Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Morning polling place updates
Posted in:
* From the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners…
Chicago led the state again in Saturday’s daily total and overall total for Early Voting. On Saturday, Chicago voters cast 30,600 ballots on the final day of Early Voting, moving the total to more than 243,000 Early Voting for the 13 days of the program.
This set a new record for percentage of registered voters using Early Voting (18% this year compared to 17% in 2008). […]This set a new record for daily average of ballots in Early Voting (18,700 per day this year compared to 14,500 per day in 2008).
Although we didn’t surpass the 2008 total of 260,000, we had nearly the same total in spite of having five fewer days of Early Voting this year compared to 2008.
* But the Illinois Republican Party makes the case that the city is fudging the early voting numbers…
According to the numbers, at this point in 2008, there were 260,376 early voters and 304,290 absentee voters. Now, the party maintains, there are 195,064 early voters and 46,232 absentee voters. That’s a loss of 57 percent of voters, since the last election. […]
“We believe the Chicago Board of Elections is misrepresenting their numbers in making comparisons to 2008,” a spokesman for the Illinois Republican party explains. “According to the numbers we see in the State Board of Elections database, there is a significant fall off in reported absentee voting in city of Chicago. The Chicago Board of Elections is reporting 240k in early voting and claiming it’s on track to surpass 2008 - but they’re actually combining 2012 Early Voting and absentee voting, and then comparing that sum to 2008’s early voting numbers (excluding absentee). There is a significant 57% drop in voter participation in the City of Chicago from 2008 - in the President’s hometown. I’d also point out that despite the Chicago Board’s point that early voting is four days shorter this year than in 2008, Illinois recently instituted “vote-by-mail” without an excuse needed, i.e. early voting by mail. This did not exist in 2008 and should have vastly expanded the numbers.”
I asked the board for a response hours ago and haven’t heard back. I’ll let you know if I do.
*** UPDATE *** I figured a post might smoke out the city board. Here’s the response…
There were never 300,000 absentee ballots cast in Chicago. In fact, there were never, ever that many absentee ballots cast in the entire state of Illinois! The election when we get that many absentee ballots is the one where we have to move our mail room to the warehouse.
The attached shows where we are - 2008 vs 2012 - as of Saturday night.
We’re up in absentee (with 16 more days for those to arrive), and we doubled Grace Period registration, and we came close to matching our Early Voting numbers from 2008, in spite of having five fewer days and 130,000 fewer registered voters.
We’re slightly under 2008 in raw numbers, slightly higher if measured as a percentage of registered voters. Either way, turnout has been and will be strong.
The attached document is here.
* In other numbers news, the Senate Democrats say the person reporting a huge contribution received by Sen. Mike Jacobs mistakenly entered the check number into the State Board of Election’s program instead of the amount, which was actually $3,000. I’m assuming the $11 million contribution from Bobby Rush’s chief of staff was also an error…
* Meanwhile, Illinois Review notes that 36 of 64 House Democratic races are unopposed in 2012, and 29 of 54 House Republicans face no opponents Tuesday.
Not mentioned, though, is that a whole lot of those legislators faced opposition in the March primary.
Look, some of this state is solidly Democratic. Some of it is solidly Republican. There is no way - barring a return to 3-member districts - that people challenging incumbents in those areas have a snowball’s chance in heck of winning.
Yes, there is plenty of gerrymandering. No doubt. A large handful of Democrats (and Republicans) are safe because of that simple fact. But the fight is and has always been about the middle-ground. And there are lots of high-intensity legislative races this year.
* Also, a friend looked at a 1999 House roll call and made note of those who still remain. Click the pick for a larger view…
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 3:44 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Morning polling place updates
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Bradley still here. Otherwise, point taken.
Comment by Ray del Camino Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 3:52 pm
These early voting numbers stories are nearly as dreary as the the polling stories. It is just another excuse for the media to skip reporting on issues or how candidates did on promise. Let’s call it Sleepmatic Journalism. Set the dial to 99!
Did Franks not get the Green Line because he did not count himself or?
And that item about competitive races always makes us ask those who yearn for competition to share with us what their vision is for IL as a result.
Go ahead just blurt it out. We are guessing it means more gridlock
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 3:55 pm
Cross off Brady from the list. That was Bill Brady (not Dan Brady) who was in the House in 1999.
Comment by mr. whipple Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:05 pm
Ray, wrong Bradley. The Bradley in that roll call is Rich Bradley. John Bradley took office in 2003.
Comment by Professor X Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:05 pm
Perhaps more interesting is to look at the roll call for the House Impeachment Committee (HR 1650, 95th GA). It’s less than 4 years ago, and depending on tomorrow’s outcome only half the new House will have been present then.
Comment by muon Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:05 pm
It’s really a shame Cross didn’t bother to recruit candidates for the 41 seats without a GOP challenger. It only takes about 500 good signatures to get on the ballot and give the Republicans in the district a choice.
There’s at least one good, determined citizen in each district that would be willing to campaign hard out of love of democracy and what many sacrificed to give us the privilege of a choice on election day.
The GOP won’t be a force in this state until it becomes more about working the precincts and less about the leadership’s golfing with lobbyists.
Cross and Radogno getting out to township GOP meetings to recruit and energize the base would mean a lot. Too bad they’re too “big” to get out and work with the “little people”.
