If Joe Sestak was caught buck naked with a 13 year old boy in a hotel room and a kilo of cocaine then Bill Healy would still defend him.

Hell Bill would probably ask Joe to let him join in on the action next time around.

And when Healy says Sestak by 8 he’s not referencing this Tuesdays election because anybody with half a brain who can read a poll knows that Toomey is going to win.

“Man-crush”
LOL!

A few points:
1) Joe’s not known for sharing, but he might let Bill watch.
2) Bill would probably claim the 13 year old boy kidnapped Joe and that it was the kid’s cocaine, and that the two of them had to kill the kid in “self-defense”. Who’s going to question the word of two military vets?
3) I think “8-points” is some mantra the acolytes chant at their Ses-tanic alter before deciding which other Dems on the ticket to sacrifice.

Perhaps he means Sestak by 8 (votes), not Sestak by 8 (points). If that is the case, we’d be in for one long, contentious recount.

Brent-
Sestak’s political career will be “over by 8″ (pm that is) on Tuesday.

Muhlenberg Daily tracking (ending date) of poll
10/19 Sestak +3
10/20 Tie
10/21 Tie
10/22 Toomey +3
10/23 Toomey +3
10/24 Toomey +5
10/25 Toomey +8
10/26 Toomey +5
10/27 Toomey +8
10/28 Toomey +5
10/29 Toomey +2 <- improvement for Joe, but not enough

but Maris just came out with Oct 26-28th
806 RV Sestak +4
461 LV Toomey +7

That's an 11 point gap going from Registered to Likely voters.

Sestak has not been AHEAD in a single Likely-Voter poll since the first Muhlenberg poll and managed tie (once) in the Ipsos poll a week ago.

During the Primary, all the LV polls showed Sestak ahead this close to the election.
See for yourself:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/senate/pa/pennsylvania_senate_democratic_primary-1050.html

Sestak not getting enough Beaver

http://earlyreturns.sites.post-gazette.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1842:beaver-dems-sorta-endorse-sestak&caid=53:post-gazette-staff&Itemid=34

Read about how Sestak didn’t pay his share to defer the costs of printing the Democratic sample ballots in Beaver County. The county party did not include the “finger pressing the button” graphic next to Sestak’s name on the ballots.

David,

The Mulenberg poll is completely worthless. The reason Sestak gained +3 from yesterday was simply because they sampled 47% Democrats and 45% Republicans the day before. Every time they sample more Republicans, the numbers go up for Toomey. Every time they sample more Democrats, the numbers go up for Sestak.

If I were you, I would stop relying on a poll that is completely worthless.

Muhlenberg needs to learn how to put a real, unbiased poll in the field. Then and only then will be it useful.

Vinny-
I’m not “relying” on Muhlenberg. I’m looking at ALL the polls:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/senate/pennsylvania
Muhlenberg is the best poll Sestak has going for him for the week, and he still can’t cross break-even on that one. I’m just having fun because team Sestak loved that first +3 for Joe from Muhlenberg, so I like tossing it back at them.

So, Vinny, what poll are YOU relying upon? What poll do you think best predicts how much Sestak will lose by?

Muhlenberg Daily tracking (ending date) of poll
10/19 Sestak +3
10/20 Tie
10/21 Tie
10/22 Toomey +3
10/23 Toomey +3
10/24 Toomey +5
10/25 Toomey +8
10/26 Toomey +5
10/27 Toomey +8
10/28 Toomey +5
10/29 Toomey +2
10/30 Toomey +2

You’re getting played, David. Sestak will be ahead in the final Muhlenberg poll come Tuesday, it’s obvious. The past two days they sampled more Democrats than Republicans. If they do the same these next final two days, then Sestak will move ahead again. Even when he moves ahead, it means absolutely nothing. Muhlenberg can fudge the results any way they want to. The only people who are laughing and having fun are the people who are laughing and having fun on people that post and strongly rely on Muhlenberg results every single day.

The only poll I would say is accurate is AP-Ispos, Reuters, ones like those. They are completely unbiased since they don’t care who wins. Polls like Rasmussen, Muhlenberg and ones like those are biased since they actually do care who wins.

LOL @ John.

So according to your estimation all of the polling data is garbage because they have Sestak trailing however the only credible poll out there is the one that has the race tied?

Looks like somebody is drinking too much of the Sestak Kool-Aid.

Did I say all the polling data is garbage? No, I did not. I said Muhlenberg is garbage. Reading comprehension, David. If you were in a debate, you would lose every time.

And for the record, I’m not even voting for Sestak. So you’re wrong there, too.

John-
My point is that NO poll shows Sestak ahead. At this point in Sestak’s two previous “come-from-behind” victories, he was up in most or all the polls.

I’m not getting “played” by Muhlenberg. It could say Sestak was 10 points ahead, but then I couldn’t use it to screw with the Sestak people. The Sestak people treated Muhlenberg as the gospel when it first came out. I don’t consider it reliable, but it just comes out everyday so it like twisting the knife.

I actually think Muhlenberg is more favorable to Sestak than the actual outcome, which is looking more like 3 or 4 points. Muhlenberg’s the outlier (and it still shows Sestak behind).
This is the election evaluation that I’m putting stock in:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/forecasts/senate/pennsylvania

Each side will always use the poll that shows they’re ahead, David. But unless the poll data is meaningful it doesn’t mean anything. Most people don’t take the time to examine the poll data to see if it’s meaningful or hogwash.

Still, most people will always cite the poll that shows their guy is ahead even if the data is meaningless. And worst of all, many people will still cite the poll that shows their guy is ahead even if they know the data is meaningless. Those are the worst offenders of all.

John-
Sestak has NO polls showing him ahead.
You know the Sestak campaign’s in trouble when all they will quote is “internal polls” and claim the race tied. That’s the best they can cherry pick? Sad.

New PPP (Public Policy Polling) which is a (D) pollster just came out with a new poll showing Toomey +5 (51% – 46%) That’s over the magic 50%.
Also, 9% of those polled say they already cast their ballots. If that’s representative, then Toomey’s got about 0.45% (about half a percent) build in lead.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_PA_10311118.pdf

It’s a shame we are going to get Toomey, but the silver lining is getting rid of Sestak and ending his political career before he can more damage to the Democratic party. Sestak’s simply unfit to serve in public office (and as member of the Democratic party).

All the polls released this morning show a 4-5 point lead for Toomey. It’s possible for a candidate to be behind by 1 or 2 (in rare cases 3) on election day and still pull it out, but it’s impossible to make up 4 or 5 points on election day. It’s over now, if there was any doubt at all.

Muhlenberg Daily tracking (ending date) of poll
10/19 Sestak +3
10/20 Tie
10/21 Tie
10/22 Toomey +3
10/23 Toomey +3
10/24 Toomey +5
10/25 Toomey +8
10/26 Toomey +5
10/27 Toomey +8
10/28 Toomey +5
10/29 Toomey +2
10/30 Toomey +2
10/31 Toomey +4 <– Final release

Key numbers:
In the cross-tabs, % within each party voting for the candidates
Party Sestak Toomey
Dem 72% 19%
Rep 13% 79%
Ind 41% 41%

The "gap" of 7% within the party (79% vs 72%) combined with the "enthusiasm gap" of GOP having a 10% higher turnout (60% of Republicans likely to turn out, vs only 50% Dem). 13% of Rep voting for Sestak, but 19% of Dems voting for Toomey

You get Sestak:
3,876,280 * 50% * 72% + 2,847,691 * 60% * 13%
= 1,617,581 votes
And Toomey:
2,847,691 * 60% * 79% + 3,876,280 * 50% * 19%
= 1,718,052 votes

That's about a 100,000 vote margin for Toomey.

Philly Dems would have to turnout 65% to 70% overcome this. They turned out slightly more than 50% in 2006 when it was Rendell/Casey.

Put a fork in Joe, he's done.

Oh, BTW, I just saw that Quinniapac has a new poll:

Toomey: 50% Sestak 45% (–>> Toomey +5)

“From October 25 – 30, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,244 Pennsylvania likely voters, with a margin of error of +/- 2.8 percentage points. ”

BTW, for Halloween, I wore a t-shirt with +8 written on it and said I was going as “Bill Healy” LOL!

Muhlenberg has the correct conclusion, but the wrong data in getting there.

