In CO - "By 10 points, more voters say having HRC on the ticket would make it less likely

[tiptoe]

they would vote for Obama. President Bush carried Colorado by 4 points over Democrat John Kerry in 2004, while Obama easily won the state's Democratic presidential caucus in February."

MI - "Obama leads by 8 percentage points among Michigan's independent voters, though by a two-to-one margin they oppose his choosing Hillary Rodham Clinton as his running mate. Obama has a large lead among women, while men are divided about evenly between him and McCain...Clinton was the only candidate on the ballot when she carried this state's primary in January, while Democrat John Kerry defeated President Bush here narrowly in 2004."

MN - "By 16 points, independents would rather he not pick Hillary Rodham Clinton as his vice presidential running mate, though they're closely divided over whether that would make them likelier or less likely to back the Democratic ticket."

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g8WvoRnUTs6fEo8Os3k4YlshdOvQD91HTS780

How important is Obama's VP choice for battleground state support? How little more election fraud than in 2004 would it take for McCain to win in 2008, especially in battleground states?

(Note discrepancies in 2004 between Kerry vote share in pre-election projected Polls, state exit Polls and the "official" Recorded Vote...Note also Kerry's expanding margin in the national 5-poll average as election day approached; he had momentum going into election day...yet he "lost".)

6/27 - 2008 Election Model Two Charts: Battleground State polls, Battleground state win probability
( AZ, AR, CO, FL, IA, MI, MO, MN, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NC, OH, OR, PA, TN, VA, WV, WI )

...
"Obama better realize that a grass roots campaign, rallies, polls, and predictions are MEANINGLESS if there is no fair election. Only a few key states are needed to swing the electoral college while only a relatively few per cent of votes need to be altered in those key states.

Kerry and Gore "won". Neither occupied the White House." — Sancho

2004 POLLING ANALYSIS AND PROJECTIONS — TruthIsAll
 
State Pre-Election polls, Projections, Exit polls and Recorded vote
 

 
 
 
 
Pre-Election Polls
(Pre Undecided Voter Alloc)
 
 
Projected
(After 75% UVA)
 
 
State Exit Poll
(Based on WPE)
 
 
Recorded Vote
( Official Vote Count )
 
 
SEP – Proj
 
 
SEP – Vote
 
 
Exit Poll
 
Projected
EV
 
SEP
EV
 
 
Proj – SEP
 
 
Proj – Vote
 
 
WPE   
State
Wtd Avg
   
AL
AK
AZ
AR
CA
   
CO  
CT
DC
DE
FL
   
GA
HI
ID
IL
IN
   
IA
KS
KY
LA
ME
   
MD
MA
MI  
MN  
MS
   
MO
MT
NE
NV
NH
   
NJ
NM
NY
NC
ND
   
OH
OK
OR
PA
RI
   
SC
SD
TN
TX
UT
   
VT
VA
WA
WV
WI
WY
EV
  538  
    
9
3
10
6
55
   
9
7
3
3
27
   
15
4
4
21
11
   
7
6
8
9
4
   
10
12
17
10
6
   
11
3
5
5
4
   
15
5
31
15
3
   
20
7
7
21
4
   
8
3
11
34
5
   
3
13
11
5
10
3 
Kerry
 47.7 % 
   
39
30
45
46
49
   
47
52
78
45
50
   
42
45
30
54
39
   
50
37
39
40
50
   
54
64
52
52
42
   
44
36
32
49
47
   
50
49
57
47
35
   
50
28
50
50
56
   
42
42
47
37
24
   
53
47
52
45
51
29
Bush
 47.0 % 
       
57
57
50
48
42
       
48
42
11
38
47
       
52
45
59
42
58
       
44
60
56
48
39
       
43
27
45
44
51
       
49
57
61
49
47
       
42
49
39
50
55
       
47
61
44
45
36
       
55
52
50
59
69
       
40
51
44
49
44
65
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Kerry
 51.0 % 
     
