Showing posts with label Exit Poll. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Exit Poll. Show all posts

Saturday, March 7, 2020

Lessons from Super Tuesday: Health Care in the Deep South

The Democratic Presidential race has changed radically since the South Carolina Primary.  As a Bernie Sanders supporter I was so hopeful for him to have a strong showing.  The outcome was very sobering.  I thought I would take a look at the exit poll data from SC and other states from Super Tuesday on the issue of Sanders' Medicare for All (M4A) proposal.

SC
Support
Oppose
AL
Support
Oppose
VA
Support
Oppose
49%
46%
51%
43%
52%
45%
Biden
44%
55%
Biden
50%
76%
Biden
42%
67%
Sanders
29%
12%
Sanders
27%
5%
Sanders
33%
12%
TN
Support
Oppose
NC
Support
Oppose
TX
Support
Oppose
53%
43%
55%
41%
64%
33%
Biden
32%
51%
Biden
34%
54%
Biden
25%
46%
Sanders
38%
9%
Sanders
36%
12%
Sanders
39%
13%

South Carolina and the five southern Super Tuesday states are summarized in the above tables.  The numbers right below "Support" and "Oppose" are the percentage of primary voters who either support or oppose the statement "How do you feel about replacing all private health insurance with a single government plan for everyone?"  

In South Carolina, it was favored by 49% to 46%.  Biden beat Sanders 44% to 29% of those who support M4A.  Biden beat Sanders 55% to 12% among those who oppose M4A.  Similar patterns were found in Alabama and Virginia.  In Tennessee, North Carolina, and Texas, Sanders did slightly better than Biden among those who support M4A and was trounced by Biden among those who did not.  Texas had the strongest support for Sanders proposal but he only bested Biden by 14 points among those who do.

It is also known that older African American voters overwhelmingly supported Biden.  The exit poll does not state whether they were more or less likely to support Medicare for All.  

MA
Support
Oppose
CA
Support
Oppose
VT
Support
Oppose
50%
45%

55%
36%

73%
23%
Biden
23%
46%
Biden
14%
35%
Biden
14%
42%
Sanders
41%
13%
Sanders
48%
14%
Sanders
62%
25%
Warren
27%
14%


Three of the states outside of the deep south where Sanders fared better against Biden are shown above: Massachusetts, California, and Vermont.  In Massachusetts the 69% who supported M4A favored Sanders over Biden by 41% to 23%.  Warren received 27% among those who do.

In California and Vermont, Sanders had strong support among those who support M4A.  Biden won among those who did not.  The lesson from these primaries and the 2016 and 2008 elections is that it is almost impossible to win the Democratic party nomination for president without substantial African American support.  It would be interesting to look at what role support for M4A plays in this.

**Update**

Biden has now won Mississippi, Michigan, and Missouri.  In Mississippi 60% of voters support M4A but 75% of those voted for Biden.  In the video below, Biden said he would veto any M4A bill that came to his desk as president.  In Missouri and Michigan those supported M4A preferred Sanders.



 **Related Posts**

Deep South Primaries

Thursday, February 6, 2020

Iowa: what we know so far


It was scintillating watching C-SPAN's coverage of the Iowa Caucus in West Des Moines on Monday night.  You can see a rebroadcast of it here.  In this one caucus room, Bernie Sanders had the most votes in the second round with 99 followed by Elizabeth Warren with 76, Pete Buttigieg with 73, and Amy Klobuchar with 57.  With these totals Sanders, Buttigieg, and Warren were each awarded three delegates to the state convention each (abbreviated in as SDE in the table above) with Klobuchar getting two.  Biden did not have more than 15% of the 333 caucus goers and received no delegates.  The statewide numbers as of this writing are presented above with 96% of the caucus rooms counted.

Like everyone else, I was flabbergasted when the results were not immediately available.  The entrance polls (exit polls are used in the primaries and general elections) showed a close race between Sanders and Buttigieg.  Forty two percent of the caucus goers were male and 58% were female.  Ninety one % were white, 3% were African-American, 4% were Latino, and 2% were other.  Sanders edged Buttigieg among young, male, and nonwhite caucus goers.  Biden did best among caucus goers who said foreign policy mattered most to them (13% of the total).  Sanders won among those who said income inequality was most important (18% of the total).  Among those who said health care was most important (42%) Sanders and Buttigieg were tied.  Likewise they were tied among those who said climate change was most important (21%).