Most of the other polls show each candidate with strong support in its own base (about 82% of Dems going for Sestak and 82% of Reps going for Toomey) but independent voters are going for Toomey by double digits. Some polls even has it as high as 20 points. Indepedents are not even by any stretch of the imagination (as Muhlenberg wants you to believe). If they are then Toomey will only win by about 1% (due to more GOP turnout than Dem turnout).

9,189 out of 9,244 Districts (99.41%) Reporting

SESTAK, JOE (DEM) 1,915,783 49.0%
TOOMEY, PAT (REP) 1,992,230 51.0%

difference: about 77,000 votes

Toomey always had more support among GOP than Sestak had among Dems. About 20% of Dems were voting against Sestak because of dissatisfaction with Obama AND because many recent Dems were Republicans prior to 2008.

“THIS is Democracy in action.”
— Joe Sestak May 18, 2010

Not bad, David, but you have to admit it was closer than what all the polls said. All the polls had Toomey ahead by 4-5 points, some even had it as high as 7 points. The final margin was 2%.

Even when the GOP last gave the Dems a bloodbath (back in 1994), Santorum only won PA by 2.5% that year.

It’s just really hard for the Republicans to win a Senate election in PA. Everything has to go right for them and if it does (as it did this year), they win by 2% or 2.5%. Because of that, Toomey will face a tough re-election campaign, although that’s not until 2016 so he has a few years before he has to worry about that.

Not Bad-
Thanks. I’d been calling it as 2-4 points for some time now. I think that pro-life, pro-gun went a long way toward helping Toomey.

The calculation of 100,000 was based on one Dem/Rep levels of support from a single poll and my own estimates of voter turnout. There was plenty of room for error in the estimate, and I presented it merely as a method to analyze the poll. Privately, to Dems that called me during the day, my guess was 50,000 to 100,000 so the result landing smack-dab in the middle of my range was pretty sweet for my “mystique”. LOL!

The reality is that I’m one of the few people in the state with access to and understanding of the raw voter data, along with decent math and computer skills to evaluate it. Enhancing that is the fact that I am out here on the blogs, under my own name, posting my ideas. That gets me noticed by people in the party and I get the occasional extra nugget of information about problems or trends.
Ideally, I’d like to be sanctioned by party as a technical consultant so I could get in on the meetings and lay out the math so the party could make more informed decisions. They can still make the calls, but I just get frustrated when they make bad calls due to lack of good data/info.

The most surprising thing was just about all the undecideds went for Sestak. Most people were arguing that the undecideds would go for Toomey. In all the polls taken, Sestak never got higher than 46% in any of them. Yet he ended up with 49%. In all the polls taken, a handful of them had Toomey up to 50%, 51% and 52%…and he could only get up to 51%. All the undecideds went for Sestak, it was almost enough to put him over the top.

In comparison, all the undecideds in Nevada went for Reid (again most argued that they would go for Angle). And most of the undecideds in Colorado went for Bennett.

What this proves is when push came to shove in blue states, they actually went towards the incumbents in the end. This strongly supports David Diano’s argument that Specter would’ve been the better candidate than Sestak. Since people in these states wanted to keep the incumbent instead of going for a change, Specter would’ve faired much better as the safer choice.

Final Analysis-
Thanks.

I think that with so many polarizing races, Pennsylvania could have stood proudly with Specter as a non-extreme candidate.

Seeing David Diano and Bill Healy battle it out on the message board over Specter vs. Sestak during this election season was VERY ENTERTAINING! Hell it was one of the reasons why most of us kept tuning into this website.

Love Him or Hate Him—Agree with Him or Disagree with Him—at least David Diano was man enough to take the heat after Specter lost in May. So at the end of the day you have to respect Diano because alot of people talked alot of trash about him (including myself at times) but he faced the fire when Specter lost. Diano didn’t crawl into a hole or disappear from the message board. He took his medicine like a man and I can respect that.

Now on the other hand its disappointing to see Bill Healy go silent after Sestak lost especially considering the fact that Healy was Sestak’s biggest advocate on this message board. Even when the polls during the general election said otherwise Healy stuck by his bold predictions of—-SESTAK BY 8. If Sestak had won then I’m sure he would’ve been bragging and gloating all over this message board. But since Sestak went down now Bill Healy is nowhere to be found. Seriously Bill we want to hear from you.

Man up and face the fire Bill Healy because if you remain silent then David Diano will have proven to be the better man than you.