NC Insider Advantage Poll: Obama and Hillary in Statistical Tie

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:07:40 PM EST
Tags: North Carolina '08 (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

A new Insider Advantage poll from North Carolina was released this afternoon. It was taken yesterday and shows Hillary and Barack Obama in a statistical dead heat: Obama 48%, Hillary 45%. Undecided: 7%.

Actual poll results are here.

InsiderAdvantage’s Matt Towery: “Really interesting dynamics at play here. Clinton has increased her lead among white voters to 58% - very close to the 60% plus level needed to pull off a victory. She now leads among those who say they are Democrats but has started to trail among Unaffiliated voters, who are allowed to participate in Tuesday’s election. Additionally, African-American voters are not quite as solid with Obama as they have been, at least based on previous exit polls. Clinton has remained in the upper teens (17%) of African-American support in our recent surveys. African-American turnout will be the key to this race. Our poll is based on a turnout model of 35% African-American vote. Anything under that number could give Clinton a shocking upset. But Indiana has become a true horserace that should concern the Clinton camp."

Here are the most recent numbers for registered North Carolina voters as of May 3, broken down by party, race and sex.

Feel free to check my math, it's not my best subject, and to suggest better assumptions than those I make below.

First, I'm adding Democrats in with Independents, since that is the greatest number that can vote in the Democratic primary. It's 3,868,446 voters.

Second, since the state chart doesn't break the ethnic vote down by party, I'm making the assumption that the African American voters are Democrats or Independents. Sure, there are some who are Republican, but I'd bet it's a statistically irrelevant number.

Third, I assume most African American voters are voting for Obama, making a comparison between the percentage of African American voters in each county and the number of Democrats and Independents in each county a relevant factor to consider.

Next, I look at five counties with close to or more than 100,000 Democrats. I add the Democrats and the Independents together. I divide the number of African American voters in each of these counties by the number of registered Democrats and Independents to come up with a percentage.

Here's what I come up with:

Cumberland, 137,562; 52% AA
Durham, 142,451; 46% AA
Guilford, 225,636; 44% AA
Mecklenberg, 391,422; 42% AA
Wake, 363,670; 29% AA

So, two questions. Is the poll's turnout model of 35% AA voters under-representing them?

Second, even if Hillary gets 60% of the white vote, are there enough white voters in the N.C. Democratic primary for her to get close to a tie?

I think we should avoid setting too high an expectation for Hillary in North Carolina. If she can lower Obama's win to single digits there, that's a big deal.

P.S. If this turns out to be a totally useless comparison, I'll be deleting it. Like I said, math isn't my best subject and I never took statistics.

< Insider Advantage Indiana Poll: Another Statistical Tie | Final Candidate Appearances >

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.

NC Insider Advantage Poll: Obama and Hillary in Statistical Tie | 77 comments (77 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

These crazy polls (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by txpolitico67 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:17:14 PM EST

I wish I had had the foresight to have started a polling service for this election cycle. I can't think of one polling group/pollster who's gotten it right consistently (I'm sure one of you is about to educate me on that).

BTW, Jeralyn, (if you are reading this), I am making a donation tonight to TL. This has become my new homepage and I am a total addict. Like PBS, it's only fair to donate. And thanks for the trusted user status...I am totally flattered!

Angelo aka txpolitico (Fort Worth, Texas)

Viva Hillary!!!

Leave it (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by txpolitico67 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:32:20 PM EST

to my fellow TL'ers to provide some insight! You guys are great. I feel really at home at this blog.

I hope that the polls showing Hillary @ +10 in IN and -5 in NC are right.

Like Hillary says, "we gotta win big and lose small!"


SUSA has been most accurate (none / 0) (#9)
by litigatormom on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:21:39 PM EST

though not entirely accurate, to be sure.


Andgarden is pretty accurate. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by oculus on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:23:22 PM EST

I follow the best pollsters (none / 0) (#15)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:27:02 PM EST

and BTD does all of the math. ;-)


Fine (none / 0) (#59)
by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:33:51 PM EST

You insult KUSA at your peril.


Heh, (none / 0) (#61)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:35:30 PM EST

That's ok, I still love you Kathy. ;-p


dagnabbit! (none / 0) (#69)
by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:06:24 PM EST

do I look like Barack Obama to you? I don't want your love--I want your respect! Hahahaha! Okay, love will do. So long as you admit that there is at least one southerner out there who you don't f-ing hate!


fiddle-de-dee! ;-) (none / 0) (#71)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:15:35 PM EST

Seriously though, I love lots of southerners, I just hate a particular mentality that's prevalent in the south. It's the mentality that turns W into the President.


