4.22.2008

Pennsylvania: Lackadaisical Liveblog

All times are US Central.

11:42 PM. We can now say with some confidence that Obama will hold Clinton under 10%. Presently, Clinton's margin is 9.53%, and the only material remaining stashes of votes are in Obama-leaning Chester and Philadelphia Counties.

The final margin will certainly end up below 9.5%, and it's entirely possible that Obama will hold Clinton under 9.0% (which might be reported as Clinton 54%, Obama 46% in those places that are not into decimals). The question is how many votes there are in the 3% of Philadelphia precincts that have yet to report. But don't hold your breath: I doubt we're going to see those Philly precincts report until the morning, and perhaps not even until the vote is due for certification.

This will likely be the last update of the evening -- thank you for joining me. I am starting to feel like a full-fledged member of the media: we blew away our traffic records tonight, so what's bad for those hoping for a quick end to the nomination process may be good for our pageview count.

11:05 PM. @95%.



10:52 PM. Based on linear extrapolation of the votes in the outstanding counties, I show a final result of Clinton 1,267,382 (54.6%), Obama 1,054,444 (45.4%). So, we're likely looking at a 9.2% margin or thereabouts.

Also, I've been blogging very little about delegates, but the guys at Kos are all caught up and are projecting Clinton +11.

10:26 PM. Double digits? Looks like it, as long as you're rounding up. I figure there are about 110K more votes between Chester, Montgomery, Bucks, and Delaware counties. If Obama split those votes with Clinton -- he would be at 45.2% to Clinton's 54.8%, for a 9.6% spread. But Clinton might have another 10K or so net votes scattered for her throughout the state. Obama will need to outright win the remaining suburban vote -- or find a stash of voters in some forgotten precinct in Philadelphia.

10:04 PM. Obama hitting some higher notes in this speech -- likely good for his fundraising. My sense had been that the Clinton campaign had sort of intimidated Obama into staying away from the Home Run Speech.

10:00 PM. @ 82%



I *think* this number is going to stick at 10 points, but I'm not sure. There are no votes at all counted from Chester County and very few from Montgomery County, both of which are very upper-crust and should at least break evenly for Obama. On the other hand, just about everything is in from Philadelphia proper, whereas there are a few scattered votes to be had from the Clinton-leaning regions throughout the balance of the state.

9:51 PM. 8! 10! 8! 6! 8! 10! 8! 10! MSNBC could really use a decimal place.

9:37 PM. @ 72%



As before, most of the outstanding results are in the Philly burbs, where Obama has slightly underperformed so far. Depending on how those end up, the margin should end up somewhere between 7 and 10 points.

9:20 PM. Update at 61%.



I think Clinton is hitting her marks in her victory address.


9:08 PM.
This is how the regional returns look with about 47% of results in (I'm running about 10 minutes behind the networks).



The key things to note are the over-representation of Philadelphia, and the underrepresenation of the Philly 'burbs.

8:52 PM. Sorry for the delay -- I'm working on a couple of metrics here.

8:16 PM. Although there is relatively heavy reporting in Philadelphia County -- and Obama now leads 55:45 there -- there is almost no reporting in Obama's next-best area, the Philadelphia suburbs. So, I don't necessarily know that the current results are unrepresentative of the state in either direction. My initial 7-8 projection is still looking quite good.

8:13 PM. As of right now, the trading markets are, essentially, entirely unchanged versus where they began the day.

8:02 PM. I think the money theme is overrated, on both sides of the equation. On the one hand, it's a little bit disingenuous for Clinton to argue that they won in spite of being outspent heavily by Obama, when they reason they were outspent is because (i) Obama got more from small donors, and (ii) Clinton blew all her money in Iowa -- and on Mark Penn. On the other hand, I don't particularly think that the Clinton campaign is going to run out of money. They have raised plenty of money -- it just doesn't look like much as compared to Obama. But as we may have seen in Pennsylvania, there are diminishing returns on campaign expenditures at the margins.