The overall results so far show that Sanders leads among the first and second round caucus goers but Buttigieg leads among state delegates by 3.  In 2016, Bernie lost to Clinton by a razor thin margin in the state delegates and it may happen again this year depending on the last 4% still to be counted. This was the first year they reported who the caucus goers preferred rather than just the delegates.  The result of the delegates could change as the last 4% is counted.



Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez has called for a re-canvassing of the caucus results.  The phone app that they used to send the results but at least they had a paper trail.  These results are similar to those of the electoral college in the 2016 and 2000 elections.  Both systems should be reformed.

**Related Posts**

Thursday, November 3, 2016

Bradley Effect for Trump?

In 1982, the popular African American mayor of Los Angeles, Tom Bradley, was running for Governor of California.  In the month prior to the election, polls were showing him ahead of his Republican opponent by 5%.  When the votes were counted he lost by 1% of the vote.  The exit polls predicted that he would win.  Looking for an explanation as to why this was so social scientists theorized that a small segment of mostly white voters did not want to admit to pollsters that they did not want to admit to pollsters that they did not want to vote for an African American.  They termed this phenomenon The Bradley Effect.  Similar polling discrepancies were seen in large races with African American Candidates.  This effect was not seen in the presidential elections of Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 and in other more recent elections with African American Candidates.  The polls were accurate both times.  

For this election cycle, it has been speculated that a similar effect may happen in elections where there is no African American on the ballot.  With Donald Trump warning of a rigged election and a "Reverse Bradley Effect."  Some political bloggers and talk show hosts have fanned the flames of this theory. 

Blogger and right wing talk show host Douglas V. Gibbs has fanned the flames of this theory at his blog The Political Pistachio.  He states that he has spoken with Trump supporters who are afraid to put Trump bumper stickers on their cars for fear of vandalism.  This is the only evidence he presents in support of his theory.  He does claim that there is evidence from the Podesta emails that Democrats are over sampled in polls and that polls are only targeting likely voters but these are issues with polling and sampling methodology not with the survey respondents as in the Bradley effect.  There is little evidence of this effect in the primaries when Trump won handily.  
The Gap Between Poll Numbers and Election Results for African American Candidates Over Time

There were fears among Democrats that the Bradley effect would come into play in the 2008.  As I stated before that didn't happen.  The effect is thought by some to be a thing of the past which may or may not be true.  The effect may be minimized with more advanced polling methodologies such as online surveys or phone surveys with automated rather than live questioners.  It may be more comfortable for respondents to speak openly to a machine than to a human being.


Of course it may be just wishful thinking on the part of Trump and Gibbs for a reverse Bradley effect.  No one really knows until the votes are counted.  The general election is a different beast than the primaries.  I haven't heard any discussion of this effect when there is a woman on the ballot.  The reverse Bradley effect refers to voters not being willing to tell pollsters that they support a candidate who is openly supported by white supremacist leaders like David Duke.  Time will tell.

**Related Posts**

More Hate Groups in States Where Trump and Clinton Win (and in DC Where He Lost)

 

SPLC Hate Group Update: Washington, DC has an Increase in Activity

 

A Wave of Hate Groups in California? No in Washington, DC

 

Terrorism Boost for Trump

Monday, March 21, 2016

Which Religious Group Supports Trump the Most?


Looking at Juan Cole's blog Informed Comment I came across this graph showing the preferences of the four major religious groups (Islam, Judaism, Protestant, and Catholic) in the US for the top 5 Presidential candidates from the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding.  The survey was conducted before Marco Rubio dropped out of the race.  The focus of the survey was how Muslims compare to other religious groups with respect to the 2016 election.  Predictably Muslims more strongly support Democrats Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders than the Republicans.  

