A Response to the Minnesota Calendar Discrepancy

Politico's story about the situation with the 2012 Minnesota caucuses was as much a newsflash to FHQ as it was to anyone else. Sadly, however, for a site that tracks the evolution of the presidential primary (and caucus) calendar, that is an embarrassing admission. The correct date for the 2012 Minnesota caucuses up until today, according to the 2010 Minnesota statutes should have been no date at all and not March 6 as it has been listed in every iteration of FHQ's calendar since December 2008. Today marks the point at which Minnesota should have first appeared on the calendar -- assuming no coordinated state central committee action between the two major state parties to select a date -- and it should appear starting today along with the other states currently positioned on February 7, 2012. That is the starting point for any change that is to occur moving forward from today.

My expectation is that, regardless of the state law, the Democrats will independently shift the date of their caucuses to a point on the calendar that is compliant with Democratic National Committee rules on delegate selection. I further expect Minnesota Republicans to move the date of their caucuses as well if it is viewed as problematic to the RNC relative to their interpretation of the party's delegate selection rules. This may or may not result in the two state parties holding concurrent caucuses next year. Years with different dates have occurred in the past but not since 2000.

That means that FHQ will have to make a change to the past versions of the calendar. Normally under these circumstances it is our policy to be as transparent as possible and to either strike through the portion of any post that requires some correction or to issue some some sort of statement regarding the correction. The latter seems to be the appropriate course of action in this case. That is especially true in view of the fact that FHQ routinely uses strike throughs on the calendar to indicate the past position of a state prior to a change. To correct this the "Minnesota caucuses" entry on past calendars will be removed, but a note with a link to this post will be added to explain what has happened. A new calendar will be issued later today to reflect the change for Minnesota that was put into action today.

How did the mistake occur?

I sincerely hope that above corrective measures prove to be adequately transparent and surpass the bar for having actually righted an embarrassing wrong. And yes, for a site that is trusted to track the changes in the calendar this is a glaring mistake. It is therefore incumbent upon us to explain as best we can how the wrong date came to appear in our calendar. It is best to examine that process sequentially.

1. During the 2008 state legislative session and in the midst of the 2008 nomination process, the Minnesota legislature proposed, considered and passed HF 3066. That retroactively brought the state law in to line with the calendar position both state parties had chosen for their 2008 precinct caucuses in 2007. It also added the March 1 deadline for coordinated action between the two parties. Admittedly, FHQ was not following the development of the 2012 calendar at that point in 2008. To the extent that anything appeared on the site related to the 2012 cycle, it was a function of something having appeared in the news. I had not taken to combing through state legislative web sites at that point. Plus, I, like most everyone else, was following the developments of the 2008 nomination races.
2. In May 2008, that bill was signed by Governor Tim Pawlenty and was to take effect on August 1, 2008. It did take effect on August 1, but it did not show up in the 2008 Minnesota statutes until they were posted online; presumably in anticipation of the calendar turning over to 2009. The thing about the Minnesota statutes is that the year affixed to them is one that describes not the year in which they are being used, but rather the year in which they were changed/established. Any changes that current 2011 legislature makes to the law, for example, is being made to the 2010 Minnesota statutes. Changes that were made in 2008, then, were being made to the 2007 statutes -- a version that would still have the first Tuesday in March as the date on which precinct caucuses were to have occurred.
3. As far as I can tell -- and for once the Internet Archive - Wayback Machine is failing me -- the 2007 statutes were still online when I first put the 2012 primary calendar together in December 2008. The 2008 statutes did not post until the 2009 legislature convened and set to work to alter them. Having missed the change to the law in early 2008 caused me to miss being on the lookout for the change to take place heading into 2009 when FHQ began tracking the 2012 calendar in earnest. And since the only legislation to come forward in Minnesota regarding delegate selection events since that time concerned establishing a presidential primary, I was never cued to look again at the precinct caucuses statute.

The good news is that FHQ's process of looking for state legislative changes to election laws has been streamlined in the time since, so future instances of this issue should not occur. But it is a tricky process, following the development of the calendar, and it is even more difficult in some cases in caucus states. Minnesota has proven that, but the matter is not without human error.

Recent Posts:

2012 Presidential Primary Movement: The Week in Review (Feb. 21-27)

Is This Deadline in Minnesota a Big Deal for the 2012 Primary Calendar?

