Election Stats

January 27, 2008

Super Tuesday states and the race of their voters

Filed under: race, super tuesday — Brian @ 10:33 pm

Super Tuesday is coming up. Based on the differing support that the candidates received based on the voters race (in South Carolina in particular), I though it would be interesting to see the racial makeup of the states in Super Tuesday. For states where exit polls exist in the 2004 Primary for Democrats, I reported those values. I also went to the Census to find the fraction of the population which is African American in all the upcoming Super Tuesday states.

Also, here’s a striking map from the US Census showing where African Americans make up larger fractions of the population – on a county-by-county basis.

In another note, it looks like Latino voters are not too fond of Obama. In Nevada (the only state so far with appreciable numbers of Latinos), he got his lowest support from them. This could be bad for him in those states with high numbers of Latinos (CA, AZ, NY).  An interesting article from the Washington Post goes into more details about the importance of the Latino vote in California.



  1. I thought our votes were cast in secret and wonder how~even with exit polls~there are stats on who voted for whom. There seems to be an assumption that persons of color are going to vote Obama based on heritage rather than based on message and issues.

    If Hillary had been disqualified from running due to bringing an impeached ex President to the White House with her, I might have supported a candidate that has already dropped out of the race. I find Obama quite acceptable on most issues and feel he would be a fantastic President, but the Patriot Act yes vote bothered me. If she wins the Dem bid I will not vote Dem or Rep in November. That is due to the slaughtered innocent children and babies in Iraq.

    It does amaze me that many African/Americans I speak to fully support Clinton. I suspect that a woman who does not view Iraq females and children as people, would be suspect of being a closet racist, despite her proclamations to be concerned about the black population. She was, after all a Goldwater Girl and her disrespect to not only Dr. King, but Rosa Parks and the thousands that had the courage to demand that a president “get it done” adds to my suspicion. As does her and Bill’s constant playing of that race card.

    If you understand the MeCHa’s and the plan to take back the 5 states “we stole from them” and Ms. Clinton’s relationship with supporters of the new Altzan you would understand Latino’s in Nevada and probably California’s support of Clinton. The good news is many elected Latino/Latina CA officials endorsed Obama.

    Comment by mary — January 28, 2008 @ 12:27 am

  2. Your votes are cast in relative secrecy. The exit polls are conducting by a non-governmental group (usually the Voter News Service), where they wait outside the voting area and ask people if they want to be surveyed. If the person says yes, then they get asked a lot of questions. If they say no (for whatever reason), then they get skipped from the survey. They survey just a small sampling of all the voters (usually a couple thousand people – depending on the size of the state). Alternatively, they make lots of phone calls to ask who voted (either in person or absentee).

    It is not a perfect system, because there could be a bias in the people they choose, or there could be a bias in the people who decline to be interviewed. For example, imagine they conduct a lot of surveys in parts of a city, but not others… or maybe a large voting block doesn’t have a regular phone (just a cell phone which is not in a directory to be called).

    Some people are probably not even sure how to answer a race question – the census does a better job than the Voter News Service in gathering all the mixed ancestries.

    Thus, the numbers are not accurate – they are only good to within a couple percent. Like in the SC primary, it says that 55% of the voters were black, but in reality it could have been between 50% and 60%. But, even the census numbers are not 100% accurate – although they do try to really count everybody.

    I’ll have to read up on the comments in your final paragraph – I’m not familiar with that.

    Thanks for your comment!

    Comment by Brian — January 28, 2008 @ 6:47 am

  3. Thanks for the reply.

    I am hoping that MeCHa is old news and a new era of unity through diversity is the wave of the future.

    I moved to So Cal in 1994 and hear this over and over again. There are many elected Latino/Latina officials endorsing Senator Obama. I visited their websites and they stand the same way as the rest of us (I mean those who want unity) so feel better than when I left that comment.

    I kind of wish everyone would elect Cynthia McKinney and we could take care of that race versus gender issue and move onto discussing issues. My neighbor just told me she is voting for Hillary to get our first woman president. : >

    Comment by mary — January 31, 2008 @ 3:40 pm

  4. I bet that Obama will be a much more popular baby name during the next few years.

    Comment by guest — June 28, 2008 @ 10:55 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: