
Wrong. It's not about passion. They make it sound like Romney can give a homerun speech and all will be well. No. That insults the intelligence of non-Mitt supporters. The problem is trust. The problem is that a lot of people do not trust Mitt Romney and do not believe what he says. That is the problem with flip-flopping too many times, especially right before you decide to run for president. ACTIONS count.
Tim Walberg's a little better on this, but still doesn't completely get it.
I don't have to go to the national media to know Romney's record with conservatives. Romney's 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy along with his 2002-2006 tenure as Massachusetts governor does the job. Romney signed a gun ban. Romney gave us Romneycare. Romney was "pro-choice" until he decided to run for president. He raised fees (taxes) as governor. Talk it cheap.
Rick Santorum isn't perfect, but I know what I'm going to get from Santorum. His 16 years of actions speaks for itself. Good. Bad. Ugly. I'd rather have that rather than gamble that Mitt won't flip-flop into Romney version 5.0.
Politico has a story about the concerns with Romney's campaign. I'm not exactly enamoured with the quotes from Dan Benishek and Bill Huizenga. I've met all of them on different occasions and like them, but they don't get it when it comes to Romney.
The problem, the members said, is simple: Romney has failed to stir the passions of the Republican faithful.
“There’s obviously an element out there looking for an alternative,” said GOP Rep. Bill Huizenga, a former state representative whose district encompasses part of western Michigan.
“I think it breaks back towards him, but he’s got to go earn it,” Huizenga continued. “He’s gotta go at it. He’s got to get everyone fired up.”
Rep. Dan Benishek, a freshman from the socially conservative Upper Peninsula, was more direct in assessing the challenge Romney faces.
“I wish he would be more passionate,” said Benishek, a former Herman Cain supporter who switched to Romney after Cain dropped out. “That’s always been my wish about Mitt.”
Wrong. It's not about passion. They make it sound like Romney can give a homerun speech and all will be well. No. That insults the intelligence of non-Mitt supporters. The problem is trust. The problem is that a lot of people do not trust Mitt Romney and do not believe what he says. That is the problem with flip-flopping too many times, especially right before you decide to run for president. ACTIONS count.
Tim Walberg's a little better on this, but still doesn't completely get it.
“I think Romney will have to explain to the pro-life community that he is true,” Walberg said. “Santorum, of course you can’t get past him on those issues. He’s 100 percent.”
....
“I think Santorum is going to have to contend with the same things that Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich have had to contend with, and the same things that Romney has had to contend with for the entire time,” Walberg said.
“I think Romney has been out there for a while now,” he added. “It’s always been suggested in the national media that Romney doesn’t have it for conservatives, and after a while people begin to believe that kind of stuff.”
I don't have to go to the national media to know Romney's record with conservatives. Romney's 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy along with his 2002-2006 tenure as Massachusetts governor does the job. Romney signed a gun ban. Romney gave us Romneycare. Romney was "pro-choice" until he decided to run for president. He raised fees (taxes) as governor. Talk it cheap.
Rick Santorum isn't perfect, but I know what I'm going to get from Santorum. His 16 years of actions speaks for itself. Good. Bad. Ugly. I'd rather have that rather than gamble that Mitt won't flip-flop into Romney version 5.0.
Poll Update - 2nd PPP poll less of an outlier
Last Thursday, I had a post about the delegate process and listed polls and congressional districts.
I never thought Santorum was up 15 over Romney in Michigan. Most of the polls have it 4-10 pts. I think 4 is accurate, right now as things stand today. Will it change in a week? Possibly.
What I like about the PPP polls is that delegates in Michigan are chosen by Congressional District. All the polls are statewide only or listed by some regions. PPP used phone area codes. While that's not a perfect assessment of the polling by district, it does show a rough estimate.
Here's the latest from PPP
Area Code:
231 - 44-22 Santorum - West/NW MI. Muskegon to Traverse City
248 - 36-32 Romney - Oakland County
269 - 48-35 Santorum - Hastings, Battle Creek, Kalamazoo, St Joe
313 - 43-22-21 - Romney, Paul, Santorum. Big shift in Wayne County - Is this the Grosse Pointes or Redford/Westland? Paul vote is probably Dearborn.
