A SoapBlox Politics Blog
[Mobile Edition]
About
- About Us
- Email Us (news/tips)
- Editorial Policy
- Posting Guidelines
- Advertise Here
Feedburner

Subscribe to Michlib daily email summary. (Preview)
Enter address:

Donate
Become a sponsor and support our work.

 MichLib sponsor list

Michigan Political Blog Ad Network

Advertise Liberally

50 State Ad Network

What do the Exit Polls Tell Us About the Michigan Primary?

by: nirmal

Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 07:52:45 AM EST


The results of the exit polls tell us about the impact that "crossover" voters had on the Republican primary, and give us a hint about what the Democratic race might have been like had the other candidates not been taken off the ballot.  Check below the fold for a few quick notes.
nirmal :: What do the Exit Polls Tell Us About the Michigan Primary?
Crossovers

According to the exits, the Republican primary vote consisted of 7% Democrats, 25% Independents, and 68% Republicans.  Some of the pundits sounded surprised that a smaller proportion of Democrats and Independents voted in this primary, as opposed to the 2000 Republican primary where self-identified Republicans were less than 50% of the voters.

It shouldn't be that surprising.  In 2000, we already had a presumptive nominee on the Democratic side.  This time around, when faced with choosing a ballot, most of the party faithful were going to pick Democratic (out of habit, party loyalty, or pro/anti Hillary).  That diminishes the pool of "very engaged" voters who would cross over to the Republican primary.  Even though our race wasn't particularly exciting or meaningful, it was still a Democratic election.

So what impact did these crossovers have on the Republican primary?  According to the exits, McCain took the plurality of Democrats (41%) and Independents (35%) who voted in the Republican primary, but didn't pick up nearly enough votes among those groups to close the gap between he and Romney among conservatives.

Doing some simple spreadsheet math (row percentages to column percentages), we can approximate the support that each candidate received by party:



McCain and Ron Paul greatly benefited from the presence of self-identified Independents (and to a lesser extent Democrats), whereas Romney, Huckabee, and Thompson did not.

Clearly, Kos' effort to get Democrats to propel Romney to victory didn't work.  It was still a cool idea, though.

What could have been

The NEP exit survey asked respondents who they would have voted for if the rest of the candidates were on the ballot.  Although this doesn't tell us what the race would have been like if the primary was still on Feb. 5, it does indicate that the race would have been much different than the outcome we saw yesterday.



This chart tells us that if the same universe of individuals who turned out on election day could have voted for any candidate instead of the choices that were available to them, 45% would vote for Clinton, 37% for Obama, and 12% for Edwards.

So 14% of Obama supporters and 27% of Edwards supporters went for Clinton instead of their preferred candidate.  That alone reflects how meaningless the election was, since we know for sure that people who ordinarily would have voted for Edwards or Obama voted for Clinton instead.  When interpreting the results, it isn't as simple as assuming that Uncommitted Vote = Obama supporters + Edwards supporters -- having a limited selection of candidates on the ballot absolutely made a difference in voting behavior.

Although we can use the results to asses the legitimacy of the election, we can't use this to determine what the result would have been had the candidates actually been on the ballot and allowed to campaign here.  This is because the path to election day would have been different.  Candidates and their surrogates would have actively campaigned here, and the narrative of the race would be different than repeatedly hearing about how Obama and Edwards turned their back on Michigan.

The outcome would also be different because a different universe of people would have turned out to vote than the group we saw today.  For example, more Obama and Edwards voters might have turned out if the name of their favorite candidate been on the ballot.  Voting for a person (especially someone that voters identify with) "feels" much different than voting for an abstract concept, and undoubtedly affected motivation to vote.

Other (pretty obvious) notes

* Among the 42% of the Republican primary voters who thought that Romney's ties to Michigan were important, Romney did very well.  Still, we don't know if Romney's ties to Michigan caused him to perform well, or if voters decided on him first and then justified their choice with his ties to Michigan afterward.  But the case can be made that Romney had a significant advantage here that won't carry over to other states.

* Romney does well with voters who are favorable toward the Bush administration, and McCain does well among voters who have a negative view of the Bush administration.  Given how out of step the Republican base is with the rest of the country on their feelings about Bush, Romney's victory was probably good for Democrats overall.  Even if he doesn't become the nominee, his continued presence in the race puts pressure on McCain to move to the right on issues where McCain disagrees with Bush.  In this political environment, that will ultimately help us in the general election.