A Potential Florida Primary Compromise?

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

If they were deciding today, where would they choose to go? A Note about the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

It has become apparent since FHQ's cameo appearance on The Fix earlier this week that the content here has been opened up to a broader political insider audience than before. It has been truer in this instance than in some of the other more general pieces in which I have had quotes on the primary calendar appear. That fact has been driven home by some push back I have gotten on the 2012 presidential primary calendar that we update when primary dates are changed. At issue seems to be where we have Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and until the state Republican Party changed the date in December, Nevada.

Nevada has preemptively moved to the mid-February date -- February 18 -- that the national parties have reserved for it. Well, the DNC specified that date while the Republicans allow more leeway, allowing the four exempt states a window of February 1 through the first Tuesday in March to hold a delegate selection event. In other words, the choice is up to the states. Nonetheless, Nevada Republicans opted for that date. That said, the Silver state Republicans have selected a date.

The other three have not. Each is waiting, as Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina typically do, for the other states settle in on dates before deciding on their own earlier dates. This is not news. And while that is not news, it doesn't change the fact that those states and possibly even Nevada will look at which non-exempt state is earliest and make the decision as to the timing of their primaries or caucuses based on that information.

Ideally from the national parties perspective that will be no earlier than the first Tuesday in March 2012. But that conflicts with the reality of the situation from the states' perspective. Election laws already on the books specify when presidential primary elections are to be held and it will take state legislative action to alter that. But unless or until that reality changes we have to operate -- we do around here anyway -- under the aforementioned assumption. Florida election law currently has the Sunshine state's presidential primary scheduled for January 31. That is currently the earliest non-exempt delegate selection event and if Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina were to have to choose today on which date each would go next year, the decision makers in those states would choose based on that information. The latest possible dates for those states to go with Florida and others -- those other states scheduled to hold contests throughout February -- standing in the way of national party delegate selection rules is right where FHQ has them.

Monday, January 16: Iowa

Tuesday, January 24: New Hampshire

Saturday, January 28: South Carolina (and perhaps Nevada)

And even that is questionable because New Hampshire law requires a week long cushion on both sides of its primary. That proposed South Carolina date falls just four days after the primary in the Granite state and if Bill Gardner, the New Hampshire secretary of state who has the date-setting power there, wants to be a stickler, he could inch the state's primary up an additional week to January 17 and push Iowa to January 9. That, however, has yet to play out.

So no, the dates for those three states are not official -- something that has been noted in the sidebar calendar and in posts since I first posted them in December 2008 and is highlighted even more clearly now -- but until the information changes (read: Florida moves back), the dates FHQ lists for Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina are the latest possible dates on which their contests will fall in 2012.

NOTE: A link to this post will be added to all archived and future updates to the calendar that appears here.

Recent Posts:

Idaho House Bill to Move Presidential Primary Up Passes Senate

Three New Presidential Primary Bills Emerge in Tennessee

"Rubio favors early presidential primary for Florida in 2012"

Are you following FHQ on Twitter and/or Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Happy New Year

FHQ wants to wish all out there a happy new year. From our perspective, 2011 should bring plenty to talk about from state legislatures and state parties positioning their primaries and caucuses (or failing to do so) for the 2012 presidential nomination cycle.

Here's to a bright new year!

Are you following FHQ on Twitter and/or Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Overdue Housekeeping (New Look, Facebook & More)

Loyal FHQ readers (and perhaps some passersby) have certainly noticed that output on the blog has been way down this year. In addition to completing my dissertation on, you guessed it, frontloading during the spring semester, I've had some other things going on and I'm currently in yet another summer of transition after my temporary tenure at Wake Forest ended in June. That said, there has been no shortage of things to talk about and I want to apologize for not being around to provide commentary and fill the void. [Well, there has not been any void in chatter concerning politics, but FHQ has been relatively quiet.]

If you have continued stopping by you have noticed several changes. First of all, when Blogger rolled out its custom design feature in June, I jumped at the chance to update the simple and, I think stagnant, FHQ look. That was the biggest visual change since we added the left-hand sidebar during 2008. The new look is obviously still simple, but it is a little sleeker and adds the background image behind the large white slate that dominates the page.

In the last month, FHQ has also become a presence on Facebook. Personally, I don't have that large a presence on the social networking site, but far be it from me to deprive FHQ readers who do use Facebook frequently from using that tool as a means of getting their FHQ fix.

There is a button (see above) underneath the Twitter section on the right side that you can click on to access the FHQ Facebook page. Once there, click "Like" next to Frontloading HQ at the top to add the page to your News Feed. All blog posts are automatically added to the site and most tweets -- those not retweeted from my phone -- appear there as well. It ends up being a nice storehouse of FHQ material and is quiet handy if you are already on Facebook (and a lot of people are...a lot).

Finally, I've also made it easier to share FHQ content on other sites. At the conclusion of every post you will see a host of tiny buttons you can click on to share content at other sites (Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Digg, Google Buzz, etc.). All you have to do is click on one of those to do so. And hey, there's even a Facebook Like button down there as well.

I'll probably bug people about Facebook (and Twitter for that matter) by reminding you of the addition at the conclusion of each post for the next couple of weeks. You've been warned. [Oh, it will stop soon enough.] Yeah, I think I've sold out a bit to be quite honest with you.

Back to politics...

FHQ is back...

...emerging from a pile of broken down cardboard boxes, bubble wrap and electronics cords. We've got some post-move catching up to do around here.


Recent Posts:
State of the Race: Virginia (7/31/09)

State of the Race: New Jersey (7/31/09)

Last Athens Post

Last Athens Post

Well, FHQ is off to North Carolina. After over 650 posts in Athens, GA, it is time to bid adieu and move our head quarters to Virginia Foxx's 5th congressional district in the Winston Salem area of the Old North State. Fare thee well, Classic City. You've been good to us.

[What that means for the rest of the day is that it will probably be tonight or tomorrow before I get to the New Jersey numbers that are due out of Public Policy Polling within the next hour or two.]


Recent Posts:
FOX Poll: 2012 GOP Primary--The Romney/Huckabee Dead Heat Continues

Modified Delaware Plan

The Week Ahead

The Week Ahead

The big news this week, at least for regular readers, is that FHQ is hitching up its wagons and moving this week. I have no idea how big a damper this is going to put on the flow of posts around here, but I can speculate that it will probably be down at least somewhat until the new FHQ HQ is up and running. So bear with me.

That said, you can probably expect a few things:

• Some residual work from last week's Presidential Primary Reform Week series should surface at various point.
• PPP is polling the New Jersey governor's race this week. Those results should be out Tuesday, and that's great, but they also plan to ask about the "potential impact of Barack Obama and Sarah Palin coming to the state to campaign for their party's gubernatorial candidates" would have. Now, I'd be willing to bet that there is a New Jersey 2012 trial heat question somewhere in there too. Call it a hunch.
• Finally, we left off in a similar post last week talking about the Sotomayor confirmation vote. This is the week for that, though. The same rules apply: Who will vote for her? Who will vote against her? And will that have future electoral ramifications for members of the Senate? Some members are already out with their decisions (ruining the fun), but others are holding on to their choices (and also ruining the fun because the choice is known).
  

And I'm sure there will be some surprises along the way as well.


Recent Posts:
Presidential Primary Reform Week: Reading Room

Oops! A 2012 GOP Primary Poll FHQ Missed and Another Rant on the Over-Interpretation of These Polls

Presidential Primary Reform Week: The National Association of Secretaries of State's New President

Search Engine Wars? FHQ Prefers Google

There's been a discussion in the tech press lately concerning the pros and cons of Google and the newly refurbished Microsoft search engine, dubbed Bing. No, this has nothing to do with presidential primaries, the 2012 election or anything of that ilk. In fact, it is more horn tooting, I suppose, than anything else. FHQ gets a steady stream of traffic based on people searching online for a number of things: electoral college maps, divisive primaries and generally anything having to do with 2012. I like knowing that people can search using those keywords and find their way to FHQ to discover what I hope they perceive as meaningful information. Hey, that's why this site exists. I could certainly do all the things that I do here and not post them, but why not share? Increasingly the internet is transforming into a highly efficient means of sharing information from the mundane to academic research. [FHQ lies somewhere in the middle, but operates under the assumption that what may be mundane to one man, may be enlightening/academic to the next.]