517 - 40-33 Santorum - Big shift to Santorum. Lansing area, Western Livingston County, Hillsdale, Jackson.
586 - tied at 38. Macomb County.
616 - 37-35 Santorum - Grand Rapids, Holland, Ionia
734 - 40-29 Romney - Big shift to Romney. Ann Arbor, Ypsi, Southernmost Livingston County, Monroe. I'm not surprised here with Ann Arbor.
810 - 46-19-18 Santorum-Paul-Romney. Eastern Livingston, Flint area, Lapeer, Port Huron.
906 - 29-27-21 - Santorum-Romney-Paul - The UP. Small sample of numbers fluctuated here.
989 - 39-29 Santorum-Romney - From Saginaw to Northeastern Michigan.
Based on this:
Santorum takes - CD 1, CD 2, maybe 3, CD 4, CD 5, CD 6, CD 7, CD 10 (thanks to thumb),
Romney takes - CD 9, 11, probably 12, 14.
Tossup - My own 8th District and the 13th
These are the NEW districts that count, not the old one's. That could help or hurt Romney in a big way since the Bloomfield/Birmingham areas - his home base - are carved up into several districts.
The 9th has Southfield Township and Bloomfield Township.
The 11th has part of West Bloomfield, Bloomfield Hills, and Birmingham, as well as Troy.
The 14th has most of West Bloomfield.
Romney in all polls leads Oakland County. The question is where in Oakland. Oakland County is a big place, and doesn't think uniformly throughout the county.
Also the big shift his way in 734 and 313. Where was the 313 samples? I'm guessing largly Grosse Pointe, in the 14th district. Does Redford and Westland in the 13th lean the same way? I'll be somewhat surprised, but it's possible. The 734 numbers here reflect my more original thoughts. I don't see Ann Arbor or suburbs warming up to Santorum. I think Romney would also play well in Plymouth (11th District).
I see this going likely 8-4 Santorum with two up for grabs in the race for Congressional districts. If I got pushed into the corner, I'd guess Romney with the 8th and Santorum the 13th, both narrowly making it 9-5. I wouldn't be shocked at 8-6 or 10-4.
That's also if things don't change. A late surprise attack wouldn't shock me in the slightest.
I never thought Santorum was up 15 over Romney in Michigan. Most of the polls have it 4-10 pts. I think 4 is accurate, right now as things stand today. Will it change in a week? Possibly.
What I like about the PPP polls is that delegates in Michigan are chosen by Congressional District. All the polls are statewide only or listed by some regions. PPP used phone area codes. While that's not a perfect assessment of the polling by district, it does show a rough estimate.
Here's the latest from PPP
Area Code:
231 - 44-22 Santorum - West/NW MI. Muskegon to Traverse City
248 - 36-32 Romney - Oakland County
269 - 48-35 Santorum - Hastings, Battle Creek, Kalamazoo, St Joe
313 - 43-22-21 - Romney, Paul, Santorum. Big shift in Wayne County - Is this the Grosse Pointes or Redford/Westland? Paul vote is probably Dearborn.
517 - 40-33 Santorum - Big shift to Santorum. Lansing area, Western Livingston County, Hillsdale, Jackson.
586 - tied at 38. Macomb County.
616 - 37-35 Santorum - Grand Rapids, Holland, Ionia
734 - 40-29 Romney - Big shift to Romney. Ann Arbor, Ypsi, Southernmost Livingston County, Monroe. I'm not surprised here with Ann Arbor.
810 - 46-19-18 Santorum-Paul-Romney. Eastern Livingston, Flint area, Lapeer, Port Huron.
906 - 29-27-21 - Santorum-Romney-Paul - The UP. Small sample of numbers fluctuated here.
989 - 39-29 Santorum-Romney - From Saginaw to Northeastern Michigan.
