Random question about the CNN exit poll in Massachusetts

[Gabu]

After looking at the partisan breakdown in Utah found by the CNN exit poll in 2004, I decided for the heck of it to look at the breakdown in Massachusetts found in that exit poll.  There were less Democrats than I expected.  That isn't the point of this thread, however.  The point is in the section on voters' religion.

If you pan down to the part that covers religion, you'll find that Kerry took the Protestant vote by 60%... and that Catholic voters were nearly completely even.  In Massachussets.  Where the Catholic Democratic nominee was from.  In fact, Bush lost 6% of the Protestant support he had in 2000, but gained 17% among Catholic voters.

Is there an explanation for this, or is this likely one of those "1 in 20" sort of statistical failures?

[12th Doctor]

After looking at the partisan breakdown in Utah found by the CNN exit poll in 2004, I decided for the heck of it to look at the breakdown in Massachusetts found in that exit poll.  There were less Democrats than I expected.  That isn't the point of this thread, however.  The point is in the section on voters' religion.

If you pan down to the part that covers religion, you'll find that Kerry took the Protestant vote by 60%... and that Catholic voters were nearly completely even.  In Massachussets.  Where the Catholic Democratic nominee was from.  In fact, Bush lost 6% of the Protestant support he had in 2000, but gained 17% among Catholic voters.

Is there an explanation for this, or is this likely one of those "1 in 20" sort of statistical failures?

When you are talking about Protestants in most of the rest of the country, you are talking mostly about Lutherans, Baptists... some fairly conservative groups.  Protestants in Mass. on the other hand tend to be from the kind of Puritan/non-denominational churches, such as the Unitarians, that tend to have a much more Liberal view of Christianity.

[Gabu]

After looking at the partisan breakdown in Utah found by the CNN exit poll in 2004, I decided for the heck of it to look at the breakdown in Massachusetts found in that exit poll.  There were less Democrats than I expected.  That isn't the point of this thread, however.  The point is in the section on voters' religion.

If you pan down to the part that covers religion, you'll find that Kerry took the Protestant vote by 60%... and that Catholic voters were nearly completely even.  In Massachussets.  Where the Catholic Democratic nominee was from.  In fact, Bush lost 6% of the Protestant support he had in 2000, but gained 17% among Catholic voters.

Is there an explanation for this, or is this likely one of those "1 in 20" sort of statistical failures?

When you are talking about Protestants in most of the rest of the country, you are talking mostly about Lutherans, Baptists... some fairly conservative groups.  Protestants in Mass. on the other hand tend to be from the kind of Puritan/non-denominational churches, such as the Unitarians, that tend to have a much more Liberal view of Christianity.

Yes, but this doesn't explain this exit poll's assertion that Bush gained 17% in the Massachusetts Catholic vote from the 2000 result when he went up against a Catholic from Massachusetts in 2004.

[HardRCafé]

Did anybody honestly consider Kerry a Catholic by 2004?

[minionofmidas]

The regions where Kerry gained was the college town west of the state, which may well be less Catholic than the rest of the state (need to check though), and the islands, which are irrelevant. Blacks in the state would also likely be Protestants, I'd think.

[Gabu]

But for Bush to have gained 17% in the Catholic vote since 2000?  That seems a bit much...

[minionofmidas]

But for Bush to have gained 17% in the Catholic vote since 2000?  That seems a bit much...

Yes it does... all I'm saying is "is there an explanation for this, or is this likely etc" is the wrong way of looking at it. Just because it's numerically wrong doesn't mean there isn't some truth behind it, some movement that partially explains it.

[Q]

The CNN exit polls from 2000 are really messed up, especially because a lot of the data has gotten mixed up since then.  You'll often see 0% or 100% for a particular candidate among a certain demographic.  I'm not sure why the numbers got moved around, but a lot of them are just plain wrong.  Caveat lector.

[Alcon]

The CNN exit polls from 2000 are really messed up, especially because a lot of the data has gotten mixed up since then.  You'll often see 0% or 100% for a particular candidate among a certain demographic.  I'm not sure why the numbers got moved around, but a lot of them are just plain wrong.  Caveat lector.

In 2000, CNN reported even when they had a tiny sample size.  They did not do this in 2004.

[TomC]

Maybe a whole bunch of Catholic pedophiles were transferred or disenfranchised as usually happens with felons.

[minionofmidas]

Maybe a whole bunch of Catholic pedophiles were transferred or disenfranchised as usually happens with felons.

I think Catholic priests mostly vote Republican, might be wrong though.