CA-AG: Things Looking EVEN Better for Kamala Harris

Update: You can check out our spreadsheets, too. We’re about 138,000 votes ahead of the SoS.

I was pessimistic last time about Kamala Harris’ chances, but daman09’s excellent analysis inspired me to do another county-by-county canvass of results with new projections. And as the title would give it away, things are looking MUCH better for Kamala.

Going county-by-county for the most recent updates, Harris now leads by 4,565 votes, 4,141,477 to Cooley’s 4,137,212.

While the SoS estimates 898,458 votes left to process, I estimate about 636,669, using the most recent estimates from individual counties when available and adjustments to the UBR counts where appropriate.

In the counties left standing, I’m conservatively estimating Harris’ weighted performance to be 46.08% to Cooley’s 45.14%, which should be good for another 5,993 votes.

Perhaps most significantly, Harris is performing better in the Abs/Prov/VBMs that have been added. Based on her performance as of our November 8th county-by-county canvass and and the origin of the 1,042,711 tabulated since then, we would have expected Kamala to outperform Cooley by 0.84%, for a margin of 8,707. But instead, she’s actually outperformed Cooley by 2.28%, improving her margin by 23,754.

Her swings in counties are as follows:



























































































































































County Swing County Swing
San Benito 1.98% Tulare -1.38%
Nevada 1.42% Sutter -1.34%
Orange 1.30% El Dorado -0.89%
Monterey 0.93% Tehama -0.64%
Alameda 0.75% Amador -0.58%
Contra Costa 0.71% Santa Cruz -0.43%
Sacramento 0.70% Yuba -0.35%
Inyo 0.64% Los Angeles -0.33%
San Mateo 0.55% Solano -0.29%
Merced 0.45% Siskiyou -0.16%
San Luis Obispo 0.39% Yolo -0.15%
San Francisco 0.38% San Joaquin -0.15%
Kings 0.28% Fresno -0.08%
Santa Barbara 0.28% San Diego -0.04%
San Bernardino 0.24% Kern -0.03%
Marin 0.18% Sierra -0.00%
Imperial 0.14%
Ventura 0.12%
Riverside 0.10%
Shasta 0.10%
Santa Clara 0.03%

My estimation of the number of unprocessed ballots differs from the UBR for the following counties:

  • Butte: +222, per the county update.

  • Contra Costa: -9,411 to adjust for votes added since November 12.

  • Imperial: -5,557 to adjust for votes added since November 6.

  • Los Angeles: -55,762 to adjust for votes added November 12.

  • Marin: -19,108 to adjust for votes added since November 8.

  • Monterey: -27,126 to adjust for votes added since November 8.

  • Orange: -43,227, per the county update.

  • Placer: +27,956 to restore the estimates to those on November 6. Placer County has not updated its results since November 3.

  • Riverside: -900, per the county update.

  • San Bernardino: -7,000 per the county update.

  • San Diego: -11,470 per the county update.

  • San Francisco: -10,037 to adjust for votes added since November 8.

  • San Joaquin: -32,279 to adjust for votes added since November 8.

  • San Mateo: -26,812; San Mateo has actually added 34,601 votes since November 8; I’ve now assumed 0.

  • Santa Clara: -9,686 to adjust for votes added since November 10.

  • Santa Cruz: -20,592 to adjust for votes added since November 8.

  • Yolo: -9,791 per the County; the County now lists no unprocessed ballots.

  • Yuba: -1,209 per the County’s labeling of its latest update as “Final.”

Movers and shakers below:














































































































































































































County Total Harris Cooley Unproc Harris Cooley Margin
Los Angeles 2,077,252 1,104,134 822,859 152,751 81,193 60,509 20,684
Alameda 413,545 275,663 106,564 24,500 16,331 6,313 10,018
Sonoma 138,383 79,052 45,321 35,500 20,280 11,626 8,653
San Francisco 245,397 174,177 50,398 11,339 8,048 2,329 5,719
Contra Costa 310,433 165,752 122,421 29,002 15,485 11,437 4,048
Mendocino 19,097 10,321 6,159 12,358 6,679 3,986 2,693
Santa Cruz 87,349 54,033 24,218 7,313 4,524 2,028 2,496
Marin 102,499 63,668 31,727 7,942 4,933 2,458 2,475
Humboldt 35,966 18,011 13,436 13,387 6,704 5,001 1,703
Napa 28,480 14,229 11,711 17,877 8,932 7,351 1,581
Santa Clara 467,447 256,069 170,877 8,414 4,609 3,076 1,533
Solano 109,963 55,825 45,385 5,498 2,791 2,269 522
Monterey 87,434 47,784 32,266 2,344 1,281 865 416
Imperial 23,812 11,583 9,985 3,629 1,765 1,522 244
Lake 14,980 6,585 6,430 5,372 2,361 2,306 56
San Benito 15,164 7,007 6,759 433 200 193 7


















































































































































































































































































































































