Event Calendar
February 2012
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 * * *
<< (add event) >>


User Blox 4
- Put stuff here

Barack Obama
"Lincoln Sells Out Slaves"
by: Rob Kailey - Sep 13
1 Comments
If You Haven't Seen This
by: Rob Kailey - Apr 28
5 Comments
Impeach the President?
by: Rob Kailey - Mar 16
15 Comments
It's the system, stupid!
by: Jay Stevens - Oct 25
7 Comments

Search




Advanced Search


Rob Kailey is a working schmuck with no ties or affiliations to any governmental or political organizations, save those of sympathy.

Recrunching the Kos numbers on Obama-McCain in Montana

by: Matt Singer

Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:46:46 AM MST


So while I've been a longtime skeptic of Obama's chances to win Montana come November, I wanted to look a bit deeper into the R2K numbers from Daily Kos on the race. That poll showed McCain winning the state by 13.

In fact, it even showed McCain winning the youth vote in Montana by 5.

So I went to some national polling to look at how the white youth vote is going elsewhere to try to get a handle on whether it would make sense for Montana youth to be going McCain (the under 30 vote in Montana is probably about 90% white, a bit more diverse than the state as a whole, but not much).

So I checked out Rock the Vote's latest polling. They have white youth going Obama 48-36. Democracy Corps has slightly older numbers that show white youth going Obama by the wider margin of 46-45.

Both of the polling firms in question are Democratic firms, but they are very respected Democratic firms. How to account for such disparity? While subsamples have higher margins of error, so that could be part of it.

But keeping in mind that the Montana youth vote is 90% white, is it likely that youth in Montana are really going more for McCain than white youth nationally? I'd doubt it. Especially since Montana's white population tends to be more big-D Democratic than whites nationally (I think this is typical of homogenous white states).

Now that homogeneity could also mean that we're seeing a racial effect here. This isn't a Bradley effect, mind you, it's people being openly racialized in their voting.

All that said, I think this subsample throws some questions on the 13 point margin.

Bottom line in my book:

  1. I don't think Obama is really down 13 in Montana.
  2. I also still think McCain ultimately wins Montana.
  3. Take all of this with a grain of salt because subsamples are just that -- subsamples.
Matt Singer :: Recrunching the Kos numbers on Obama-McCain in Montana
Tags: , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Those Democracy Corps numbers... (0.00 / 0)
I assume a "wider margin" means something bigger than 46-45? Like 46-25?

The Wizard of Id vote... (0.00 / 0)
They have white youth going Obama 48-36.

The wizard says....if there are more stupid people than there are intelligent ones, then the democrat wins.


your comment... (0.00 / 0)
...belies your claim.

[ Parent ]
Dr. Paul (0.00 / 0)
You know I've seen a ton more Ron Paul crap out there than Obama. If they poll within a few points of each other I think Paul spoils Montana. God bless the third party nuts on the right.

Conservatives should seriously consider Ron Paul and Bob Barr (0.00 / 0)
Nationwide it's clear that Obama supporters should be focusing on persuading independents and undecideds, but in Montana I seriously think we should be trying to convince conservatives instead of (or in addition to) moderates.

Not necessarily to vote for Obama, but to make a vote that as conservatives they can actually be proud of this year.

We Democrats are mostly voting for Obama because we really like him--his ideas, his proposed policies and the kind of person he is.  Republicans generally can't say the same thing about McCain, and if they were honestly paying attention they certainly wouldn't be able to say it.

Anyone who's paying attention should be able to recognize that McCain has sacrificed his principles--he's become a liar and he's irresponsible in choosing Palin as his possible successor as President.  He's putting campaign ahead of country.  He's too old and he's not up to the job--maybe he would have been able to handle it in 2000 but it's too late to correct that mistake.

Barr and Paul have stayed true to their principles.  They're not going to win, but the larger their share of the vote, the more loudly their honest conservative statements will be heard.  If Obama's going to win nationally anyway, Montana conservatives won't be sacrificing anything by voting their conscience for Barr or Paul.  Sure, Obama might win Montana's measly 3 electoral votes, but conservatives will still be voting against him, and he probably won't get a majority of MT's popular vote.

Sorry for rambling--I think I'll write some version of this up as a letter to the editor, but I'm using this comment to work through a few of these ideas first.


[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Bookmark and Share

Poll
Voting. Useful or not?
Yes!
No!
Maybe, but only if you vote my way.
There are theories that ...
Meh ...

Results

Blog Roll
  • A Secular Franciscan Life
  • Big Sky Blog
  • David Crisp's Billings Blog
  • Discovering Urbanism
  • Ecorover
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Intelligent Discontent
  • Intermountain Energy
  • Lesley's Podcast
  • Livingston, I Presume
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Montana Cowgirl
  • Montana Main St.
  • Montana Maven
  • Montana With kids
  • Patia Stephens
  • Prairie Mary
  • Speedkill
  • Sporky
  • The Alberton Papers
  • The Fighting Liberal
  • The Montana Capitol Blog
  • The Montana Misanthrope
  • Thoughts From the Middle of Nowhere
  • Treasure State Judaism
  • Writing and the West
  • Wrong Dog's Life Chest
  • Wulfgar!

  • Powered by: SoapBlox