MSNBC exit poll sneak peak

[Johnny__Motown]

Most Important Quality

49% Bring Change
26% Experience
14% Cares about me
8% Electability



Obama Voters only

73% Bring Change
14% Cares about me
8% Electability
3% Experience


Clinton Voters only

47% Experience
27% Bring Change
14% Cares About me
9% Electability




Maybe it is just me but these look like very good numbers for Obama


IF 26% of all voters said Experience was most important.... and 47% of Clinton voters were the ones who said it... plus 3% Obama voters.... doesn't that mean that Clinton voters are about 48%-49% of the total? That would give Obama the 51% or so that are left or am I missing something???

[DerekJ]

1. Don't TRUST THAT:

On Super Tuesday, the "first wave" had Obama winning New Mexico by 6 (he lost by 1) and losing California by just 3 (actual margin: 8). The "second wave" wasn't any more accurate: it had Obama winning Georgia by 50 (actual margin: 35), Illinois by 40 (actual margin: 32), Alabama by 22 (actual margin: 14), Delaware by 14 (actual margin: 9), Connecticut by 7 (actual margin: 4), Arizona by 6 (lost by 8), New Jersey by 5 (lost by 10), Missouri by 4 (actual margin: 1), Massachusetts by 2 (lost by 15), and losing Tennessee by 10 (actual margin: 13), New York by 14 (actual margin: 17), Oklahoma by 30 (actual margin: 23) and Arkansas by 46 (actual margin: 44). So Oklahoma and Arkansas were the only states on Super Tuesday where Obama did better than the leaked, unweighted exit polls suggested.

On March 4, the "second wave" showed Obama winning Vermont by 34 (actual margin: 21), Texas by 2 (lost by 4), Ohio by 2 (lost by 10), and tied in Rhode Island (lost by 18).

http://blog.brendanloy.com/2008/04/dont-trust-the.html

[Johnny__Motown]

2. I don't really trust it... just saying it looks good for Obama.IMO a 53-47 loss for him would be OK

[ORDem]

11. Yep. The early exit polls have almost always favored Obama by quite a bit. Politico is also

reporting that in PA the cities and 'burbs report first (contrary to most other states and common sense) and if true the early results may show Obama doing well and then losing it as the night wears on.

BTW, the CA exit polling you noted above may actually have been the most accurate. About a 1/3rd of the voting had already taken place by absentee ballots before Super Tuesday. Remember that Obama won SC just before and his numbers were surging.

:dem:

[mmonk]

3. Since Bring Change is first

and with Clinton voters, Bring Change is second @ 27%, I would say yes, that looks good for Obama.

[ShaneGR]

4. Well, that one does look good for Obama, but they're not scientific....

So many factors go into the exit polling, most of them can skew the results to not represent actual outcome.

#1: Did the voter tell the truth, not everyone comes out of a polling place and answers truthfully.

#2: How many people were surveyed? Sample size is very important, the larger the better

#3: In what areas did the surveys take place and were the numbers evened out to represent the full electorate (Were more people sampled in Philadelphia than in rural areas to represent the electorate?)

#4: At what time did they take place? Urban areas tend to vote later than earlier.

[Johnny__Motown]

5. You are right, I am just getting my hopes up I guess.. thanks

[CTD]

6. MORE from MSNBC...

Who attacked unfairly?
Clinton 67%
Obama 49%

Campaign ads important?
Important 54%
Not important 43%

[Johnny__Motown]

7. I saw that too, again looking good for Obama... man, I don't want to get my hopes up but.. but.. but

[karynnj]

8. Interesting - using 50/50 on each attribute gets close to the total %

- not just on experience as you note.

electibility is 8% overall and 8% Obama and 9% HRC - any differce is rounding.
Cares about me is the same for all three
experience (3+ 47)/2 = 25 where the total was 26

This means it's less than half for Obama - using experience and change, you have 2 variables and 2 equations - assuming that everyone is either Obama or Clinton - you get 48% Obama -

[DLnyc]

12. Yes, I think you are right, or pretty close.

(oops, edit title)

49 = 73B + 27C (where B is Barack's fraction of total and C is Clinton's. From 73% of B's say change, 27% of C's, 49% of total)
Assuming 1= B + C (their fractions of total add to 1) so B = 1-C, plug in, get
49 = 73(1 - C) + 27 C
49 = 73 - 73C + 27C
73C - 27C = 73 - 49
46C = 24
C = 24/46 = .522 = 52.2%

25 = 3B + 47C (From 3% of B's say Experience, 47% of C's say experience, 25% of total)
25 = 3(1 - C) + 47C
25 = 3 - 3C + 47C
22 = 44C
C = 22/44 = .50 = 50.0%


(The other two, "Cares about me", and "Electability", don't give reliable information, since they are too close together and too small.)

49% Bring Change
26% Experience
14% Cares about me
8% Electability



Obama Voters only

73% Bring Change
14% Cares about me
8% Electability
3% Experience


Clinton Voters only

47% Experience
27% Bring Change
14% Cares About me
9% Electability

[GoesTo11]

9. self delete

[GoesTo11]

10. Checking your math

.47H + .03B = .26
H + B = 1.00

With rounding, this works out to H = .52 or .53, B = .48 or .47

But even this is more tenuous than basing the MOE on the overall percentages based on sample size, since it multiplies a couple of uncertain variables.