But what about Google and Bing? Well, to my mind there was no better way for me to check out the search abilities of the upstart, Bing, than to use the typical keywords that guide traffic to FHQ. If Bing is so good/better than Google, then it will do the same and more in terms of introducing more eyeballs to FHQ, right? Sure, theoretically. But that's not what I found. Where FHQ would appear high on the Google list, it rarely appeared at all in Bing searches.

Huh?

Here are some examples:
2012 electoral college map (Google, Bing)
2012 primary calendar (Google, Bing)
Divisive primaries (Google, Bing)
*For the record, Yahoo settles in somewhere in between both ends of the Google/Bing spectrum.

This struck me as odd. But then I realized that Blogger/Blogspot is a Google service and it occurred to me that either Google is protecting their own or Microsoft is penalizing those outside of its accepted list of blog services. [Nah, surely big, competing businesses wouldn't do that!] In the end this is all very interesting to me. Look, FHQ gets a meager amount of traffic in the grand scheme of things, so it isn't that big a deal. But it is curious and makes me wonder if this has affected other bloggers out there.

Plus, it is a slow Saturday and this was something I was thinking about.


Recent Posts:
What's Wrong with 2012 Polls?

State of the Race: New Jersey (7/16/09)

Romney Leads 2012 GOP Race (...and in more than just the Gallup Poll)

FHQ Hangin' Out in FL-08

...sans mouse ears.

FHQ is checking out a very limited area of Alan Grayson's district this week. The highlight thus far? Someone wearing a Reagan/Bush '84 t-shirt (Liberal friends, get your credit cards ready.). I never want to be someone who take the shirt off another man's back, but in this case, I was tempted to request/barter/buy said shirt. I suppose an '80 version may have been better, but that was a heck of a memento there. I may have been the only one to fully appreciate it.

Anyway, this is a long way of telling everyone that I'm not entirely certain how this will affect posting this week. Though, between juggling the parks and dissertation writing, it probably won't result in increased posting. We'll see.


Recent Posts:
Oklahoma Bill to Have Parties Pay for Presidential Primaries is Done for 2009

No Split in Springfield...Illinois

The 2012 Presidential Candidates on Twitter

FHQ Now on Twitter

To quote Fred Flintstone, "That's the camel that broke the straw back."

FHQ has finally broken down and joined the "tweeting" ranks. It may in fact just be a fad, but I can no longer justify shrugging the service off because of its overly short messages. In real time, nothing is more powerful for dispersing messages quickly and that has distinct ramifications in the political realm. We saw that with the Oklahoma Republican convention a few weeks ago. The mainstream media was not covering the GOP chair battle in Oklahoma -- the one that potentially would have had the party adopt a presidential caucus over the state-funded primary.

Plus, the political world seems to have adopted Twitter as well (see picture to the right). All of the possible candidates mentioned for the GOP nomination in 2012 have at least some presence on Twitter. In fact, you can now see their up-to-the-minute updates in FHQ's left-hand sidebar below the blogroll (Yes, way down there.). To go to the candidate's Twitter page simply click on the "about _ hours/minutes ago" link or just follow along here. I'll have more on this tomorrow, but for now a few notes about the sidebar gadget's functionality will suffice.

As for FHQ, you can add our Twitter feed (@FHQ) if you are so inclined (There is a link to the feed in the right sidebar above the Blog Archive). For now, my contributions will be confined to automatic postings of actual FHQ posts with attendant URLs, but that could change in the future. My feeling is, why deprive loyal FHQers of the opportunity to follow the site in a more mobile format if that's what they prefer.

Like I said, though, I'll have more on this tomorrow. In the meantime, have fun with the new gadgets.

NOTE: Also, please let me know if you experience any lags in site loading time when you're here. Adding these gadgets has slowed things down some and I want to keep tabs on that. Thanks.


Recent Posts:
Does the Sotomayor Choice Make Texas a Swing State?

Two Huckabee Slips in One Day?

Is Charlie Crist Running for Senate or Vice President?

Back in Business

FHQ is now back. I apologize for the absence, but with the new job, it was unavoidable. I'll have something new up shortly.

Ooh, May is off to a slooooooow start.


Recent Posts:
Open Thread: Home Renovation Edition

Forget You Saw That...

