MyDD :: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted

Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted

by Democratic Courage, Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:39:17 AM EST

Wharton professor Gregory P. Nini (the statistical whiz behind much of the number crunching in Fear and Courage in the Democratic Party) and I just authored this new paper showing that more than two million additional people would have voted in those primaries had they thought the results would be counted.

Among the proposed alternatives for seating the delegates from Florida and Michigan is to use the results of the primaries that already happened, based on the argument that doing so would avoid disenfranchising the 1.7 million Floridians and 600,000 Michiganders who already voted. However, doing so would disenfranchise many people from FL and MI who did not vote in the earlier primaries because they did not expect their delegates would be seated at the convention. Based on a statistical comparison with turnout in other states' primaries, it appears that roughly two million more people would have voted in FL and MI had they expected their delegates would be seated.

Download the full study here.

Tags: Gregory P. Nini, Glenn Hurowitz, Florida, Michigan, delegates, Democratic nomination, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Permalink :: 22 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

I guess the democrats don't care if we lose these states in the GE....

by nikkid on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:51:36 AM EST

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

Another possibility is that Democrats don't believe we will lose those states in the GE as a result of the primary screw up.

Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius

by Blue Neponset on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:15:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

MI (2.00 / 1)

Actually polls show Obama beating McCain in MI with Clinton losing.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3 /6/145023/7178/225/470640

Polls also show that most FL don't want the results of the original vote to count.

by DreamsOfABlueNation on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:30:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MI (2.00 / 1)

I guess you have not seen the latest polls for FL and OH from PPP (posted at Political Wire)? DEMs don't have a chance in FL against McCain if FL delegates are not seated or no revotes. In OH Hillary barely leads McCain but trumps Obama.

by meliou2 on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:07:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MI (none / 0)

The link is busted.

Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius

by Blue Neponset on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:36:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: MI (none / 0)

Try this

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3 /6/145023/7178/225/470640

by DreamsOfABlueNation on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:40:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

General election? What's that? Only the primaries matter! FL and MI can go f*** themselves!

by sricki on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:45:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

What is the standard deviatioon on your estimate for turnout in FL/MI had there been an expectation that the votes would have counted?

If you follow history with a long enough arc, things always get better, and the truth always prevails...Gandhi

by SevenStrings on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:52:20 AM EST

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

Okay, I have read your paper; and I do not see any mention of a standard deviation.

I hope you know that any "statistical analysis" that does not report a standard deviation is not worth the paper it is printed on !!

If you follow history with a long enough arc, things always get better, and the truth always prevails...Gandhi

by SevenStrings on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:01:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama should have supported re-votes, then (none / 0)

That would have been the best alternative. Instead, his campaign dragged their feet.

We've got a lot of bad options now. I don't want to go into the general election having told MI and FL voters that the Democratic Party doesn't want to count their votes.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

by desmoinesdem on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:54:39 AM EST

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

Furthermore, the "missing" voters very well might have voted differently than those who turned out. Thus the faux election gave different results than would have occurred if people thought that it would count.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:56:35 AM EST

Who to disenfranchise? (2.00 / 1)

Two options:

(1) disenfranchise half the voters of MI and FL estimated to not have voted because of the DNC penalty,

(2) disenfranchise all the voters of MI and FL.

In an imperfect world, I choose (1).

by Sieglinde on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:59:28 AM EST

interesting decision... (none / 0)

which would certainly give credence to the original sanction: only half the elected delegates and none of their superdelegates. i could live with that...

"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009

by bored now on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:08:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I could live with that too (none / 0)

but the Obama campaign has chosen to play this differently, in a way that will probably hurt all Democrats in the general.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

by desmoinesdem on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:21:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

Furthermore, the "missing" voters very well might have voted differently than those who turned out. Thus the faux election gave different results than would have occurred if people thought that it would count.

Notice how the verb tenses change in your two sentences from the speculative "might well have voted" to the definitive "Thus the faux election gave".

It strikes me that your candidate partisanship has robbed you of your ability to make a valid argument. Yes, the results might well have been different. But it is at least as plausible that the results would have been remarkably similar.

Fortune strums a mournful tune for those whose campaigns peak too soon. --Bored of the Rings

by Inky on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:09:23 AM EST

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

You are absolutely correct that the results might have been remarkably similar.

It is also plausible in Michigan at least that with only Sen. Clinton among the major candidates on the ballot, that there was a systematic bias in the results; her supporters had someone to be exited about going to vote for whereas Edwards' and Sen. Obama's supporters were presented with no such incentive.

"We live entangled in webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them". -- NC

by Trond Jacobsen on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:31:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results Highly Distorted (none / 0)

You're right. I should have left both sentences with the conditional. We don't know to what extent the results would have been different, if at all.

However, I think it's likely they would have, for several reasons:

Campaigning and get out the vote activities increase turnout. This is very well-established. Furthermore, it is well-established that such activities produce different electorates, since some people are habitual voters who vote pretty much every time. Those voters are older (a Clinton demographic) and don't move often, those don't need to re-register (and those are homeowners, older voters, a Clinton demographic).
The presence of the ballot initiative on property taxes brought out property owners who are older and thus more likely to be more pro-Clinton.
Some people didn't vote because they didn't want to give legitimacy to a process where candidates couldn't campaign. I have a friend in Orlando who is pro-Obama who didn't vote for that reason.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:39:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results (none / 0)

The notion of giving preference to those who didn't vote over those who did strikes me as beyond absurd. Although the available information at the time was that the delegates apportioned by those votes would not be seated and therefore "wouldn't count," there was no reason to believe that there would be another opportunity to vote on the presidential nominees. I don't know how voting works in Michigan, but Florida had both early voting and vote by mail (they are getting away from the term "absentee ballot" which implies that one needs an excuse to use one), so work schedules and such would not be a reason not to vote in the Florida primary.

