Get yer polls, bets, numbers & pretty graphs! Elections 2008

I mentioned this in the "Obama '08" thread last night but I think it bears repeating - Primary results carry very little, if any, weight as far as extrapolating how any general election results might turn out (other than the obvious of determining who the party's nominee will be).

It's nothing much more than that - it doesnt guarantee anything.

fishin wrote:

I mentioned this in the "Obama '08" thread last night but I think it bears repeating - Primary results carry very little, if any, weight as far as extrapolating how any general election results might turn out (other than the obvious of determining who the party's nominee will be).

Hhmmmm...

In the other thread, I echoed your sentiment. I think it's foolish to, as Finn was doing, extrapolate from one candidate winning the primaries to that candidate having the better chance in the general elections. After all, the same things that endear you to a majority of your party's stalwarts, may turn off the floating voters you need in the general elections.

However, it is another thing to examine what independent voters do. They're not party stalwarts. They constitute a sizable chunk of the people you also need to win over in general elections.

If independent voters in Virginia were twice as likely to be motivated to vote by one of the Democratic candidates than by one of the Republican candidates, that is a good sign.

It's nothing much more than that - it doesnt guarantee anything. A lot of factors could be at work -- for example, people thinking that McCain already had it in the bag, so didnt need their vote anymore; better to vote in the (close) Democratic race where your vote still counts for something. But 2:1 is a huge difference, and it is a difference that has emerged time after time, if not quite to this degree, in previous primaries too. Even when the Republican race was still close, it wasnt attracting close to as many independent voters as the Democratic primary did.

There is no guarantee that the indys who decided to vote in the Dem race rather than the Rep one in all of these past primaries will also pull the Dem lever in the GE, of course, no. But it does show an enthusiasm gap of sorts - if many more usually floating/undecided voters take the trouble to go vote for you than for a candidate in the other party, there's evidently more excitement/enthusiasm about your race. That is a good sign, regardless.

This was my overall point. I agree that it is interesting, but there is no precise correlation so people shouldn't jump to conclusions.

We wrote this last Tuesday:

Three weeks ago, Clinton was leading Obama in superdelegates, 165-69, a 96 superdelegate lead. As of today, just over 3 weeks later, Clinton leads 201-107, a 94 superdelegate lead. 74 superdelegates have endorsed over the last 3 weeks (3.3/day), and Obama has won 38 of the 74, or 51% of them. So while Obama is now keeping pace with Clinton, he's certainly not cutting into the gap as some have expected, or even thought was actually happening.

A week later, and the spread as of this morning is 228-138, a 90 superdelegate lead. 58 superdelegates have endorsed over the last week, and Obama has taken 31 of the 58, or 53%. It has been written elsewhere that Obama has made big inroads into the superdelegate gap. It hasn't happened yet.

realjohnboy wrote:

But then, 7% of Repubs crossed over and voted in the Dem primary. And MSNBC describes that as huge? They went to Obama by 7-3, but how huge is huge?

But your summary is wrong. It's not that "7% of Repubs crossed over and voted in the Dem primary", it's that 7% of voters in the Dem primary were Republicans.

With a turnout in the Democratic primary of 973,000, that makes for some 68,000 Republicans voting in the Dem primary.

Meanwhile, Republicans made up 76% of voters in the Republican primary - but turnout in the Republican primary was much lower. Meaning that this 76% made up about 361,000 voters.

So, of a total of 429,000 Republican voters in these primaries, 68,000 voted in the Democratic primaries. That's 16%, or one in six -- that's pretty huge. And of those 68,000, almost three-quarters went to vote for Obama (72%, according to the current update of the exit polls).

I'm growing more than a little suspicious of the numbers of crossovers too. If my party's candidate had mostly already won the primaries, and I lived in a state that allowed it, I'd be going independent so I could switch party ballots and vote for the person I thought either least likely to win against my favorite or vote for my second choice after admitting my first choice had no chance of winning the general election.

Remember that if you're independent, in most states you have no say in who the nominees are and you are probably frequently disappointed by your choices.

Nimh, this is great stuff! So great, my nephew wants to use it to show the overall percentage of Republicans who voted for Obama. Could you please source these numbers? (I'm guessing you remember where they came from since you are Nimh). I'd owe you a big favor!

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Nimh, this is great stuff! So great, my nephew wants to use it to show the overall percentage of Republicans who voted for Obama. Could you please source these numbers? (I'm guessing you remember where they came from since you are Nimh). I'd owe you a big favor!

Sure, but do note that I was just talking about Virginia!

I got the total number of voters in the Democratic and the Republican primaries from the website of the Virginia State Board of Elections - here for the Democratic race, and here for the Republican race.

The numbers about:

- Republicans making up 7% of voters in the Dem primary and 76% of the voters in the Republican primary;

- Independents making up 22% of voters in the Dem primary and 21% of the voters in the Republican primary;

- The percentages of the Independents who voted in either race going for Obama or Clinton, resp. McCain or Huckabee or Paul;

were all taken from the exit polls - see here for the Democratic primary, and here for the Republican primary.

The rest was calculated on the basis of the above.

Give my regards to the boy!

Thank you much, my friend. YOU RULE!

Looking for Sure Political Bets at Online Prediction Market

What happened to the 'youth' vote? ABC just reported they must have slept in.

[..] I gather they are surprised (and a little disappointed) after all the hype, that the youth didn't 'get out' to vote as expected.

Diane Sawyer mused, "maybe if we promise them pizza next time".

As in other states, [Obama's] victory was aided by young voters. Voters under age 30 made up 14 percent of Democratic primary participants, up from 8 percent four years ago.

The overall rate of young people from either party taking part in the election grew from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent this week, according to an analysis by the University of Maryland's Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.

[..] While historically high, Maryland's youth turnout rate increase was lower than that in some other states, where the rate tripled or, in the case of Tennessee, quadrupled, said Peter Levine, executive director of the UM civic learning and engagement center.

"It's a statistically significant increase, but not the most dramatic increase in the country," Levine said.

The phenomenon owes its genesis to more than just the Obama phenomenon, as in some states Clinton carried the youth vote, Levine said. The national numbers reflect "some fairly deep changes in young people," he said, which show themselves also in high volunteerism rates.