: oh, let's not do this again (none / 0) (#74)
by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:01:34 PM EST

that particular mentality is all over the WORLD. Go to Rotterdam and talk to some black stockings.

And PUSA ain't too happy either (none / 0) (#73)
by ccpup on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:25:00 PM EST

Although they're still both asleep on their doggie beds and could probably care less.

But when they wake up for their bed-time treat, they'll be FURIOUS, I'm sure.


NW Indiana (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by facta non verba on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:28:55 PM EST

The Obama camp made a huge ad buy in the Chicago media market over the weekend. That media market includes NW Indiana that holds 25% of the state's AA population. The question is why? It seems that their internals show a softening of AA support.

In North Carolina, I spoke with the Clinton camp today and they told me that the Clinton camp is running 2 ads for every 1 of Obama's this weekend. That's a huge differenc from PA where Obama outspent Clinton nearly 3:1. The Clinton camp is also confident that they can get 60% of the white vote in NC and 70% of the rural vote. If they do, it may be a long night for Obama.

Obama may also not get his usual 90% AA vote. It may be more like 85%. This number will be critical to watch tomorrow. Also remember that exit polls have overstated Obama's result by 5%. If this holds up again, Clinton may take both. If she does, is this the game changer? Let's hope so.

Are you sure about the NC ad spend? (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by Democratic Cat on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:44:23 PM EST

If Obama is really getting outspent, I'd figure it's because he's confident of winning. He can't have a shortage of money.

The Indiana ad buy is interesting. They may see their numbers softening or maybe they think they are very close (or even leading) in Indiana and want to make a last push.


The North Carolina Ad (none / 0) (#36)
by facta non verba on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:56:19 PM EST

buy only reflects this weekend's and today's ad buys, not overall ad buys. I don't have those numbers unfortunately.

Meanwhile Clinton has started ad buys in Oregon.

Here's her ad in Oregon:

Clinton Ad in Oregon


: Is Clinton Gonna Take Care Of The Great Lakes (none / 0) (#75)
by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 10:22:46 PM EST

in Oregon like obama is stating in his mailers? lmao

The big ad buys for IN (none / 0) (#44)
by litigatormom on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:06:45 PM EST

may be related to the fact that the Chicago news media, including TV news, has been doing a lot of Rev. Wright coverage. The coverage may be eating into what should be Obama's "backyard."


This would (none / 0) (#24)
by Ga6thDem on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:38:19 PM EST

explain why he was supposedly campaigning in areas that have large numbers of AA's. On another blog, one of the posters said that the NC news reported that Obama only had a closed door meeting today and didn't do any campaign stops. Wierd.


either he's going to get thumped (none / 0) (#30)
by Salo on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:46:33 PM EST

or he doesn't care that he's going to get thumped.

shouldn't he be out reducing her margins and making sure she's beaten back?


: Very Strange (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:53:03 PM EST

Maybe they're sure they'll win. Maybe they're planning for a potential loss?
The guy just doesn't seem to have the same stamina Hillary does. I'll say that much.

this is true (none / 0) (#32)
by oldnorthstate on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:49:21 PM EST

barack wasn't anywhere to be seen today. he had a small closed door event and that's it for the area.


give the guy a break... (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by p lukasiak on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:51:18 PM EST

he had to do the "I approve this message" clip for his attack ad on Clinton yesterday -- he's gotta be exhausted.


He's Got Events In Indiana Tonight (none / 0) (#39)
by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:02:28 PM EST

See here.

But it is weird he only had meetings today in NC.


: I read that it was a (none / 0) (#41)
by litigatormom on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:05:00 PM EST

"closed door town hall meeting."
I thought only Bush had those....

I would guess (none / 0) (#35)
by AnninCA on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:53:21 PM EST

they are crafting a go-forward message. Looks pretty serious to me.


: That was my first reaction (none / 0) (#37)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:58:03 PM EST

I expect to hear about the MATH.
This was supposed to be his week. . .

The only (5.00 / 1) (#67)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:58:02 PM EST

polls that will matter to us are the Olbermann's lips and Tweety's spittle poll

Measure the thin-ness of the lips or the quanity of spittle, and it'll give you a hint of how well Hillary's doing.