I think there are a lot of cases where people would vote or would vote differently if they knew the outcome in advance, i.e., voting for Bush (or Nader) in 2000.

by Alice in Florida on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:36:20 AM EST

Re: Wharton Study: FL/MI Results (none / 0)

I hear you. But in my humble opinion, you are not giving preference to people who didn't vote if a flawed, unfair contest is excluded.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:41:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I strongly support a revote in Michagan ... (none / 0)

But the Obama campaign has tried to thwart a revote for its own political advantage (I suspect that Donna Brazille, the same genius who decided that the Gore campaign should ask for a recount of only a few counties in Florida, rather than the entire state, in the 2000 recount debacle, was also responsible for this smart move).

As desmoinesdem notes, The Obama camapaign's decision to obstruct efforts to to enfranchise the voters of Mich. and Fla. is unfortunately only going to hurt the Democratic party in the GE.

Fortune strums a mournful tune for those whose campaigns peak too soon. --Bored of the Rings

by Inky on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:43:27 AM EST

feel free to provide evidence... (none / 0)

that the obama campaign is working to "obstruct efforts to to enfranchise the voters of Mich. and Fla."

i agree that it is going to effect the general election. but so what? that's what happens in divisive primaries. hillary could see the writing on the wall, and work to unite the party, but that's not really in her, is it? let's face it, people like you expect the frontrunner to step aside because he's not "your gal." the fact that the obama campaign has run a far superior campaign, has a better message to contrast himself from john mccain, has won more votes, more states and more elected delegates just doesn't phase you. hillary was inevitable and you can't adjust to the fact that the voters did not agree.

there is no doubt that florida and michigan will be seated when hillary concedes. but she'd rather destroy what we built up in the last eight years...

"We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it." - President Obama, Sept 9, 2009

by bored now on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:54:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Here's one piece ... (none / 0)

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsm emo.com/2008/03/obama_campaign_has_yet_t o_sign.php

there is no doubt that florida and michigan will be seated when hillary concedes. but she'd rather destroy what we built up in the last eight years...

That statememt reminds me of a hillarious post on the Left Coaster:

The Clinton Rules (TCR) and The Obama Rules (TOR).

The Clinton Rules (TCR)

TCR 1.0. If anything bad happens to the Democrats in this campaign, it can and should be blamed on Hillary Clinton.

TCR 2.0. Every statement of any supporter or surrogate of Hillary Clinton is a reflection of Hillary Clinton's personal views or directives.

* COROLLARY to TCR 2.0: Statements by any supporter or surrogate of Hillary Clinton that might cast her in poor light are most definitely a reflection of Hillary Clinton's personal views or directives - regardless of whether she distances herself from those statements, supporters or surrogates.

TCR 3.0. If Hillary Clinton gets the nomination (through her evil machinations) and loses, it will be the fault of Hillary Clinton and her supporters.

TCR 4.0. Any votes that Hillary Clinton receives from Independents and Republicans are due to their interest in preventing Sen. Obama☼ from becoming the Democratic nominee and defeating Sen. John McCain.☼ After all, the GOP wants to run against Hillary Clinton in the Fall! [added, thanks to reader Wasab]

TCR 5.0. If Hillary Clinton attempts to work the completely screwed up primary system to her advantage, it represents vote-stealing and cheating. [added, thanks to reader Dawn]

Once you know The Clinton Rules, it is easy to derive....

B. The Obama Rules (TOR)

TOR 1.0. If anything good happens to the Democrats in this campaign, it can and should be attributed to Sen. Barack Obama.

* COROLLARY to TOR 1.0: All the good stuff that has happened and will happen is because of Obama's unifying and positive campaign of change and his brilliant 50-state strategy (the resounding success of which is evident from the fact that he has so far already won in states with 193 electoral votes, while Clinton has only won in states with 263 electoral votes).

TOR 2.0. NOT every statement of any prominent supporter or surrogate of Barack Obama is a reflection of Barack Obama's personal views or directives.

* COROLLARY to TOR 2.0: Statements by any supporter or surrogate of Barack Obama's that may cast him in poor light, are most definitely NOT a reflection of Barack Obama's personal views or directives - regardless of whether he distances himself from those statements or supporters or surrogates.

TOR 3.0. If Sen. Obama gets the nomination and loses, it will be the fault of Hillary Clinton and her supporters.

TOR 4.0. Any votes that Sen. Obama receives from Independents and Republicans are a result of his uplifting and positive campaign of hope, change and unity and his incredible coattails - and not because they are just becoming Democrats for a day. After all, isn't it ridiculous that Democrats alone are allowed to pick the Democratic nominee? [added, thanks to reader Wasab]

TOR 5.0. If Sen. Obama attempts to work the completely screwed up primary system to his advantage, it represents hope, optimism and change and a reflection of the will of the people. [added, thanks to reader Dawn]

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/0 12147.php

Fortune strums a mournful tune for those whose campaigns peak too soon. --Bored of the Rings

by Inky on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 12:34:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.