7:56 PM. And Obama isn't doing well in the "T": I think this might end up closer to 10 points after all.

7:52 PM. Here's why they might have called it: with 11% of precincts reporting in Philadelphia County, the split is presently 50:50. There are whole areas of Philadelphia that aren't so Obama friendly, but overall that is a result she should be pleased with.

7:49 PM. MSNBC and Fox News have called it for Clinton. One curiosity I have at this point is whether there are additional waves of exit poll data that we don't yet have access to.

7:36 PM. Pennsylvania now too early to call and leaning Clinton, says MSNBC.

7:21 PM. Also, Clinton has no advantage over Obama in the "cares about people" attribute: that vote split 51/49 Clinton. 65 percent said Obama is "in touch with people like them", and 64 percent the same about Clinton.

In some sense, the Obama campaign may have been a bit fortunate that Clinton decided to devote so much attention to bittergate. It may have slowed his momentum, but it didn't reverse it, and it presented the opportunity cost of precluding Clinton from closing on potentially stronger themes.

7:16 PM. Since exit polls do matter for spin: there are, to my mind (and this is where my biases might creep in), no real landmines for Obama in the exit poll demographics. The groups he's losing, he's losing about 55:45 or 60:40, but not some of the 2:1 margins we saw in Ohio, of the sort that lend themselves to Pat Buchanan talking points.

7:10 PM. Probably more important than the exit polls: Andrea Mitchell (who should have gotten her own show instead of David Gregory) says that Clinton insiders expect a close result based on their field reports.

7:01 PM. Obama clears a (very low) hurdle, as the election is "too close to call". My sense has been that the race needs to be about 15 points for the networks to call it at the outset.

Time-of-poll-close exit polls, which have been only marginally more accurate than early edition exit polls, project to about Clinton +4 -- essentially identical to the Drudge numbers.

We're going to be in a little bit of a quiet, eye-of-the-storm period for the next 30-60 minutes -- at least. Fortunately, I have a pizza coming.

6:57 PM. This is what tabbed browsing was invented for.

6:41 PM. If you buy my contention that exit polls tell you more about who voted than how they voted, the numbers do not look especially good for Obama, at least based on what was on MSNBC just now.

6:30 PM. On second thought: the composite national exit poll shows just a 16-point gender gap (although it's 26 points among white voters), so it may have been SurveyUSA who was off on those numbers, rather than Pennsylvanians.

6:25 PM. One small irony: although its Clinton who tends to win traditionally Democratic-leaning states, it's Obama who tends to win traditionally Democratic-leaning regions within those states. This is especially true in Pennsylvania.

6:00 PM. Clinton closed strong on national security, and there's this notion that such appeals are supposed to appeal more to female voters -- your so-called security moms. But the leaked exits are showing about a relatively small 17-point gender gap, as compared with a whopping 38 percent in the final SurveyUSA poll.

5:40 PM. Howard Wolfson: no sweater. And lowering expectations, with what I read as sincerity.

5:38 PM. Here's a TRUE polling shocker from Pennsylvania: only 28 percent of Pennsylvanians are beer drinkers.

Polling your friends about politics is bad enough, but if I asked my friends about their beer drinking habits, about 94 percent would answer in the affirmative -- and the other 6 percent would have gluten allergies.

5:11 PM. One thing to remember about exit polls: they are better at telling you who voted than how they voted. The reason is mathematical: the topline demographics are taken as a portion of the entire sample, whereas the breakdowns within those demographics are taken from a subsample. So if you look at seniors, for instance, that's probably about 25 percent of an initial sample of 1,400, or about 350 voters, which has an associated margin of error of 5-6 points. And if you look at something like "voters who decided today", which has an even smaller sample size -- about 150 voters -- the margin of error is around 8 percent.

48 comments

jr1886 said...

Poblano,
With over an hour to go, isn't it a fact older voters vote early during the day and younger voters usually vote late in the day? If that is true, Obama should get a little boost later

jakam said...