Based on this:
Santorum takes - CD 1, CD 2, maybe 3, CD 4, CD 5, CD 6, CD 7, CD 10 (thanks to thumb),
Romney takes - CD 9, 11, probably 12, 14.
Tossup - My own 8th District and the 13th
These are the NEW districts that count, not the old one's. That could help or hurt Romney in a big way since the Bloomfield/Birmingham areas - his home base - are carved up into several districts.
The 9th has Southfield Township and Bloomfield Township.
The 11th has part of West Bloomfield, Bloomfield Hills, and Birmingham, as well as Troy.
The 14th has most of West Bloomfield.
Romney in all polls leads Oakland County. The question is where in Oakland. Oakland County is a big place, and doesn't think uniformly throughout the county.
Also the big shift his way in 734 and 313. Where was the 313 samples? I'm guessing largly Grosse Pointe, in the 14th district. Does Redford and Westland in the 13th lean the same way? I'll be somewhat surprised, but it's possible. The 734 numbers here reflect my more original thoughts. I don't see Ann Arbor or suburbs warming up to Santorum. I think Romney would also play well in Plymouth (11th District).
I see this going likely 8-4 Santorum with two up for grabs in the race for Congressional districts. If I got pushed into the corner, I'd guess Romney with the 8th and Santorum the 13th, both narrowly making it 9-5. I wouldn't be shocked at 8-6 or 10-4.
That's also if things don't change. A late surprise attack wouldn't shock me in the slightest.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
State House Redistricting - District 79 (HD-79)
State House - District 79
Current Rep - Al Pscholka (R-Lincoln Township)
Old District (79th)
Al Pscholka - 17,293
Mary Brown - 8,761
I'll call this district almost safe. I can't call it safe because it's a 22% black district with Benton Harbor and Benton Township. It also has the GOP strongholds of Berrien County. This district has not been competitive downticket. The closest it has been was 6500 votes in 2008, with Obama on the ticket. The close calls for state rep have not been here as they were in the 78th district next door. On the other hand, Obama did better here than he did next door. If a democrat drives up the Benton Harbor votes and gets the same thing downticket while getting just enough crossovers, he can win. It just hasn't been done. That's why this district is almost safe. There's still bad potential to get caught looking if you're not careful.
The old and new districts here are almost the same. Sodus Township is dropped to the 78th district. Other than that, it's a battle of strongholds. Bainbridge, Lincoln, Coloma, and Royalton Townships lead the way for the GOP. St Joe leans heavily Republican, but not quite the same margins as in Lincoln Twp. Benton Harbor and Benton Township lead the way for the dems. They are mostly black and it shows in the election results. McCain won everywhere except the Bentons (and lost Watervliet by 6). He still lost the district, which shows how strongly democrat Benton Harbor is. That number is not a misprint.
This one should stay ours, but don't get caught looking.
Current Rep - Al Pscholka (R-Lincoln Township)
Old District (79th)
Al Pscholka - 17,293
Mary Brown - 8,761
I'll call this district almost safe. I can't call it safe because it's a 22% black district with Benton Harbor and Benton Township. It also has the GOP strongholds of Berrien County. This district has not been competitive downticket. The closest it has been was 6500 votes in 2008, with Obama on the ticket. The close calls for state rep have not been here as they were in the 78th district next door. On the other hand, Obama did better here than he did next door. If a democrat drives up the Benton Harbor votes and gets the same thing downticket while getting just enough crossovers, he can win. It just hasn't been done. That's why this district is almost safe. There's still bad potential to get caught looking if you're not careful.
The old and new districts here are almost the same. Sodus Township is dropped to the 78th district. Other than that, it's a battle of strongholds. Bainbridge, Lincoln, Coloma, and Royalton Townships lead the way for the GOP. St Joe leans heavily Republican, but not quite the same margins as in Lincoln Twp. Benton Harbor and Benton Township lead the way for the dems. They are mostly black and it shows in the election results. McCain won everywhere except the Bentons (and lost Watervliet by 6). He still lost the district, which shows how strongly democrat Benton Harbor is. That number is not a misprint.
