Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

NC-IN Follow-Up Links

Topics: 2008 , Exit Polls

Here are links to exit poll and related analysis from:

Other pollster related news:

  • Brian Schaffner plots pollster performance
  • SurveyUSA report cards for NC and IN
  • PPP takes a victory lap
  • Mickey Kaus (8:45 entry) vents about hidden exit poll estimates

If you've seen other exit poll analysis or pollster related news, email me a link and I'll add it to the list.

 

Comments
Tybo:

Hello, President McCain.


You can not win the presidency with 38% of the white male vote, and even less of the Hispanic male vote.

____________________

jac13:

Tybo,

Please take your hostile, adversary posts to one of the food-fight sites and stop putting them up here.

(BTW, please send me a copy of your letter of apology to Zogby.)

____________________

carl29:

Well, as you can see guys, I was right about NC. I always tought that would be Obama up by 15%. I was right on the money ! ! However, I'm really impressed by IN. I honestly tought that would be like PA, Hillary up by high single digits.

Let me tell you the guy knows who to give a fight. No one can argue that these have been his most diffucult weeks and still Hillary could not even "overtake" him in IN. Look at the average of the polls coming from IN where she was up by 5%. No one expected Obama to make Hillary's people sweat last night in IN.

I really think that yesterday was Hillary's last chance. She really failed miserably. The worst weeks for this guy and he outperformed in both states. To me that says a lot about Hillary's support. Obama had a rough time, and instead of living him, his people rallied around him in a big way.

Kuddos for him ! ! !

____________________

jac13:

My prediction after PA was that Obama would win big in NC and that IN was a "pick-em," with one of the two winning it close. And that is what happened. (We'll never know if Obama would have won IN but for "Operation Chaos.")

There is the usual spate of "Clinton's Options Narrow" commentary over at RealClearPolitics this morning, and there has been lots of talk both on tv last night and on the web this morning about HRC dropping out. As I've said on other sites, I think if she does it will be because of money, not principle. We shall see.

____________________

killias2:

"Hello, President McCain.


You can not win the presidency with 38% of the white male vote, and even less of the Hispanic male vote."

While this is a PRIMARY and not a general election (so things will change), I thought I'd do a little research and check this out. Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 with 36% of the white male vote.

____________________

goawaybillary:


looks like the bogus statements and falsehoods from camp clinton have already begun.......


____________________

carl29:

WELL, I CANNOT SAY ANYTHING ON BEHALF OF WHITE MALES. HOWEVER, I AM HISPANIC, LIVING IN MIAMI. MY ENTIRE FAMILY IS HISPANIC, FROM CENTRAL AMERICA.

SENATOR OBAMA IS GONNA CARRY THE HISPANIC VOTE BIG. WHY? HISPANICS VOTE WITH THEIR POCKETS. RIGHT NOW, THE ONES THAT ARE FEELING THE HEAT IN THIS ECONOMY ARE THE PEOPLE AT THE VERY END OF THE LINE. HISPANICS ARE RIGHT THEIR.

SO,FIRST OF ALL, HISPANICS, EXCEPT CUBANS, ARE OVERWHELMINGLY DEMOCRAT. THE REASON THAT HISPANICS ARE VOTING SO BIG FOR HILLARY IS BECAUSE OF BILL CLINTON. HISPANICS REMEMBER THE GOOD ECONOMY OF THE 90'S AND WANT THOSE YEARS "BACK." ONCE THEY ARE PRESENTED WITH THE CHOICE OF THE REPUBLICAN AND THE DEMOCRAT, THE DEMOCRAT WINS HANDS DOWN.

THIS IS JUST HISPANIC PSICOLOGY. WE LOVE BRANDS, AND REMEMBER THAT THE CLINTONS ARE THE BIGGEST BRAND AMONG DEMOCRATS. SO, NO WONDER WHY HISPANICS ARE GOING FOR THEM, BUT LET ME TELL YOU THAT ONCE THE TIME COMES THEY WON'T THINK TWICE ABOUT VOTING FOR THE DEMOCRAT, NO MATTER WHO THIS IS.