* McCain wins among those who disapprove of the war in Iraq (despite his pandering), whereas Romney wins among those who approve of the war in iraq.  Similarly, McCain wins among voters who favor a path to citizenship, whereas Romney wins among voters who favor deportation.  Again, Romney appears to win with voters who are in line with the Republican base, whereas McCain won with voters who weren't in line with the base on these issues.  Given that McCain and Romney really aren't all that different on Iraq, this might be suggestive of each candidate's fundamental appeal to voters.

* Despite not being on the ballot, Obama still beat Clinton among African-Americans.

* A surprisingly large proportion of Edwards supporters (14%) broke for Kucinich and not Uncommitted, especially compared to the 3% Obama supporters who went for Kucinich.  What does this tell us about each candidate's supporters?

* Of the different gender and marital status combinations, only single men broke for Uncommitted over Hillary.

Anyway, this is all speculation, very heavily informed by my own biases.  What do you think?
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
What do the Exit Polls Tell Us About the Michigan Primary? | 24 comments
Thanks, Nirmal (4.00 / 2)
I wondered how my candidate might have fared if his name had been on the ballot.  Either way, Edwards is still running third.  :-(
immigration and exit polls (4.00 / 1)
I've heard there is an agreement by the national media and that democrats that immigration is not included in what issues concern a voter in exit poll interviews. I guess like the issue doesn't exist.

Can anyone shed some light on this?

NEP and questions (4.00 / 1)
Unfortunately, I don't have the answer to that.  I do know that the NEP has been criticized in the past (fairly, IMO) for only asking Republicans the "evangelical question," and only asking Democrats the "union question."  There are Republican union members and Democratic evangelicals.  I guess it just goes to show that you only find what you look for.

This time around, the NEP asked the "union question" on the Republican side.  27% of everyone who voted in the Republican primary was from a union household, and union households made 47% of everyone who voted on the Dem side!  Clearly it's important to ask it on both sides.

Check out my mediocre blog.

[ Parent ]
there were no questions about issues (4.00 / 1)
the only two that came close were the union question and a question asking if your vote was affected by tv advertisements.
[ Parent ]
thanks to both (4.00 / 1)
nirmal, I stopped by your blog and bookmarked it. not mediocre at all
[ Parent ]
They did not mention Romney being either for or against everything at some point in time? (4.00 / 3)
How could they miss this in their exit polling?
14% of Edwards supporters break for Kucinich (4.00 / 1)
I think the percentage would have been much higher if not for some labor leaders pushing the uncommitted vote.  When Edwards drops out, Obama is done for this election cycle.

I wound up voting for HRC because I could not vote for Edwards, and I do not like Obama.  I assumed that a vote for uncommitted would simply be counted as an Obama vote, and some are making that assumption.

Its interesting to think about what might have been.  My thoughts are that a "real" primary would have been about as useless as the one we got.  Nobody would have spent much time or money here before Iowa or New Hampshire.  We would have gotten lost in a super/uber Tuesday.  Edwards would have been hard pressed to come here because he simply doesn't have the money.  Even if some people we wanted to see had stopped in for a quickie, thats about all the romancin' we would have gotten.  

You think so? (0.00 / 0)
Obama actually came in 1st in Iowa among labor members, and SEIU and UNITE-HERE, the two cornerstones of the Change to Win Coalition, are supporting him in Nevada.

(Hillary came in second among Union members, and Edwards came in third, even though he beat Hillary.)

[ Parent ]
If McCain got the anti-Bush vote... (4.00 / 4)
We've still hot a lot of work to do in creating an informed electorate.
Great Work Nirmal (4.00 / 4)
Most excellent wonkery, Nirmal. (4.00 / 6)

Great post and has given me a lot to think about.  So, what, do people PAY you to do this stuff now?  :)

Let's hope that this type of analysis is taken into consideration by the strategists at the HRC, Edwards and Obama campaigns as they run up to Feb. 5.  If McCain is seen as being anti-Bush, there's a LOT of work to be done to inform the electorate.



Do stupid people know they are stupid?
lol, you're too kind (4.00 / 4)
So, what, do people PAY you to do this stuff now?

That reminds me, I should clarify that I don't do anything like this for my job (what I do there is actually a lot more complicated and involves a lot less personal opinion), don't use my day job resources to blog (I only use what's in the public domain), and that any opinion expressed by me online anywhere absolutely doesn't reflect the opinion of my employer.

Check out my mediocre blog.

[ Parent ]
Agreed (4.00 / 5)
I actually agree with your assessment nirmal. Good job!

Although we can use the results to asses the legitimacy of the election, we can't use this to determine what the result would have been had the candidates actually been on the ballot and allowed to campaign here.  This is because the path to election day would have been different.  Candidates and their surrogates would have actively campaigned here, and the narrative of the race would be different than repeatedly hearing about how Obama and Edwards turned their back on Michigan.


Nothing is easier than solving a problem on the back of the poor. People who don't have lobbyists or clout.
Nirmal is a statistical genius:) (4.00 / 2)

Low crossover vote (4.00 / 3)
Another reason for fewer Dem to Rep crossovers than in 2000 was the requirement of asking for a Republican ballot.  In 2000, you didn't have to do that.

The people who are motivated to cross over are precisely the party activists who are most interested.  And in 2008, probably a lot of Democratic activists didn't want to end up identified as a Republican.

Years later when you're a candidate for something, an opponent could use it to raise questions about your partisan bona fides, whereas an honest explanation could be used to portray you as a malicious political trickster.

Oh no! (4.00 / 1)
How do I cover my tracks? ;)

The end of the human race will be that it will eventually die of civilization.

 - Ralph Waldo Emerson
[ Parent ]
Larry- a question for you (0.00 / 0)
If we had run a real election, do you think we would have seen turnout boosts comparable to those in Iowa and NH?
[ Parent ]
Yes! (4.00 / 1)
Turnout was mediocre yesterday.  I'm sure it would have been much higher if people had the sense we were really participating.
[ Parent ]
Turnout (4.00 / 2)
I agree. I talked to too many people who thought the election was stupid and was not going to bother to vote.

Although the odds of this happening again is somewhere around never, we really need to change our laws (like Florida) so that candidates can't arbitrarily take their names off the ballot again.

Nothing is easier than solving a problem on the back of the poor. People who don't have lobbyists or clout.

[ Parent ]
This is a great post: should be crossposted (4.00 / 3)
over at DailyKos, where may are patting themselves on the back for "delivering" Michigan to Romney.

Many great points are made in your analysis. Thanks for taking the time to look at the data and explain it all.

We miss Nirmal! (4.00 / 5)
This dude was the poll-cracking whiz kid back in '06.

Nice work, buddy!

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

Excellent work (n/t) (4.00 / 2)

[ Parent ]
I hope ya don't mind (4.00 / 4)
but I've included a link to this diary from diaries on DaikyKos and Hulaballoo about the MI results. So many non-Michiganians are cooing about how "Democrats and Independents delivered a victory for Mitt - great job, us!!!" and it's grating on my nerves. I've pointed them to your analysis that shows their theories are completely unsupported by facts.
Primary (4.00 / 1)
Great read, Nirmal. I was disappointed with Paul's 6%, but at least he beat Rudy and Fred.

I don't understand why people dislike Obama. I understand them preferring a different candidate maybe, but not disliking him.

What do the Exit Polls Tell Us About the Michigan Primary? | 24 comments

Features

Mobile Blog Reader - powered by Notice Orange
RSS
Politics & Elections Library:
- US Senate
- US House
- Executive Branch
- Michigan Senate
- Michigan House
- State Supreme Court
- Michigan Media

Special Sections:
- Technical Politics - Grebner
- Michigan's Fallen

Search
Progressive Blogroll
For MI Bloggers:
 - MI Bloggers Facebook
- MI Bloggers Myspace
- MI Bloggers PartyBuilder
- MI Bloggers Wiki

Statewide:
 - Blogging for Michigan
- Call of the Senate Dems
- [Con]serving Michigan (Michigan LCV)
- DailyKos (Michigan tag)
- Enviro-Mich List Serve archives
- Democratic Underground, Michigan Forum
- Jack Lessenberry
- JenniferGranholm.com
- LeftyBlogs (Michigan)
- MI Eye on Bishop
- Michigan Coalition for Progress
- Michigan Messenger
- MI Idea (Michigan Equality)
- Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan
- Rainbow Mittens
- The Upper Hand (Progress Michigan)