This one should stay ours, but don't get caught looking.
| McCain | Obama | Total | Diff | GOP | DEM | Diff | |
| Bainbridge Twp | 926 | 519 | 1445 | 407 | 64.08% | 35.92% | 28.17% |
| Benton Harbor | 94 | 4364 | 4458 | -4270 | 2.11% | 97.89% | -95.78% |
| Benton Twp | 1480 | 5108 | 6588 | -3628 | 22.47% | 77.53% | -55.07% |
| Bridgman | 625 | 555 | 1180 | 70 | 52.97% | 47.03% | 5.93% |
| Coloma | 412 | 327 | 739 | 85 | 55.75% | 44.25% | 11.50% |
| Coloma Twp | 1437 | 949 | 2386 | 488 | 60.23% | 39.77% | 20.45% |
| Hagar Twp | 992 | 805 | 1797 | 187 | 55.20% | 44.80% | 10.41% |
| Lake Twp | 943 | 715 | 1658 | 228 | 56.88% | 43.12% | 13.75% |
| Lincoln Twp | 5112 | 3165 | 8277 | 1947 | 61.76% | 38.24% | 23.52% |
| Royalton Twp | 1743 | 886 | 2629 | 857 | 66.30% | 33.70% | 32.60% |
| St Joseph | 2331 | 2253 | 4584 | 78 | 50.85% | 49.15% | 1.70% |
| St Joseph Twp | 3240 | 2975 | 6215 | 265 | 52.13% | 47.87% | 4.26% |
| Watervliet | 332 | 339 | 671 | -7 | 49.48% | 50.52% | -1.04% |
| Watervliet Twp | 751 | 589 | 1340 | 162 | 56.04% | 43.96% | 12.09% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Total | 20418 | 23549 | 43967 | -3131 | 46.44% | 53.56% | -7.12% |
| Bush | Kerry | Total | Diff | GOP | DEM | Diff | |
| Bainbridge Twp | 1016 | 394 | 1410 | 622 | 72.06% | 27.94% | 44.11% |
| Benton Harbor | 161 | 3600 | 3761 | -3439 | 4.28% | 95.72% | -91.44% |
| Benton Twp | 1739 | 4123 | 5862 | -2384 | 29.67% | 70.33% | -40.67% |
| Bridgman | 772 | 427 | 1199 | 345 | 64.39% | 35.61% | 28.77% |
| Coloma | 444 | 308 | 752 | 136 | 59.04% | 40.96% | 18.09% |
| Coloma Twp | 1573 | 829 | 2402 | 744 | 65.49% | 34.51% | 30.97% |
| Hagar Twp | 1146 | 671 | 1817 | 475 | 63.07% | 36.93% | 26.14% |
| Lake Twp | 1098 | 594 | 1692 | 504 | 64.89% | 35.11% | 29.79% |
| Lincoln Twp | 5646 | 2474 | 8120 | 3172 | 69.53% | 30.47% | 39.06% |
| Royalton Twp | 1717 | 661 | 2378 | 1056 | 72.20% | 27.80% | 44.41% |
| St Joseph | 2630 | 1865 | 4495 | 765 | 58.51% | 41.49% | 17.02% |
| St Joseph Twp | 3808 | 2326 | 6134 | 1482 | 62.08% | 37.92% | 24.16% |
| Watervliet | 418 | 270 | 688 | 148 | 60.76% | 39.24% | 21.51% |
| Watervliet Twp | 826 | 513 | 1339 | 313 | 61.69% | 38.31% | 23.38% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Total | 22994 | 19055 | 42049 | 3939 | 54.68% | 45.32% | 9.37% |
| Last St House | GOP | DEM | Total | Diff | GOP | DEM | Diff |
| Bainbridge Twp | 716 | 151 | 867 | 565 | 82.58% | 17.42% | 65.17% |
| Benton Harbor | 95 | 1457 | 1552 | -1362 | 6.12% | 93.88% | -87.76% |
| Benton Twp | 1136 | 1908 | 3044 | -772 | 37.32% | 62.68% | -25.36% |
| Bridgman | 546 | 210 | 756 | 336 | 72.22% | 27.78% | 44.44% |
| Coloma | 336 | 117 | 453 | 219 | 74.17% | 25.83% | 48.34% |
| Coloma Twp | 1093 | 454 | 1547 | 639 | 70.65% | 29.35% | 41.31% |
| Hagar Twp | 795 | 355 | 1150 | 440 | 69.13% | 30.87% | 38.26% |
| Lake Twp | 766 | 244 | 1010 | 522 | 75.84% | 24.16% | 51.68% |
| Lincoln Twp | 4289 | 1032 | 5321 | 3257 | 80.61% | 19.39% | 61.21% |
| Royalton Twp | 1449 | 334 | 1783 | 1115 | 81.27% | 18.73% | 62.54% |
| St Joseph | 1981 | 872 | 2853 | 1109 | 69.44% | 30.56% | 38.87% |
| St Joseph Twp | 2822 | 1243 | 4065 | 1579 | 69.42% | 30.58% | 38.84% |
