Indiana Poll: Hillary Ahead By 3, Leads in All But One Age Group

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:24:44 PM EST
Tags: Indiana '08 (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

A Research 2000 poll of Indiana voters is out today. It has Hillary 49%, Obama 46% with a 5 point margin of error. Full poll results are here (pdf).

The poll over-represented African-American voters. They make up 12% of those surveyed, but 9% of Indiana's population. 81% of those surveyed favor Obama to 16% for Hillary.

Obama had a big lead in the 18 to 29 age group, 63 percent to 36 percent, but in the over 60 age group, Hillary leads 60% to 34%.

And Hillary leads the 30 to 44 age group by 7 points and the 45 to 59 age group by 6 points.

Hillary's campaign says she isn't taking a single vote for granted and the race will be close. [More...]

"It's going to be a hard-fought primary and, going back to what (Clinton) said several times, she is not taking any Hoosier voter for granted," said Jonathan Swain, spokesman for Clinton's Indiana campaign. "This is going to be won precinct by precinct."

Indiana has 72 pledged delegates.

Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton have already made a combined 20 Indiana campaign stops, and Obama began airing television commercials around the state last week.

< John Edwards Says He Won't Accept VP Slot | Hillary on Tonight Show with Jay Leno Tonight >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Indiana Poll: Hillary Ahead By 3, Leads in All But One Age Group | 45 comments (45 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Indiana is a key state... (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by white n az on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:38:57 PM EST

She will beat Obama in PA, KY, WV and probably lose NC so IN becomes a real key state and it would seem that she will win IN because it has been the trend for late deciding voters to go in her favor.

Poll Link broken (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by white n az on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:39:55 PM EST

You need to fix the link in your posting because the link doesn't work

fixed now (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by Jeralyn on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:47:23 PM EST

it doubled the http. I'm on a Mac tonight and the keyboard is sticky.


: blame the Mac... (none / 0) (#21)
by white n az on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:03:18 PM EST

I thought they were easier to use... ;-)
Actually, I used to run the Apple User group in the 80's but I am a Linux guy now (though I do support Mac's at work and at some clients offices).

pdf works, but not the other one (none / 0) (#6)
by Josey on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:42:40 PM EST

Also (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by nell on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:43:15 PM EST

aren't African American voters usually a higher percentage in Dem primaries because they are "over represented" in the Democratic Party? By this I mean that they make up a larger proportion of Dem voters than their overall proportion in the state's population...

In any case, I proudly cast my absentee ballot in Indiana for Hillary. It felt really good!

From the vibes I am getting from people back home, Northwest Indiana and Indianapolis should go strongly for Obama, much of the rest of the state will go to Hillary. Who wins will depend on turnout...

I know for a fact there are some doctors in Indiana who are opposed to universal health care for their own selfish reasons and believe Hillary will actually implement it and are planning to vote for Obama in the primary to stop her and universal health care and the will vote for McCain in the general...

Go Hillary Go!!!! You are my hope for (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by athyrio on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:44:08 PM EST

the next administration....I live in a state of republicans and have heard many of them say that they will vote to polls and votes as much as possible so that they can run against Obama who they perceive as weaker than Hillary....All I can say is, try running in a national race while having nothing but bad press hammering in the background and see if you can keep up...Her strength is amazing....

: No kidding. (none / 0) (#18)
by ghost2 on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:55:37 PM EST

Never mind that he is outspending her. He gets hours of free commericial by Chris Matthews, KO, and many many others in the media.
In reality, she is being outmuscled 10 to 1, or more.

That's not oversampling. (none / 0) (#1)
by LarryInNYC on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:34:22 PM EST

Or at least, not necessarily. The pollsters may simply be predicting a higher percentage turnout among African American voters than others -- a not unreasonable assumption given the excitement around Obama's campaign.

How does such a prediction compare to the relative turnout along racial lines in other, similar states so far?

thanks for the correction (none / 0) (#9)
by Jeralyn on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:44:50 PM EST

I'm not sure what over-sampling is but when NBC did the same thing last week, they had a note on their poll they were over-sampling the African American voters. I'll change it to "over-represented."

It looks to me like this poll also oversampled the over-60 voters. According to census data, 12% of voters are over 65. Would there be 22% over 60?


Oversampling... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by mbuchel on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:55:19 PM EST

It means that you interview more of a particular subgroup so that you can draw conclusions about that group with smaller error margins. However, for the overall poll the groups are weighted properly.
Nor does "over-representing" properly represent what's happening in the poll. AAs will be a higher percentage of a demo primary since almost all AAs are democrats. Generally, for a rough estimate, you can double the AA proportion of a state to determine how much they will represent in a demo primary.
I don't know the history of turnout in IA, but a 12% AA demo primary turnout in a state that has a 9% AA population seems small.


Not over-represented (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by hlr on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:01:30 PM EST

in a Democratic primary. The AA vote share in the '04 GE was 7%, so 12% in a Dem primary sounds about right to me, unless there's a GE-like turnout.