Upper Peninsula:
- Keweenaw Now
- Lift Bridges and Mine Shafts
- Save the Wild UP

Western Michigan:
- Great Lakes Guy
- Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott
- Mostly Sunny with a Chance of Gay
- Public Pulse
- West Michigan Politics
- West Michigan Rising
- Windmillin'

Mid-Michigan:
- Among the Trees
- Blue Chips (CMU College Democrats Blog)
- Christine Barry
- Conservative Media
- Far Left Field
- Graham Davis
- Honest Errors
- ICDP:Dispatch (Isabella County Democratic Party Blog)
- Liberal, Loud and Proud
- Livingston County Democratic Party Blog
- MI Blog
- Mid-Michigan DFA
- Pohlitics
- Random Ramblings of a Somewhat Common Man
- Waffles of Compromise
- YAF Watch

Flint/Bay Area/Thumb:
- Bay County Democratic Party
- Blue November
- East Michigan Blue
- Genesee County Young Democrats
- Greed, Eggs, and Ham
- Jim Stamas Watch
- Meddling Outsider
- Saginaw County Democratic Party Blog
- Stone Soup Musings
- Voice of Mordor

Southeast Michigan:
 - A2Politico
- arblogger
- Arbor Update
- Congressman John Conyers (CD14)
- Mayor Craig Covey
- Councilman Ron Suarez
- Democracy for Metro Detroit
- Detroit Skeptic
- Detroit Uncovered (formerly "Fire Jerry Oliver")
- Grosse Pointe Democrats
- I Wish This Blog Was Louder
- Kicking Ass Ann Arbor (UM College Democrats Blog)
- LJ's Blogorific
- Mark Maynard
- Michigan Progress
- Motor City Liberal
- North Oakland Dems
- Oakland Democratic Politics
- Our Michigan
- Peters for Congress (CD09)
- PhiKapBlog
- Polygon, the Dancing Bear
- Rust Belt Blues
- Third City
- Thunder Down Country
- Trusty Getto
- Unhinged

MI Congressional
District Watch Blogs:
 - Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood (CD08)
MI Campaigns:
- ActBlue (MI Congressional Candidates)
- Michigan Round Table for Diversity and Inclusion
- MichUHCAN (Affordable Health Care)
- Politics1 (MI Candidate Listings)
- Senator Carl Levin

MI Democratic Orgs:
- Michigan Democratic Party
- Michigan House Democratic Caucus
- Michigan Senate Democratic Caucus
- MDP Youth Caucus
- Michigan Young Democrats
- Ingham County Democratic Party
- Genesee County Dems Progressive Caucus
- Saginaw Area Democratic Club
- Justice Caucus
- South County Dems (Berrien Co.)
- Western Washtenaw Democrats

MI Progressive Orgs:
- America Votes Michigan coalition
- Michigan Labor organizations
- Michigan Voice coalition

MI Misc.:
- Absolute Michigan
- Center for Michigan
- Citizens Research Council
- Detroit News Politics Blog
- Freep Opinion
- Media Mouse (Grand Rapids Indy Media) Blog
- Michigan Campaign Finance Network
- The Michigan Citizen Blog
- Michigan Interfaith Trust Fund
- Michigan Future (WWJ)
- Michigan Nonprofit Association's blog
- Michigan Prospect
- Michigan Public News Service
- Michigan Radio
- Michigan Secret Court
- MLive.com Blogs
- Political Graveyard
- Red Tape Blog (Government Documents Librarians of Michigan)

National Alternative Media:
- Air America Radio
- BlogTalkRadio
- BuzzFlash
- ePluribus Media
- Indymedia
- New Journalist Program (Center for Independent Media)
- PoliticsTV

National Blogs:
- AFL-CIO Weblog
- BlogPAC
- Daily Kos
- Firedoglake
- From The Roots (DSCC)
- The Gavel (Speaker's Office)
- Huffington Post
- HuffPo: Rich Robinson
- Kicking Ass (DNC)
- MyDD
- My Left Wing
- The Next Hurrah
- Open Left
- The Thicket (NCSL)
- Senate Guru
- Smart Ass (CDA)
- The Stakeholder (DCCC)
- YDA



© Michiganliberal.com, LLC
Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
Powered by: SoapBlox