CNN: Exit polls on Issues vs. Electability.

[Renew Deal]

Which is more important. Electability or aree with you on issues.

Kerry Voters
49 electability - 44 issues

Edwards voters
69 issues - 24 electability

[still_one]

1. Is this a trick question

[David Dunham]

2. Edwards will finish below second place in the big NY primary next week.

There's very little support for Edwards in NY. I hear he's weak in CA and OH as well.

[spooky3]

6. he hasn't spent much time in any of those places.

He's someone the voters have to get to know.

[David Dunham]

7. Edwards Comes across as too southern to do well in NY, simply put.

[David Dunham]

8. That's why Edwards as nominee could lose states in northeast.

Simply put, Edwards, like Jimmy Carter, comes across as too southern to win many states in the northeast as Clinton and Gore did.

[Zynx]

9. Carter won most of the Northeast and Midwest including Ohio.

[David Dunham]

11. Carter Barely Won NY; lost CT,NJ,VT,ME in '76;in '80, Reagan swept

Carter in 1976 barely won NY even though Gerald Ford had told it to go to hell. In 1980, Reagan swept the region, including Mass., against Carter.

[spooky3]

12. Gerald Ford was a FAR more moderate Republican than *.

[David Dunham]

17. But Bush Can stress his New England roots if he needs too.

And he's got his convention in NY.

[mlawson]

10. Odd. Many, many New Yorkers move here to NC, especially

to Asheville. And our "Southerness" doesn't seem to offend them. :-)

Bill Clinton carried NY twice, as I recall. What is your reasoning here?

[David Dunham]

13. Clinton was a Yalie; Southern trial lawyers don't play in NY and CA

[mlawson]

15. ??? And your data on that is...

How many Southern trial lawyers have run for President in NY and CA???

Do you not mean instead, that *you* don't like Southern trial lawyers???

[David Dunham]

19. Most Dems in NY and CA are free traders, not anti-NAFTA like Edwards

[David Dunham]

20. Clinton was a Yalie and free trader, so he did well in NY

[spooky3]

16. If perceptions not evidence are all you're offering, let's talk Ohio.

Lived there > 15 years; I know it well. With money and time, I think Edwards would be strongly preferred to Kerry. I don't think he has enough time and money to overcome the momentum factor that has little to do with the quality of the candidate.

[David Dunham]

18. CA and NY have a lot more delegates than OH.

[Zynx]

3. I heard that electability wasn't nearly as important in this primary.

[TheDonkey]

4. I'm all for a nice civil debate between issues of Kerry and Edwards

hope they can have another televised debate... and actually debate each other.

[David Dunham]

5. Edwards' anti-NAFTA position will hurt him in big trading NY and CA

Watch for the big trading states of NY and CA to give the nomination effectively to free trader Kerry next week.

[killbotfactory]

14. I don't get it.

Why do you have to vote for one over the other?

[NV1962]

21. What's new?

I posit that:

1. The American electorate is largely politically disenfranchised, disinterested and dis-informed;
   
2. Media are not really informing, nor framing news objectively (as in: "fair and accurate") but instead strive to provide "entertaining content" to serve and protect their advertisement revenues;
   
3. The scourge of "pundits" is a preposterous case in point for media offering off-the-wall opinion for mainstream entertainment and elitist controversy;
   
4. It took 3 years to get to the point that people now begin to understand that there's a problem with Bush in the White House - expecting them to be knowledgeable on "candidate issues" is just six bridges too far;
   
5. The generic sense of embarrassment over Bush, the overwhelming rah-rah response (IMO a likely after-wave of the mood after 9/11) to generally backing the war against Iraq, and the resulting bouts of denial, further propel the tendency to opt for "electability" as main motivator to back whomever is generally perceived to be the front-runner;
   
6. The more "issue oriented" a candidate is, the more his/her supporters will tend to become a hard-core following, which in turn tends to tick of people who consider themselves as "mainstream voters";
   
7. For a strange reason, "intelligent" is a voter-repellent trait of candidates; there's a tendency to "mistrust" candidates that are generally portrayed / perceived as "very intelligent";
   
8. Name recognition is all.

Add all up, and you end up with a very broad and shallow support for Kerry (hence the importance of "electability" among his supporters) and a more narrow and deep support for others.

Thank gawd for Jerry Springer, Larry King and casual sex (ha, I got your attention!)