: But the turnouts (none / 0) (#26)
by SantaMonicaJoe on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:24:02 PM EST

have been massive on all demographic groups.
Young people are turning out in numbers as high as say ... 20%.
Sorry. Couldn't resist, but it's true. Youth turnout is up, but not massive.

Not in the population as a whole. . . (none / 0) (#13)
by LarryInNYC on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:50:17 PM EST

but in the actual primary electorate? It's quite possible.

Remember everyone was slamming the DeMoines Register for their wacky turnout predictions right up until the minute they turned out to be spot on the money.


Well (none / 0) (#19)
by ghost2 on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:59:55 PM EST

Their turnout model wasn't accurate. I personally believe they created a huge momentum for Obama, b/c the media covered it without scrutiny, and it became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

For the same reason, I think Hillary's comeback in NH showed true grit and was amazing. The numbers were in the dialy polls, but hidden by averaging. Yet, she came back.

I really think some pollsters let their opinion have an influence in their modeling (of turnout), which is the black box of the whole polling numbers.


: I agree (none / 0) (#25)
by SantaMonicaJoe on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:22:13 PM EST

the problem is the Likely Voter average.

Oversampling (none / 0) (#15)
by Ben Masel on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:54:54 PM EST

usually means they query more voters in the oversampled demographic to have enough to read trends within that subgroup, but then dilute in the broader sample to reflect that group's true percentage of their modelled electorate.


Uh? (none / 0) (#30)
by Addison on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:51:39 PM EST

Are you talking about when NBC oversampled blacks so they could get usable crosstabs? You know that was much ado about nothing right? Chuck Todd explained and it was reported on TPM and everywhere else (not here?). That they oversampled to get enough blacks to statistically work with separately and then adjusted their percentage back down to the normal range.


I love it... (none / 0) (#37)
by sar75 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 02:14:55 AM EST

...how non-pollsters try to spin the results of polls by subtly suggesting they are flawed by using terms such as "oversampled" and "overrepresented."

What you should be doing is wondering why this is 6 points closer than the SurveyUSA poll, or why the RCP average now has Clinton up only 5.4 points in Pennsylvania.


And as for that "outlier" PPP poll in PA (none / 0) (#39)
by sar75 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 02:31:45 AM EST

...that everyone poo-pooed. Well, here's PPP's track record (from my DD). I guess they just have Pennsylvania wrong (where they have Obama up by 2)

State    PPP    Actual Actual Results
Texas    Clinton +6    Clinton +4
Ohio    Clinton +9    Clinton +10
Wisconsin    Obama +13    Obama +17
S. Carolina    Obama +20    Obama +28

Clinton supporters should be very worried about Pennsylvania saving the day.


: WI and SC (none / 0) (#41)
by Marvin42 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:29:35 AM EST

Don't look so great, that's a pretty good error in Obamas favor.

: I recall PPP being very off (none / 0) (#44)
by white n az on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:36:48 AM EST

but I'm not going to research.
Rasmussen report released on 4/1 had Hillary up by 12
just sayin...
Some of the lesser polls just don't get it right.

Isn't Research2000 one of the credible polls? (none / 0) (#4)
by Josey on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:40:49 PM EST

"what she said" may not work in Indiana (none / 0) (#12)
by Josey on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:49:28 PM EST

>>>>On issues, the poll showed 39 percent of respondents sayings a candidate's stand on the economy or job creation would most determine their vote. That is followed by 22 percent who said they were most concerned about pulling troops out of Iraq. A fifth of respondents said the cost of health care was their top concern.

What kind of Primary is it? (none / 0) (#14)
by wasabi on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:54:36 PM EST

Open or closed?

: closed (none / 0) (#22)
by Jeralyn on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:05:12 PM EST

from the delegate selecton plan for Indiana

The Indiana Primary Election is "closed" in that a voter must ask for a ballot by party designation. After this is recorded, the voter must sign his or her name, thus registering party preference and recording it for future
reference.

What kind of Primary is it? (none / 0) (#17)
by wasabi on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 10:55:21 PM EST

Same day registration?

: Deadline is April 7 to register (none / 0) (#23)
by Jeralyn on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:08:29 PM EST

see here.

The PA polls (none / 0) (#24)
by riddlerandy on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:16:36 PM EST

are also becoming very interesting

yeah nell (none / 0) (#27)
by confloyd on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:24:38 PM EST

those self absorbed Doctors will try everytime to keep the poor folk in this country from having real healthcare. I am in healthcare and it just irritates me that the Doctors want to make sure they get they half a million a year before the poor people can have healthcare!!