Retirees do tend to dominate the early day voting. Workers, especially blue collar ones, tend to vote after work, so they're probably just now casting votes.

That 92-8 margin for Obama among black voters will be helpful, it's stronger than the 87-13 margin in Ohio.

A double digit margin for Hillary would surprise me.

538/poblano said...

jr,

That sure seems logical to me -- which is one reason why I can't understand why the early exit polls have tended to tilt so strongly toward Obama.

Rasmus said...

But the sample group of white men should be pretty big- and that SHOULD be a core group. When it´s true, that they went 55-45 to CLinton, (CNN) that´s a big advantage for her.

This will be a long night...
0.53 AM now...
and running all night from the PC to the TV and vice versa...

jr1886 said...

I think that's probably due to what Jakam said above:"Workers, especially blue collar ones, tend to vote after work" and these voters favored Clinton. Yet, earlier today I heard Black in the Philadelphia area usually waited in the last two hours to cast their votes. SO, we'll see later tonight and this race is shaping up to be a very close one.

538/poblano said...

If you trust the exit polls, then white men have polled better for Obama than they did in Ohio, but worse than they did for him in Texas.

Seniors have performed better for Obama than in either state. But I'd expect this gap to widen a bit.

jr1886 said...

Have any of you seen the composition by race? Drudge leaked exit polls required a composition of 83% white and 14% Black. I always thought black would make 17% of the electorate.

538/poblano said...

There's not a lot of difference between 14% and 17%, especially if it's true that urban black voters tend to vote later in the day. Anything in about the 13-18% range would be reasonable IMO.

Rasmus said...

CNN just told, that Philly is notoriously late-reporting- and Allegheny and West Central early.
If this is true, it should be interesting to see how Allegheny plays out. Is your regression right or is F&M (what the hell is F&M??)?

jakam said...

Even among the gun-owner demographic and the weekly-churchgoer demographic, Hillary failed to hit 60%, which is not as strong a showing as in Ohio. Other than the overwhelming 92-8 margin among blacks, no other group has given one or the other candidate any more than a low-60s margin.

My admittedly very rough estimate of the padding that that black vote margin gives Obama, based on population demographics (Philly has 750k blacks, Pittsburgh 100k, and the rest of PA about 500k), likelihood to be Democrat (for blacks, very high, between 8 and 9 out of 10), is anywhere from 400k to 700k, based on African-American turnout.

Hassan said...

Rasmus

Hi. F & M is the polling company, "Franklin and Marshall." I believe Poblano is referencing the F & M poll that was from April 8--13 and released on April 14.

Poblano, great discussion here, I look forward to this during the general election.

Hassan

jakam said...

My overall prediction for the night is that Hillary will struggle to reach 55% Which means Pennsylvania won't change the game much at all, and Obama should be able to undo any gain Hillary makes both tonight and in Indiana and then some.

David said...

My expectations certainly are lowered if Wolfson isn't dressed like Chris Elliot's character in Groundhog Day. It would have been even more appropriate today, since Clinton probably will win Punxsutawney pretty convincingly.

Elliot said...

Poblano,

SUSA's poll, for whatever reason, almost always overstates the gender gap in the Democratic primary, I've looked at it, it's strange.

Ted said...

One thing that might cut across the demographics and point to Obama's favor is the polling that two thirds of voters thoughts she attacked unfairly. Maybe that could cause him to lure some voters from the demographics that he has struggled in, as it did in Wisconsin.

Rasmus said...

Hassan,

thanks. I know Franklin&Marshall, but for some reason I couldn´t match that with "F&M" ...

The AA-vote margin some Exits reported (92-8) seems to be higher than in most polls (I think Quinnipac predicted 83-17, SUSA 87-11 PPP 81-12)

Maybe this can save Obama from a double-digit defeat- my gut says that the white vote went to Clinton heavily.

Sorry for my bad english, at 2 AM it is even worse than during the day.

jakam said...

Well, they've closed shop and no immediate call for one or the other.

