Posted on 01/10/2008 12:35:30 PM PST by neverdem
THE failure of the New Hampshire pre-election surveys to mirror the outcome of the Democratic race is one of the most significant miscues in modern polling history. All the published polls, including...
--snip--
To my mind all these factors deserve further study. But another possible explanation cannot be ignored — the longstanding pattern of pre-election polls overstating support for black candidates among white voters, particularly white voters who are poor.
In exploring this factor, it is useful to look closely at the nature of the constituencies for the two candidates in New Hampshire, which were divided along socio-economic lines.
Mrs. Clinton beat Mr. Obama by 12 points (47 percent to 35 percent) among those with family incomes below $50,000. By contrast, Mr. Obama beat Mrs. Clinton by five points (40 percent to 35 percent) among those earning more than $50,000.
There was an education gap, too. College graduates voted for Mr. Obama 39 percent to 34 percent; Mrs. Clinton won among those who had never attended college, 43 percent to 35 percent.
Of course these are not the only patterns in Mrs. Clinton’s support in New Hampshire. Women rallied to her (something they did not do in Iowa), while men leaned to Mr. Obama. Mrs. Clinton also got stronger support from older voters, while Mr. Obama pulled in more support among younger voters. But gender and age patterns tend not to be as confounding to pollsters as race, which to my mind was a key reason the polls got New Hampshire so wrong.
Poorer, less well-educated white people refuse surveys more often than affluent, better-educated whites. Polls generally adjust their samples for this tendency. But here’s the problem: these whites who do not respond to surveys tend to have more unfavorable views of blacks than respondents who do the interviews...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I’m more inclined to think vote fraud by Shrillery.
Where do they get all of these numbers? The same place that got the poll numbers that were wring?
Why were they able to rather closely call the (R) side?
Me thinks the polls were probably rather accurate on the left too.
Is anyone checking into the possibility of voter fraud?
Polls are designed to steer public opinion not gauge it.
I didn't think the Democrats had any of those........... /s
Lots of folks. But it looks more like the Clintons took full advantage of the lax voting "regulations" in New Hampshire than committed any outright fraud.
Democrats don’t care about poor whites. So they pay the price and will continue to pay that price as long as they play favorties with respect to race and national origin. It’s very disinginuous and infantile to complain about it.
This was noted by Real Clear Politics yesterday.
Hillary got MASSIVE support from the OLD, welfare recievers, and the uneducated...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/01/how_clinton_won.html
True. They'll save that for other States...
Wild-assed rumor that they bussed people in. More likely bussed'em around. Manchester a low-down dirty demo town, so it's possible ...
The Bradley effect in action. Iowa was not a secret ballot state. About 3-5% of voters can be expected to say they will vote for the “black guy” but do otherwise once in the booth.
I myself am from the South, but the Times calling New Hampshire racist turns my stomach.
“Why were they able to rather closely call the (R) side?
Me thinks the polls were probably rather accurate on the left too”
I think Rush called it yesterday.
The problem with the dims is the “Bradley factor” (also goes by other names).
When a dim gets a call from a pollster, the answer will always be “I’m voting for the black guy” so the dim will appear to be politically correct.
Once the dim votes (without anyone checking for political correctness), the vote comes out the way he/she was really thinking.
Rush is pretty good at figuring out convoluted dim logic.
Someone check for voter fraud by the donkeys? Don't hold your breath, especially with a voter identification law being reviewed by the Supreme Court in 2008.
Or maybe it’s well-to-do, highly educated racists indulging in wishful thinking when conducting their polls.
Or maybe, the racists tend to vote Democratic. That is, after all, what he is saying, whether he realizes it or not.
Most of the sign holding supporters I saw always seemed to get into or out of a car with MA plates...
Me too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.