Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

Pennsylvania's Undecided Voters

Topics: Barack Obama , Exit Polls , Hillary Clinton , National Journal , Pollster , Time/SRBI

Senator Clinton currently holds a 6 point lead over Senator Obama in Pennsylvania, based on our Pollster Trend Estimate, 49%-43%. But that leaves about 8 percent undecided. What they do will determine whether Clinton's vote expands her lead compared to the polls, or if the undecided narrow or possibly reverse, the lead.

My partner at Pollster, Mark Blumenthal, has looked at this using aggregate polling data here and in his NationalJournal.com column here.

In this post I take a look at the individual level, though using data that are three weeks old, so use caution in extrapolating to tomorrow's electorate.

Using data from the Time/SRBI poll of Pennsylvania, conducted 4/2-6/08, I estimate a model of support for Obama compared to Clinton. I use "the usual suspects" as variables predicting vote: partisanship, gender, race, Hispanic ethnicity, region of the state, age, education, religion and income. The data at that time found an eight point Clinton lead, a bit higher than today's trend estimate.

Using the coefficients for "decided" voters, I can estimate the probable vote of the undecided 11% of voters in the poll. This gives us a look at how they would be expected to behave IF they behave like those who have already picked a candidate. (Note the "if" here. As with all models, this assumes stable influence of the variables among the undecided as among the decided.)

The plot above shows the distribution of estimated probability of voting for Obama. Values close to zero are very likely to support Clinton, while values close to 1 are very likely Obama supporters. Those close to .5 are flipping a coin. The shape of the distribution gives a sense of where voters "lump up" in their estimated preferences.

The black line plots the distribution among those who reported a vote preference. The red line plots the distribution of estimated support among those who said they were undecided in early April.

The key point is that the undecided resemble the decided, with a small shift to the left, suggesting they were as a group somewhat more likely to support Clinton. In these data, the primary difference between undecided and decided voters was age, with older voters more likely to say they hadn't decided. As we've seen in virtually every exit poll, older voters are more likely to support Clinton, so the result we find here, that the undecided lean a bit more towards Clinton, is consistent with this result.

Now again for the caveats. These data are three weeks old. The model requires the assumption that undecided voters ultimately behave like those who decided. Different variables as predictors can make a difference. And so on.

The goal here is NOT, NOT, NOT a prediction of tomorrow's vote. Much may have changed since the first week of April.

The point is to illustrate what we can learn about undecided voters beyond the simple fact they say "undecided". In this case, the data suggest they are not wildly different from those who decided, but their older age makes it more likely they ultimately lean more to Clinton.

The Time/SRBI data are archived at the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. I am solely responsible for the analysis here.

Cross-posted at PoliticalArithmetik.com.

cinnamonape:

Mark...have you ever considered looking at the trends in the polls like ARG and SUSA that push undecideds over several surveys. Look for secular trends in the shifts (in PA Hillary seems to be losing "pushed" soft voters over the last three surveys). This gives you and indicator of what proportion and direction the "Undecideds" in other surveys are doing).

Then you compare these to the other polls with wider margins and split their votes accordingly.

Apportion each surveys hard polls against those that push. Then allocate the residuals to the undecided and compare how many pushed voters went to one, or the other candidate.

For each poll you get a static percentage of the possible split. But it really gets interesting in measuring the trends of the "undecideds".

In this case it seems as if the Undecideds are behaving differently than in previous primaries. It seems that they are swinging towards Obama, as evidenced by the SUSA and ARG polls significantly shifting that way, instead of toward Clinton.

I'm wondering if the desire to end the Democratic Primary season, and the increasing attacking mode by Clinton (making her less "Presidential" and more partisan) hasn't done more damage than good. If she had actually just allowed the debate moderators to go after Obama, or made some mild defenses of him she still would havve scored points, and eeven prevented an attack upon her (the Bill Clinton pardoned two Weather Underground terrorist rebuttal). Sometimes voters want "nice".

____________________

michelle`:

Barack Obama for President!

____________________

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