I think the margin in PA will be small enough that Obama's margin in North Carolina will neutralize both Indiana and Pennsylvania.

And good thing for Obama because Kentucky and West Virginia will probably be massacres.

jakam said...

The Obamas are having a rally in Evansville, Indiana, with John Mellencamp, easily one of the most elitist people in America (sarcasm intended).

Carlos D said...

Thanks Poblano - your exit poll coverage makes MSNBC and CNN seem positively anemic and dare I say "out of touch."

Hassan said...

Poblano and all,

Why do exit polls show the total population from South-eastern Pennsylvania region (Philadelphia and Philadelphia suburbs) as 29% of the regional vote, but Pittsburgh as 33%. This seems odd. I wonder if that's going to be adjusted?

Hassan

Ryan said...

5% of Philadelphia in and Clinton is winning. I know its early, but surprising.

jakam said...

Well, the Democratic machine in Pennsylvania is in Clinton's corner, so if Philly is that close I'm calling shenanigans.

Rasmus said...

Philly won´t stay 50-50.
According to CNN it changed from 46-54 Obama to 52-48 in the last two minutes- before that it was 40-60 Clinton.
Edit. NOw it´s at 54-46 with 19% in.

Obama can still get a 20-25% margin in Philly, I think.
Where did you get your information that he isn´t doing well in the "T"?
He loses Luzerne county by a 3:1 margin, thats bad, but in the other "T"-counties there aren´t results in yet.

I also think he is doing good in the North-West- two counties are effectively ties and in the others he´s around 40-45%- that´s not bad.


I think it´s far to early to call a winner without more results from Philly and any results from Pittsburgh, Allentown etc...

Rasmus said...

Allegheny is (with about 1200 votes in or so) at 57-43 Obama.
Philly now 55-45, Delaware a tie.

Anonymous said...

A bit early to tout your prediction with virtually no Allegheny votes in.

Rasmus said...

I know. And Allegheny is solid Clinton territory now with 70% of precints reporting. It was not a prediction. I just wanted to say that the race was still to early to call at that moment in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

The last anon comment was obviously directed at Poblano.

Anonymous said...

She seems to have a flat affect; sort of mildly disappointed.

jakam said...

""I think Clinton is hitting her marks in her victory address.""

It might not matter. David Gergen made a good point on CNN tonight that I've actually been thinking about for a few days now.

He said that even if superdelegates do in fact find Hillary electable and Barack not, they may still have little choice but to nominate him, even if it means sacrificing the election to save the party. Because if Barack leads in pledged delegates, popular vote, and states won, and they still take it from Barack and give it to Hillary, they'd lose black votes and young votes in droves, and no Democrat in the past 40 years has won the white vote in presidential elections - not even Clinton or Carter. They may sacrifice the election to save the party, because they'll be thinking about congressional seats, and also ahead to a reapportionment in 2010, because red counties are growing faster than blue ones, and have been for decades. And they'll need those black votes and young votes to hold on to Congress.

538/poblano said...

FWIW: I posted that comment about 5 minutes into her address, and I think she lost some steam in the middle. But I think she's hitting largely the right tone for heading into Indiana, even if she needs to cut down on the sap factor a bit.

Anonymous said...

Since your demographic model seems to have Pennsylvania spot on (7 to 8% Clinton advantage), can you do a preliminary projection for Indiana and NC using the same model? It's proved itself as a baseline.

KAP said...

Almost 10 pm Central, and the very first Chester County results trickle in: Obama, 55-45. He could make up some ground in the wee hours.

jakam said...

Yeah...from the exit polls I predicted a 53-47 margin. We'll see if he can narrow it to that.

Anonymous said...

Pedantic nitpick here.

It's spelled Allegheny, not Alleghany. Check your charts and tables.

Anonymous said...

Obama did what he had to do in Philly, but those Clinton margins in the northeast and Southwest are killing him. Much higher than polls showed there.

jakam said...