County Total Harris Cooley Unproc Harris Cooley Margin
Placer 107,703 31,998 66,112 28,056 8,335 17,222 -8,886
San Diego 806,573 309,842 421,749 60,500 23,241 31,635 -8,394
Riverside 447,756 163,335 248,095 28,800 10,506 15,958 -5,452
San Bernardino 393,156 145,444 207,987 29,000 10,728 15,342 -4,613
Fresno 166,017 59,237 95,001 17,500 6,244 10,014 -3,770
Kern 159,058 42,875 100,947 10,202 2,750 6,475 -3,725
Orange 838,124 260,554 504,483 11,089 3,447 6,675 -3,227
Butte 56,937 20,635 29,626 18,229 6,607 9,485 -2,879
Tulare 76,763 22,316 48,368 6,700 1,948 4,222 -2,274
Ventura 241,363 93,845 129,520 12,556 4,882 6,738 -1,856
Madera 27,635 8,130 16,872 5,806 1,708 3,545 -1,837
Calaveras 14,501 4,168 8,236 4,918 1,414 2,793 -1,380
El Dorado 72,133 21,081 43,705 3,900 1,140 2,363 -1,223
Shasta 59,536 15,995 37,152 3,400 913 2,122 -1,208
Stanislaus 110,462 41,587 59,205 6,980 2,628 3,741 -1,113
Tehama 17,117 4,594 10,321 2,999 805 1,808 -1,003
Sutter 22,671 6,642 13,871 2,384 698 1,459 -760
Nevada 37,088 14,129 19,126 4,730 1,802 2,439 -637
San Joaquin 146,197 59,904 70,919 7,436 3,047 3,607 -560
Sacramento 378,523 169,118 178,844 21,621 9,660 10,215 -556
Amador 15,640 4,334 9,238 1,741 482 1,028 -546
Santa Barbara 119,282 51,662 57,104 6,536 2,831 3,129 -298
San Luis Obispo 99,236 37,257 51,944 1,728 649 905 -256
Del Norte 6,876 2,520 3,562 1,008 369 522 -153
Tuolumne 21,104 6,629 11,962 524 165 297 -132
Mariposa 7,010 2,096 4,051 267 80 154 -74
Merced 46,263 18,698 23,540 400 162 204 -42

72 thoughts on “CA-AG: Things Looking EVEN Better for Kamala Harris”

  1. what a crazy race. I guess with Newsom and probably Harris heading to Sacramento coming in January shatters the myth that “San Francisco Liberals” are unelectable statewide. Epic fail for the California GOP. Hopefully this means they’ll be reduced to irrelevancy in the next few years. (Full disclosure: I voted for Cooley.)

  2.  Was that although Harris is from San Francisco, she won San Mateo County by only 18 points which is just to the south of SF. Obama won there by 50 so when you put in the lean, you would expect a 26 point Harris win. I thought being near SF would help her margins there.

    I am guessing that Cooley picked a few more points than expected there because it has alot of moderates in Hillsborough and Woodside.  

  4. I’ve really gotten into this race, mainly because there weren’t really any close races in CA in 2008 (other than CA-44, which I knew deep down wouldn’t change hands)

  6. I’ve been talking about this at work every day, and now I’ve got many of my coworkers watching this one closely as well.

    California, I love you, but you need to hurry the frak up with that counting. Even Washington is beating us, and that’s just sad.

    And just in case anyone’s still not sure why this one matters:

    Perhaps most important, state AGs play a key role in reining in corporate excesses. Some former state AGs, like Dick Blumenthal in Connecticut or Andrew Cuomo in New York (now Sen.-elect Blumenthal and Gov.-elect Cuomo, respectively), earned themselves the enmity of corporate America-and the thanks of voters-for their aggressive pursuit of tobacco companies and Wall Street, respectively. California is much bigger than New York or Connecticut, and the AG there can have a greater impact on national issues than Cuomo or Blumenthal have had as AGs. Consequently, the tobacco, insurance, and gambling interests that fund the [Republican State Leadership Committee] have good cause to make sure Harris isn’t elected.

    http://motherjones.com/mojo/20…

    Go Kamala!

  8. in at least two ways:

    1) Provide timelier updates.  The SoS only updates results when the counties send the results to the SoS.  El Dorado County has not had any updates on the SoS site since election day.  But, on the county web site, there was one update a few days after the election and another update more recently.  The SoS should be more proactive in contacting counties, rather than just waiting for the counties to send in the information.  Better yet, there should be an automatic electronic transfer from the county web site to the SoS web site.

    2) Provide clearer updates.  The County Reporting Status and Unprocessed Ballot Status pages need to be merged into one page.  As it is now, they are not in sync.  (There are 18 counties in this situation per Jeffmd’s adjustment notes above).  When a vote update is received, the unprocessed ballots should be updated for that county on the same web page.  The Washington SoS does this.  Their Voter Turnout page shows how many ballots have been counted, when the last update was, when the next update is expected and how many ballots are left to be counted.  Here is the format they use:

    http://vote.wa.gov/Elections/W…

    The excellent tables that Jeffmd put together clearly show where everything stands at this moment.  Debra Bowen, who was just reelected to a second term, should endeavor to update the SoS web site with a similar goal in mind.

Comments are closed.