The one number that jumped out at me n the graph at the top was the group that most strongly supported Donald Trump.  Donald Trump was supported by 4% of Muslims, 13% of Jews, 17% of Protestants and 28% of Catholics.  This number seems worth investigating.  Another graph in their report presented below shows that 47% of Protestants are more likely to identify as Republican compared to 34% of Catholics, 16% of Jews, and 6% of Muslims.  This comes as exit polls in the primaries show Trump doing well among evangelical or born again Christians with Ted Cruz doing better in some states. 
The graph below may shed some light Catholic support for Trump.  Immigration and National Security were listed as the top issues among Catholics while the economy and national security were listed as top among Protestants.  The economy was most important among the other groups.
It seems as though issues with the US and foreigners trumps the brief feud that Trump had with Pope Francis regarding his proposal to build a wall on the border with Mexico for 28% of US Catholics.  

**Update** 

Ted Cruz and Bernie Sanders won the Utah Caucus handily over Trump where the state is 70% Mormon.  The LDS church (aka the Mormons) might be a good group to survey on their political preferences which may differ from mainline protestants and Catholics.

  **Related Posts**

Terrorism Boost for Trump?

Numbers and Catholicism 

More Hate Groups in States Where Trump Wins

Saturday, February 13, 2016

NH Exit Poll: Dems Divided, Trump Voters United

The New Hampshire primary was a resounding victory for Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.  Their wins clearly show a dissatisfaction with the party establishment but the exit polls show different demographic patterns for their support.

Democratic Primary

The generation gap between older and younger voters for Sanders has been well reported but there are other divides.  Sanders won 61% of the white vote and 50% of the nonwhite vote (they were 7% of the electorate in NH).  Sanders won all education levels with 60% or more all education levels except for a lower % of the vote among post-graduates at 51% to 48% for Clinton.  

He won every income level except those earning more than $200,000 or more (8% of NH Dem voters) with 53% for Clinton.  Sanders had 60% or more of the income categories earning less than $100,000.

Sanders won 52% of voters who were registered Democrats and 73% of independents.  He won 67% of unmarried voters and 56% of married voters.  What gender is crossed with gender Sanders did equally well with married men and women with 56% support from each.  Sanders won 74% of unmarried men and 62% of unmarried women.  


The top issues among democratic voters were economy/jobs (33%), income inequality (32%), and health care (23%) followed by terrorism (9%).  Sanders won among each of these issues with the lowest share among those who name terrorism where he garnered 50%. 


63% of Dem voters said that they support a single payer health care system while 32% said that they did not.  Sanders won 71% of those who support it while Clinton won 58% of those who oppose.  Sanders won 61% of those who said that the debates were a factor in deciding who to vote for while winning 54% among those who did not.


GOP Primary

The most remarkable thing to say about the Republican primary is how homogeneous it is.  Trump won 38% of male voters and 33% of female voters which was the highest for both genders.  Trump won all age groups with 30% or more of the vote.  Trump finished first among all education levels with 47% of those with high school or less, 39% of those with some college, 33% of college graduates, and 25% of those with post graduate degrees.  Trump finished first among all income levels.  Trump did equally well among independents and registered Republicans.

The sharpest divide among voters appeared to be among issues.  Trump did better among gun owners (40%) than non-gun owners (28%) but finished first among both.  Trump did better among non-evangelical Christians (38%) than evangelicals (27%) but finished first among both.  


The top issues for the GOP voters were 33% economy/jobs, 26% government spending, 24% terrorism, and 15% immigration. Trump won all 4 issue groups with the strongest support among those stating immigration being strongest for Trump (53%) and those stating terrorism (29%) being the weakest.


Third place finisher Ted Cruz won among voters who stated 'shares my values' as the top candidate quality (21%) while Trump won among those who stated electability (33%), tells it like it is (66%), and can bring change (37%).  Trump won among those who were very worried about the economy (39%) while second place finisher John Kasich barely won among those who were somewhat worried (27%).  


65% of voters supported Trump's proposal on banning Muslims entering the US while 32% did not.  Trump had 45% of those who supported his proposal while Kasich had 26% of those who did not.  

New polls suggest that Clinton and Sanders are tied in Nevada and Trump is leading in South Carolina which are the next contests for the parties on Feb. 20.  If similar patterns are seen in the entrance poll in Nevada and in the exit poll in SC it could be another good night for Trump and Sanders.

  **Related Posts** 

Terrorism Boost for Trump?

 

Bernie Sanders Lead in Iowa and NH but not SC: Inside the Numbers

 

Inside the Democratic Poll Numbers and Jon Stewart Returns