Yeah, but the exit polls broke remarkably close to neighboring Ohio for almost every subgroup. Which at least suggests that the Wright and bitter controversies didn't have much impact other than perhaps ceasing his momentum.

jakam said...

Montgomery County looks like it might be about to turn.

Rasmus said...

Hi,
anyone interested in hearing my prediction for Pennsylvania (the actual result is 9,4%)?


.... 9,6% ....
.... 9,6% ....
.... 9,6% ....

It seems that my simpla formula of (average Clinton - average Obama)*3
is not so bad...

Anonymous said...

People usually like to hear predictions before events occur Rasmus.

Rasmus said...

Yep, I posted that first 4/16

Anonymous said...

Are you going to write a post analyzing your projection in light of the results? I thought the higher turnout could explain a lot; also one notes a somewhat better than expected HRC in suburban/educated, which may perhaps be a result of a small but meaningful factor you did not use, namely Jewish vote?

Anonymous said...

The special appeal to the latter vote may explain Clinton's "obliterate Iran" declaration in the final days of the campaign. But more likely that was aimed at showing she was tough than at winning over the relatively small Jewish vote in PA.

Check this for population estimates by state: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop.html

Mark Penn said...

This philly cheese steak is YUMMY...mmmmmmmmm

Rasmus said...

Here are my predictions again (crossposted at pollster.com)



And Indiana and NC have virtually nothing to do with Electability- because Indiana is red and will prbably stay red- and it does not harm Obamas electability argument when he wins NC by 10 points- or did it harm Clintons PA-OH electability argument when she won there by that margin?

I think you can predict the outcome of primaries pretty well with 538 numbers:
Clinton average-Obama average*3 or if black population>20%: (Black Population*0,9*1,8+(95-BlackPopulation*1,8)*0,25*+5*0,55)

If I had to predict the margin of victories in the past-Super-Tuesday PRIMARIES (caucuses are a different thing) I would come to this results:


Maryland:
29*1,8*0,9= 47+
48*0,25=12+
5*0,55= 2,75
=
61,75% for Obama (margin: 23,5)
actual margin: 23

Virginia:
(this is a little bit critical �cause the AA-population is 19,6%)
13,2 average (for McCain-Clinton)-6,3 average (McCain-Obama)*3= 20,7% margin for Obama
"real" margin: 29%

The problem here is, that the election is 2 months ago and Obama lost ground against McCain. i guess the prediction would come closer to the real result just with the polls older than 12 February...

Wisconsin:
=
2,9 (C average) - (-3,2) (O average) *3=

18,3%-margin for Obama
"real margin": 17%

Ohio:
(-2,9)-2,1*3= 15% margin for Clinton
actual result: 10% margin

this is a bit to high, but here the same pattern: Clinton improved since the election. I wouldn�t wonder when she won a 2nd primary with 15%.

Texas:
1,6*3=4,8% margin for Clinton
real margin: 4%

Mississippi:
37*0,9*1,8+68,06*0,25+5*0,55=
40% margin Obama-
actual result: 24% margin.

OK, this is far off and i don�t have any idea why. I know why, the turnout of black voters was just about 37% in a state with a 36,66% AA-population. But I don�t know why that happened. Probably an outlier... Anyone here who knows why the MS-blacks stayed at home?

Pennsylvania:

-3-0,2*3= 9,6% margin for Clinton. Actual it is 9,4% as far as I know.

Lets summarize:
This is the difference between the "real" margin of victories-Obama:Clinton and my predictions:


Maryland: 0,5% (really good, I think)
Virginia: 8,3% (far off, but I already explained why that happened. The state has 0,4% LESS African-American Population than I needed to use the other formula...)
Wisconsin: 1,3% ( I can live very good with anything below 2,5%, I think ... )
Ohio: 5% (a little bit off, but Clinton improved in OH since 3/4)
TX: 0,8% (again, pretty close to the actual results)
MS: 16% off (a disaster for me, I assumed about 55-60% AA-turnout with my formula, but it was less than 40% in the state with the biggest black community)
PA: 0,2% off (and I made this prediction first on 4/16- six days before the election.)

