Exit Polls Actually Do Tell All


While I may have called the race for the Democratic party nominee a week ago, the exit polling data from today’s contest in Wisconsin quantifies the feeling I’ve been getting for the better part of a month now.

From CNN’s online coverage of the election (which, I must say, has been fantastic):

NOTE: You don’t have to be Stephen Hawking to notice that some segments do not add up to 100 percent. Due to Wisconsin’s proximity to Canada and the porous nature of the U.S.-Canadian border, I just figure that it is some sort of metric-to-english conversion problem. (Honestly, if anyone can explain this to me, please let me know.)

GENDER
Male voters: Obama 67%, Clinton 31%
Female Voters: Obama 50%, Clinton 50%

AGE
18-24 voters: Obama 73%, Clinton 26%
25-29 voters: Obama 66%, Clinton 26%
30-39 voters: Obama 63%, Clinton 37%
40-49 voters: Obama 61%, Clinton 39%
50-64 voters: Obama 55%, Clinton 44%
65plus voters: Obama 41%, Clinton 58%

RACE
White: Obama 54%, Clinton 45%
Black: Obama 91%, Clinton 8%

CHURCH ATTENDANCE
Obama swept all categories–weekly, monthly, never, etc.–by at least 10% in each.

EDUCATION
Voters with H.S. diploma: Obama 51%, Clinton 47%
Voters with no college degree: Obama 56%, Clinton 43%
Voters with a college degree: Obama 60%, Clinton 39%

INCOME LEVEL
Obama swept every category, from people who make $15k each year to those who make $150k. The closest was a six-point edge over Clinton in the lowest-income category.

MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE
Economy: Obama 57%, Clinton 41%
Iraq: Obama 60%, Clinton 39%
Health Care: Obama 54%, Clinton 46%

PARTY AFFILIATION
Democrats: Obama 53%, Clinton 46%
Republicans: Obama 72%, Clinton 28% (amazing.)
Independents: Obama 64%, Clinton 33%
Incidentally, when asked about ideology, Obama swept everyone on the political spectrum, from “very liberal” to “somewhat conservative.”

RELIGION
Clinton split Catholics 50/50 with Obama. Nothing else was even close.

UNION AFFILIATION
Union Households: Obama 53%, Clinton 44%
Non-Union Households: Obama 59%, Clinton 41%

Actually, Hillary Clinton only came close or prevailed in a few spots. She split unmarried women with Obama, fifty-fifty. She split Catholics with him, fifty-fifty. She took white democrats by a 51 to 48 margin, and was a favorite among the senior citizen crowd by 17 percentage points. She prevailed 95% to 5% among voters who valued experience above all, but that’s about as much a surprise as her probable success among hairy-lipped lesbians in pantsuits.

While I don’t believe that Hillary will back out of the race any time soon, I know that McCain will be facing off against Barack Hussein Obama this fall in a contest to essentially determine the fate of our nation. Given the turnout among republicans and democrats during the primary season, the Arizona senator has a lot of ground to cover, and the base on the right needs to swallow its pride and bite its tongue. Too much is at stake here, and the opponent is freak-of-nature strong.

Share

Comments

  1. Katherine says:

    There are a few reasons why the numbers don’t add up to 100:
    1) some people vote for someone other than Clinton or Obama, such as someone who has dropped out of the race, or “uncommitted”. (That’s why you never see it add to more than 100%)
    2) some people answer some questions on the exit poll, but not others (it is a LONG questionnaire). So female voters might add up to 50/50, but then church attendance does not.
    3) Different breakdowns cause different sized categories. For example, gender might be 60/40, whereas race might be 90/5 (plus 5% non-white and non-black). So something might add up perfectly in one category that’s a certain size, but then when the categories are re-divided, the numbers don’t add up perfectly. Again, you can see this with gender where the females added up to 100 but the males did not (they must have voted for alternative candidates). But then when you re-divide by race, neither white nor black adds up to 100, but both are closer to 100 than males were.

  2. Jeff Schreiber says:

    Nicely put, Katherine.

    As it were, my confusion was short-lived (can you blame me for originally forgetting about the likes of Mike Gravel?), but you explained it better than I ever could.

    Out of pure stubbornness, however, I am sticking to the theory that any and all voting discrepancies in our northernmost states are a result of metric conversion issues.

    Jeff :)

Speak Your Mind

*