June 3, 2014: Super Tuesday primary thread (8 states)

Statistikhengst

Diamond Member
Nov 21, 2013
45,564
11,757
2,070
deep within the statistical brain!!
Alabama

AP election results for Alabama

------------------------------------------------------------

California

AP election results for California

------------------------------------------------------------

Iowa

AP election results for Iowa

------------------------------------------------------------

Mississippi

AP election results for Mississippi

------------------------------------------------------------

Montana

AP election results for Montana

------------------------------------------------------------

New Jersey

AP election results for New Jersey

------------------------------------------------------------

New Mexico

AP election results for New Mexico


------------------------------------------------------------

South Dakota

AP election results for South Dakota

------------------------------------------------------------


Poll closing times:

8 PM EST: New Jersey (8 PM local time), Alabama (7 pm local time), Mississippi (7 pm local time)

9 PM EST: South Dakota (7 pm local, but the state is in two time zones and reports once the more westerly time zone hits 7 pm, which is 9 pm EST), New Mexico (7 PM local time)


10 PM EST: Iowa (9 PM local time), Montana (8 PM local time)

11 PM EST: California (8 PM local time)

That information looks like this on a map:


2014-06-003SuperTuesdayPrimarymap_zps7ad80390.jpg

Here the time-zone map of our Union, for reference:

USA time zones map with current local time 12 hour format


This is an interesting mix of states. Of the 8 states, in presidential politics, three states are solid DEM states (NJ, CA, NM), four states are solid GOP states (AL, MS, MT, SD) and one is generally considered a battleground (IA).

Those 8 states account for 18.75% of the current US-population. Source.


Of those 8 states, 6 states have Senatorial Primaries: AL, CA, IA, MS, NM, SD.


In Alabama, Jeff Sessions is uncontested for the GOP nomination. There is also a "David Sessions" running for State House District 105. I don't think the two gentlemen are related to each other. The Democrats are not running a primary for the Senate in this state - so Jeff Sessions will easily be re-elected. Governor Robert Bentley must first win a primary (he will) and two Democrats are in the running for the DEM gubernatorial nomination. I consider Bentley to be one of the finest GOP governors in the USA and excellent VP, possibly Prez material. Pretty sure he will be re-elected.


California runs a Jungle Primary system, so D's and R's run against each other in the primaries. Gov. Jerry Brown is in a Jungle Primary against 14 other candidates on the ballot and two guaranteed write-in candidates. In polling, he is sweeping them all. Ditto for Gavin Newsom, who is in a race against 6 or 7 others. In California, because of the Jungle Primary system, it's the CD races that are interesting, because that means, going into November, you could have 2 Ds pitted against each other, or two R's pitted against each other. At any rate, that often helps to know some of the definite math about the make-up of the next US HOR by knowing that certain seats, regardless of the GE outcome, will definitely be for one party or the other.

In Iowa, Rep. Bruce Braley (D) is unopposed for the Democratic nomination for the Senate Seat, where Tom Harkin (who will have served 40 years when the new Congress is sworn-in) is retiring. On the Republican side, 5 candidates are vying for the nomination, and there is also an active Libertarian ballot and two Independents on an independent ballot. Iowa is a very good example of the adage that "all politics are local" and Bruce Braley is very well liked in this state. However, depending on the mood of the country come November, this could become a very competitive race. On the gubernatorial side, Republican Terry Branstad is up for re-election has has the incumbent's advantage over a lesser known State Senator, Jack Hatch (D).

