Exit Poll Analysis of Wisconsin

[sgpine]

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/WI/index.html

This first thing that jumped out to me is that Dean's numbers were artificially inflated by Republican Convervative voters. Edwards also had strong support from these groups, but I'd say that at least part of that vote is Republicans who would rather have Edwards in the White House than Kerry, while people who voted for Dean I have to believe just want Dean to get the nomination and lose. However, some of those people I'm sure did vote for Edwards for the same reason.

Examples: While Dean got 18% of the overall vote, he received 26% of the Republican vote, 32% of the Very Conservative Vote, 32% of the "Enthusiastic about the Bush Administration" vote, and 26% of the "Strongly Support War in Iraq" vote.

Edwards strongest support was from High Income, Educated, White Males, which I figured would be more Kerry's base. Kerry did very well with Minorities, particularly African Americans.

The veteran vote has a small impact, veterans being equally likely as non-veterans to vote for Edwards, but slightly more likely to pick Kerry and less likely to pick Dean.

Kerry dominated the Democratic vote, 48-31-16. (Although this is still only a 15% lead, much less than was previously polled). This is probably cause for concern for Edwards, although I think the momemtum bonus that Edwards will receive will include Democrats. The question is how much. Other than Georgia (which Edwards would be favored in anyways), Vermont is the only other completely open primary, although some states do have a modified open primiary.

Interesting, the only Ideology that Edwards won in Wisconson was "Somewhat Conservative". "Very Conservative" was a tie between Dean and Kerry, and Kerry won the Moderate and Liberal votes, although Moderate was very close between Edwards and Kerry. (In fact, Edwards received the fewest votes from the "Very Conservative" crowd). This makes me believe that Edwards could be a very strong candidate if he gets the nomination, it appears he is getting the vote from Moderates and Conservatives who would actually prefer him as president over the other two, as opposed people voting for the weakest candidate, as seen in Dean support among Very Conservatives.

OVERALL BIG SUPPORT DEMOGRAPHICS (45% or more):

EDWARDS: Positive Message Candidate: 57%
                  Right Temperment Canidate: 55%
                  Care About People "    "      :  47%
                  Top Issue: Economy, Jobs   :  46%
  Satisfied but not Enthusiastic w' Bush:  50%
           Made up mind within last 3 Days: 45%

KERRY:      Big City Vote                         : 46%
                 Can Beat Bush Candidate    : 69%
                 Right Experiance Candidate : 68%
                 Top Issue: Education           : 47%
        Trade With Countries Good 4 Jobs: 45%
                 National Economy is Poor    : 45%
Beating Bush more important than Issues: 59%
 Made up mind more than 3 days ago  : 52%
       Religious Group "Other Christian" : 49%
                 Party ID: Democrat             : 48%
            Both people in House in Union : 48%
          Education: HS Graduate            : 48%
    Families' Financial Situation: Worse : 45%
    Income Under $15-30,000: 46% / <$15: 50%
    Race: Latino: 46% / African American: 55%

DEAN: None.

Conclusion: I thought Edwards would have more support among Minorities than he did in Wisconsin. However, Edwards Clintonian appeal seems to be a real phenomenon, and could grow. People who said "Can Beat Bush" was the most important charecteristic was only 23%, which, without looking at what is was in the last few primaries, seems to be fairly small. In constrast, "Positive Message" was 17% and "Cares about People" was 19%. If those numbers grow, Kerry will be in trouble. Dean is utterly done. Just counting Liberals and Moderates, Dean got 14.5%. I can't imagine many of the conservatives voting for him plan on supporting him.

Also, if anyone knows where to get the raw data from the exit polls, there is a good chance I can access it with my student account and I'll run some cross-tabs.

[elcorazon]

nice work.  Go Edwards!

[JohnFKennedy]

nice work.  Go Edwards!

I second that!

[DarthKosh]

nice work.  Go Edwards!

I second that!

The longer the primaries the better for the republicans.

[© tweed]

Dean tied for the lead among those who idenified themselves as 'very conservative.'  Lol...

But Edwards did very well among those who identified themselves as either independents or Republicans, so this just solidifies the idea that edwards is the best candidate.

I'll say it again: Bush would have no chance against edwards.

[MarkDel]

Miami,

Bush would have no chance against Edwards??? That's a laughable statement. Edwards IS a stronger candidate than Kerry, but no chance??? Come on...

[© tweed]

Miami,

Bush would have no chance against Edwards??? That's a laughable statement. Edwards IS a stronger candidate than Kerry, but no chance??? Come on...

Edwards is the only Dem running on a positive message.  It would be a likeable southerner with a positive message v. a Texan runnng a campaign based on fear.  I don't see it as much of a race.