| Watervliet | 222 | 124 | 346 | 98 | 64.16% | 35.84% | 28.32% |
| Watervliet Twp | 583 | 189 | 772 | 394 | 75.52% | 24.48% | 51.04% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Total | 16829 | 8690 | 25519 | 8139 | 65.95% | 34.05% | 31.89% |
State House Redistricting - District 78 (HD-78)
State House - District 78
Current Rep - Sharon Tyler (R - Niles)
Old District (78th)
Sharon Tyler - 15,218
Cindy Ellis - 8010
This district on paper should lean Republican, but the old district has given us some close calls. In 2008, Tyler won by 1600 votes. In 2006, Neal Nitz won by 900. 2004 was better (6000) as was 2002 (3100). This is a district that can't be taken for granted. It is what I call a prototypical "caught looking" district. There isn't a lot of major strongholds here for the GOP. There are some small strong areas, and a couple of lean dem areas, but there's no Benton Harbor here, nor Lincoln Township. While the GOP has historically won this district, it's not a gimme in a bad year as shown by the 06/08 numbers.
The old district covered in Berrien County Baroda, Berrien, Bertrand, Buchanan, Chikaming, Galien, New Buffalo, Oronoko, Pipestone, Three Oaks, and Weesaw Townships as well as the cities of Buchanan, Niles, and New Buffalo. It also covered in Cass County the City of Dowagiac, Howard, Silver Creek, and Wayne Townships.
The new district drops Dowagiac and Wayne Township and picks up Milton and Ontwa Townships in Cass County. It picks up Sodus Township in Berrien County. The rest of this stays the same. That makes it slightly safer with Dowagiac's dem leanings, but I'll consider this district lean GOP and not safe. In addition, keep in mind that the influence here is Chicago and South Bend, not Grand Rapids or Detroit. Obama is from Chicago, and did extremely well within a 90 minute radius of the city, including Berrien County. Part of that was Benton Harbor, but he did well in both Berrien County districts. We'll need to be prepared for trouble here, especially this year. There's no excuse to be caught looking when your opponent catches fire and causes an upset victory.
Current Rep - Sharon Tyler (R - Niles)
Old District (78th)
Sharon Tyler - 15,218
Cindy Ellis - 8010
This district on paper should lean Republican, but the old district has given us some close calls. In 2008, Tyler won by 1600 votes. In 2006, Neal Nitz won by 900. 2004 was better (6000) as was 2002 (3100). This is a district that can't be taken for granted. It is what I call a prototypical "caught looking" district. There isn't a lot of major strongholds here for the GOP. There are some small strong areas, and a couple of lean dem areas, but there's no Benton Harbor here, nor Lincoln Township. While the GOP has historically won this district, it's not a gimme in a bad year as shown by the 06/08 numbers.
The old district covered in Berrien County Baroda, Berrien, Bertrand, Buchanan, Chikaming, Galien, New Buffalo, Oronoko, Pipestone, Three Oaks, and Weesaw Townships as well as the cities of Buchanan, Niles, and New Buffalo. It also covered in Cass County the City of Dowagiac, Howard, Silver Creek, and Wayne Townships.