Mississippi is of course the state where THE marquee race of the night will be, in the GOP primary battle between GOP incumbent Thad Cochran (GOP establishment, some might say) and Tea Party challenger Chris McDaniel. I just reported on the polling in this race here yesterday. Most doubt that a checkmark will be coming early in the night in this race. Travis Childers, the Democrat, is about as Right-Wing as you can get and still somehow call yourself a Democrat. He is well liked among the black community in Mississippi (which is 37.4% black American). If Cochran wins the primary, he has the incumbent's advantage over Childers. But if McDaniel (Tea) wins the primary, this means that Childers has a shot at the seat and if nothing else, can make the race so competitive that the GOP (RNC) is forced to sink money into a usually safe GOP state. So, this race really is the critical race of the night. BTW, there's a pretty interesting GOP primary race going on in CD-4.


In Montana, Democratic Senator John Walsh is in for the race of his life against the GOP. Three Republicans are running for the GOP Senatorial nomination, but Steve Daines is the likely winner, he has considerably more money than the rest. This is a PRIME pick-up opportunity for the GOP in the fall, and Walsh is not doing well in polling. Since Daines is giving up Montana's at-large US House seat to run for the Senate, this means a primary on both sides for that CD. This is a very likely GOP retention in the fall, retgardless who wins the primary.


In New Jersey, Democrat Corey Booker is up for re-election to the Senate seat he won in a special election in 2013. He is unopposed for the primary, while four Republicans are on the GOP primary ballot, plus one "Democratic-Republican" on a ballot alone (lol...), three independents on the Independent ballot and one Libertarian on the Libertarian ballot. Booker is heavily favored to retain this seat. He built a warchest of $15,000,000, his nearest GOP competitor has a warchest of $90,000. Of course, it ain't over until the fat lady sings, but even the GOP is not really sinking any resources into this race, not yet, at least.

In New Mexico, Senator Tom Udall (D) is up for re-election. He will easily win his primary, and two GOP challengers are on the primary ballot. Allen Weh is the likely winner of today's ballot. Maybe [MENTION=6847]Foxfyre[/MENTION] might want to comment on the GOP ballot. I would like to hear her input. BTW, Allen Weh has a most interesting bio, I find him to be fascinating.

Republican Governor Susana Martinez, who is very well liked in New Mexico, is up for re-election. She is unopposed for the GOP primary, but 5 Democrats and two Democratic write-ins are on the DEM ballot. This is a very, very likely DEM hold in the Senate in the Fall and a very, very likely GOP hold in the Gubernatorial in the Fall, strong proof that New Mexican's are not straight-ticket voters. Many Republicans see Gov. Martinez as possible presidential material in the years to come, and I agree with them. She could indeed explode onto the national stage.

In South Dakota, Democratic incumbent Senator Tim Johnson is retiring at the end of his third term, making for a huge set-back for the Democratic Party. This seat is one of the two most very likely, practically guaranteed GOP pick-ups in the Fall, alongside the seat in West Virginia. Rick Weiland will be the Democratic nominee (he is unopposed). There are five Republicans on the ballot, but the race is essentially a two-person race between Bosworth and Rounds. Either way, the GOP nominee will very likely take this seat in the Fall. Republican Governor Dennis Daugaard is up for re-election in the Fall, he is unopposed in the primary and two lesser-named DEMS are on the DEM ballot. This gubernatorial seat will be a secure GOP hold in the Fall, likewise for SD's at-large congressional district. It is very unlikely that the DNC will sink much money into this state, the Republicans are already outspending the Democrats on a order of about 8 to 1 right now.

So, tonight's primary results will be fascinating to watch.