[© tweed]

Another funny thing from the Wisconsin exit poll is that Dean actually did better among pro-war voters than he did with anti-war voters.  This might be the Republicans-for-Dean-because-he-is-the-weakest effect.

[MarkDel]

Miami,

Yes, but you are ignoring one HUGE factor. The "fear" Bush is running on is real. I think those were real people who jumped out of the burning World Trade Centers, not that anyone in your party seems to remember 9/11.

[© tweed]

Miami,

Yes, but you are ignoring one HUGE factor. The "fear" Bush is running on is real. I think those were real people who jumped out of the burning World Trade Centers, not that anyone in your party seems to remember 9/11.

That fear is exaggerated.  How many terrorist attacks on the USA since 9-11?  None.  Hw any in the 8 years before 9-11?  None.  All bush is running on is fear.  Did you hear his speech yesterday?  All he ever said was 'tirrir' and 'tirrirists'.

[MarkDel]

Miami,

How many WOULD have occured in the US with a Democratic administration that treated 9/11 as a Criminal Justice Matter?

How many terrorist attacks continue all around the world?

As for your claim of no attacks against the US in 8 years before 9/11...I guess the USS Cole doesn't count as a US interest, or the Khobar Towers, or the Embassy in Africa...

Do other Democrats share your view that the terrorist threat is not that severe? If that's the case, this election is even MORE important than I thought, and I was pretty certain it was damn near a matter of life and death before we started this conversation.

[© tweed]

Miami,

How many WOULD have occured in the US with a Democratic administration that treated 9/11 as a Criminal Justice Matter?

How many terrorist attacks continue all around the world?

As for your claim of no attacks against the US in 8 years before 9/11...I guess the USS Cole doesn't count as a US interest, or the Khobar Towers, or the Embassy in Africa...

Do other Democrats share your view that the terrorist threat is not that severe? If that's the case, this election is even MORE important than I thought, and I was pretty certain it was damn near a matter of life and death before we started this conversation.

Americans care as much about terrorist attacks away from the homeland as the rich care about the poor.

[sgpine]

Some Trends from previous open primaries, Missouri v Tennessee v Wisconson, dealing with Top Candidate Qualities

Quality: CARES ABOUT PEOPLE

State       % Most Important    Edwards     Kerry
Missouri           18%                     39%          39%
Tennessee       19%                     40%          29%
Wisconson       19%                     47%          30%

Quality: STANDS UP FOR BELIEFS

State       % Most Important     Edwards    Kerry
Missouri            22%                      18%        40%
Tennessee        20%                      19%        34%
Wisconson        25%                      28%        24%

Quality: RIGHT EXPERIANCE

State       % Most Important      Edwards    Kerry
Missouri             10%                       6%         67%
Tennessee         10%                       8%         50%
Wisconson           8%                      13%       68%

Quality: POSITIVE MESSAGE

State       % Most Important      Edwards    Kerry
Missouri               13%                     50%        35%
Tennessee           14%                     42%        34%
Wisconson           17%                     57%        27%

Quality: CAN BEAT BUSH

State       % Most Important      Edwards    Kerry
Missouri                23%                     15%       78%
Tennessee            25%                     18%       64%
Wisconson            23%                     21%       69%

Experiance and Electablity are why people are voting for Kerry, but only about a third of people are voting for Experiance and Electablity.

Edwards climbing numbers in the Can Beat Bush category is crucial, as the % voting for that category isn't going anywhere soon (unless Democrats suddenly begin thinking beating Bush will be easy). There may not be much Edwards can say to promote his electability, however the close race in Wisconson and familiarity with Edwards could do it for him (along with media help).

It would seems that Experiance is something Kerry could be served in pushing, since that category could easily grow in importance, imo, and he should countinue to dominate it.

If Dean drops out, and Edwards gets more of his "stands up for beliefs" votes (Dean's strongest category), that will help as well.

[MarkDel]

Miami,

If you're right, then our time as a nation is nearing an end and the free world is in serious peril. The threat posed by international terrorism is FAR MORE severe than any threat posed during the Cold War. If you and others can't see it, then I guess we're doomed.

[© tweed]

Miami,

If you're right, then our time as a nation is nearing an end and the free world is in serious peril. The threat posed by international terrorism is FAR MORE severe than any threat posed during the Cold War. If you and others can't see it, then I guess we're doomed.

More people die from smoking, heart attacks, the flu, etc. than the amount of people who die from 'tirrir'.  Lets put some of that military budget into ending world hunger, which would cost about $20,000,000,000.  the military budget is about.... $399,000,000,000.

[MarkDel]

Miami,

You cannot possibly be that stupid??? Are you familiar with nuclear weapons? Biological weapons? What do you suppose would happen if Jamal "I can't wait to meet Allah" Muhammad or some other random terrorist gets his hands on weapons like this???