The new district drops Dowagiac and Wayne Township and picks up Milton and Ontwa Townships in Cass County. It picks up Sodus Township in Berrien County. The rest of this stays the same. That makes it slightly safer with Dowagiac's dem leanings, but I'll consider this district lean GOP and not safe. In addition, keep in mind that the influence here is Chicago and South Bend, not Grand Rapids or Detroit. Obama is from Chicago, and did extremely well within a 90 minute radius of the city, including Berrien County. Part of that was Benton Harbor, but he did well in both Berrien County districts. We'll need to be prepared for trouble here, especially this year. There's no excuse to be caught looking when your opponent catches fire and causes an upset victory.
| McCain | Obama | Total | Diff | GOP | DEM | Diff | |
| Berrien County: | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Baroda Twp | 851 | 614 | 1465 | 237 | 58.09% | 41.91% | 16.18% |
| Berrien Twp | 1398 | 903 | 2301 | 495 | 60.76% | 39.24% | 21.51% |
| Bertrand Twp | 776 | 642 | 1418 | 134 | 54.72% | 45.28% | 9.45% |
| Buchanan | 792 | 1140 | 1932 | -348 | 40.99% | 59.01% | -18.01% |
| Buchanan Twp | 895 | 794 | 1689 | 101 | 52.99% | 47.01% | 5.98% |
| Chikaming Twp | 907 | 950 | 1857 | -43 | 48.84% | 51.16% | -2.32% |
| Galien Twp | 312 | 381 | 693 | -69 | 45.02% | 54.98% | -9.96% |
| New Buffalo | 390 | 504 | 894 | -114 | 43.62% | 56.38% | -12.75% |
| New Buffalo Twp | 591 | 739 | 1330 | -148 | 44.44% | 55.56% | -11.13% |
| Niles | 1712 | 2976 | 4688 | -1264 | 36.52% | 63.48% | -26.96% |
| Niles Twp | 2906 | 3301 | 6207 | -395 | 46.82% | 53.18% | -6.36% |
| Oronoko Twp | 1794 | 1858 | 3652 | -64 | 49.12% | 50.88% | -1.75% |
| Pipestone Twp | 662 | 395 | 1057 | 267 | 62.63% | 37.37% | 25.26% |
| Sodus Twp | 559 | 411 | 970 | 148 | 57.63% | 42.37% | 15.26% |
| Three Oaks Twp | 627 | 770 | 1397 | -143 | 44.88% | 55.12% | -10.24% |
| Weesaw Twp | 540 | 454 | 994 | 86 | 54.33% | 45.67% | 8.65% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Cass County: | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Howard Twp | 1363 | 1590 | 2953 | -227 | 46.16% | 53.84% | -7.69% |
| Milton Twp | 895 | 661 | 1556 | 234 | 57.52% | 42.48% | 15.04% |
| Ontwa Twp | 1237 | 1241 | 2478 | -4 | 49.92% | 50.08% | -0.16% |
| Silver Creek Twp | 840 | 749 | 1589 | 91 | 52.86% | 47.14% | 5.73% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Total | 20047 | 21073 | 41120 | -1026 | 48.75% | 51.25% | -2.50% |
| Bush | Kerry | Total | Diff | GOP | DEM | Diff | |
| Berrien County: | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Baroda Twp | 969 | 474 | 1443 | 495 | 67.15% | 32.85% | 34.30% |
| Berrien Twp | 1552 | 708 | 2260 | 844 | 68.67% | 31.33% | 37.35% |
| Bertrand Twp | 799 | 541 | 1340 | 258 | 59.63% | 40.37% | 19.25% |
| Buchanan | 1005 | 958 | 1963 | 47 | 51.20% | 48.80% | 2.39% |
| Buchanan Twp | 1014 | 741 | 1755 | 273 | 57.78% | 42.22% | 15.56% |
| Chikaming Twp | 1124 | 842 | 1966 | 282 | 57.17% | 42.83% | 14.34% |