Comment by Palos Park Bob Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:07 pm
===* Meanwhile, Illinois Review notes that 36 of 64 House Democratic races are unopposed in 2012, and 29 of 54 House Republicans face no opponents Tuesday.
Not mentioned, though, is that a whole lot of those legislators faced opposition in the March primary.
Look, some of this state is solidly Democratic. Some of it is solidly Republican. There is no way - barring a return to 3-member districts - that people challenging incumbents in those areas have a snowball’s chance in heck of winning.
Yes, there is plenty of gerrymandering. No doubt. A large handful of Democrats (and Republicans) are safe because of that simple fact. But the fight is and has always been about the middle-ground. And there are lots of high-intensity legislative races this year.
* Also, a friend looked at a 1999 House roll call and made note of those who still remain. Click the pick for a larger view…===
What makes Madigan better than Cross, (there is more than one thing that makes Madigan better, but I don’t want to digress!) and what made Madigan better than Daniels, is that the “middle ground” was won by the HDems more often than the HGOP. while the HGOP looks for its soul, in spite of wanting its majority.
Example?
How about the South Suburbs in 1996? Madigan saw that the most vulnerable seats to get the Gavel back were the South Suburban seats that Daniels leveraged to cobble a majority.
Madigan won back the House by understanding why he lost, where the targets were ripe in a Republican map and went to work.
Tom Cross, Minority Leader now, and IF he keeps that title after this cycle, would do well learning that lesson that Madigan learned, and learned so well that the HDems kept their majority with the strong GOP map and the VERY Strong SGOP map.
The Middle Ground.
That is the lesson here. The Illinois Review wants 118 candidates, when the formula dictates 60 - SIXTY - wins are need to win the chamber. Get your 60 … that is the number, not 118.
Looking at the Roll Call above and all the names crossed off. Some are gone … but some are MISSED.
There is turnover, but in the game of head counting, the number is 60, not 118. The partisan ends will never understand that you build, you cobble, you stretch to find the 60, not make 118 clones and “run ‘em” and expect a light bulb to flicker above voter’s heads and low and behold a Majority.
Sixty seats, Tom Cross …60.
Find those districts, sew that quilt, stitch that majority. The golf course will always be there, Tom.
Great Post - Awesome. Will the ILGOP and will the Caucuses of the GOP understand? Will the far right and the moderates understand …. 60?
Remember 1996 and the South Suburbs, GOP … and run that play up the middle, and through the “middle” to find common ground to win …60.
Sixty, Tom Cross.
SIXTY.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:09 pm
I see where the ILGOP made their error …
they forgot to CARRY the 4, then when subtracting, borrow the one, then multiply by Pi … then …
Blame Madigan.
Funny thing about numbers …they are what they are. Can’t make a ‘7′ a ‘4′ …they are what they are.
Should I be ok with the 4.5 Million or so calls, or is that math fuzzy too?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:17 pm
In 1999 the Rep. Osmond would have been Tim Osmond, not JoAnn.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:21 pm
The McAuliffe would have been Roger, right?
Comment by Elo Kiddies Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:26 pm
I love this early vote data as much as anybody (even if it is only marginally useful) but why is the ILGOP spending today even having this fight? The last WAA poll of Illinois had the President ahead by 16 points, even if early turnout was lagging turnout isn’t going to decide that race. Unless a massive opinion shift takes place that race is over. Unless the ILGOP thinks that the turnout game is a 16 point operation (spoiler: it isn’t) this seems like a silly fight to pick today, even more so now that the Chicago BOE has made clear their absentee numbers have a a lot in common with the square root of -1.
There are 6 targeted congressional races in this state taking place tomorrow each of which are probably too close to call and none of which have any precincts under the jurisdiction of the Chicago Board of Elections. I bet Walsh, Dold, Biggert, Plummer, Davis and Schilling are all just thrilled to see the ILGOP’s attention today is focused on Chicago.
Comment by The Captain Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 4:47 pm
I love early voting. I admit to casting my ballot on the first day possible. Did it in the primary and the general this year.
Comment by Boone Logan Square Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 5:19 pm
who needs term limits
Comment by Todd Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 5:28 pm
So, the turnover of membership in the Illinois should point to the need for Term Limits for Legislative Leaders.
Comment by Cal Skinner Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 5:29 pm
===this seems like a silly fight to pick today,
What else should Pat Brady be doing?
Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 5:32 pm
Oswego Willy hits the nail on the head but forgets that Cross and Radogno have no stomach for hammering together a majority.
A leadership fight would be a sign the GOP has some self-awareness.
Comment by Sideliner Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 5:35 pm
=== What else should Pat Brady be doing? ===
Well for one he forgot to connect this conspiracy to Mike Madigan in any way … so at least he could get back on message.
Comment by The Captain Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 5:43 pm
Not even eleven million dollars could save Mike Jacobs now.
Comment by QC Participant Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 7:20 pm
===Oswego Willy hits the nail on the head but forgets that Cross and Radogno have no stomach for hammering together a majority.===
I think you hit it on the head that both Caucuses decided to take on new leadership, that would be a sign of life.
Back at ya!
If the goal of the Minority Party is NOT to be the Majority Party, why help them?
And I think the “money drain” shows that PACs and individuals are tired of being made a fool.
60…. 30 … Majorities????
I guess not?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 5, 12 @ 7:56 pm