____________________

mago:

killias2:

Yes, I was just going to say that if Obama wins 38% of the white male vote in NC or IN in November, it will be a Dem landslide.

Looking at the crosstabs on SUSA's polls v. McCain, the demographic differences between the two Dems largely disappear, e.g. Clinton does well w/ young people and Obama does well with women and Latinos. Which is basically a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.

____________________

Tybo:

carl,
Please take your insults to a food fight site yourself.

At least I talk about polling.
You? other posters.

Obama has all the makings of a 38 state win---for Mccain.
If you don't like it that Obama has a real problem carrying white and latino male votes (and female, but they will probably be less an issue in the GE) that's tough. It's what the numbers show

You don't like the facts, try debating with numbers..
Ah, there's the problem.


now, please stop shouting. All caps is rude

"SO,FIRST OF ALL, HISPANICS, EXCEPT CUBANS, ARE OVERWHELMINGLY DEMOCRAT"

than must be news to the GOP since in 2004 new mexico,nevada ,arizona,and colorado went Gop because of the Latino vote.

____________________

Tybo:

" Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 with 36% of the white male vote."

and lost the election.

____________________

Tybo:

and Kerry had 37% of the white male vote and lost in 2004

and in Indiana Obama had 42% of the white male vote and lost the primary, despite record AA turnout and 92% of the vote.


>>> It is not a personal affront to be faced with the facts.
Obama is in trouble.
Kerry had 53% of the latino vote. McCain is very likely to carry that Latino vote, so how is Obama going to remedy that loss?

____________________

carl29:

Dear Tybo:

I was just giving you an insight into the "Hispanic" world. I think that I can say it because of my position as a hispanic.

Now, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico have never been strongholds of the Democratic party. Actually, they are increasingly slipping away from Republicans precisely because of the hispanic vote, and some exilees from California.

In fact, Bush won New Mexico precisely because of hispanic women, moms whose major concern was education. You know, Karl Rove found it out through "micro-targeting." So, What did Bush do? target those moms with his "No Child Left Behind" type of slogan. However, that was way back then when the economy was O.K. and people were concern about other issues as well.

I don't think that anybody doubts that the economy and all other "bread and butter" issues are going to define this election. And unfortunately, people don't see Republicans as capable to deliver on those issues. Republicans are seen as capable to manage national security issues, but when it comes to domestic issues, they are in BIG trouble.

The reason that the Clintons are fighting like crazy for this nomination is because they know that Republicans are in BIG TROUBLE. So, the chances for the Democrats are huge.


____________________

killias2:

Tybo,

Al Gore won the popular vote with that number. Bill Clinton won the entire election in 1996 with 38% of the white male vote.

Your suggestion that his weakness with Hispanics and women will carry over to the general election is flawed at best.

The primary is over. McCain is next.
GOBAMA

____________________

cinnamonape:

First there seems to be some real issues in drawing Conclusions from Primary to General election results. Many comments above (and in the media) suggest that because Obama doesn't attract certain demographics in the Primary that they will not support him in the General. That's absurd and illogical.

Invert the proposition. "Hillary can't win because she won't attract black voters...she'll only get 10% and the rest will support McCain". The people who supported Hillary MAY defect...but simply because they voted for her in an Obama v. Clinton matchup doesn't predict their behavior once she's out of the race. Over 70% of Hillary's supporters say they will vote for the eventual nominee, even if it is Obama.

Second, given the large number of Republicans that have switched registration and independents that voted in the Democratic Primaries it's quite likely that some will vote for McCain in the General. But that may also mean that a good number will not. How many of these voters were part of "Operation Chaos" and how many are actually individuals who supported one of the Democratic candidates is a very real issue. When the Republican Primary race was meaningful and diverse about 10% of the Republicans "jumped parties" (almost zero in the other direction). That indicates real antipathy to the Party.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

Obama can easily get white males by getting Edwards as VP or Hispanics by getting Richardson. People think this race is so static like noone has a trick up their sleeve. SNAPSHOTS people, snapshots in time are what we are talking about.

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

Tybo,

Don't believe the media hype that "obama has a problem with white working class." The fall election is a loooong way away, and, despite the close polls now, our country's mood overwhelmingly favors democrats. Even on MyDD this morning I see hints of reconciliation between the enemies. The stakes are too high for Democrats to suddenly abandon ship.

