We've polled 23 different states since switching over to likely voters. Likely voters in those states this year report having voted for Barack Obama by an average of 1 point. Obama won the 23 states by an average of 9 points. So taken as a whole we're seeing on average an electorate that's 8 points more Republican friendly than in 2008.
Here's the thing though: just because these 23 states average an electorate that's 8 points more Republican doesn't mean that's the case for all of them individually. Some of them are seeing gaps much larger than 8 points. And some of them are actually seeing a slightly more Democratic electorate than in 2008.
Let's start with those states where we find a more Dem friendly electorate this time around. They are West Virginia, Kentucky, and Alaska. What do those states have in common? They saw basically none of the Democratic surge for Obama in 2008 that the rest of the country did. Obama did the same as John Kerry in West Virginia and saw only a 3 point improvement in Kentucky and a 4 point improvement in Alaska, compared to the 10 point improvement nationally.
It stands to reason that in states where there was not a big gain in Democratic turnout in 2008, there's also not going to be a big drop in Democratic turnout in 2010. We've been getting a lot of flack because our West Virginia poll yesterday showed a McCain +11 electorate when he won the state by 13 that basically boils down to 'where is the enthusiasm gap?' The truth is that the Presidential race was the turnout driver in 2008 and West Virginia Democrats don't like Barack Obama. The Senate race is the turnout driver this year and West Virginia Democrats love Joe Manchin.
It's a close race and he could still lose but it's misguided to think that because Democratic turnout is going to be way down nationally that it will be in West Virginia, just as it would have been a mistake in 2008 to assume that because Democratic turnout was way up nationally that it would also be in West Virginia.
Now let's look at some of the states where we see particularly steep drops in Democratic turnout this year: Hawaii (19 point shift), Michigan (15 point shift), Wisconsin (14 point shift), New Mexico (11 point shift), Delaware (11 point shift), North Carolina (10 point shift), Illinois (10 point shift), and Nevada (10 point shift.) What do those states all have in common? They saw some of the biggest surges in Democratic performance in 2008 compared to 2004. So it's really no big surprise that they would see some of the biggest reversions to normal in a midterm year.
It's not a 100% correlation but generally speaking the places where Democrats improved their performance the most in 2008 are going to have the biggest dropoffs in turnout this year. And the places where Democrats saw little or no improvement have the smallest dropoffs.
Here's the full breakdown:
| State | 2008 Vote | 2010 Electorate | Shift |
| Hawaii | Obama +45 | Obama +26 | R+19 |
| Michigan | Obama +16 | Obama +1 | R+15 |
| Wisconsin | Obama +14 | Tie | R+14 |
| New York | Obama +27 | Obama +14 | R+13 |
| Pennsylvania | Obama +10 | McCain +1 | R+11 |
| Delaware | Obama +25 | Obama +14 | R+11 |
| New Mexico | Obama +15 | Obama +4 | R+11 |
| Maine | Obama +17 | Obama +7 | R+10 |
| New Hampshire | Obama +10 | Tie | R+10 |
| Illinois | Obama +25 | Obama +15 | R+10 |
| North Carolina | Obama +1 | McCain +9 | R+10 |
| Florida | Obama +3 | McCain +7 | R+10 |
| Nevada | Obama +12 | Obama +2 | R+10 |
| Colorado | Obama +9 | Tie | R+9 |
| Ohio | Obama +4 | McCain +3 | R+7 |
| Connecticut | Obama +22 | Obama +15 | R+7 |
| Missouri | Tie | McCain +7 | R+7 |
| California | Obama +24 | Obama +21 | R+3 |
| Louisiana | McCain +18 | McCain +20 | R+2 |
| Texas | McCain +11 | McCain +11 | None |
| West Virginia | McCain +13 | McCain +11 | D+2 |
| Kentucky | McCain +16 | McCain +13 | D+3 |
| Alaska | McCain +21 | McCain +14 | D+7 |
9 comments:
Regarding WV, in your first poll, you found a large enthusiasm gap, in your second poll you found that the gap disappeared plus some more, very hard to believe either, probably in the middle, because electorates don't swing so wildly.
Delusional.
Obamacare / stimulus / bailouts are driving turnout in 2010. This is a nationalize wave election.
" And some of them are actually seeing a slightly more Democratic electorate than in 2008."
You are just dumb. Seriously do you even believe your own polls?
"Regarding WV, in your first poll, you found a large enthusiasm gap, in your second poll you found that the gap disappeared plus some more, very hard to believe either, probably in the middle, because electorates don't swing so wildly."
You're right, they don't normally, but Rasmussen, CNN, and other polls coming out in the last few days have also shown movement toward Manchin.
Raese's series of blunders and exposed details (being a multimillionaire whose campaign openly calls his supporters 'hicky', for example) can go a long way toward closing an enthusiasm gap in a hurry. For that matter, entering the last month of a campaign tends to produce a leftward shift as lower-frequency voters (who are demographically more likely to be Democrats) start paying attention, and the large number of non-activists buries the differences among enthusiastic-or-not activists.
"whose campaign openly calls his supporters 'hicky',"
You know, of course, that the Raese campaign had nothing to do with that ad at all.
The NRSC's vendor's vendor made the 'hicky' comment.
I also like that two polls have now come out with Raese tied or leading and this "confirms" PPP's poll with Manchin leading.
"whose campaign openly calls his supporters 'hicky', for example"
See, this is how false rumors get started. NRH, I suggest you correct your comment and the similar comments you've posted on other blogs.
Once again, CA seems to be the 'outlier' here...
"...and the similar comments you've posted on other blogs."
How about you correct that one?
Post a Comment