April 25, 2016

2016 Pennsylvania Democratic Presidential Primary - Clinton 52%, Sanders 41%

2016 Pennsylvania Democratic Presidential Primary - Clinton 52%, Sanders 41% (Opinion Savvy/Fox 29 4/24)


http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/opinion-savvy-fox-29-24359

April 25, 2016

2016 National Democratic Primary - Clinton 50%, Sanders 45% (Suffolk University/USA Today 4/20-4/24)

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/suffolk-usa-today-24356

April 25, 2016

Hillary beats Kasich in 2 most recent polls (+8, +3 Pollster.com)

POLLSTER DATES POP. KASICH CLINTON UNDECIDED OTHER SPREAD
Ipsos/Reuters 4/16 - 4/20 1,334 RV 32 40 13 15 Clinton +8
Morning Consult 4/15 - 4/17 2,032 RV 39 42 19 - Clinton +3


http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/ipsos-reuters-24323

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/morning-consult-24302


People have started to look at Kasich, they don't care for the misogynist as much as they initially thought.

April 25, 2016

2016 Connecticut Democratic Presidential Primary - Clinton 48%, Sanders 46% (PPP 4/22-4/24)

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/ppp-d-votevets-action-fund-24340

April 23, 2016

Board of Elections will boot (Repub) official after her error purged over 100,000 Brooklyn voters

Board of Elections will boot official after her error purged over 100,000 Brooklyn voters from the rolls, wrecking havoc at polls

The massive purge of over 100,000 Brooklyn voters from the rolls — which caused huge problems at polling sites this past Tuesday — was the result of an epic screw-up by a long-time official expected to be forced out over the debacle, sources said.

Diane Haslett-Rudiano, the Board of Elections' chief clerk, was suspended without pay on Thursday, two days after the city’s botched presidential primary prompted criticism from both the winners and losers on the Democratic side.

...

The problems began when she was trying to clean up the voting books, which must be periodically purged to eliminate people who die, move or are ineligible for other reasons.

Sources said she skipped one of the steps that was built in to stop the system from purging eligible voters, which caused a chain reaction that led to people being improperly removed.

Brooklyn lost 102,717 — or 8% — of its active voters from Nov. 1, 2015, through April 1, 2016, according to state stats.

The high number of dropped voters — combined with other issues like long lines, late starts, and inadequate equipment — led to both the City Controller and the state Attorney General to launch investigations into the widespread irregularities.

...

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/election-official-ousted-error-purged-brooklyn-voters-article-1.2610369

________________________________________________________

Also, from Heavy.com

Diane Haslett-Rudiano: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

...

Haslett-Rudiano, 73, wasn’t fired but she was suspended without pay, according to NBC New York. The suspension will stay in place while an internal probe is conducted to determine what happened that caused over 100,000 voters’ registrations to be purged in Brooklyn.

According to New York Daily News, she may have made an error when cleaning up the voting books. She may have skipped a required step that would have stopped the computer system from purging eligible voters.

Haslett-Rudiano is also the Republican Commissioner for the Board of Elections’ Overseas and Military Voter Services.

...

5. Some Sources, Like the New York Post, Speculated that Haslett-Rudiano May Have Been a Scapegoat

Meanwhile, some people aren’t convinced and believe Haslett-Rudiano was a scapegoat. The New York Post wrote a particularly scathing article, claiming that Haslett-Rudiano was removed to protect the BOE Deputy Clerk, Betty Ann Canizio. The Post went on to report that Canizio is an ally of Frank Seddio, a Brooklyn Democratic Chairman who may have helped her get her post.

Meanwhile, Canizio is denying these claims. When asked on her official Faceobok page, “Did you purge Democratic votes to help Hillary(sic)?”, Canizio responded: “No, was a Bernie supporter. Please don’t make assumptions. (sic)”

http://heavy.com/news/2016/04/diane-haslett-hasslet-rudiano-brooklyn-new-york-voters-fired-scapegoat-canizio-election-fraud-who-is/

___________________________________


The interesting part was the Post article I saw posted here implying that the Bernie supporter, a Democrat was responsible for the purge. How ironic since the person actually suspended for the purge was a Republican. It seems many here are all too willing to promote right-wing rags that go after the Democrat (surprise) in an attempt to fling poop at Hillary. Pretty shameless.

April 22, 2016

New York Elections Board to Face Audit Over Primary Problems

After the numerous voting irregularities, including suspicion of election fraud and voter suppression, it has been announced an official audit and investigation.

First, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced an official investigation, stating that he is “deeply troubled by the volume and consistency of voting irregularities.”

http://twitter.com/AGSchneiderman/status/722880473043587073/photo/1
New York City comptroller, Scott M. Stringer, announced on Tuesday that his office will audit the city’s Board of Elections for their part in the irregularities.

The fact that Stringer is a delegate for Hillary Clinton has raised some eyebrows. Stringer stated that if he finds any issues that call for him to recuse himself he will and that he isn’t “auditing the election results. We are auditing the management of the agency that conducts the elections.” Stringer called for the audit before polls closed and the results were in.

http://www.nationofchange.org/news/2016/04/21/new-york-elections-board-face-audit-primary-problems/

April 22, 2016

Fellow Sanders Voters: Remember That Bernie Has Benefited From Closed Caucuses

Again, the Rude Pundit has to state, for the record, that he threw his lot in with Bernie Sanders. But, for chrissake, get yer facts together, Bernie voters, or you just sound like you're crazy.

For instance, we love touting the many victories Sanders has and then we turn around and get all angry about how New York held a closed primary - that is, only registered Democrats could vote in it. So, sorry, independents, but go fuck yourselves. This has upset the Sanders side because they think that their candidate would have won an open primary in New York (and that's kind of a big leap).

But that whole discussion is undermined by your very support for Sanders and his victories elsewhere. Because, see, many of the states Sanders has won have held caucuses, not primaries. And those fuckers are almost always meant only for the party faithful. It's their fuckin' rules.

* Colorado. where Sanders beat Hillary Clinton by 19 points? Closed caucus for voting. Anyone could watch, if that's your thing. But only registered Democrats could vote.

* Wyoming, where Sanders won with 56% to 44% for Clinton? Closed.

...

While Sanders won the open primaries in Vermont, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Wisconsin, you could make a strong argument that much of the momentum of his campaign comes from closed caucuses for Democrats only and not from the mythical independent voters. You could also make the case that Clinton has captured those independents because of all the open primaries she's won (Illinois, Virginia, North Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, and more). Sorry, but results are results.

...

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2016/04/fellow-sanders-voters-remember-that.html

I like the Rude Pundit.

April 21, 2016

Did New York’s Voting Problems Hurt Hillary Clinton?

Sam Frizell @Sam_Frizell April 20, 2016

When Gemma Gonsalves gave her name at a public school off of Brooklyn’s Ocean Parkway, she was expecting to be ushered in quickly to vote.

But she said poll workers said she wasn’t listed in the voter rolls, telling her to go to a nearby courthouse and come back with a court order to vote. Already running late for her job cutting hair at a local Supercuts, she left and never did cast a ballot in the Democratic primary.

“I’ve been in this country more than fifty years,” says Gonsalves, an immigrant from Trinidad who voted for John McCain in 2008 and Barack Obama in 2012 at the same polling place. “It’s just so baffling.”

...

Both the Sanders and the Clinton campaigns are crying foul, but it may be the Clinton campaign that suffered the most. The areas where the most votes were lost was in Brooklyn—which she won with 60% of the vote, better than throughout the state as a whole.

...

A total of 1.82 million people cast votes in New York. If tens of thousands of people were unable to vote, it could have meant a swing of a handful of delegates for either Clinton or Sanders. The voter affidavits have not been counted, so it is not clear which candidate they may have benefited. Still, most of the voters stricken from the registers lived in neighborhoods that were favorable to Clinton, based on Tuesday night’s results.

Gonsalves, at least, had been planning to vote for Clinton.

http://time.com/4301762/new-york-voting-problems-hillary-clinton/

I don't think we actually know which candidate may have been harmed by this voter purge, perhaps we'll have a better idea after the affidavits have been counted.

April 21, 2016

2016 National Democratic Primary - Hillary 51%(+3), Bernie 45%(-4) (Ipsos/Reuters (Web) 4/16-4/20)

I know nobody cares about national polls, but Bernie was up 1 in the previous Ipsos/Reuters poll done 4/9 - 4/13 - 49-48.

April 20, 2016

Sanders Has Been Losing In States Where Income Inequality Is Worse

Here's some irony: Bernie Sanders is winning the states where income inequality is lowest. Where it's highest? Those states are all Hillary Clinton, and her win in highly-unequal New York only made the trend more pronounced.

It's a counterintuitive trend because Bernie Sanders' whole campaign is built on inequality. The phrase "millionaire and billionaire class" (or some variation on it) seems to feature in every single one of his speeches.

...

Direct relationship? Probably not.

The fascinating question is why this is happening.

Spoiler: There's no single great explanation.

Sorry about that. But there are a few things we can say.

One is that this doesn't necessarily mean that Clinton is beating Sanders at appealing to voters on the basis of inequality. Put another way, it's not that all of the Democrats of New York (the most unequal state yet that Clinton has won) looked around and thought, "Huh. Inequality is high here, so I should vote for Clinton."

...

What it means

Really, it might be that there are lots of trends going on alongside these inequality numbers. Race may play into what's going on here. The south is both heavily unequal and heavily black. And American blacks in general are more economically disadvantaged than whites nationwide, as research from the Brookings Institution has found, due in part to what they call "deep-rooted, systemic problems." And it is also true that many black voters have been for a variety of reasons loyal to the Clintons over the years.

Sanders also appeals explicitly to rural voters in particular with his gun control stances, which may have helped fuel his performance in states with larger rural populations — think those large western states like Wyoming, Alaska, and Idaho.

...

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/19/474835424/sanders-has-been-losing-in-states-where-income-inequality-is-worse