Are Clinton and Obama Still Fighting? The Texas Primary-Caucus is Back

Open Thread: Home Renovation Edition

You've likely noticed that it has been quiet around here the last few days. Not only is it the end of the semester, but we're in the midst of a whirlwind renovation to get the house ready to go on the market. Hopefully things will be somewhat back to normal tomorrow or Thursday.

Having said that, I thought I'd open up the comments for talk on Souter's replacement, Rubio running for Senate in Florida, and if you want to, you can continue talking about the New Hampshire situation.


Recent Posts:
Forget You Saw That...

Are Clinton and Obama Still Fighting? The Texas Primary-Caucus is Back

Democracy for the People

Forget You Saw That...

If you saw the post on the situation in New Hampshire, disregard the information. According to the New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair, Ray Buckley, the news was not true about the gay marriage vote and the Granite state's primary.

EDIT: I should probably add -- in the interest of not totally confusing everyone who didn't catch the original post -- that the issue in question was the DNC strong-arming hesitant Democratic state legislators into voting to pass the gay marriage bill wending its way through the General Court by threatening New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary status.


Recent Posts:
Are Clinton and Obama Still Fighting? The Texas Primary-Caucus is Back

Democracy for the People

More Party Switchers?

Democracy for the People

...or FHQ readers at least.

Recently I changed up the "Links" section here by replacing the default setting (Well, default when I started this endeavor a couple of years ago.) with a widget that cues up the most recent entry at the sites I read the most. I also moved that section from the right sidebar to the left one under the frontloading trend maps. Here's a screenshot:

[Click to Enlarge]

Anyway, it strikes me as somewhat unfair that I get to pick what's in that section. So I thought I'd open the comments section up to suggestions for additions to that area. I mean, we do have a community of readers here and it is my preference that everyone have a stake in FHQ -- a minority stake, but a stake nonetheless. I put it to you, then, FHQ readers both vocal and silent: Are there sites you'd like to see included in that space and, if so, what are they?

A couple of notes:
1) The sites have to be blog-like in that the widget requires an RSS feed. Some standard sites won't work. For example, CQ is frustratingly out of the loop for whatever reason. UPDATE: Well, maybe that wasn't a good example. Maybe, just maybe I wasn't trying hard enough to add CQ. Ha! [Hat tip to Matt from DemConWatch for the proper link.] CQ's now up.
2) There are only so many sites we can include before it gets overwhelmingly cluttered. That doesn't prevent you from suggesting something, but I feel the need to offer that disclaimer.

Anyway, have at it. The suggestion box is now open.


Recent Posts:
More Party Switchers?

Open Thread: Specter Switch

Indiana Sec. of State on 2012 Presidential Primary

Shoveling Out from Under...

The South generally isn't very adept at dealing with snow (...or in some cases the threat of snow*). Usually, six inches of snow is enough to shut the world down. Well, truth be told, an inch or two can have the same effect. But I just thought this applied to the world of economics. It just isn't cost-feasible for state and local governments here in Georgia or across the South to purchase the necessary equipment to deal with snow, especially if you only get significant accumulation once a decade (or so).

I can buy that. But I just didn't know that this applied to natural world as well. Most of the problem with this storm, and the reason FHQ has been unusually quiet the last couple of days, had to do with trees not being at their fittest.

What!?! [Bear with me; I'm hypothesizing here!]

If snow doesn't fall in any given year (or decade), weak trees and especially weak limbs never get tested, much less "weeded out". So when an unbelievably heavy/wet snow hits, chaos, in the form of down trees/limbs and inevitably power outages, is never far behind. And that was the case here on Sunday and Monday.

Maybe, then, just maybe, everyone was wrong to have mocked the Bush administration's Healthy Forests Initiative. Sure, that was meant for forest fire prevention, but it could have proven beneficial in the South in winter as well. Oh fine, it was a measure that only served the logging industry. You got me.

Anyway, I shoveled out from under snow yesterday and today I'm doing the same with email and FHQ-related business. I'll try to make up for lost time as quickly as possible.

*Often the threat of snow is enough to send seemingly 90% of the public out to the nearest grocery store to stock up on bread, milk, batteries, etc.


Recent Posts:
The Supreme Court Weighing in on Frontloading?

1996 Presidential Primary Calendar

Like a Kid in a Candy Store: A 2012 GOP Presidential Preference Poll

Inauguration Day

I would be remiss if I didn't say at least something of the day the United States just encountered. FHQ often focuses on the means, but today was about ends. Today was one of those days where the means come to their ends; a day where campaigns and elections come to fruition.

