« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Taking a Second Look at those #WIRecall Exit Polls–And Other Things

Promoted from the diaries by Jeff

In their frantic attempt to glean something positive from last night’s shellacking in Wisconsin, we found the Obama campaign clinging (bitterly?) to the results of the exit polls. According to them, Obama was still beating Romney 51-45% in the state. Unfortunately, for them at least, they don’t even get this satisfaction anymore. Michael Barone has done the analyzing:

It has been emblazoned on mainstream media that the exit poll also showed Barack Obama leading Mitt Romney in the state 51%-45%. But if you think the exit poll was 4% too Democratic—and that’s in line with exit poll discrepancies with actual vote results over the last decade, as documented by the exit poll pioneer, the late Warren Mitofsky*—that result looks more like 49%-47% Romney. Or assume the remaining Milwaukee County precincts whittle Republican Governor Scott Walker’s margin over Democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett to 53%-47%, which looks likely, the Obama-Romney numbers would look like 48%-48%.

But you know what? I can’t say these results surprised me. Walker winning big is a real sign that Republicans would have a chance in that state. True, five months is an eternity in politics, but this wasn’t just any off year election. This was the biggest election since 2010, and it confirmed that year’s results: the people want common sense conservative governance. And, as @fivethirtyeight noted on Twitter:

Exit polls have been highly accurate in every recent election except 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2010.

But that’s not the only thing the Obama campaign ought to be worried about. This election found 38% of union voters broke for Walker. Not a majority, by any means, but that’s digging deep into what is supposed to be a Democratic constituency. To add to their misery, Walker took about 18% of Obama voters. As The New Republic‘s Alec MacGillis notes, these voters displayed two major traits: recall fatigue and support for someone who was actually doing something, even though it might or might not have been their ideal way of doing those things. And he finds:

Now, the Obama campaign should not take too much comfort in these Walker-Obama voters. They are, after all, swing voters, and Romney and Walker will do their best to swing them in the next few months. But they are the reason why, as I argued yesterday, a Walker win was not necessarily going to as disastrous an augur for Obama as most of the commentariat was prepared to label it.

So, all in all, not a good day for Democrats. They got that Senate seat, but that’s about it. And things may not be a bed of roses there, either. [Update: This story goes into more depth on the Senate control issue beyond the other link]

COMMENTS

  • tnfriendofcoal101368

    Dick Morris has so ably pointed out on numerous occasion the 4% undecided at this point is really 4% independent and have decided to fire the President. The only way those folks don’t split 90/10 for the challenger is if Romney has a “John Edwards or Gary Hart” moment so that really is 52-48 Romney assuming same get out the vote on each side.

  • red_oakster

    Walker proved that Wisconsin will be in play this November. Ten electoral votes is a huge opportunity for Romney and a political migraine for Obama.

    Ryan moves up in the veepstakes. He is a favorite son and his selection as veep would complicate Obama’s life immensely. Wisconsin has not had representation on a major party since … ever. It would be a big deal in Wisconsin to have Ryan on the ticket.

    • robertm75

      and that is exactly why I want him to stay in the House. We need to surround him with more Tea Party-type colleagues and challenge the Beohner-McConnell-DC GOP establishment. Ryan is a master on the Apps Comm in the House and we need his leadership there.

  • medicineman

    I would like to get the African American turnout. One would assume it was similar to 2010 levels.

    With that said, being down 1-2 points at this point in time compared to a 14 point defeat in ’08 is a darn good place to be..

    • acat

      over at Ace of Spades Decision Desk

      I’m not a Wisconsinite, so lack good knowledge on what cities are where, but … they have the turnout broken down to the county level at least, and if you dig I think they have sub-county in there somewhere.

      Mew

  • PowerToThePeople

    are not that valuable at this time. I do not know why, but way too many are still unwilling to state who they will really vote for as President when asked in person, but when they close that curtain, their vote is for who they really want. I think this is why so many polls were wrong on Tuesday.

    I know why they say what they say when it comes to Obama, they do not want to be accused of racism so they lie. I think Wisconsin is in our hands and will be for awhile now. It will be close, but the democrat rule in Wisconsin is over.

  • GreyCloak

    Even though Walker and his Lt Gov. won by 53% to 46-47%, it is heartening that three of the Senate races retained Republicans by 60/40.

    That was also true of the Senate District 21 vote up until about 9 pm, with 25% of precincts reporting. It seems odd that the vote shifted to the Democrat, late in the game.

