Patterico's Pontifications

4/22/2008

Pennsylvania Exit Polls

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 3:14 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

The exit polls reveal that most voters decided on a candidate more than a week ago. Voters also said the negative campaigning has primarily tarnished Clinton but also hurt Obama:

“Despite all the down-to-the-wire campaigning, preliminary exit poll results indicate that nearly eight in 10 Pennsylvania voters made up their minds at least a week ago, and six in 10 decided on their candidate more than a month ago — a higher number of early deciders than the norm in Democratic primaries to date.

As far as campaigning, many discern a negative tone — and more blame it on Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., than on Barack Obama, D-Ill. Two-thirds of Pennsylvania voters in preliminary exit poll results say Clinton attacked Obama unfairly; fewer, but still about half, also say Obama unfairly attacked Clinton.”

Early reports show turnout is high for women (6 of every 10 voters) and lower than in other states for African Americans, but the ultimate numbers may change.

We’ll see if the actual results match the exit polls. They don’t always seem to match up this year.

— DRJ

6 Responses to “Pennsylvania Exit Polls”

  1. WHITE MEN

    53% CLINTON

    46% OBAMA

    WHITE WOMEN

    64% CLINTON

    36% OBAMA

    (In Ohio, Clinton won 13% of the black vote, in PA it was Obama 92-8%.)

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/22/exit.polls/index.html

    steve (dad5ec)

  2. It looks like the difference was black voters and white women. A racial/gender divide.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  3. Hillary up 8 percent. Unfortunately for us in Indiana, we are looking at 2 weeks of nothing but Hill and Baracky. Actually, I think Baracky is already here, and Hill will be here in the morning. I am going to take my girls to see them, if I can.

    JD (5f0e11)

  4. He;s in Evansville…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  5. “I think even more important though is that the difference is likely much larger among Republicans and Independents. Thats a lot of important (white) voters breaking against a Obama candidacy. If this is accurate, then this spells a lot of trouble for Obama in states like Minnesota, Colorado, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida …” This comment came from another poster, so it’s not original. But, it’s correct. There’s no way Obama can win enough votes from Republican leaners and independents who aren’t going to swallow his main themes.
    22% of us were against the Iraqi War before it started. 70-78% were for it or neutral. As the debacle in Iraq has gone on, there’s been a real shift. Those 70-78% who were in favor of the war don’ NEED Senator Clinton to justify her vote. Her vote was in sync with the national numbers. As someone opposed to the war to the point where I was a leader in the anti-war movement, I do not, however, place all of the blame for the war on Hillary Clinton. In fact, she’s been in the forefront to make sure our troops got all the support they needed.
    The inability of the Ultra Liberal Elitists (ULEs) to forgive Clinton should be looked at, from where I sit, as a 70% disabled combat infantry vet from Vietnam (gunshot wound; malaria; PTSD; Purple Heart; Combat Infantry Badge; tour in S. Korea before Vietnam in 1966), I’ve found in interesting that many Obamistas haven’t the courage to enlist in all these years since September 11.
    And yet, many are physically and mentally able to serve. But, they don’t. They talk a lot of sh.t as many did during the Vietnam War. And so, many of the more privileged and educated grok to Obama. There are millions of independents and Republicans who are well aware of the long story of Vietmam will know because of our experience, and often, our direct participation in the war, that we CAN declare victory and go home.
    Senator Clinton has already set the stage for this, as opposed to McCain, who will stay as long as the Iraqis need us … and Obama, who will leave precipitously. Those of us who have grown up on the complexities of the Cold War (again, gone since 1991) understand the difficulty in pulling out of Iraq. Iran will surely ascend in importance. A blood-bath will ensue between the Shi’a and Sunni. The latter have dominated Islam for 13 centuries.
    On the other hand, the Shi’a dominate that part of the Middle East. As internecine warfare among Muslims erupts, the supply of oil will be very, very dangerously impacted. The other day, the price jumped because 1 Japanese supertanker was hit by rockets from terrorists, and some oil pipeline was disrupted in Nigeria.
    Senator Clinton knows that there will not be any way to leave any earlier than two years, for combat forces. And they will not go far. Those Republicans and Independents, therefore, who WERE for the war, but are now weary, will need somewhere to go. They will never go to Obama.
    They don’t want to go to Mccain.
    Instead, if they are ready to find a neutral way out, they will vote for her. If Obama is the nominee, the Democrats will lose, as they always have with McGovern; Mondale; Ted Kennedy; Dukakis; Gary Hart; John Edwards; John Kerry; and, the inimitable Dr. Howard Dean — all Ultra Liberal Elitists. They would sooner vote for McCain, even though they want out of Iraq.
    Governor Romney was never going to be elected. He was not only wishy-washy, but a Mormon. Evangelicals flocked instead to Huckabee. McCain is more secularist and a pretty light weight “Christian,” but he’s not a Mormon. So, Huckabee won the Evangelical vote, as did McCain to a lesser degree. People didn’t have to NOT vote for Romney, and expose themselves to possibly being called bigots. Or, intolerant. Wow. For me, looking at Warren Jepps, and knowing the Utah State Government has been well aware of plural marriage freaks, and, that such places are bastions of pedophilia, I’d say, I sure as hell wouldn’t vote for what appears to be a cult, not a religion. But, of course, I’ll be labeled a bigot for that.
    People won’t HAVE to vote for Obama, and be called “racists” because that will be what they are called if they say, “Oh, I don’t like Obama.” “Oh, well, don’t you want to vote for an African-American?” This is a reality of America: there still is prejudice, but what would it be called if a white minister said: Obama can’t represent me as well as a white man. He ain’t never been called a honkie cracker!” And “God DAAAAMN America,” the “KKKA of America!”
    Millions of us started in the early sixties to support the Civil Rights Movement. If Rev. Wright says those things about Senator Clinton, and many of the parishoners were sucking it up (watch the video), I KNOW damned well I’VE been called a HONKIE MOTHER F….R,” to my face … and not all of that was way back in Vietnam, or the decade after Vietnam. I marched, and supported monetarily, and I don’t need to have some guy say that shit about me. Obama sat through 20 years of that. That’s a LONG TIME to hear that, and not walk away. Lots of us have been deeply offended that Obama has been credited with “not cutting a friend lose,” with Rev. Wright. Obama did that so he wouldn’t alienate the African-American crowd. Remember: he was thought, initially, to not be “black enough.” Calculated? You bet.
    This is the first significant Affirmative Action Election for Democrats. And, while a month or two ago, George McGovern, speaking in support of Hillary said: “It appears it is easier for an African-American to get elected to the Presidency than a woman,” the shift in white, some black and also some Hispanic Americans saying, more and more: it’s becoming easier to vote for a woman than an African-American, will resonate more and more.
    The crowds get bigger for Senator Clinton. She has the ability to engage with small crowds, but her crowds now get bigger and more enthusiastic. AND, look at the faces BEHIND her now: more and more young women. She has rallies in more and college and university venues. More young men, also, have been showing up. She’s weakened some of Obama’s hold on the Buppies & Yuppies. Again, there are many of those groups have more than been happy to allow lower class & less educated to go and fight & die in Iraq & Afghanistan.
    Lower and Middle Class Americans have seen this crap before during Vietnam. And, so, that only adds to my own skeptical view that Obamistas are chicken hawks, or, cowards, to fight for their country. Oh, yes, my war made it possible to say: “I’m not for this war,” and in fact, I became one of the first Vietnam Veterans still in uniform to publicly come out in July, 1967, against the war. On the other hand, I volunteered for combat, and saw it, and was able to compare it to my own education (high school), and sense of ethics. I have no regrets, even though I’ve lived with my wounds, and PTSD, since 1966. I saw, and made my changes through direct experience.
    I wouldn’t ever stand in the way of someone who felt they needed to defend the nation in the wake of September 11. I would have told them to not go, to Iraq, but every man, and every woman, has a right to experience such things. I find it is much easier to avoid that experience if you have a higher eduction, or your family has more money. Always has been; always will be. WW II, and, to some extent, the Korean War saw a draft that leveled many of those “outs.”
    Obama isn’t ready.
    I won’t vote for him because he’s arrogant, aloof and fervently thinks he knows more about foreign policy than the other two candidates. He also he really meant what he said about small town Americans. He doesn’t understand small town Americans.
    Unfortunately, the next states are ALL heavily populated with small towns. And, a fair number of them have very high proportions of veterans, or, men and women who’ve enlisted in every war since the Revolution. There are also more Christians in those “farm” states. He cannot connect with them as Clinton speaks in terms of very specific solutions to our problems. THEY know where their sons and daughters have been. THEY now know they’ve been suckered again. And so, the Superdelegates should look at that and also, that we Clinton supporters will raise holy hell about Florida and Michigan.
    Google those two primaries, and you will see that on election day, and even before, Obamistas were telling people to vote for “uncommitted” if they wanted to register a vote for Obama. And Wolf Blitzer even reminded voters of that on Michigan’s election day. It sounded to me like a direct intervention on his part.
    Florida will not take being excluded lying down. If Clinton can win in six or seven of the upcoming states, she will be close to the raw numbers, when we all insist that the outcomes in those two states be validated by proportional delegate awards.
    Look at the # of counties she carried in PA, and you will see that nearly ALL the counties other than Philly, parts of Scranton & some of the Pittsburgh & Philly suburbs voted Obama. But not enough. Obama’s peaked.
    Rev. Wright is into his own self-centered reinvention this weekend, and Obama goes on FOX. He will NOT convert FOX news independents or Republicans sick of the war. Nope. He will lose more young, educated women too, as they see that they, not African -Americans, have the most realistic prospects for setting a new historical precedent: ending the 43-0 male v. female score for the White House. Obama’s energy is slipping.
    He doesn’t do well when he makes mistakes and he doesn’t do well when he loses. He takes it very personally, and you can see him lose some lustre. So, if she hammers him consistently, in these upcoming campaigns, he could lose his energy even more.
    3:1 in money spent, and he still lost by 10%. She was challenged to win with double digits: she delivered. She will become known as the Terminator, if she wins six or seven of the next contests. Democrats DO want to win this time.
    I stand for Clinton. She’s a moderate, and knows compromise. People might look at that & realize there lies part of the path to true healing. Compromise has become a tarnished word, but it was at the center of much of America’s success. Ruling from the Ultra Right or Ultra Left has left us all worn down. Who wants more of that sh.t?
    I stand for Senator Clinton.
    She’s tough, intelligent, adept on her feet, understands politics (oooooh, that’s bad!! Makes her “a monster!”); and has worked with many Republicans who have come to respect her competence & understanding that compromise happens to all of us, sometimes. She’s endured tremendous attacks … but still has a grace about her.
    I’ll send her some part of my tax rebate check. I want to give her every chance to win — fair and square: big towns, little ones. Universities; colleges; rust belt; farm belt; tobacco belt; corn &bwheat belts; Oregon woods & Indiana fields.
    She sure as hell is flawed, but if one wants to see a “monster” woman leader, check out “Eilzabeth.” There’s more than a few women monsters in those films. Hillary’s not remotely close to Elizabeth. Get a grip.

    Jerry (Eagan) (c91a0d)

  6. *rolls his eyes*

    SOmeone’s let lil Eagan get into the adult kool-aid…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3014 secs.