More on Georgia 8

Several reporters I’ve spoken to today, and several high level GOP officials, believe based on 72 Hour tracking numbers that Mac Collins will be elected on Tuesday.

The 72 Hour numbers are reported to be ahead of expectations in the 8th District and the 12th District. Continual feed back from those participating indicating a large movement in favor of both Collins and Burns, along with Sonny Perdue and the down ballot Republicans.

Says one source in the media, “I expect we can call the 8th for Mac Collins within 30 minutes of the polls closing based on the data I’ve seen from both the DNC and RNC.

67 comments

  1. Dawgfan says:

    Georgia may save the house for the GOP. I’m very curious to see how MT’s weakness will affect down ballot races.

  2. defnotrep says:

    Hey Dawgfan,

    Sonny is a weakness. He’s the incumbent, he’s been on the air forever, he’s had a lot of money….and he’s below 50%.

    Taylor will end up winning this.

  3. This is a load of hogwash. Lets see some actual figures. I think Bill Hagan polled his multiple Wikipedia and Peach Pundit logins and Collins was ahead in that poll. As for a real poll, doubtful.

  4. me says:

    Listen, Erick, you’ve acually been a pretty straight-up guy, but you’re letting this year get you all on edge. Sometimes you just can’t win. Sometimes (actually, fairly often), forces bigger than you shape things.

    GOTV is BS. It doesn’t even win close elections — oh, maybe a small election here and there every few cycles, but that’s it. The people who are going to turn out turn out. Fairly deep, long-term forces drive tornout for a given year. Message can tweak it a little (overall message that affects the dominant mood, not these little stories trying to ratchet up the base). GOTV does not make any appreciable difference. It does not “remake [an] electorate]”, as the WSJ article quotes the “internal” Republican memo written for gullible conservative news outlet consumption as saying.

    Guys who are 16 points behind don’t win. Guys who are five points behind in a valid poll almost never win, and if the do, turnout isn’t what made the difference. They certainly don’t win in a bad year for their party.

    First, no GOTV program really gets done in anything like the way it’s designed. Second, this business about sophisticated microtargeting is really just made up to promote the careers of the people claiming it does anything. Third, even if everything were done perfectly, it just wouldn’t matter. People don’t go through the effort of voting (absentee or in-person), and they don;t change their mind, because someone knowcked on their door and interrupted their free time. People generally hate politics.

    I tried GOTV for years. Once I was confident it did nothing (which only makes sense, after all), I randomly had precinct captains work their precincts — or not — on five separate election days in one season. It made NO difference — and the people in the places I tried this personally knew practically everyone in their district. More formal experimental tests have found the same.

    The GOTV gurus always claim after the election that, if the party or candidate won, the GOTV wasn’t done right. If their party or candidate won, it was because of the GOTV. Never fails. They’re never really willing to say whether the GOTV was done right and stick with that judgment until AFTER the election.

    Sonny will quite probably win. The retread Congressmen won’t. The other races are too unformed to say; they’re close enough and undecideds are high enough that they are in flux, but in any competitive race in this year, the Republican almost certainly loses. This is clearly worse for Republicans than 1994 was for Democrats.

    Of course the NRCC is saying there are a few races they’re going to defy expectations in. What else are they going to say? The fact that they’re saying “we’re gonna win” is not news, nor is it surprising, nor is it in any way related to the reality of their predicament.

    So Erick, keep your objectivity. Don’t buy into the spin. You’re a partisan, yes, but you’d like to have some measure of credibility next Wednesday morning.

    One other thing: To the extent the Repububs are pulling out ANYONE, they’re Perdue voters in Bibb and Houston — half Marshall’s district. And those are Perdue/Marshall voters.

  5. Iraqi Info Minister says:

    “They are retreating on all fronts. Their military effort is a subject of laughter throughout the world.”

  6. GOP_Dude says:

    I haven’t been able to lay my hands on the hard data, but I read in a news article that each party has had an incumbent defeated in every election since the 1800s, even in years where there was a major trend in the favor of that party. For example, even in 1994, there were a few Republican incumbent Congressman that lost. Sounds reasonable.

    That means that, unless we buck over 100 years of trend, a Democrat incumbent somewhere in the nation is going down next Tuesday. On the national radar there are only 3 races where the Republicans are in serious contention against a Democratic incumbent, and 2 are in Georgia. Perhaps this is a little too academic to be a real “driver” of Burns or Collins winning, it is worth thinking about. I would be very surprised if both Barrow and Marshall won next Tuesday.

