Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

by Chris Bowers, Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:47:59 PM EST

Don't know if these are accurate, but I just heard these.

Democrats leading in:

VA: 52-47
RI: 53-46
PA: 57-42
OH: 57-43
NJ: 52-45
MT: 53-46
MO: 50-48
MD: 53-46

Republicans leading:

TN: 51-48
AZ: 50-46

Double super caution: These numebrs are both unconfirmed and they are exit polls. I am going to keep looking into this.

Update: The numebrs I saw didn't change. I just noticed some typos.

Tags: rumors (all tags)

Comments

30 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

obvious... but that would get us to the sublime number of SIX.

by wintersnowman 2006-11-07 12:51PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

You know these numbers are quite believable, except for Montana, which I think should be closer. On the other hand, I don't believe them for a second.

by b1oody8romance7 2006-11-07 12:51PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Tester severely overperformed in the primary relative to the polls. I think it is enthusiasm and a good ground game, so that should carry over to tonight. (fingers crossed)

by CA Pol Junkie 2006-11-07 01:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

They are realistic

These seem quite reasonable. But, of course, anybody can make up BS numbers that seem reasonable-however, my gut was telling me that the close race that was not going to go our way was TN, so I'm actually inclined to believe these. AZ was supposed to be close but eventually go to the Reps, so that's correct as well.

by Geotpf 2006-11-07 01:29PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Where's CT?!?!?

by peter0118 2006-11-07 12:55PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

And where's Maryland?

by b1oody8romance7 2006-11-07 12:57PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

wow wow wow wow wow, From Chis Bowers keyboard to the lords ears! Lets hope these numbers end up in reality by nites end! Thanks, Chris!

by politics64 2006-11-07 12:56PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

I know they are unconfirmed exit polls but they all look about like what I expected except the margin in Virginia is higher than I expect and the margin in Tennessee and Arizona is closer.
This gets us the six we need--hope they are right.

by Camus 2006-11-07 12:56PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

We went down this road in 04, when early exit polls showed Kerry beating Bush by a good margin. Lets not get a false sense of security here. We need to focus on GOTV for the last few hours and make sure everyone gets out and votes.

That and protecting the validity of the election.

by parmenides 2006-11-07 12:57PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Amen. I'm not believing any of this stuff until later tonight. I remember the excitement running through my law office in 2004 when we were getting the exit polls. Too much time for shenanigans left.

Also, Denver is getting totally fucked right now. Details over at Kos.

by RisingSign 2006-11-07 01:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

Still better to be winning

In the exit polls, than losing in them. That would be a kick.

by scientician 2006-11-07 01:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Chris, why do you post the numbers, I think early good exit poll numbers are not motivating for canvassers and get out the vote people to do their work until polls closed.
I rembered that when I was canvassing in Iowa 2004 and we heard about the exit polls that some people left to celebrate a kerry victory

by Johannes 2006-11-07 12:59PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

then those people who left are the fucking IDIOTS.

by jgarcia 2006-11-07 01:59PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Also please note that they do not (presumably) include early voting. In TN, roughly 40% of the voting was expected to be early.

by Christopher 2006-11-07 01:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

I gotta say that I remember this from two years ago. So, screw these numbers. They're raw, maybe?

by Brian CB 2006-11-07 01:03PM | 0 recs

permalink

Tradesports

Tradesports is starting to show alot of movement in our favor for Democratic House / Democratic Senate. It's at 35 right now, but was at 30 a few minutes ago. I'm wondering if a bunch of other have this data as well.

by CA Pol Junkie 2006-11-07 01:04PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Tradesports

Dem House / Dem Senate is now at 44, just a few minutes later. People are getting good enough indications Democrats are winning that they're moving alot of money on it.

by CA Pol Junkie 2006-11-07 01:07PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

on a completely different note,
does anybody know if it's possible to view election coverage online? a live-stream or something like that?
Since I unfortunately don't even get CNN here in Germany

by Johannes 2006-11-07 01:07PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

You can watch C-Span live at their web site. They have election coverage starting at 8:00 pm EST.

http://www.c-span.org/

by pualo 2006-11-07 01:16PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Sounds good to me!!

As of 7 minutes ago, polls are closed in KY-3, KY-4, and all but 2 counties of IN-9.

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-07 01:08PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Wow, AZ is close. TN too.

Grain of salt!

But color me encouraged.

by beeswax49 2006-11-07 01:11PM | 0 recs

permalink

Turnout

MSNBC is reporting 70% turnout in MO and over 60% in Virginia. Can these #s be accurate?

by libintex 2006-11-07 01:13PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Turnout

Don't know about MO, but CW here in VA is that the Dem GOTV is kicking ass, or, maybe more appropriately, kicking overstuffed pachyderms.

by Bob Miller 2006-11-07 01:25PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Turnout

From what I saw in the Washington Post, turnout was strong in MD and VA: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2006/11/07/AR2006110700473. html?referrer=emailarticlepg

by Sandwich Repairman 2006-11-07 01:25PM | 0 recs

permalink

Ed Rollins looked sick on CNN

I always use his face and tone as a leading indicator. As a longtime party operative Rollins no doubt is tipped on the early indications.

Rollins just said both sides got out their base but it depended on whether independents turned out, since they will favor Democrats 2-1. Rollins said he thought independents had turned out. His face said that and more.

If so, let's take this West. I want some local upset wins to celebrate.

by Gary Kilbride 2006-11-07 01:18PM | 0 recs

permalink

I look to Carville Face

he is very obvious....has a hard time even looking at the camera on bad nights. Haven't seen him yet.
these numbers needlesstosay are extraordinary - but what the heck does the OH result even mean.

I need to relax and pretend I didn't see this for a few hours....

by Patrick Thompson 2006-11-07 01:38PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

mydd, oh mydd, why do you taunt us so with tasty exit polls.... argh!!!

i'm off to make moveon phone calls. John Kerry did not win Pennsylvania by 20 points.

by Shai Sachs 2006-11-07 01:38PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Remember how sick the Republicans looked on TV in 2004.

by Christopher 2006-11-07 01:43PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

Yup, we gotta look at the demographics in the exit polls. I have the exit poll up now for the Webb/Allen race. I do recall at the end of the polling cycle that Webb had a majority or women, and Allen a lesser majority among men. So, if we see exit poll results with Webb up 5%, and a women-2-men sampling of 55-45 (just like in 2004), we're probably in trouble.

by Bob Miller 2006-11-07 01:50PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Unconfirmed Senate Numbers

How many of you Liberals are going to move to Canada or France when the Democrats fail to take over either the House or the Senate? I can't wait to hear all the claims of fraud when the results do not match the exit polls.

by Bman 2006-11-07 02:46PM | 0 recs