Here my prediction for NC:
52,5 Obama: 47,5% Clinton.
This is definetly too close. Why?
Because whites tend to vote more heavily for Clinton when there is a big black population and my formula covers that in a simple way.

In NC the black population has the ideal size for Obama. ENough to give him a big boost, and small enough to give him 40% of the white vote- or more.

Maybe I should increase the minimum size of AA population for using the 2nd formula to 25%.

Then I had to use the first formula and would get out:
56,15% Obama 43,85% Clinton
Maybe still a little bit too less, but i think this could be in a 2,5% range of the actual results.

Indiana:
Obama: 56,9% Clinton 41,1%
Either the Republicans love Obama in that state, the polls are dramatically wrong, or we�ll see a surprise in the primary there.

I also predict that he will get slain in WV, Clinton could get to 74% there, and in KY he is doing SO bad that my predictions can�t be right. When they are right, he would be in danger to fall below the 15% threshold...

But just look at the latest KY-SUSA poll: Clinton is competitive, he trails by 34 (!) points. Those both states have the largest margins of all 50 states- maybe he could win a Wyoming primary by a similar margin, but that was it.

For Oregon I�d predict a 63-37 Obama win.
Obama is doing a lot better against McCain in Indiana than Clinton (so much to the Electability argument)

Poblano said...

IIRC, Obama did fine among the Jewish vote, losing it something like 51/44.

I'm really quite pleased with the projection -- we had Clinton winning by 7.8 points and she actually won by 9.1. That's more accurate than 8 of the 10 polls of the state.

Anonymous said...

Your projection was *splendid*. All the more reason to ponder the tiny +1.3 gap as (just possibly) of interest. As a matter of logic, this gap is a combination of local campaign effects and of hidden variables which your projection ignores. Now, one would tend to think the campaign effect should be +Obama since your projection is based on a series of events whose background was national polls where Obama and Clinton were at best (for Obama) tied, whereas PA took place when Obama is clearly ahead in national polls; this should count for something. Thus one should look for hidden variables. Whatever they are, they seem to be located mostly at the PA White educated (which, I understand, stand out as White not improving for Obama over OH). Now, 2.3% Jewish general population is perhaps 10% educated voters in a Democratic Primary, which may begin to move numbers. And the Jewish educated voters are certainly worse for Obama than the general white educated voters. All of which however is I have to admit rather weak since what really counts is the differential of Jewish population between PA and OH, which is quite small (even when magnified to the levels of percentages of educated white Democratic primary voters).

So when do you post the Poblano projections for the remaining contests? Indeed, did you post the Poblano projections for past contests, to help us in our search for hidden variables?

信次 said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,

酒店上班請找艾葳 said...

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 飯局小姐,領檯人員,領台,傳播妹,或者想要到台北酒店林森北路酒店,私人招待所,或者八大行業酒店PT,酒店公關,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的禮服酒店,鋼琴酒吧酒店領檯,酒店小姐,公關小姐??,還是想去制服店上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作兼差打工假日兼職兼職工作學生兼差兼差打工兼差日領工作晚上兼差工作酒店工作酒店上班酒店打工兼職兼差兼差工作酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領假日兼職兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚,無業績壓力,無脫秀無喝酒壓力,高層次會員制客源,工作輕鬆,可日領現領
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已,對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有!艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪,不需擔心!只提供最優質的酒店打工,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現金、有卡債缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學日本打工嗎?妳是工讀生找工作??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,兼職工作日領假日打工的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??整天還在煩腦如何賺錢有什麼賺錢方法,和賺錢最快方法!?,想要打工,日領工作,短期打工,兼差工作,打工兼差工作嗎!?,
請加入我們艾葳酒店經紀公司工作單純輕鬆”高時薪”又可日領徵想要當傳播妹,上班小姐,酒店兼差,酒店兼職,歡迎學生打工,!!!
加入我們實現夢想就從現在開始^__^