I will be adding more links as the day progresses...
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #2
A friendly shout out to some folks who may really enjoy the information in the OP: [MENTION=42916]Derideo_Te[/MENTION] [MENTION=9429]AVG-JOE[/MENTION] [MENTION=45886]Mad_Cabbie[/MENTION] [MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION] [MENTION=38281]Wolfsister77[/MENTION] [MENTION=21679]william the wie[/MENTION] [MENTION=43625]Mertex[/MENTION] [MENTION=37250]aaronleland[/MENTION] [MENTION=36767]Bloodrock44[/MENTION] [MENTION=30999]daws101[/MENTION] [MENTION=46449]Delta4Embassy[/MENTION] [MENTION=33449]BreezeWood[/MENTION] [MENTION=46750]Knightfall[/MENTION] [MENTION=20450]MarcATL[/MENTION] [MENTION=20594]Mr Clean[/MENTION] [MENTION=20704]Nosmo King[/MENTION] [MENTION=45320]Nyvin[/MENTION] [MENTION=20321]rightwinger[/MENTION] [MENTION=25283]Sallow[/MENTION] [MENTION=21524]oldfart[/MENTION] [MENTION=46193]Thx[/MENTION] [MENTION=20614]candycorn[/MENTION] [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] [MENTION=29614]C_Clayton_Jones[/MENTION] [MENTION=18990]Barb[/MENTION] [MENTION=31057]JoeB131[/MENTION] [MENTION=11278]editec[/MENTION] [MENTION=22983]Flopper[/MENTION] [MENTION=46136]dreolin[/MENTION] [MENTION=19867]G.T.[/MENTION] [MENTION=47936]AntiParty[/MENTION] [MENTION=34688]Grandma[/MENTION] [MENTION=48060]guno[/MENTION] [MENTION=20112]bodecea[/MENTION] [MENTION=41527]Pogo[/MENTION] [MENTION=48010]Machaut[/MENTION] [MENTION=48981]DiabloBlanco[/MENTION]


Anyone who doesn't want to be on this occasional mention list: just let me know, I will drop the name immediately.

Thanks,

-Stat


PS. Please do not quote this posting, otherwise you will send out the @ list again. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Mississippi could be in play whatever the results after Tuesdays primary ... for the Senate.

.
 
Mr. FF and I voted early this year but of course we won't start getting primary election results until after 7 pm tonight. Stat's analysis of New Mexico conforms to the conventional wisdom though. Since name recognition seems to be the most important criteria for election in this state--a standing jokes is that a criminal record or multiple DUI's seems to help too--I just don't see any incumbants losing ground. But we'll see how it goes.
 
This is one of the most exciting primary days so far.

I hope Cochran wins as that would secure MS in the GOP column (McDaniel's a bit too risky for the state).
I'm also rooting for Lonegan to win the NJ primary for Congress as I really like him and wish he beat Cory Booker in 2013.
 
The economy will determine the results in November and I just saw some data on the marginal costs of various oil producers vs. the marginal costs of new oil fields going into production. What is not known is whether the bond downgrades/defaults on existing producers will precede or follow the drop in energy prices from new producers such as Gabon. Precede means big night for the GOP, follow means normal mid-terms, that will be interesting to watch.
 
Conventional wisdom tells me Cochran will hold his seat, both in the primary and general election
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #8
Mr. FF and I voted early this year but of course we won't start getting primary election results until after 7 pm tonight. Stat's analysis of New Mexico conforms to the conventional wisdom though. Since name recognition seems to be the most important criteria for election in this state--a standing jokes is that a criminal record or multiple DUI's seems to help too--I just don't see any incumbants losing ground. But we'll see how it goes.


Are you talking about Susana Martinez? Does she have multiple DUIs?
 
Mr. FF and I voted early this year but of course we won't start getting primary election results until after 7 pm tonight. Stat's analysis of New Mexico conforms to the conventional wisdom though. Since name recognition seems to be the most important criteria for election in this state--a standing jokes is that a criminal record or multiple DUI's seems to help too--I just don't see any incumbants losing ground. But we'll see how it goes.


Are you talking about Susana Martinez? Does she have multiple DUIs?

No, of course not. She's a Republican (cough). No seriously, she has an amazing small amount of baggage anybody could exploit. But nobody seems to bring up our many guys elected and appointed to stuff--both GOP and Dem--who DO have some illegal stuff and DUIs on their resumes. And even when their opponents try to exploit it, it doesn't seem to bother the voters one whit. But voters these days are so dumbed down I doubt many of them know ANYTHING about the people they vote for anyway and for a lot of them party is far more important than qualifications or credentials.
 
Mr. FF and I voted early this year but of course we won't start getting primary election results until after 7 pm tonight. Stat's analysis of New Mexico conforms to the conventional wisdom though. Since name recognition seems to be the most important criteria for election in this state--a standing jokes is that a criminal record or multiple DUI's seems to help too--I just don't see any incumbants losing ground. But we'll see how it goes.


Are you talking about Susana Martinez? Does she have multiple DUIs?

No, of course not. She's a Republican (cough). No seriously, she has an amazing small amount of baggage anybody could exploit. But nobody seems to bring up our many guys elected and appointed to stuff--both GOP and Dem--who DO have some illegal stuff and DUIs on their resumes. And even when their opponents try to exploit it, it doesn't seem to bother the voters one whit. But voters these days are so dumbed down I doubt many of them know ANYTHING about the people they vote for anyway and for a lot of them party is far more important than qualifications or credentials.

I agree that many pols have baggage. No disagreement there.

Only, I was unaware that Udall had DUIs. Were you talking about Udall, or did you have another candidate in New Mexico whom I did not mention in mind?

I also agree with you very strongly that voters need to inform themselves better.

You made a good point about that, imo.

[MENTION=6847]Foxfyre[/MENTION]
 
wow, McDaniel actually has a small lead with 24% in!!! Amazing...wonder if it'll hold
 
Hmm..89% in and McDaniel still ahead...by 3,000 votes!!!! Maybe I'll prove myself wrong here...crazy. I honestly didn't see this coming, I'm shocked
 
Mississippi could be in play whatever the results after Tuesdays primary ... for the Senate.

.

No, it can't. The Democrats have no chance of winning that seat in November. Mississippi is like the opposite of Vermont.
 
This is one of the most exciting primary days so far.

I hope Cochran wins as that would secure MS in the GOP column (McDaniel's a bit too risky for the state).
I'm also rooting for Lonegan to win the NJ primary for Congress as I really like him and wish he beat Cory Booker in 2013.

Mississippi is secure regardless of whether or not Cochran wins or loses.

Lonegan has no chance of defeating Booker.
 
Mississippi could be in play whatever the results after Tuesdays primary ... for the Senate.

.

No, it can't. The Democrats have no chance of winning that seat in November. Mississippi is like the opposite of Vermont.

That's a very blind viewpoint. Childers is very conservative, more conservative then Matheson or Manchin. Democrats get elected in Mississippi state elections all the time in the last 20 years, there was a period of time sometime around 2009 or something where democrats held a majority in both state houses. Also democrats had 3 of the 4 congressional districts just 8 years ago. The only reason we haven't seen Democratic senators is because in the last 70 years Mississippi has had 5 Senators (two of the early ones democrats, Eastland and Stennis), the only modern age Mississippi senators are Cochran, Wicker, and Loft.

They don't elect democratic presidents, but Presidential elections are not everything. The candidate is what matters.
 
Last edited:
Ultimately, regardless who ends up on which ticket, it's not realistic to expect anything but Republican gains come the mid-terms -- because the Democrats hold the White House. Historically the party in the WH almost always loses ground in every mid-term. There have been just three exceptions in the last century and a half; it's virtually a given. The only question is how much of a gain.

And of course the local microstories such as Mississippi, which is still undetermined at this writing.
 
Ultimately, regardless who ends up on which ticket, it's not realistic to expect anything but Republican gains come the mid-terms -- because the Democrats hold the White House. Historically the party in the WH almost always loses ground in every mid-term. There have been just three exceptions in the last century and a half; it's virtually a given. The only question is how much of a gain.

And of course the local microstories such as Mississippi, which is still undetermined at this writing.

I don't know of many people denying this, I'd find it bizzare if the GOP didn't pick up at least 3 seats.
 

Forum List

Back
Top