something rotten in alaska?
And isn't it curious that if you believe the current numbers, turnout in Alaska was way, way down from 2004. From 66% to 54%. A trend matched in precisely no other state during an election that grabbed the attention of Americans. And despite the fact that turnout in the Alaskan primaries was UP 12%. And despite the fact that there was a crucial Senate race.
Oh and despite the fact that there was a friggin' ALASKAN on the national ticket of one of the two major parties.
The boys at fivethirtyeight.com, bending over backwards for an explanation that doesn't involve the word "fraud", speculate that Alaskan Democrats may have become complacent because of the big lead the challengers had over Young & Stevens, plus knowing by 4:00 local time that Barack Obama wouldn't need Alaska's votes.
A question to any Alaskans out there: did turnout look like it was up or down from 2004?
World-famous Alaska blogger Mudflats thinks she might smell something: So I invite you to hop on board the Conspiracy Theory Express with me for a moment, because it’s pulling out of the station here in Alaska, ready to take you on a five minute tour.
Some numbers courtesy of Mudflats (but read the whole thing, there is lots more):
As these strange numbers rolled in at Election Central, I was there watching. Here’s how it fell out over time.
With 36% of the precincts reporting:
61.76% for McCain
35.64% for Obama
With 81.3% reporting
61.54% for McCain
35.69% for Obama
With 96.1% reporting
61.29% for McCain
35.96% for Obama
Alaska, like many states, has blue areas and red areas. The Mat-Su Valley, home of Sarah Palin is very very red. Anchorage? Blue. The Kenai Peninsula? Red. Juneau? Blue. You get the idea. When I, and my fellow progressive celebrants watched the first numbers come in, we thought, “That must be the Valley”, because the latest polls actually had the presidential race neck and neck with Obama only 2.7 points behind. We kept waiting for the progressive areas of the state to kick in, but they never did. No fluctuations one way or the other more than .3%. And George Bush won the 2004 election her by a margin of…..61-35.
Labels: politics
1 Comments:
I'm not much into conspiracy theories but your numbers certainly are suspicious. Most compelling is the fact that turnout was down. Got instance, in 2004, GOP voters knew by 4:00 local time that Bush really didn't need their votes, yet they still came out to vote. Why would Democrats be any different, especially considering the well-documented enthusiasm gap? Very, very peculiar. Hopefully, they'll be an official investigation. Until then, my official position is to be disgusted with Alaska voters for returning a felon to the Capitol. No wonder DC has a bad reputation.
Post a Comment
<< Home