The Alaska Senate race is showing a 2% lead for Stevens when polling had him down anywhere from a few points to even a few polls showing double digit leads. Nate Silver had the probability of a Begich win at 100%.

Will there now be a "Stevens Effect" where voters will tell pollsters that they are voting against a convicted felon but then proceed to vote for the felon to continue the flow of pork money? On the other hand, does anyone know what type of voting equipment they use there?

That is another catchphrase I wanted to see retired this season. Besides being 26 years old, it was based on an assumption of voting behavior that was impossible to verify, yet this didn't stop the gasbags from trotting it out endlessly, with the added benefit of lending faux erudition to their fact-free blather. A handy trick for those with amnesia about practically everything, including what they said last week.

Another noticeable detail in this election were the actual percentages; several red states were much closer this time, while several blue states, including my own (Oregon), were such wipeouts that Republicans might as well fold their tents and go home. Dixie, on the other hand, just gets redder and redder; is it naive to wish they'd secede again?

How do the polls look for Congressional and Senate races compared to actual results? This is where I'd expect to see tampering this election anyway.

What about down-ticket races where the results weren't all but guaranteed?

How do the polls look for Congressional and Senate races compared to actual results? This is where I'd expect to see tampering this election anyway.

I'll do that comparison, but as I said here, that's the comparison I did for 2006 -- the most hotly contested Senate races. When a debate broke out here a few days ago regarding voting machine fraud, I pointed that out, and most advocates of the theory told me that it's far more likely to see that sort of voting fraud on a state-by-state basis in a presidential race for the electoral college than it was to see it in a mid-term election on an individual Senate basis.

If you think that down-ballot races are the key, then look to 2006. If you think that presidential races are key, then look at 2008.

Jim, the reported AK vote totals are only 2/3 of the '04 election. There are indications that there are a lot of uncounted early votes in AK (and CA and GA and... etc).

Since the early voting was trending Dem, Stevens might just be out after all.

GG's assessment is accurate and reasonable imo. The machinery of american elections remains suspect, poorly organized, and underfunded. Much of it remains untrackable and unreviewable.

the potential for fraud and manipulation remains.

One danger going forward is that 2006 and 2008 will allow leaders to ignore the work that must be done. And, as Greenwald points out, the lack of measurable manipulation in 2006 and 2008 does not bear on the documented irregularities of 2000 and 2004. As with so many other aspects of the Bush era, there has yet to be an accounting, let alone effective corrective measures.

..it is necessary to conduct a thorough analysis of all state contests to see if there is any evidence of fraud. Not saying that there is any, just want to be sure.

By the way, I do not agree with your statement that the poll results that you showed were extremely accurate. There does appear to be a small bias. If they were truly accurate, the "Actual results v. polls" should show Obama up on some and McCain up on others. Obama's performance was systematically underestimated. This indicates a bias, some other kind of inaccuracy in addition to the error from the size of the random sample. It is not a very big bias, but it does appear to be slightly significant.

Another way of saying this is this: One poll has a predicted result and a predicted error. Nothing more to say. But the results of many polls can be used to look for bias in the group of polls as a whole. The results of many polls should tend towards the predictions on average if the only errors are the random ones from the limited size of the random samples. These do not. It is not surprising that there are other errors, but it does mean one should be cautious about polls.

I would gladly trade away these "excesses" in the results for Obama in exchange for another Senate seat or two.

Which of course they don't have a clear idea of how many of those they have. Not declaring an election is old fare for NC. In 2004 we had 2 elections that went through the courts for almost 2 YEARS before a revote was run. TarHeelistan I am confident will move heaven and earth and the bones of Jesse Helms to symbolically declare McCain the winner.

The only battles in this battleground state, were fought in the 1860's.

The "tubes" seem awfully stopped up this morning. Perhaps Joe the plumber, who is bound to have a lot of free time on his hands, could snake the lines.

I just went to oregonlive.com, the site for The Oregonian, and their Senate totals are from around midnight, with Merkley in a narrow lead. A glance at TPM, though, shows that the smarmy game show host is back ahead, with still only about 2/3 counted. (If it matters to Oregonians, it's in Talking Points Memo...) Guess there's no point wasting 75 cents on the Oregonian today; they went to bed kind of early. Surprise. Maybe they need to be nicer to conservatives.... they could sell more papers and get their beauty rest.

...not that there was ever any doubt...

from the good ole pusillanamous AP

"Not one Republican ousted a Senate Democrat.

But on the brighter side, the GOP blocked a complete rout in that chamber,"

link - http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-bc-congress-rdp1stld-writethru,0,7501588.story

I'm one of those who thought they would steal the election through manipulation of the electronic voting. I still think that the majority of Republicans have demonstrated themselves dishonest enough to do such a thing... but for whatever reason they didn't do it.

I'm happy to be wrong.

I'm happy that all the Conservative trolls who post here will turn to stone in the daylight, the proper fate for all trolls. I'm going to have a good time demonstrating that Democrats aren't just people who like to complain, as they've accused us of being; we only complain when something's wrong. And then we go out there and FIX IT. And then we party!