If I had to put my money on it now, I say Obama landslide in the fall. Right now he ties (and even beats) McCain in the polls. Wait for the 10 pt unity bounce and talk to me in August. Right now all the polls say Obama 46, McCain 45 or so....In August I bet that will look something like Obama 51, McCain 40. Just sayin.

____________________

eternaltriangle:

This white vote - black vote thing misses a key point, and that is that blacks are clustered voters in very few likely swing states. Winning even 100 % of the black vote or increasing black turnout substantially would only matter for defending Michigan and picking up Ohio. Moreover, in both cases, working class whites are far more numerous.


____________________

killias2:

Yeah the 12% of the population that consistently votes Democrat never made a difference in national politics. **rolls eyes**

____________________

Tybo:

al gore won the popular vote, but lost the election.
Bill Clinton won both elections with a plurality, Perot took 8 or 9% in 1996.. There doesn't not appear to be a strong 3rd party candidate for 2008.

If CLinton was the nominee , the AA may not support her, but they would not vote for McCain. That's the difference. The white male vote won't sit it out.

Obama's Deep weakness with the Latino's will
create another gap he'll need to fill. And Latino's support over the years has been strong for McCain. Has he lost some of it with his change on Immigration? I don't know.

I thought I was clear in my post that I believe woman(white at least) will drift towards Obama (unless McCain VP's a woman who is moderate/conservative). Sorry if that wasn't completely clear.

But white and Latino males, especially those who work?
Obama must find a way to get their support, else it's two votes .. one for not voting for him, one for voting with McCain.


It's not media hype that Obama doesn't carry the working man white vote, it's the numbers.

____________________

killias2:

"al gore won the popular vote, but lost the election.
Bill Clinton won both elections with a plurality, Perot took 8 or 9% in 1996.. There doesn't not appear to be a strong 3rd party candidate for 2008."

Yeah, I suppose you're right. Bill Clinton's win with -49.24%- is way different than a win with -50.00%-. **rolls eyes**

"It's not media hype that Obama doesn't carry the working man white vote, it's the numbers."

Yeah, the numbers also prove that Obama only wins like half of the democrats in every state! I mean, of course, those are primaries, but let's go ahead and assume it will hold true in the general election as well. **rolls eyes yet again**

Talk to me when you have some solid general election data.

____________________

illinoisindie:

@Tybo
The last time I checked, this site was called pollster.com not spinster. Com
Interpreting results just to suit your particular spin is so annoying. What is more annoying is the discounting of the African American vote by people like you. Every-one in this campaign matters, and democrats rely on the African American vote, so what if their universal support of one candidate spurs him on to victory while the rest of the democratic party is split down the middle- all in all they still make up an important part of the democratic electorate.
As for the spin on the % of white male vote Obama is at about 35-40% guess where Bill Clinton was when he won. So get off it already. The democratic base has expressed that its newcomers, young and ?highly? educated like Obama and its blue collar like Hillary. Here?s a great stat for you Obama improved his standing with white blue collar from OHIO and PA from 32% to 40% in IN.
Make no bones about it this election may be close and turnout will be important, however based on registration and turnout models I say advantage democrats.
(Disclosure- highly energized Obama republican turn independent- will vote for Obama in GE and will drag myself kicking and screaming to vote for Hillary if she eeks this out) too much at stake in this election.

____________________

Tybo:

"Interpreting results just to suit your particular spin is so annoying. "

then stop doing it.

____________________

Tybo:

"Interpreting results just to suit your particular spin is so annoying. "

then stop doing it.

I didn't discount the AA vote.
I don't count the popular vote as if it matters in the GE.
I don't think that Obama losing Indiana is a sign of strenght.
Even Obama said Indiana was the 'tie breaker".

and he lost it.

The GE doesn't work like the absurd Democratic nomination process (states with a primary and a caucus, states that award extra credit for carrying some districts) No wonder the democrats match to the loss of the election against Bush in 2004.