  7. I examined absentee ballot requests and returns today, not counting early voting. For the entire state, of all white voters who returned absentee ballots, about 25% of them voted in this year’s Republican primary, about 17% of them voted in this year’s Democratic primary.

    What about District 8? Well, you may be surprised. The Republican primary percentage is actually a little lower than the statewide average (about .3%) but the Democratic primary percentage for white voters is actually over 21% here, which is 25% higher than the statewide average.

    Black voters on a statewide basis are returning their absentee ballots at about a rate of 45% so far compared to requests. But in the 8th district, the number is getting very close to 50, just shy of 49% right now. Again, this is better than the statewide average.

    Maybe the Republicans have different numbers, but it looks like, compared to the rest of the state, 8th district Democrats are neutralizing some of the Republican absentee advantage. Looks like the national GOP is just blowing smoke up our asses here.

  8. RuralDem says:

    “On the national radar there are only 3 races where the Republicans are in serious contention against a Democratic incumbent, and 2 are in Georgia.”

    Actually there is 4. Boswell in Iowa and Hart in Illinois as well as Marshall and Barrow here in GA.

    Anyway, I am confidant that Congressman Marshall will win. If for some reason he does not, well, all I can say is I’m glad redistricting moved my area out of that district.

    The “I have nothing to run on but someone’s coattails” campaign failed miserably for Calder Clay against Congressman Marshall. Hopefully the same will hold true for Collins.

  9. Other Chris, the SOS is making this data available to the parties. You can download a big report that has information about the voters requesting and returning absentee ballots and voting early. I did additional work to match the 2006 primary as well as the race.

  10. Maurice Atkinson says:

    Erick, I believe you are correct. Mac is on a roll and Marshall gave him the best boost last week by pointing out the Mac supports private accounts, the fair tax and opposes increasing the minimum wage. These issues, most everyone agrees on, but not Marshall. Marshall is conservative on domestic issues but definitely a liberal on fiscal matters.

    Today’s visit from the President was a huge boost. The President laid out his agenda and what the stakes are in this election. It was clear, concise and delivered passionately. In my opinion, this was the best speech I’ve heard him deliver.

    If I were a betting man I would put my money on Mac Collins.

  11. RuralDem says:

    “These issues, most everyone agrees on”

    Care to back that up? We saw how well the privitizing Social Security idea went over with people. The fair tax is still very new, and I’m willing to bet it’s 50/50 for/against the minimum wage.

    You’re a Mac supported so obviously you’ll see this as a boost, but I don’t see it really doing that much. If anything, Mac’s partisanship will nullify many of the positives that he has.

  12. Maurice Atkinson says:

    Rural Dem. are you absolutely under a rock when it comes to private accounts? Your Dem. leadership demagogued it and the President dropped it. It”s the most commonsense pro-active concept that has come out of DC and it will certainly be back.

    Would you for a minute consider investing your entire lifetime in an investment that gets a subpar return with no way to manage the investment, then not be able to pass it on to your heirs?

  13. RuralDem says:

    Maurice,

    I think Marshall realizes that would hurt him. Besides, like I’ve said before, he doesn’t need to bring anyone in. Congressman Marshall can win without riding the coattails of other politicians.

    Sure Collins has experience but he’s simply taking a play from the Calder Clay playbook. If you call that “simply playing his cards” then that’s fine if you support that type of stuff. I, however, tend to support those who actually stand for something.

  14. RuralDem says:

    And another note, why not mention Senators such as Ben Nelson, Mark Pryor, Blanche Lincoln, or Representatives such as Gene Taylor, Henry Cuellar, etc… or do you honestly think the entire Democratic Party consists of those three names that you guys rehash on every campaign ad?

    ‘Rural Dem. are you absolutely under a rock when it comes to private accounts?”

    I don’t think I ever said anything about my views on Social Security. Nice attempt though.

  15. Maurice Atkinson says:

    Was only responding to “””Care to back that up? We saw how well the privitizing Social Security idea went over with people. “”” I assumed you were against it since you mentioned it in this way.

    I have probably as many friends who are Dems as Republicans. I don’t know of “1” person who is against it. It is an absolute no brainer, and Marshall has made it a campaign issue, and is very much against it.

  16. RuralDem says:

    Weird, I’ve spoken with plenty on both sides as well who are against it.