[© tweed]

Miami,

You cannot possibly be that stupid??? Are you familiar with nuclear weapons? Biological weapons? What do you suppose would happen if Jamal "I can't wait to meet Allah" Muhammad or some other random terrorist gets his hands on weapons like this???

So you believe terrorism is a greater threat than global warming?

[sgpine]

nice work.  Go Edwards!

I second that!

The longer the primaries the better for the republicans.

I would argue not nessisarilly. Certainly in some ways it is: it costs the Democrats more money, and could cause infighting that can later be used against them.

But it also serves as free publicity for Democrats, creates excitement about the nominees, and will result in a battle- tested candidate who has been through the gaunlet to a degree already.

[MarkDel]

Miami,

Terrorism and global warming??? Ok let's examine that show we can illustrate what a ing moronic statement you've just made:

1. Terrorism is the manifestation of a group of REAL religious fanatics who hate us more than they love life. Nuclear weapons are REAL, terrorists are REAL and if the terrorists secure nuclear weapons and use them, you could end up seeing the destruction of all mankind.

2. Global Warming is the scentific HYPOTHESIS disputed by a growing percentage of the scientific community that the destruction of trees is creating holes in the Ozone Layer that MAY lead to a warming of global temperatures.

OK, nuclear weapons or trees....hmmmm

[© tweed]

Global warmng threatens every person to walk the earth, terrorism only threatens those in urban areas.

[Esteban Manuel]

nice work.  Go Edwards!

I second that!

The longer the primaries the better for the republicans.

The longer the primaries the better the democrats as longer as there's a clear front runner

[sgpine]

Miami,

You cannot possibly be that stupid??? Are you familiar with nuclear weapons? Biological weapons? What do you suppose would happen if Jamal "I can't wait to meet Allah" Muhammad or some other random terrorist gets his hands on weapons like this???

The degree of the threat of terrorism, in my opinion, depends on the way the threat is handled.

Certainly, ignorance or avoidance, which is thrust upon the Democrats, is a poor choice of a responce. Overconfidant terrorists are not good.

However, lets not forget that terrorism is founded in desperation, and the more desperate a situation becomes, the more terrorists will be formed, and the more extreme those terrorist will be.

The Bush administration, I feel, is encouraging this desperation by his no negotiation, dead or alive, all out assult.

Now, to you and most Republicans, this probably seems to be a suggestion that we shouldn't fight terror, or perhaps that beating terrorism is bad because it causes a surge of desperation as terror is on the verge of the defeat.

However, I am instead of the opinion that terror is not at the verge of defeat, and what the Bush administration is doing is making terrorism stronger.

Terrorism is the tool of a group that is not getting what is wants, and has no other methods to achieve what it wants. As we remove the ability of groups to get what they want, and fail to address what those groups want, the threat of terrorism is thus increased.

A pot is boiling that we need to cool, and Bush's policy to make it stop boiling seems to be "turn up the heat, the water will be gone faster"

[MarkDel]

Sgpine, I understand and respect your argument, but let me draw an analogy for you.

If a person is diagnosed with cancer, does the person ignore it and hope it goes away? Does he try to reason with it and hope that it changes its mind? No, he moves forward with aggressive treatment to remove and kill the cancer, and hopefully he does so without killing himself in the process. Chemotherapy is not a great option, but it's the lesser of two evils. Sit back and wait to die, or be proactive and perhaps prevent death.

[Gustaf]

We should have a separete thread for terrrism, JR started one under Articles...

[JohnFKennedy]

Miami,

You cannot possibly be that stupid??? Are you familiar with nuclear weapons? Biological weapons? What do you suppose would happen if Jamal "I can't wait to meet Allah" Muhammad or some other random terrorist gets his hands on weapons like this???

Miami,

Terrorism and global warming??? Ok let's examine that show we can illustrate what a ing moronic statement you've just made:

1. Terrorism is the manifestation of a group of REAL religious fanatics who hate us more than they love life. Nuclear weapons are REAL, terrorists are REAL and if the terrorists secure nuclear weapons and use them, you could end up seeing the destruction of all mankind.

2. Global Warming is the scentific HYPOTHESIS disputed by a growing percentage of the scientific community that the destruction of trees is creating holes in the Ozone Layer that MAY lead to a warming of global temperatures.

OK, nuclear weapons or trees....hmmmm

I would just like to say MarkDel, that not ALL terrorists are religious fanatics and especially not all are Muslims, that is pretty stereotypical man, there are a great number on non-Muslim terrorists and extremists that are threats to the world, some would argue Christian extremists are a threat to the world.....