____________________

illinoisindie:

Tybo
So whats that now double spin.... address his gain in the white blue collar vote in IN... "Its the numbers right and you cant argue with the numbers"
You must be a softer version of the infamous "the general" poster

____________________

illinoisindie:

Tybo
and yes you are discounting the AA vote when your focus is the white blue collar vote... an intelligent argument is:
Obama needs to make inroads into the blue collar vote- he improved in IN but he could do better

Clinton needs (or needed-depends on how you feel about the status of the race) to make inroads into his base of the AA's that once overwhelmingly supported a Clinton. 70-30 split of the AA's and we would be having a different conversation today

____________________

Gmann:

The BEST weapon that the Democrats have on McCain, is McCain himself. McCain is flip-flopping on his flip-flops. He changed opinions to please consevatives, now he is showing signs he is flipping back.

Dems will win big in November

____________________

zebedee:

You guys seem to be comparing apples with oranges. If he only gets 38% of the white vote in the dem primary vs HRC, we don't know what he would get in the GE. One might assume less than 38% since all the repub white males come into play and even amongst dems some will have voted for BO mainly because they don't like HRC but would be OK with Mccain

____________________

Jacob S:

First, the race is over. I said in a previous post that, if Obama reaches the 100 delegate mark, the race is effectively over. According to an email that I just received from the campaign, Obama did just that.

Second, I am not too concerned with 38% of white people figure. One, this figure is from two conservative and rural states. Two, it's hard to get a majority of the Caucasian vote, when your opponent has the unflinching loyalty of old Caucasian ladies (let's face it, that is almost half of the white Democratic vote right there). Third, I am convinced that Republicans are crossing over to vote for Clinton. If you eliminate these three factors, Obama would probably be competitive among Caucasians, as he indeed was in Wisconsin. Finally, allow me to point out that over a MILLION people voted in the Democratic primary in Indiana. If Obama gets most of those votes in November, the Republicans will be in BIG trouble.

Bottom line: if Clinton drops out of the race by mid-June and unites behind Obama, I give him a 60 percent or so change of winning.

____________________

cinnamonape:

"zebedee:


You guys seem to be comparing apples with oranges. If he only gets 38% of the white vote in the dem primary vs HRC, we don't know what he would get in the GE."

Well THAT's the only thing I agree with here. White male voters had a choice Hillary vs. Obama. They tended to prefer Hillary...but only if one assumes that they made their decision EXCLUSIVELY because she is WHITE, would it follow that the will automatically vote for McCain. They would have to ignore all sorts of other economic and political issues that distinguish McCain and Obama. Things like the "hundred year war", the housing and employment crisis, hius transformation from being an independent "maverick" to being a lock-step supporter of 98% of what Bush wanted.

"One might assume less than 38% since all the repub white males come into play and even amongst dems some will have voted for BO mainly because they don't like HRC but would be OK with Mccain"

But then you have White males that voted for HRC that won't vote for a Republican. And then you have a bunch of Republican WM's that voted for Obama in the early races EVEN WHEN the Republican Primaries had choices and options. They chose not to support McCain (or any of the others) when it really mattered. They chose to vote in the Democratic race.

Less than 25% of those that voted for Clinton say they will not vote for Obama. Many of those may drop out. Many were Republicans that crossed over to vote in the Democratic primary (look at the actual Primary participation levels...both Obama and Hillary got twice the amount of votes that McCain did in the Republican race).

If those 25% jump to McCain (or don't vote) and the 75% come to Obama...it's not gonna be close!

____________________

illinoisindie:

Heres why I say the election may be close- and this is the 6 month out picture which will change with the dynamics of this race.

Apart from the white/black/hispanic voter mama-drama. Obama's jugular is those older voters. The polls had them on average high 60's for Clinton. Unfortunately-(if you're a democrat) they all moved to Florida where there's significant electoral votes.

For a landslide...The unreliably-reliable young vote needs to "rock the vote" in 08 as they did in 92". They need to help him counterbalance those "set in their ways" older voters. The young are reliably Obama's but their turnout could be unreliable.

So while I hope and pray for an Obama blowout, he has some issues that he needs to address... and I hope that Hillary gives him the time to do it

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR