Reality-BasedTM Political Numbers from Nicholas Beaudrot
Electoral Math
Reality-BasedTM Political Numbers from Nicholas Beaudrot
A good sign for Clark? | Home | A South Carolina Debate rooting guide
I want to take a minute to play amateur pundit and look at the New Hampshire exit polls. There's a bunch of information here that suggests that Dean would be toast in a national election, and we are in a three horse race between Kerry, Edwards, and Clark, with Dean as a nice side show, a la Jerry Brown in 1992. I want to go through these break downs, piece by piece.
Gender: Kerry polled better with women than he did with men. Edwards polled well with men. This bodes well for Edwards in a general election.
Forgive me for ignoring the "Race" sub-component in a state that is 97% white.
Age: Dean seems to do well with Gen Xers and retirees, butnot with baby boomers or thirtysomethings. Kerry, meanwhile, polls poorly among young voters, allthough this is probably just because Dean is in the race.
Income: This is a big deal. In 1992, Paul Tsongas won the New Hampshire primary, but mostly by carrying a large majority of upper class, college educated voters. Clinton came in second, but drew respectable from both upper class and working class voters. As the primaries moved further South, Tsongas's inability to win over more middle income voters doomed him. The ability to win over the middle class is important both in the later primaries and the national election -- this is why one of Clinton's main primary themes was "the forgotten middle class", and why one of Clark's main lines is "I will never forget America's working families". . The Gore vs Bradley primary of 2000 illustrated the same phenomenon; Bradley was unable to win over working class voters.
In New Hampshire, there was no sizeable winner or loser among the middle class voters. Clark polls well with lower middle class voters ($30-50k), while Kerry did well with upper middle class voters ($50-75). Surprisingly, the image of Dean's voters as latte-drinking, volvo-driving, etc., does not pan out; he fares worse and worse as you go up the economic scale. This may be attributable to his appeal to young voters, who are either in college or in their first job and therefore probably not making too much money.
Family Finances over the last 4 years: There's nothing interesting here, except that people who's finances have improved are voting for Lieberman, while those who are hurting aren't. But it's Lieberman. Who cares.
Education: Here we see the clearest failure of Dean's "excite the base" strategy. Dean polls extremely well among college educated and those with post-graduate study. But he fairs poorly among high school graduates. Also, his decent marks for voters with "Some College" experience probably means he polls well among those going to college, but poorly among those who dropped out of college.
Sidenote: 26% of New Hampshire Democrats hold Masters, PhDs, MDs, or Law Degrees? What the heck?
Union Households: I don't know what to make of these numbers. Clark holds a slight edge among union households. I don't think this matters too much; this election is rapidly proving that labor unions do not represent a significant political force in the US.
Veterans: Interestingly, among actual veterans, the general does do better than the lieutenant. While these numbers are likely related to income and education, it indicates that Kerry's emotional stories about Vietnam play better with people who haven't been to war than among those who have. This is probably a good sign for the general election, since non-veterans greatly outnumber veterans. Note that Clark also told war stories during the New Hampshire campaign, and made them more focal as the days went on, so this may have played a part in the veteran vote.
Sidenote: 15% of New Hampshire Democrats served in the Armed Forces? What the heck?
Party identification: Another episode of Dean's failing; he polls wretchedly among self-identified Independents and Republicans. Clark, meanwhile, holds a number of Republicans, despite being quite liberal. Kerry also does fairly well among the few Republicans who voted. Lieberman was the Republican's candidate of choice, and his strategy of appealing to Independents helped him. Sadly for him, he's not actually a Democrat.
Ideology: Kerry and Edwards do well among Moderates. Clark and Edwards do well among voters who are "Somewhat conservative". Dean gets hosed in the middle. Again.
Religion: Kerry, a Catholic, pulls well from Catholics. Catholics were once a large part of Democratic support, but haven't been since 1988, when Dukakis failed to draw the Catholic vote very well. Dean fairs well among atheists, who, you will not, are still only minority of voters.
Church attendance: In another show of Edwards moderate appeal, he draws well from occasional church goers. Dean, meanwhile, draws well frm the quarter of the population that never goes to church.
Importance of debate: There's not to much to see here. Clark voters appear to want to vote for Clark regardless of how he debates, probably either because they are in the "anybody but Bush" crowd and evaluate Clark as having the best chances, or they like his qualities as a general, or they like his middle class tax cut, or whatever.
Opinion of the Bush Administration: Edwards shows well again with Moderates ... especially those who are "satisfied" with the Bush White House. Clark does as well, which means Kerry draws poorly from this demographic.
Dean's Temperament: It looks like Dean voters flocked to Kerry as a consequence of his temperament. Interestingly, Clark voters are evenly split on whether or not Dean has the right temperament.
Quick notes on Favorable/Unfavorable Ratings:
War In Iraq: New Hampshire Democrats did not mirror Iowa Democrats on this issue ... they disapprove much more of the War in Iraq.
Most Important Issue: Clark needs to show he is multi-dimensional -- he draws well from those who think Terrorism and the War in Iraq are the most important issues, but poorly from others. If he can show that he has a useful domestic policy, he becomes a viable candidate. Hopefully he will get a chance to talk about his domestic policy in the South Carolina debate.
| | technorati
Last
updated by Nicholas Beaudrot on 11:30 13 February 2005
