Comments on: Outliers: What Oregon Shows About Kentucky and West Virginia

By: bostondreams

bostondreams — Thu, 22 May 2008 12:22:38 +0000

Anita,

Do you really believe that CLINTON will unite the party? Does it not work both ways?

By: Kyle E. Moore

Kyle E. Moore — Wed, 21 May 2008 22:11:31 +0000

Okay, so we were really kind of talking around each other; understandable as I replied to your original comment at about bedtime for me, which is not my most lucid and cogent.

Do I really want to believe exit polls? Sometimes. Exit polls in advance of official tallies, not unless they are very solid, ie. Kentucky’s exits were probably pretty accurate. After the tallies come in, sure, as they provide some of the data that we use to analyze what happened.

But yeah, we’re about at the right place here. Clinton’s support, I believe is being falsely inflated by the Chaos effect in some states, particularly indiana, which, taking it away from Obama, does mean that there is not quite as strong of an indicator to believe that Clinton would perform as well as she suggests in those states.

And no, WV and KY are not predictive at all, especially considering how few electoral votes they are worth. Still, I think Obama’s going to contest them. I think, assuming he continues to haul in money at the rate he has been, I think he’s going to push every state regardless of how likely he is to win it.

If you want an example of where the Democratic party really is, I think Gallup’s numbers make an awful lot of sense at this point.

By: Chief

Chief — Wed, 21 May 2008 14:48:45 +0000

Kyle,

That wasn’t my point. “Fact is, those are votes that Obama really isn’t going to get in the fall, and must be accounted for elsewhere.” We were talking about outliers and the overall Dem nominating process. The fact that a certain number of Republicans crossed over and voted for Sen. Clinton makes the race for the Dem nomination appear closer than it really would be if only Dems had been voting. And ‘exit polls.’ Do we really want to believe them?

I view WV and KY as non-predictive of the Dem outcome in November.

By: Manamongst Hussein

Manamongst Hussein — Wed, 21 May 2008 14:28:01 +0000

Especially when some from the Clinton side will cling to excuse after excuse and make him out to be the boogie man. What SHE is doing now is giving her supporters false hope…”going toe to toe”? Really, every non-clouded and clear thinking person know’s it’s over. The vast majority of her supporters now rightfully will continue to vote for her until she pulls the plug. They won’t allow themselves to be united. Good thing for them this is still a slow moving train out of the station. As each week goes by they will realize HOW BAD a candidate John McCain is. And after that point they’re welcome to vote for him…something tells me that they were the dummies that crossed over and voted for Bush a second time…buying into the elitist crap they’ve been suckered into again by the Clinton camp. in short, we don’t care when you get on the train, just get on.

By: Anita

Anita — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:34:53 +0000

And how much of that national trend toward Obama is due to the media drumbeat that he’s the nominee? I would bet quite a bit.

And of course you insert the qualifier “there should be no reason that Obama can’t be effective with ……. a unified party”. Which is precisely the point. He can’t unit the party. If he was capable of doing that it would have happened already.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:22:32 +0000

At what point does it become politically correct to point out that the states where Hillary seems to trounce Obama with “white, working class, less educated voters” also happen to be states or areas with really bad records on race relations? By the way – the exit polling data bears this point out, as Sully pointed out last night with respect to Kentucky. But I’ve noticed similar data in a lot of the other states where Hillary has done quite well.

By: Kyle E. Moore

Kyle E. Moore — Wed, 21 May 2008 12:28:09 +0000

Heh. Glad to hear it.

Off the top of my head, and that’s as good as you’re going to get as I’m getting ready for bed, but I can look it up later if I get time, I don’ think that Republican crossover vote ever got up over a few points.

I do vaguely recall that in Indiana, where Clinton one by a very narrow margin, the Operation Chaos vote actually extended up towards ten points, but I can’t be sure. What I am absolutely positive about, though, is that Clinton did not win Indiana by greater than the Operation Chaos contribution.

Yes, Republicans voting to extend the Democratic primary succeeded in that state, but that’s the only state in which I feel safe confirming it.

Still, as much as I would love to be able to use that in some kind of argument for Obama or against Clinton, I can’t. Fact is, those are votes that Obama really isn’t going to get in the fall, and must be accounted for elsewhere.

By: Chief

Chief — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:44:27 +0000

My question re: voting in Dem primaries. How many of the people who voted for Sen Clinton in PA and OH were crossover Republicans? Limbaugh was promoting Operation Chaos.

Sen Obama certainly has this 65+ year old white guys vote.