41.3
39.0
48.0
49.8
55.0
     
50.0
55.8
85.5
57.0
51.5
     
45.8
51.8
37.5
56.3
40.5
     
53.8
38.5
42.0
48.3
57.5
     
55.5
70.0
53.5
54.3
46.5
     
48.5
40.5
36.5
49.8
50.8
     
55.3
49.8
59.3
48.5
41.8
     
51.5
35.5
53.8
53.0
61.3
     
43.5
45.8
48.5
39.3
28.5
     
57.5
47.8
54.3
48.8
54.0
32.8
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Kerry
 51.8 % 
     
42.5
40.3
46.7
44.8
59.8
     
50.1
62.2
90.9
61.3
50.9
     
42.5
56.4
30.8
57.0
40.0
     
50.7
37.5
39.6
44.1
55.5
     
60.0
64.8
54.4
55.7
45.8
     
49.0
37.7
36.7
52.9
57.0
     
57.8
52.9
64.1
49.2
32.9
     
54.2
33.5
53.0
55.3
61.8
     
45.9
36.3
42.8
40.6
29.2
     
66.4
49.4
57.0
40.3
52.0
31.2
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Kerry
 48.3 % 
     
36.8
35.5
44.4
44.5
54.3
     
47.0
54.3
89.2
53.3
47.1
     
41.4
54.0
30.3
54.8
39.3
     
49.2
36.6
39.7
42.2
53.6
     
55.9
61.9
51.2
51.1
40.2
     
46.1
38.6
32.7
47.9
50.2
     
52.9
49.0
58.4
43.6
35.5
     
48.7
34.4
51.3
50.9
59.4
     
40.9
38.4
42.5
38.2
26.0
     
58.9
45.5
52.8
43.2
49.7
29.1
Bush
 50.7 % 
     
62.5
61.1
54.9
54.3
44.4
     
51.7
43.9
9.3
45.8
52.1
     
58.0
45.3
68.4
44.5
59.9
     
49.9
62.0
59.6
56.7
44.6
     
42.9
36.8
47.8
47.6
59.0
     
53.3
59.1
65.9
50.5
48.9
     
46.2
49.8
40.1
56.0
62.9
     
50.8
65.6
47.2
48.4
38.7
     
58.0
59.9
56.8
61.1
71.5
     
38.8
53.7
45.6
56.1
49.3
68.9
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Diff
  0.8 %  
      
1.2
1.3
(1.3)
(5.0)
4.8
      
0.1
6.4
5.4
4.3
(0.6)
      
(3.3)
4.6
(6.7)
0.8
(0.5)
      
(3.0)
(1.0)
(2.4)
(4.1)
(2.0)
      
4.5
(5.2)
0.9
1.5
(0.7)
      
0.5
(2.8)
0.2
3.2
6.3
      
2.5
3.2
4.8
0.7
(8.9)
      
2.7
(2.0)
(0.8)
2.3
0.5
      
2.4
(9.4)
(5.7)
1.4
0.7
      
8.9
1.7
2.8
(8.5)
(2.0)
(1.5)
Diff
  3.6 %  
     
5.7
4.8
2.3
0.3
5.5
     
3.1
7.9
1.7
8.0
3.8
     
1.1
2.4
0.5
2.2
0.8
     
1.5
0.9
(0.0)
1.9
1.9
     
4.1
2.9
3.2
4.7
5.7
     
2.9
(0.9)
4.1
5.1
6.8
     
4.9
3.9
5.7
5.7
(2.6)
     
5.5
(1.0)
1.7
4.4
2.4
     
5.0
(2.1)
0.3
2.4
3.2
     
7.5
4.0
4.2
(2.9)
2.4
2.2 
WPE
  7.1 %  
      
11.3
9.6
4.6
0.5
10.9
      
6.1
15.7
3.4
15.9
7.6
      
2.2
4.7
1.0
4.4
1.5
      
3.0
1.7
(0.1)
3.8
3.8
      
8.1
5.8
6.3
9.3
11.3
      
5.8
(1.8)
8.1
10.1
13.6
      
9.7
7.8
11.4
11.3
(5.2)
      
10.9
(1.9)
1.8
8.8
4.7
      
10.0
(4.2)
0.5
4.8
6.4
      
15.0
7.9
8.4
(5.8)
4.7
4.3
Kerry
  331  
      
     
     
     
6
55
     
9
7
3
3
27
     
     
4
     
21
     
     
7
     
     
     
4
     
10
12
17
10
     
     
     
     
     
5
4
     
15
5
31
     
     
     
20
     
7
21
4
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
3
     
11
     
10
     
Kerry
  325  
    
    
    
    
    
55
    
9
7
3
3
27
    
    
4
    
21
    
    
7
    
    
    
4
    
10
12
17
10
    
    
    
    
    
5
4
    
15
5
31
    
    
    
20
    
7
21
4
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
3
    
11
    
10
    
< 2.0%
   21   
    
yes
yes
yes



yes



yes




yes
yes


yes






yes
yes
yes

yes

yes






yes




yes

yes




yes
yes


yes


yes
yes
> 2.0%
   33   
    
yes
yes
yes
yes


yes


yes
yes

yes

yes



yes

yes
yes
yes


yes
yes
yes
yes

yes

yes



yes


yes
yes

yes

yes
yes


yes
yes
yes

yes


yes

yes
yes
yes
> 6.0%
   25   
    
yes
yes


yes

yes
yes

yes
yes













yes

yes
yes
yes



yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes


yes


yes


yes



yes

yes
yes
yes

[midnight]

1. Kerry and Gore "won".

Neither occupied the White House." — Sancho Does anyone have any insight into why this has happened twice and what is planned to prevent us from having to have this happen a third time?

[tiptoe]

2. massive registration and GOTV plus McCain's support of least popular president's policies

http://www.google.com/search?q=%2BObama+%2B%22massive%22+%2Bregistration+%2BGOTV&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

A large voter turnout overcame enough of the 2006 fraud for Dems to retake control of House and Senate, so that John Conyers holds an Inherent Contempt/'Sword of Damocles' over * WHIG members (that he wisely withholds wielding until the "Get out of jail free" pardoning-POS is out of office)

Regrettably, efforts by Dems to legislate election reform are being undermined by GOP (hijacked by radical conservatives)

GOP objects to bill allowing recounts — 4/25/08

Voting rights activists who hoped the federal government would help local governments pay for paper trails and audits for electronic voting machines have gone from elation to frustration as they watched Republicans who supported such a proposal in committee vote against bringing it to the House floor.

The result: The elections in November will likely be marred by the same accusations of fraud and error involving voting machines that arose in the aftermath of the 2004 presidential race.

When New Jersey Democratic Rep. Rush Holt’s Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act came up for a vote in the House Administration Committee on April 2, the Republicans on the committee gave it their unanimous support.  But two weeks later, those same Republican members voted against moving the bill to the House floor. It would have taken a two-thirds vote to push the bill to the floor; with most House Republicans opposed, the bill didn’t make it that far.

Larry Norden, director of the voting technology project at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s law school, called the vote “a sad statement on how little Congress has done on the issue of making sure elections are as secure and reliable as possible.”
...

Successful attacks can only be detected by examining the paper ballots: There would be no way to know that any of these attacks occurred; the canvass procedure would not detect any anomalies, and would just produce incorrect results. The only way to detect and correct the problem would be by RECOUNT of the ORIGINAL PAPER BALLOTS
source

http://fixco1.com/docs/votecount.html

[crankychatter]

3. outstanding post - thank you - NT

[tiptoe]

5. Election Fraud is ongoing for decades...and the "loss" of elections by Dems to fraud

has provided argument (false argument) for the so-called Democratic Party "move to the center"...and the influence of the DLC and Bill Clinton and Hillary.

For an example of how Bill Clinton's centrist policy may have contributed to the pillage of California's General Fund to the eventual tune of $11B by Ken Lay & crooks with help of a novice, lying, colluding a**h*** Sch*zenegger (and why I wouldn't want DLC-Hillary -- used by savvy-enough-to-know-better Bill when he set her up with Bush advisor Mark Penn to feed her all those anti-Obama comments for regurgitation by McCain campaign later -- anywhere NEAR Obama's White House), start with Keith Olbermann's June 18 video on John McCain's Connection to $4 gas:

Randi Rhodes' Hillary was used by Penn, recommended to her by "good dem" DLC-er Bill C.

Key phrase by Olbermann: "Clinton never undid Gramm's changes."

(Bill Clinton and John McCain have something in common: inaction against Enron insider-trading and market manipulation activities that ripoff Americans. "All hail the DLC!" And DLC existence is based on a falsehood of fair elections and loss of elections by fraud: Americans are more liberal than election results reflect! Read about Vote Suppression and Disenfranchisement to keep those liberals from voting. The Levers of New York do a wonderful job of assuring a 'Republican-lite' democrat like Hillary can get re-elected.)

For background of Historical Election Analysis, Election Fraud and Bill Clinton and DLC "philosophy":

1988-2004 "The Democrats actually won all five elections by an average 8-9m votes. Don't believe it?

[paulk]

4. there are other states where she helps him, though

states that have more electoral votes than the two you mention - Ohio and Florida come to mind. Not to mention that it will bring Hillary's supporters (and donors) completely into the fold.

How is Obama "easily winning the CO caucus" relevent, btw? How is a caucus with a 7 - 8 % turnout relevent to the general election?

[tiptoe]

6. Caucuses, unlike primaries, are hand-counted affairs...more trustworthy. Limbaugh+Hillary

The 2008 Primaries: Statistical Footprints of Election Fraud ( TIA ) Mar 08, 2008

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5874445">How Operation Chaos Caused Obama to Lose Indiana and Vote Shares Everywhere Else May 7, 2008

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5723171">Election Fraud: Obama Should Have Won the Nomination By Now Apr 28, 2008

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5612304">Pennsylvania: “Trust us to count your vote, even though you can’t verify it” ( TIA ) Apr 20, 2008

Obama leads Clinton in the Recorded Vote in Primary and Caucus states ( TIA ) Mar 10, 2008

Ohio Does Its Magic: Hillary’s 3% Exit Poll Margin Morphs to 10% in the Vote ( TIA ) Mar 07, 2008

Déjà vu: Obama to Clinton Exit Poll Shift ( TIA ) Mar 07, 2008

Obama doesn't need Hillary's donors.

Hillary's supporters include Rush Limbaugh. (Wouldn't it be something if Hillary -- or more likely Penn -- knew she could count on "Operation Chaos"?)

[paulk]

7. oh, bullshit.

:crazy:

I should have known better than to take someone who links to TIA seriously.

He got kicked off here for a reason.

[tiptoe]

8. yeah, he did: for exposing the implausible and the impossible to "interested" parties. nt

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

9. Caucuses. More. Trustworthy.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[tiptoe]

10. OPERATIONMINDCRIME's exchange on caucuses vs. primaries:

Are You Happy With The Current Primary/Caucus System?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. More or less likely is irrelevant.

Lots of people who will never vote Democrat anyway hate Clinton.

The relevant categories are:

1) People who will vote Democrat if Clinton is VP but not if not.
2) People who will not vote Democrat if Clinton is VP but will otherwise
3) People who will vote Republican if Clinton is VP but not if not
4) People who will not vote Republican if Clinton is VP but will otherwise.

My *guess*, and this is pure guesswork, is that category 4 is nearly empty, category 1 is quite large, but not as large as 2 and 3 put together, and therefore Clinton is probably a bad choice for running mate. I have no great confidence in that judgement, though.