Didn't the SUSA poll yesterday (none / 0) (#28)
by hairspray on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:25:11 PM EST

have her up by 9?

two days ago... (none / 0) (#32)
by white n az on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 12:00:04 AM EST

Here

SUSA has been pretty accurate


: Was this (none / 0) (#42)
by Marvin42 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:30:24 AM EST

Before or after the "bowling incident?" :)

The young should be idealistic (none / 0) (#29)
by nellre on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:48:57 PM EST

Obama would appeal to the young and idealistic.
As we get older, we become more pragmatic.
The thing I don't get is that the educated go for Obama. Education should also lead one to a more pragmatic frame of mind, and an understanding of what can be learned in the school of hard knocks.

The pragmatic, knocked about me is going for HRC.
If I were 20, sure, it'd be Obama. When I was 20 my generation was going to change the world. *sigh*

: Intelligent vs. Smart (none / 0) (#35)
by jeffhas on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:23:23 AM EST

Haven't you ever met someone that was well educated, but they couldn't understand the most basic things that everyday working class people go through?...
You know someone who is clearly intelligent, but not actually 'street smart'
I think that's what's going on - people who are so educated and/or privileged, but they have no concept what it's like to have to work to take care of the kids - get them to school, worry about their health - how to pay the premiums, mortgage, etc. Let alone how to fix a car, change a tire, or deal with Al at the hardware store.
These people have no idea what 'Hard Knocks' are... that's not a school they've ever attended. That's why Hillary has been getting the 'lunch bucket' Dems and BO's been getting the 'latte libs'.... but he's got the AA's to put him over.
Just interesting that you what the Dem party used to be vs. what it is becoming.
You know - you don't have to be college educated to be successful in this country... it proves that no one is better than anyone else - we all have equal opportunities.

: educated voters (none / 0) (#40)
by ColumbiaDuck on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 07:29:06 AM EST

I think it's actually a myth that "educated" voters have a better handle on issues. I believe they are just as swayed by emotion and rhetoric than any other group.
One part of this myth is the idea that higher income, educated voters were for withdrawal from vietnam, while working class voters were against it (an idea butressed by student protests). In reality, polling at the time showed the opposite.
So "educated" voters don't necessarily have better judgement than others groups... My two cents.

On oversampling... (none / 0) (#31)
by Addison on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 11:53:26 PM EST

...the demographics of the Democratic Party, or Democrats, in Indiana are not the same as the demographics of Indiana as a whole. There will be, for instance, a higher level of blacks and a lower level of old white people. I think that's a pretty well-understood thing and explains the discrepancy you note and use to somewhat dismiss the results.

Obama has only been in Indiana (none / 0) (#33)
by maritza on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 12:22:25 AM EST

once, tomorrow will be a second time. The Clintons have been there SEVERAL times. Should be interesting to see how the polls change once he starts campaigning there as it has in Pennsylvania.

I wouldn't be surprised if Obama wins that state.

people quickly forget. O - who? (none / 0) (#36)
by thereyougo on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 01:55:43 AM EST

so, up until the 22nd,the undecided usually make their decisions, in a tight race they make the diff.

but, he's got $ to burn so, get a limo and take the folks to the polls! I don't want to give them any IDEAS ! Then he'll be called the limo-liberals !


: Gee... (none / 0) (#38)
by Alec82 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 02:19:55 AM EST

...when did lattes become passe?

Changing, yes (none / 0) (#43)
by Marvin42 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:32:30 AM EST

But winning, not so much. Remember TX and OH? Everyone said the same thing. Wait until they see Obama. And it is true, the polls closed up, but he didn't win. And I think this effect gets reduced further we go, as he is more and more known.

I think IN will be close, but I am guessing Hillary will win. PA won't be close at the end of the day. Probably neither will NC.


the breakdown in Indiana (none / 0) (#46)
by white n az on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:42:13 AM EST

just doesn't favor Obama. I don't see much hope for a change of the outcome - which polling now shows him behind 3-9 % - We are starting to reach the point where the candidates are well known and the likelihood of massive swings of numbers is low, except for the unknowns like large numbers of Republicans registering as Democrats.

He has to do well in Indiana...it's clearly a state that will damage his chances to get the nomination if he loses it.


This site (none / 0) (#45)
by commissar on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:38:44 AM EST

Has become relentlessly tedious. "So don't read," you say? I don't. I'd block it from my Memeorandum feed if I could.

Several weeks ago, BTD used to freak out at any Obama supporter whose comments went 0.1% off the objectivity meter, saying "Do you know how you sound?"

Jeralyn, BTD ---

"Do YOU know how YOU sound?"

Later.

: Like approximately... (none / 0) (#47)
by white n az on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 08:45:54 AM EST

45% of the Democratic voters in this country
You also sound like 45% of the voters in this country.
It seems that you and Jeralyn sound like 45% of the voters in this country but different groups.
Nice of you to do a 'drive by fruiting' for the purpose of ridicule.

: Try a site more to your taste... (none / 0) (#48)
by Camorrista on Fri Apr 04, 2008 at 12:24:46 PM EST

This site has become relentlessly tedious
The remedy, for you, should be obvious: go away.