home

First Exit Polls: "Independent" Turrnout

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:51:32 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

By Big Tent Democrat

Via Mark Halperin:

The primaries in Ohio, Texas and Vermont were open to all voters, while in Rhode Island registered independents could choose which party's primary to vote in. In the Democratic primaries, independents were about one in five voters in Ohio, one in four in Texas, a third in Rhode Island and four in 10 in Vermont.

Somewhat higher than SUSA projected in Ohio and Texas. Seemingly advantage Obama. Though I must add that I think the reporting of "Independents" probably includes Republicans which puts it in line with SUSA's finding. Probably not advantage Obama.

< Last Minute Predictions and Thoughts Before the Results Come In | Who's the Biggest Media Horse's As*s? >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    First Exit Polls: "Independent" Turrnout | 26 comments (26 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    CNN's 1st exit polls in TX (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:54:39 PM EST
    report wide lead for Clinton among Latinos/as, wide lead for Obama among AAs. So no real news yet -- not really telling us turnout, which would make this news. But may I just mention again that the media ought not be allowed to release exit polls while the polls still are open in primaries? They agree to stop doing so, some years ago -- but apparently parse it to mean only in the general election. Situational ethics to the max, but that's our media.

    I think Clinton wins Ohio easy (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:57:08 PM EST
    right now.

    Parent
    Not what (none / 0) (#5)
    by AF on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:59:57 PM EST
    Clinton aides say the exit polls say (they say she has a "slim lead".

    Parent
    That's just spin (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:02:12 PM EST
    Who the heck knows what they think.

    My guess is Hillary wins by about 4-5.

    Texas is a toss-up with one or the other winning by 1 or 2.  

    Parent

    Hey (none / 0) (#14)
    by AF on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:05:07 PM EST
    I'm just reporting what Marc Ambinder reports Clinton aides report voters reported.  

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:02:07 PM EST
    Slim is an interesting word.

    Parent
    Cream, I read that Clinton is winning the (none / 0) (#3)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:58:09 PM EST
    white vote in Ohio. Didn't she lose it in Wisconsin? Does this even matter demographically in Ohio? I guess we'd need the number of white men vs white women to tell anything?

    Parent
    She needs to win it substantially (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:00:03 PM EST
    But I think she did.

    Parent
    20% African Americans in Ohio (none / 0) (#12)
    by AF on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:04:07 PM EST
    Reportedly.

    If they go 80/20 for Obama, Clinton would have to win non-blacks by almost 60/40 just to break even.

    Parent

    More interesting (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:07:15 PM EST
    The top 2 issues for voters were the economy and Iraq.  Health care #3.

    Parent
    Not accoridng to this (none / 0) (#23)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:13:59 PM EST
    Fifty-nine percent considered the economy the most important issue facing the country, followed by 18 percent considering Iraq most important and 19 percent considering health care their most important.


    Parent
    Sure (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:09:36 PM EST
    She is expected to win them close to 2-1 according to SUSA.

    Parent
    Well, I don't see that happening. (none / 0) (#15)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:07:07 PM EST


    Parent
    Survey USA (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Shawn on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:08:41 PM EST
    had her winning whites 62-36.

    Parent
    I wasn't aware it was that much. (none / 0) (#22)
    by Teresa on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:13:31 PM EST
    That makes me kind of sad even though I support Clinton.

    Parent
    Well (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Shawn on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:15:00 PM EST
    It was closer a few days ago.

    Parent
    From your link (none / 0) (#18)
    by Shawn on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:07:43 PM EST
    "the highest turnout is among white women, according to exit polls"

    You think this is good news for Obama?

    Parent

    The highest turnout always is white women (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:15:24 PM EST
    since 1952, actually. More non-news from media.

    Parent
    No I don't (none / 0) (#21)
    by AF on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:12:05 PM EST
    But it isn't quantified, so I don't know what to make of it.  Generally white women are the largest single demographic group in Democratic primaries, and certainly in Ohio.

    Parent
    In Wisconsin (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:07:10 PM EST
    BO won white men, two to one -- and may I note that is exactly the same percentage by which they rejected woman suffrage in Wisconsin as late as 1912. This was not and is not a state of progressive men. The split of white women in Wisconsin was similar to that nationwide, about even between HRC and BO.

    Parent
    What a system. I wouldn't be shocked if (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by tigercourse on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:03:40 PM EST
    "independents" managed to make Kucinich our nominee in 2012.

    Ouch, ouch, ouch, and ouch (none / 0) (#4)
    by ineedalife on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 04:58:16 PM EST
    The Republicans were really laying in the weeds weren't they?

    Why do you think big non-Dem. (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:00:46 PM EST
    turnout helps Obama?  Won't the Rush Limbaugh effect help Hillary Clinton?

    No (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:02:22 PM EST


    Parent
    IMO (none / 0) (#13)
    by flyerhawk on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:05:05 PM EST
    I think it gives a slight advantage to Obama.

    I don't think many people will go out to vote the other party because they hate a candidate.  If you're that partisan you're probably not the type that would "sully" yourself with pretending to be one of the "others".  

    Parent

    You continue to deny crossover voting (none / 0) (#26)
    by Cream City on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 05:17:21 PM EST
    exists, and can be massive, for some reason, despite the considerable evidence to the contrary in many states. Curious: Is this a long-held belief on your part or only recent?

    Parent
    First Exit Polls: "Independent" Turrnout | 26 comments (26 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment