More Exit Polls : Thread Two

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:30:17 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Turnout numbers - 80% White, 14% A-A.

Key exit poll findings from ABC:

Preliminary results indicate that nearly six in 10 voters are women, which if it holds in final data will be a high for Pennsylvania, though about what it's been in all Democratic primaries this year. Turnout among African-Americans could be lower than it's been overall this year; it'll take updates later tonight to see whether it does or does not exceed the Pennsylvania primary record, 17 percent in 1988 and 1984.

We know Drudge said 52-48, but here is a reminder that early exit polls have not been great, and the early exits have been pretty favorable to Obama for whatever reason. Brendan Loy reminds:

For instance:

* In New Hampshire, the "first wave" showed Obama leading by 4; he lost by 3.

* On Super Tuesday, the "first wave" had Obama winning New Mexico by 6 (he lost by 1) and losing California by just 3 (actual margin: 8). The "second wave" wasn't any more accurate: it had Obama winning Georgia by 50 (actual margin: 35), Illinois by 40 (actual margin: 32), Alabama by 22 (actual margin: 14), Delaware by 14 (actual margin: 9), Connecticut by 7 (actual margin: 4), Arizona by 6 (lost by 8), New Jersey by 5 (lost by 10), Missouri by 4 (actual margin: 1), Massachusetts by 2 (lost by 15), and losing Tennessee by 10 (actual margin: 13), New York by 14 (actual margin: 17), Oklahoma by 30 (actual margin: 23) and Arkansas by 46 (actual margin: 44). So Oklahoma and Arkansas were the only states on Super Tuesday where Obama did better than the leaked, unweighted exit polls suggested.

* On March 4, the "second wave" showed Obama winning Vermont by 34 (actual margin: 21), Texas by 2 (lost by 4), Ohio by 2 (lost by 10), and tied in Rhode Island (lost by 18).

Clinton could lose tonight or win big or who knows what. We do know these early exit polls have not been that good at telling us much.

By Big Tent Democrat

< What's Considered a Win for Hillary in Pennsylvania? | Pennsylvania Exit Polls: Thread Three >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

More Exit Polls : Thread Two | 33 comments (33 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

ABC exit poll: Women turnout 60% (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by diplomatic on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:32:08 PM EST

Supposedly. Anyone else see that report?

No I did not see that (none / 0) (#4)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:34:54 PM EST

: Link (none / 0) (#8)
by diplomatic on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:37:44 PM EST

http://tinyurl.com/59ardg
Excerpt:

More than half rate the economy as the top issue in the election, similar to what it's been in all Democratic primaries to date. About nine in 10 say the nation's economy is in a recession and about four in 10 say it's a "serious" recession. On attributes, as elsewhere, the top quality cited by far is the candidate who "can bring about needed change."
Preliminary results indicate that nearly six in 10 voters are women, which if it holds in final data will be a high for Pennsylvania, though about what it's been in all Democratic primaries this year. Turnout among African-Americans could be lower than it's been overall this year; it'll take updates later tonight to see whether it does or does not exceed the Pennsylvania primary record, 17 percent in 1988 and 1984.

That sounds better for Hillary (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:36:29 PM EST

but I haven't seen that anywhere, so I doubt it.

Poll close in an hour and a half.


It is true (5.00 / 2) (#10)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:38:49 PM EST

and black turnout is unlikely to exceed 15% of the total.


Then it could be an amazing night for Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by andgarden on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:39:32 PM EST

the see-saw continues until we have numbers.


PResumably this is second wave (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:40:43 PM EST

Because Drudges number do not line up now.


: And Jim Geraghty's make no sense whatsoever (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by andgarden on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:42:37 PM EST

I'm dismissing all of these numbers, though. Let's see what we see when the polls close.

Quit getting my hopes up andgarden. (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by Teresa on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:42:28 PM EST

Well we'll see (none / 0) (#9)
by diplomatic on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:38:41 PM EST

I have a link for it: http://tinyurl.com/59ardg


Overall turnout was 60% women... (none / 0) (#7)
by Exeter on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:37:11 PM EST

...or 60% or registered female Dems turned out?


: Reading the report: implies Dem Women (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by diplomatic on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:39:03 PM EST

I think (none / 0) (#29)
by AnninCA on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:00:04 PM EST

That number is standard for the Dems. Women represent 60% of the voters.

I think.


: No (none / 0) (#33)
by diplomatic on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:13:24 PM EST

They are the majority but never before in this primary have Democratic women turned out at 60%
Registered vs turnout is the contrast.

Ok, I'm tearing myself (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by MarkL on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:32:37 PM EST

away for a couple hours.
Post some good news while I'm gone, please.

Thanks BTD (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by felizarte on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:35:03 PM EST

for the injection of an antidote for premature hysterics.

The problem with early exits (5.00 / 4) (#24)
by spit on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:47:22 PM EST

(aside from normal problems with polling) is that different sorts of voters are not spread totally evenly throughout the day; any one time period is not a representative sample of people voting, and different portions may have different patterns. Blue collar workers tend to vote after work, white collar workers can often find other times (lunch, etc). Seniors and students both have a lot of flexibility in their schedules, while others do not. I could go on.