    Guess we’ll see Tuesday if Marshall’s “liberal” views are truly that liberal. 🙂

  17. CHelf says:

    Hmm…I guess that “faulty” poll done a few weeks ago could be right after all huh? 😉

    I wonder if those counties in that Marshall poll were correct?

  18. jsm says:

    RuralDem,

    You keep firing out BS on Mac, and it’s still not true. He’s not riding anyone’s coattails, and he would be an idiot to deny help from the President.

    The reason Maurice brought up Kennedy, Kerry, and Pelosi is that these people control the Democratic Party. Marshall, if elected, would follow their direction or continue to be shoved in a corner and silenced.

    Mac is a true conservative, and he will make a difference in Washington. He will guide the ruling party in the right direction, because of the high regard shown for him by his colleagues there.

    I’m planning to be in the 8th on Saturday knocking on doors and doing all I can to see Mac win. For the good of our Nation, I sure hope he does.

  19. RuralDem says:

    jsm,

    I am not firing out anything untrue about Collins. He may be running a great campaign but from what I have seen in his ads (I am in the WMAZ ad market, though not in the district), is nothing but attacks on Marshall. Collins’ has not offered anything positive or entirely different. It gives off the impression of “vote for me because I am a Republican” and nothing more. I’m looking at this through the eyes of the average voter.

    Kennedy, Kerry, and Pelosi do not “control the party”. Sure, liberals have more control over the party now than years ago, but they do not “control the party”, if they did none of the commonsense Democrats would still be in the party.

    Marshall has not and will not “follow in their direction”. Party label doesn’t and shouldn’t mean squat when it comes to your constituency. When I go to the poll I vote for the person who is going to do better, not for the person who has a D or R beside his or her name.

    IF elected, Collins would be a member of the minority party. Marshall, on the other hand will be a member of the majority party, and with the close split, he, along with other Blue Dogs, such as Congressman Bishop, Congressman Tanner, Congressman Taylor, etc.. will all be more influential within the party.

    Georgia needs politicians who are not afraid to go against their party. Georgia needs Jim Marshall.

  20. mercergirl says:

    I volunteered for Calder’s campaign and I would disagree that he simply tried to ride someone’s coattails- same with Mac Collins. The President’s visits simply show how important this race is to the Republican party. And he did a very good job yesterday of explaining this at the rally in Perry.

  21. RuralDem says:

    mercergirl,

    Maybe in Macon, Calder ran a good campaign. I can say for sure though that in the rural areas he had no substance. I distinctly remember one time hearing “Vote for President Bush, Johnny Isakson, and Me!” or something along those lines.

    Maybe I am out of line here but who cares how important the race is to the Republican Party? How about focusing on how important the race is to the citizens of the 8th district? Both parties need to open their eyes and realize how out of touch they are.

  22. jsm says:

    RuralDem,

    Whatever you’re smoking is very potent. I’m sure some others on this site would like to know who your dealer is.

    There is no way on God’s greeen earth that the D’s will be the majority party next year.

    Maybe party label didn’t mean anything in the past, but it means a lot today. Anyone who can identify himself with today’s national Democratic Party, which is so completely out of touch with the values of common Americans, is not a good fit for Georgia’s 8th District.

    Mac Collins knows the district, the people, and what they stand for. He is the only candidate who will stand for their values 100% of the time in Washington.

  23. RuralDem says:

    jsm,

    I think the Democrats will take the House and the Republicans will take the Senate. Most analysts including Republicans believe that will be the case. If not, oh well, I was wrong.

    Party label means nothing when it comes to representing the people who elected you. If you care more about the party than the people who put you where you are then you need to be voted out. It’s that simple.

  24. I’ll agree with other posters, Democratic facts on this site are not as good as Republican spin. But only the facts will be remembered next Wednesday.

    Now, who wants to wager that when Jim Marshall beats Mac Collins Chelf will somehow use that as proof that the false poll was actually conducted?

  25. CHelf says:

    Again, you just don’t get it. My whole argument was ONLY on that bogus claim by Bobby Kahn. He was wrong in his claim and used something he tried to discredit as his only proof. How can anyone with a brain try to use something they say is wrong as their only proof?

    Chrishardcore, did you ever get your own site fixed? I figured you of all people would have the correct districts online.

    And ME, where is the quantitative analysis of the other polls? Is your defintion of analysis only based on partisan feelings?

    Tell Insider Advantage to call the people who actually did the poll. If they have a question about the wording of the poll, go to the source. It’s been explained but some people just can’t accept fact. And I’m the idiot.

    So who are you? Do you work for IA? MOR? Please tell me who you are so I can show you proof.

  26. DougieFresh says:

    I don’t think polls are effective as they once were, and there value will only continue to decline in the coming years.

    As more and more people rely on cell phones, and as Caller ID and Privacy Director permeate subscribers of landline phones, the sample will become more and more skewed statistically.

    Forget the “margin of error”, which is a measure of the uncertainty of a perfectly random sample, the systematic error due to the mechanics of the process is probably much larger than that.

    Any race that is within 5 points is definitely a tossup, and I will not be surprised if the Democrats and the National media are embarrassed come Tuesday night.

  27. Iraqi Info Minister says:

    Bobby, Chris, ME, et al., I have only this to say about Chelf and his “inside polling knowledge”:

    “I can assure you that those villains will recognize, will discover in appropriate time in the future how stupid they are and how they are pretending things which have never taken place”

  28. me says:

    No, my polling experience is much more serious than that.

    Proof? Put it online.

    Actually, proving that the source makes no sense in itself is the best proof of all. That’s why I invite you to keep talking.

  29. CHelf says:

    So you are telling me that your only evidence that you say is wrong is the best proof? Weak case my friend. Very weak. Don’t go into law.

    What is your polling experience?

    Why put it online? Why not show you directly face to face?

  30. CHelf says:

    I am about proving the data itself was correct. The footnote issue can be debated all day long. I am not in the Polling Company’s head and I defer to them on that. But the source data used was correct. I can stand by that. Data is concrete fact. Your argument is speculation based on mistaken words and your mistaken assumptions.

  31. me says:

    Well, in 1994 I ran the tracking prgram for a major national poltical / public policy organization, just to give you a relevant highlight.

    Post your data, along with proof that it has not been doctored. Why are you waiting?

  32. CHelf says:

    Whoo hoo…..anything else? Nothing since 1994? That speaks volumes.

    I’m waiting to tell me who you are so I can provide you with proof in person. What do you have to hide? Lose?

  33. me says:

    No, fool.

    It’s just that this year is like 1994 in reverse.

    Some people are really just too stupid to live.

  34. DougieFresh says:

    This is not like 1994 in reverse, because people do not look to the Democrats to be a better alternative.

    The Democrats have nothing but their own sorry state to blame for being out of power for 12 years. When the Kook Squad has the reins of power, they lose more and more credibility every election.

    If they Democrats actually looked like adults with some ajenda instead of calling Republicans names, Race Bating, and spouting hatred, they could actually have 60 percent majorities in both Houses. As it currently stands, the Republicans seem like they only have to show up to win a majority.

  35. CHelf says:

    So you have not done anything since 1994. Like I said, that speaks volumes. I thought you said you had serious polling experience. One event in a losing year for your party does not bode well for your own credentials.

    Dougie, I’m shocked the Dems will actually gain anything. Seeing people like ME here insulting people for absurd reasons and using such childish behavior that only my 4 year old could relate to says a bit for their braintrusts.

  36. me says:

    1994 was about disgust with a moribund Democratic majority.

    This is exactly that in reverse.

    The idea that swing voters voted for some inspiring Rpeublican alternative is just a Repub fantasy.

    To head off te usuall silly rejoinder, basically no one new what the contract with America was.

  37. me says:

    No, I sadi that 1994 was of particular relevance. I have been orking in the field continually since then.

    YOUR 4-year old? Oh my God, you were allowed to reproduce?!?!?!?!?

  38. CHelf says:

    More classy insults. Judging by the word selection and the repeated insults, I think I have a good idea of who I am speaking with.

    What else have you orked in the field? Anything notable that you’ve orked lately?

  39. CHelf says:

    So you only toss out one event and a vague reference to field work and you’re a qualified expert in polls? List some more. And nothing on meeting in person huh? Rather remain anonymous and hurl insults. I understand.

  40. me says:

    I don;t want to meet you in person. Franly, you strike me and others as irrational and a little creepy. Just post the darned data, if you have it.

  41. defnotrep says:

    Hi Me,

    Secretary of State’s Office is calling for a 48% turnout. I think that sounds high. What do you think? Thanks.