    It might be worthwhile to compare the names of the 71,000 who voted to the past year”s obituaries.

    http://wisconsinvote.org/election-results

    • BlueLandRed

      that we just lost control of the Wis Senate.

      Now it is just grid lock until the next election.

      And looking for voter fraud post election can’t change the results. Tho’ it can help in the future.

      • http://jakespeaks.wordpress.com/ Jake Walker, no relation

        Fraudulent ballots can fudge no higher than three percent of the grand total of voter. Usually more like 2.5

        Beyond that, you’re safe.

      • Finrod

        They’re not scheduled to meet again until after the November elections, which will be run on maps set by the Republicans, plus there are 10 Dems and 6 Reps up for re-election then.

    • Flagstaff

      As was noted yesterday morning, Walker needed to win by more than the “margin of vote fraud.” Apparently SD21 didn’t.

      Since that was a mostly symbolic loss (the Senate is no longer in session, out until the next election) maybe the Repub’s should just study how the cheating was done and be ready to stop it in November.

  • Flagstaff

    Keep it up all summer.

    I loved “Exit polls have been highly accurate in every recent election except 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2010.”

    fivethirtyeight has a way with words too.

  • 6t9boss

    I don’t see how on any statistical level you say that one half of the exit polling was flawed and the other half wasn’t. The pollesters got this SO SO WRONG there is no way the Obama/Romney question results are even close to accurate.

    • Right_Again

      It is not that one half is flawed and the other half is not. The entire exit polling was flawed. But by comparing it to the actual results we know how it was flawed in relation to the Walker/Barrett race. We are therefore at least somewhat able to extrapolate that flaw to the Obama/Romney race. If the Walker/Barrett race was off by approximately 7% in favor of the Democrat, it follows that the Obama/Romney race results in the exit polling were off by a similar margin.

      • 6t9boss

        but I think had Obama /Romney been on the ticket the outcome would be the same and Romney would have won.There are alot of people who are suffering under Obamas policies (even Liberals) and are tired of fighting against the tide of socialism and just don’t want 4 more years of this junk.

  • waynemiddleton

    With due respect to all who write posts and speak publicly using the term “Republican” as the Jake Walker does in various ways and places in this article describing the party status with the results of this Wisconsin election (such as “Republicans would have a chance in that state”), it is time conservatives got off the party bandwagon and started using terms which focus more on the “GOAL” we need to achieve – that is “CONSERVATIVE” wins or “FREEDOM” progress or “LIBERTY” improvemetn.

    I am as tired of reading or hearing what “Republicans” have done or will do as I am of the same regarding “Democrats.” No matter which, it is all “PARTY TALK,” making me think of keeping some current “Holder of Office” in that position of power.

    ENOUGH!

    WE NEED TO FOCUS UPON AND CLEARLY HEAR THAT CONSERVING OR RESTORING OUR COUNTRY’S LIBERTIES AND FREEDSOMS IS THE ROOT AND GOAL OF DISCUSSION ABOUT ELECTIONS IN THIS COUNTRY.

    • 4suramcan

      hear hear

    • rigdum

      I suspect that I agree with you on almost all conservative positions, and up to the Limbaugh rule that says that in times like these the correct vote is always for the most conservative candidate running, in a primary or a general. [despite Alaska, Delaware, and Nevada Senate races last year]. But, and this is a big but–we have to ally with the Republicans, since only they have any conservatives at all, and we are locked into a two-party system. Until true conservatives are at least 40% of the country [I put them at 25% at the most] and maybe more, we can either commit political suicide and feel good, or take turf a bit at a time.

      • gwbramhall

        Never a truer word spoken. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
        As you say, they are the only party of the two viable parties to have any conservatives. We must not quibble and give another pass to the outrageously awful.

        • 6t9boss

          I was one of those who said I would not vote for Romney during the primary…NOW!?….It’s Romney because I can’t take FOUR MORE YEARS of Obama. I think if anyone splits and votes third party THIS TIME ; they have sealed the fate of this country forever and the final nails of Socialism WILL be driven in the coffin of this country if Obama gets that second term.

  • ariyosef

    (simple street reality)_

  • gwbramhall

    How can an exit pole be scientific or unbiased? The respondents
    cannot be random. True, they are certainly “likely voters” but the
    individual who does not want to be thought of as racist is going
    to walk by the poller while the democrat partisan is going to be
    eager to display his bonifides. If the Obama team takes comfort
    from this news, they are even less competant than the stories I’ve
    been reading on that point indicate.