Everyone can hope on day one, but the real work begins tomorrow.

...and no, I don't necessarily mean on initial re-election efforts. Well, 2012 is in the back of my mind, I suppose.


Recent Posts:
Oklahoma in 2012

End of Unannounced/Unintended Hiatus

A One State Presidential Election in 2012?

End of Unannounced/Unintended Hiatus

Well, 2009 has been a whirlwind thus far for me. I spent the first week of the year putting the final touches on my classes for this semester and preparing for the Southern Political Science Association's meeting in New Orleans. And this past week I've had some things start moving for me on the job front. [Always a good sign in a horrible year on the political science job market.]

Anyway, there has been some chatter in a few states regarding their 2012 presidential primaries of late and I'd like to take them all one-by-one in the coming days to discuss the particulars and the potential for an overall trend between 2008 and 2012. Plus, I'd like to make a few comments about the paper I put together for the aforementioned SPSA meeting. Believe it or not it is frontloading-related. And finally, the race for the chair of the GOP is heating up. If I get a chance to get around to it, I'd like to put some stuff together on this as well.

In the meantime, let me point you all in the direction of a couple of interesting links:
1) The Monkey Cage this past week has had a dialog going between their regular contributors and the authors of several pieces on the 2008 election that have appeared in the latest edition of The Forum. The original post is linked above and you can follow the rest of the discussion in their archives. Some good stuff.

2) Princeton political scientist, Nolan McCarty, has started a blog and has had some interesting material so far. He and Rose Razaghian had a paper in the American Journal of Political Science about a decade ago concerning advice and consent within the Senate during the confirmations of presidential nominees (cabinet-level and lower positions). So I keep waiting for him to weigh in on some of the confirmation battles. Whether he does or doesn't is immaterial. The posts are worth a look and the blog is worth tracking.

Recent Posts:
A One State Presidential Election in 2012?

A Projected 2012 Electoral College Map (version 2.0)

The Race for RNC Chair

FHQ Hasn't Disappeared...It Just Seems That Way

Alright, FHQ has been on a bit of an end-of-the-semester, conference-paper writing hiatus since the Georgia Senate runoff finished up last week. And no, this isn't necessarily a sign of things to come. Though, with elections talk rapidly reaching its nadir as the focus shifts toward actual governance, updates won't be as regular as they once were. No more of those three [plus] post days.

Anyway, loyal readers deserve to know what's going on with the uncharacteristic silence. Regardless, I have one more Georgia early voting post that is more updating the data than anything [There were some after-the-fact revisions on Wednesday.], and I've got a neat little 2012 post I put together over the weekend. Look for those later today.


Recent Posts:
Live Blog and Open Thread: Georgia Senate Runoff

The Georgia Senate Runoff: A Polling Projection

Georgia Senate Runoff: Early Voting (Final Day)

Map Update Coming...

I was swamped yesterday, and that's why the map is a little late this morning. You know I must have been busy if the map wasn't updated. Ah, academia.

Anyway, after getting everyone's hopes up heading into last weekend about a post on the Bradley/Wilder effect, I'm actually going to have time to get that up today. Both of my classes got a test run this morning, but I have one more spin to put on it (...along with some graphics) after the map update.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (10/21/08)

Early Voting in Forsyth County, GA: Technology at Work

What About North Carolina? Can Obama Swing the Tar Heel State?

Reminder and a Note

For tonight's update, the thresholds between categories will be lowered to reflect the fact that there are just 18 days until the election. In other words, there will likely be some changes to the map that are a function of the switch and not a fundamental shift in FHQ's methodology.

That's the reminder. And the note?

Well, I've been looking at some of the Bradley/Wilder effect data today and will hopefully have a post up concerning that over the weekend. I could probably get that out tonight, but with the switch from the line drop, it may be a bit too much scenario analysis. As such I'll separate the two and get the Bradley/Wilder effect post out later in the weekend. Hopefully I've caught enough people before they've headed out the door for the weekend.

There will be some other changes to the map tonight as well. But I'll make you come back to see those.


Recent Posts:
The Electoral College Map (10/17/08)

The Electoral College Map (10/16/08)

Live Blog and Open Thread: Final Presidential Debate