| Galien Twp | 376 | 334 | 710 | 42 | 52.96% | 47.04% | 5.92% |
| New Buffalo | 474 | 451 | 925 | 23 | 51.24% | 48.76% | 2.49% |
| New Buffalo Twp | 624 | 675 | 1299 | -51 | 48.04% | 51.96% | -3.93% |
| Niles | 2145 | 2426 | 4571 | -281 | 46.93% | 53.07% | -6.15% |
| Niles Twp | 3210 | 2705 | 5915 | 505 | 54.27% | 45.73% | 8.54% |
| Oronoko Twp | 2057 | 1310 | 3367 | 747 | 61.09% | 38.91% | 22.19% |
| Pipestone Twp | 724 | 330 | 1054 | 394 | 68.69% | 31.31% | 37.38% |
| Sodus Twp | 566 | 344 | 910 | 222 | 62.20% | 37.80% | 24.40% |
| Three Oaks Twp | 826 | 583 | 1409 | 243 | 58.62% | 41.38% | 17.25% |
| Weesaw Twp | 627 | 369 | 996 | 258 | 62.95% | 37.05% | 25.90% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Cass County: | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Howard Twp | 1599 | 1327 | 2926 | 272 | 54.65% | 45.35% | 9.30% |
| Milton Twp | 921 | 523 | 1444 | 398 | 63.78% | 36.22% | 27.56% |
| Ontwa Twp | 1730 | 921 | 2651 | 809 | 65.26% | 34.74% | 30.52% |
| Silver Creek Twp | 963 | 639 | 1602 | 324 | 60.11% | 39.89% | 20.22% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Total | 23305 | 17201 | 40506 | 6104 | 57.53% | 42.47% | 15.07% |
| Last St House | GOP | DEM | Total | Diff | GOP | DEM | Diff |
| Berrien County: | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Baroda Twp | 705 | 242 | 947 | 463 | 74.45% | 25.55% | 48.89% |
| Berrien Twp | 1094 | 341 | 1435 | 753 | 76.24% | 23.76% | 52.47% |
| Bertrand Twp | 689 | 218 | 907 | 471 | 75.96% | 24.04% | 51.93% |
| Buchanan | 655 | 435 | 1090 | 220 | 60.09% | 39.91% | 20.18% |
| Buchanan Twp | 786 | 323 | 1109 | 463 | 70.87% | 29.13% | 41.75% |
| Chikaming Twp | 736 | 574 | 1310 | 162 | 56.18% | 43.82% | 12.37% |
| Galien Twp | 249 | 145 | 394 | 104 | 63.20% | 36.80% | 26.40% |
| New Buffalo | 300 | 271 | 571 | 29 | 52.54% | 47.46% | 5.08% |
| New Buffalo Twp | 464 | 354 | 818 | 110 | 56.72% | 43.28% | 13.45% |
| Niles | 1402 | 1060 | 2462 | 342 | 56.95% | 43.05% | 13.89% |
| Niles Twp | 2405 | 1202 | 3607 | 1203 | 66.68% | 33.32% | 33.35% |
| Oronoko Twp | 1392 | 631 | 2023 | 761 | 68.81% | 31.19% | 37.62% |
| Pipestone Twp | 554 | 163 | 717 | 391 | 77.27% | 22.73% | 54.53% |
| Sodus Twp | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Three Oaks Twp | 466 | 297 | 763 | 169 | 61.07% | 38.93% | 22.15% |
| Weesaw Twp | 432 | 193 | 625 | 239 | 69.12% | 30.88% | 38.24% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Cass County: | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Howard Twp | 1158 | 549 | 1707 | 609 | 67.84% | 32.16% | 35.68% |
| Milton Twp | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Ontwa Twp | 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | ||
| Silver Creek Twp | 742 | 262 | 1004 | 480 | 73.90% | 26.10% | 47.81% |
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| 0 | 0 | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | #DIV/0! | |||
| Total | 14229 | 7260 | 21489 | 6969 | 66.22% | 33.78% | 32.43% |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
