http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2008/

http://www.sos.mo.gov/enrweb/a…..sp?eid=256

I actually toiled through the actual data spread sheets for the different Alaska districts and State Assembly areas. In the normal vote count Begich leads in the following District 1 [ Area 2 (58%), 3 (71.5%), 4 (61%), 5 (58%), 35 (53%), 36 (56%)]; District III [ Area 8 (57%) and tied in 6,7,9.10]; District II [ 18 (54%), 19 (52%) 20 (56%), 21 (52%), 22 (59%), 23 (61.5%), 25 (56%), 26 (54%), and tied in 24 and 29]; District IV [37 (52%), 38 (68%), 39 (60.5%) and 40 (61%)].

Stevens is ahead in the walk-up vote in the following: District 1 [Area 1 (56%), 33 (61%) 34 (63%); Mat-Su 13-16 averaging 63.5%; District III [11 (63%), 12 (57%); District II [17 (58%); 27 (54.5%), 28 (56.3%), 30 (53%), 31 (57.6%), 32 (53%)].

Some of the early ballots have been counted and this is where the real advantage goes to Begich. Begich is polling between +5% to + 18% better than his walk-up polls, with no counted precinct showing a lower number than his election day numbers.

In District I only two precincts (3,4) had some early ballots counted and these were 77% (+6%), and 70% (+9%). But the unrecorded pro-Begich districts out-number the Stevens areas.

Begich’s Mat-Su numbers for the for precincts showed an average of +7% for early voting [41-45% in this heavily Republican district]. So even though he never gains a majority there he cuts into Steven’s substantial leads in the walk-up votes.

District II precincts were about 12% higher than his walk-up numbers (with all above 51% and averaging about 63%).

District III his early voting numbers (61%) were averaging almost 14% higher than his walk-up vote averages.

In District IV only one set of early voting number was available. Area 4 showed Begich with a 64%-36% advantage over Stevens. That was about 4% higher than his walk-up vote % on election day.

Given the above, if the pattern continues Begich should win easily…unless some bias is present in the “problem votes” towards Stevens.