None of it is easily accounted for, so I never ever trust the exits until the last ones trickle in, at which point it makes just as much sense to just wait for the actual results. I know everybody is waiting on the edges of seats and just wants an answer (NOW, for the love of Dog!), but IMO it's generally better to just wait the, what, hour and a half more before deciding what to think.

That said, I'm not immune either, especially as it seems now that each of these contests has so much at stake.

My prediction: whatever result will infuriate a lot of people. Which is, of course, bound to happen basically no matter what, so it's a pretty safe bet.

Only half of Clinton voters would vote for (5.00 / 2) (#25)
by Teresa on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:48:45 PM EST

Obama. The rest either McCain or not vote. We are in big trouble. Even if this exit poll is 50% off, that's bad.

: At this point, IMO, (5.00 / 4) (#27)
by spit on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:54:48 PM EST

there are a lot of fences to mend once the nominee is chosen.
Some of Obama's more, uh, strident supporters really do damage in this regard, IMO. No matter who wins, they're going to have to be able to win over the supporters of the losing party, which becomes harder the more those folks feel spat upon.
I personally won't get too worried until similar polling after the nominee is clearly chosen. I think people are feeling more bitter now than they necessarily will be later, when the choice between Democrat X and McCain is in front of them.
That said, I also think McCain is the one shot the Republicans had this cycle, and he could easily take some folks we'd have otherwise gotten even aside from the bitter primary stuff. People like that bogus maverick thing, and many won't IMO fault him as much for his views on Iraq as a lot of the left blogosphere is hoping.

as a poli-sci (5.00 / 2) (#30)
by isaac on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:01:00 PM EST

major, exit polls are very useful, from a historical perspective. early exits, which havent been weighted and are incomplete, are pretty meaningless

: Thanks (none / 0) (#32)
by AnninCA on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:03:39 PM EST

for putting it into perspective.
Makes sense.

Exit polls tell us one thing (none / 0) (#3)
by Marvin42 on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:32:52 PM EST

That exit polls are worth nothing!

Sorry, I have excess snark today.

Hey BTD, (none / 0) (#11)
by andgarden on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:38:53 PM EST

I pulled 17% AA out of my educated rear end, but it looks like that's actually happened before!

Looks like it will be less (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:40:04 PM EST

Exit polls sure play on my emotions (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by diplomatic on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:43:42 PM EST

Argh, BTD why did you lure me into this mess. Now I'm posting links to them and everything. LOL. I just love TalkLeft too much.


: Heh (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:45:31 PM EST

We're junkies.

if the AA turnout is less than expected (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by ccpup on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:44:57 PM EST

or than what the Pollsters anticipated, then how might that affect the overall vote for each candidate? Or the accuracy of the pre-Primary (even SUSA) Polls?

It seems as if lower AA turnout isn't good for Obama (and says something about his GOTV efforts which should raise a few Superdelegate eyebrows) and a 60% female voter turnout bodes better for Hillary, right?


Every extra point in A-A turnout (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:46:11 PM EST

is a point in Obama's column.


SUSA and white males (5.00 / 2) (#23)
by diplomatic on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:46:39 PM EST

Let me jump in here to make the point that some exit polls also are showing Hillary winning white males by a good amount. The SUSA projections were based on a better performance by Obama in that demographic.


Obama takes that vote (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by AnninCA on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:54:39 PM EST

for granted. He didn't even campaign much in the heavily dominated AA areas. I read an article about it this week.

It had great quotes from people saying, "They understood."

I love this one site by AA politicos. They are writing that Obama equals 4 years of irrelevance. He just is using them.

No promises. No show-ups.

Who knows? Maybe we're really are going to see a trend that makes a difference tonight.

Low turn-out in his key group spells big trouble.


The thing is (5.00 / 4) (#28)
by Steve M on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:55:30 PM EST

AA voters are pretty reliable at showing up in most elections, to their credit. But this also means there aren't as many new AA voters to bring out to the polls.

In terms of raw numbers, AA turnout is surely up for Obama this year. It's just that non-AA turnout is up by more - at least this is how it worked in Texas - and this is mainly an artifact of the reality that black voters are less likely to be "new" to the process.

If the black vote is up 20% from the last election, and the white vote is up 30%, that will be reported as "lower black turnout" because the percentage of blacks in the voting pool will be lower than it was the last time. But that phrase wouldn't really tell the whole story.


: Correct (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by AnninCA on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 06:01:47 PM EST

Steve. One of the interesting side-bar stories was that the AA voter percentage actually dropped in the Texas primary in Houston.
I blinked when I first saw that, but what you are saying is the explanation.

Interesting. A return to the pre-Iowa (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by Cream City on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:46:23 PM EST

thinking in the AA community that -- after the Rev. Wright, Ayers and Dohrn, the debate debacle, etc. -- an AA can't win . . . at least not this one now? Maybe next time, when he can handle it better?

People may forget that for many months pre-Iowa, Clinton had AAs well ahead of Obama's numbers. (That's when he was not known, when discussion in the black press was that he did not come from the heritage of slavery, wasn't "one of us," etc.)