  42. ohnoes says:

    “Franly” my dear, we don’t give a damn about what either of you think. I can’t believe how you two, who both clearly know NOTHING about politics or this race are spouting out whatever bullcrap you happen to think of at the moment. Give it a rest losers.

  43. defnotrep says:

    lol ohnoes….another bully Repub.

    Can’t take the heat huh…makes the baby mad.
    Makes him upset….wants to say mean things.

    Ohnoes, Can’t take the debate…that’s your problem.

    Personally, I like it.

  44. ohnoes says:

    I wasn’t referring to you and I’m a moderate democrat if anything. I just hate to see how people like elfie and ME ruin this blog. We can’t have informed and reasoned debates– we have two nutjobs with nothing better to do but throw shit against the wall and see what sticks. They clearly know nothing, they are trolling each other, and this could escalate into actual threats — which puts Erick and the rest of us in a very unfortunate position.

  45. me says:

    Oh, please, ohnoes. My pints have been wholly rational. I ave been calling Chelf what he is, however. He is the Steve Forbes of this board. Whatever pont anyone else makes, he just repeats is little verison of “hope, growth and ooportunity”. The fella’s a veritable bundle of non-sequiturs.

    I have not noticed. however, that this board contains a lot of rational debate.

  46. ohnoes says:

    ME, your ‘pints’ may be rational, and that may explain a lot. You aren’t stupid– just an alcoholic.

    Furthermore, your points aren’t rational–they are biased opinion that comes from your ass. And so are his. The sad part is that you actually believe the crap you say. I’m sure that he has known all alone that he is an idiot; you on the other hand, are delusional.

  47. ohnoes says:

    I just finished re-reading this thing– and I realize that I am now an expert. Before I went to work for the farms, I helped out with a CNN poll. By the reasoning on this board, I TOO am an expert on politics. Given this revelation, I am woefully underpaid and should probably start a blog. You want to join my team Defno? You have to be tired of this crap too

  48. me says:

    Ah, ohnes, you come to this purporting to be the voice of reason, and you turn out to be another partisan tool. I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt once.

    An alcoholic? Whence comes such a judgment?

    Well, my points are wholly rational. They are certainly not partisan. And you and CHelf would benefit from a course or two in logic.

  49. ohnoes says:

    I see that we have discovered the spellcheck function. HOORAY!!

    ME, I’m not your enemy. Partisan Hackery is the little devil that haunts this board. I don’t know anything about you (and I don’t want to, so please stop telling us about your glory days back in the 90s) and it was not a judgment.

    Tell you what, I’ll let you write for the blog too (we will have to spell check it first, of course). Clearly, you need something productive to do with your time. What do you suppose we call it? How about, GeorgiaLibel or something clever like that.

    What do you think?

  50. me says:

    Calling a fool a fool is not libel.

    I would be happy for you to engage on the substance of the comments made by CHelf or myself.

    Calling someone an alocoholic with no evidence is per se libel.

    Actually, ny career has had a straight upward trajectory since 1994. Again, tracking across all the target races in the last tidal wave year is just a particularly relevant experience to this year. I undertsand that you wish it were not.

    Partisan hackery seems to be your game. Engage my points, if you can.

    I have a little box to type in. I’m probably too busy tp post here at all, but I’m certainly too busy to read it over for typos.

  51. me says:

    Well, do it. Debate me. You have yet to ffer anargument. You have offered only ungrounded characterization.

    Sorry if I violate the rules of this board — that Republican opinion sare asserted as fact but facts presented by Democrats are dismissed as partisan — but I’m just more honest than that.

  52. CHelf says:

    So instead of actually arguing over the topic of the post we have the sqeaky third wheels coming on here whining about others when all they have to do is ignore.

    Back to the topic at hand, I guess being anonymous and arguing with no facts is much more rational. Again, every insult is a badge of honor. I am not going to post the data since you’ll just blame some conspiracy for altering it. I can show this to you directly to prove how foolish you are but you’d rather keep saying how right you are based on one simple statement both you and the source have equally determined was incorrect.

  53. defnotrep says:

    ohnoes….I got it now. I just wish we didn’t have to always resort to name calling.

    I did think ME made some interesting points regarding GOTV.

  54. me says:

    I wish we COULD commite to engaging substance of the other person’s points. That’s what seems to be lacking. Always falling back to buzzwords like “credibility” (usually misused) and ideological screeds against Democrats.

Comments are closed.