Crikey, what an amazing result following pollsters’ predictions of another sweeping victory for Democrat Barack Obama in New Hampshire.
He seemed a dead cert to win ahead of rival Hillary Clinton, but virtually all of the late polling on the Democratic side proved to be very wrong. The last Rasmussen Report had Obama +7 over Clinton. CBS had him +7. USA Today had Obama +13 and CNN +10.
So how could pollsters have got it so wrong? Huffington Post writer David Kuo believes that it comes down to race, that despite all the talk of how little race matters in this campaign, it is clear that race is still a big deal in bi-racial campaigns. He believes it is a return to the race-gap polling problems of the 1980s and 1990s:
This phenomenon was first noticed in the 1982 race for governor of California, where Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, a black Democrat, narrowly lost to Republican George Deukmejian, despite polls showing him with a lead ranging from 9 to 22 points. The next year, African-American Democrat Harold Washington barely won his race for mayor of Chicago against Republican Bernard Epton. Pre-election polls taken within the last two weeks of the campaign showed Washington with a 14-point lead.
I personally think Bill Clinton is too much baggage for Hillary to carry, that a desire for change will win over Hillary’s experience.
Update: Great quote from Dave Barry: “The Democrats seem to be basically nicer people, but they have demonstrated time and again that they have the management skills of celery. They’re the kind of people who’d stop to help you change a flat, but would somehow manage to set your car on fire. I would be reluctant to entrust them with a Cuisinart, let alone the economy. The Republicans, on the other hand, would know how to fix your tire, but they wouldn’t bother to stop because they’d want to be on time for Ugly Pants Night at the country club.”
I think one factor is that the Clinton/democrat machine has a lot of predecided voters and super delegates in play, which Obama doesn’t…
Yes, Ellee, imagine Bill as First Man – he’d have a field day!
I think automatically assuming it’s a race issue is a bit simplistic. The Iowa result showed that White America is ready to vote for a Black President.
Clinton has a huge base within the Democratic Party while Obama is popular with Independents – but then so is McCain. In some primaries the race is really going to be between Obama and McCain for the independent vote.
Clinton’s show of emotion worked to show that she isn’t the hard faced type people expect of her.
Still think Clinton/Obama is an unbeatable ticket.
New Hampshire = Liberal Elites = Clintons
[…] 2. Elle Seymour asks “how did the pollsters get it so wrong?” Obama was said by some (CNN) to have a 10point lead in New Hampsire but he was edged out by Hillary Clinton. […]
Ellee, you’ll see from my Jan 4 post this was predictable. It was a primary, not a caucus and she is east coast. But mostly, her crocodile tears, carefully timed with her shaky voice did the trick. A woman has great power this way.
Alas, I think you are right, and the pundits were very wrong. Such a disappointment. I detest the Clintons and all their baggage.
I also think Dave Barry is absolutely right.
Ian, South Carolina is bracing itself for its pivotal role in the primaries, with thousands more people registering to vote:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-scprofile_andersonjan09,1,178712.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
No doubt that Obama will do better here.
James, not everyone has your perception.
Polls are never guarantees on how the public will vote. They look foolish when they get it wrong.
HC will be a disaster if she wins through all the way.
Dave Berry’s quote is spot on for me too
I agree that “change” will trump “experience.” If you look at sites like Fit to be President (http://www.fittobepres.com), it’s clear that voters are looking for a completely new direction. (And for the record, I only trust sites like Fit to be President — sites that actually rate many different personal attributes).
Elle I wonder if you agree with Colin Byrne’s take on what this means here? http://byrnebabybyrne.com/?p=166
David, the pollsters are meant to give the views of the electorate, so it doesn’t really answer the question, and as a result, it reduces their credibility. Maybe we believe what we want to at the end of the day too.
If a large majority of women voted for Clinton over Obama, are these Democrat women racist or just sexist!?!
I’m from Chicago where we were taught by legendary newspaper columnist Mike Royko that we had a civic duty to lie to pollsters. I’m sure there was some of that in New Hampshire.
I can’t really argue that Hillary manipulated the polls — but she certainly played the expectations game brilliantly. In these early primaries in America, winning is largely irrelevant. The important thing is to surpass the pundits’ expectations. It’s like a publicly traded company’s quarterly earnings reports: If it ‘beats the Street’ — does better than the financial experts predicted — the stock price goes up… even if the company lost money. (“XYZ Corp. gained 57 points today in heavy trading on news that it only lost $3 billion in the last quarter, less than the $4 billion that had been predicted by Wall Street analysts.“)
Hillary set it up so that she might lose — but Obama would have had to score a knockout blow to actually “win.” She fanned the expectations that Obama was running away with it. I read this morning that he came on stage at one event following a recording of Stevie Wonder’s “Signed, Sealed, Delivered” — he would have had to do better than what the overly optimistic polls were predicting, under those circumstances, to win the expectations race. And Hillary — a true political pro — kept her troops in line and got them out to the polls… and actually won.
P.S. — I think Dave Barry is entirely correct.
I can’t help but wonder if Bill is a thorn in Hilary’s side.
I still say America is more prepared to vote for a woman than for a young Black man whose name sounds like Osama Bin Laden.
It may not be a conscious reproach but it’s there nonetheless. Imagine the headlines: President Obama on Osama Bin Laden. It sounds like a rhyme gone awry. And heaven forbid there’s a typo!
August
After hearing all the predictions, I couldn’t believe the result! Although in a way I would like to see a woman President, I agree with you about Bill.