Wouldn't it be special if she comes within 3% in NC?

Party time!

Uh-oh (none / 0) (#1)
by ruffian on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:10:37 PM EST

But Indiana has become a true horserace that should concern the Clinton camp."

What's he talking about here?

They Also Have a New IN Poll (none / 0) (#10)
by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:22:47 PM EST

Clinton 48 - 44 Obama, see here.


: meh (none / 0) (#16)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:27:31 PM EST

Zogby wannabe. I don't believe this pollster.

I don't know about your math (none / 0) (#2)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:11:17 PM EST

(though I commend you for wielding it--I don't do math!)

However, I generally don't think too much of Insider Advantage. They've made some pretty major mistakes this season.

That's why I did my own math (none / 0) (#3)
by Jeralyn on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:12:34 PM EST

from the 5/3 voter numbers released by the Secretary of State.


Well, you ask two questions (5.00 / 1) (#4)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:16:32 PM EST

Is the poll's turnout model of 35% AA voters under-representing them?

My opinion is that it's either exactly right or slightly over-representing them. I say this because I believe in God, Country, and SurveyUSA. ;-)

To make it a single digit race or to win, Hillary really needs closer to 70% of the white vote. That will be difficult if not impossible for her to achieve.


The other thing I would say (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:18:31 PM EST

is that turnout is rarely even across regions. Especially problematic is rural AA turnout. This would be to Hillary's benefit in places like NC-13, which has a mixed urban/rural demographic.


single digit? (none / 0) (#7)
by miguelito on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:19:13 PM EST

It will certainly be single digits, most likely less than 5 points.


I highly doubt it (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:26:24 PM EST

This is a ten point race for Obama. I expect him to win it as Hillary won PA.

Anything less than about 9 points for him will be embarrassing.


Don't you mean (5.00 / 1) (#62)
by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:38:25 PM EST

anything less than 9.4356697847948701%?

There's also something we haven't talked about today (I know, it doesn't seem possible!): Maya Angelou. She has been hitting the trail hard for our girl.

I wonder--does someone have a break-down of the age as percentage of the aa population? Angelou will hit the high notes with a certain group of aa voters. She'll also bring in a certain slice of the latte dems.


Anything less than 13 will be embarrassing (none / 0) (#22)
by dianem on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:36:41 PM EST

That's what his spreadsheet predicted, and it has been fairly on target until recently. Whoever put it together simply made the false assumption that the media worship would continue at least until the end of the primary.


This morning on the Today Show (none / 0) (#45)
by litigatormom on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:07:38 PM EST

Obama claimed that he was "slightly favored" in NC.


Spreadsheet projection (none / 0) (#66)
by waldenpond on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:58:01 PM EST

was NC win by 8 and an IN win by 7. He also projected to lose W VA by 12 so that W VA poll at a 26 pt loss was not looking good.


: Thanks. I misread the spreadsheet. (none / 0) (#70)
by dianem on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:14:57 PM EST

I actually read it as 45 for Clinton and 58 for Obama. I know, I know... that makes no sense whatsoever. So much for a higher education.

Slightly O/T (none / 0) (#8)
by litigatormom on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:20:50 PM EST

On Countdown, Keith Olbermann and Chuck Todd were just talking about how many pledged delegates and superdelegates were still uncommitted/unchosen, and how they had to break to clinch the nomination for Obama. Olbermann said that the number to clinch the nomination is 2025 -- a "magic" number that assumes that MI and FLA do not and will never count. Chuck Todd does not disagree with this statement, or qualify it. That means that Olbermann is assuming the permanent disenfranchisement of all FLA and MI delegates. Do you suppose they are trying to discourage Clinton turnout in IN and NC by suggesting that votes for Clinton are hopeless?

I'm writing to Olbermann and MSNBC right now.

ok, but please stay on topic (none / 0) (#12)
by Jeralyn on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:23:07 PM EST

so as not to redirect the conversation on this one. Thanks!


but barack said the florida and michigan (none / 0) (#27)
by oldnorthstate on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:43:57 PM EST

delegations should be seated on my tv tonight.


: seated but not counted (none / 0) (#54)
by angie on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:28:30 PM EST

which isn't the same thing, imo.

I'm not surprised by this at all. There's (none / 0) (#11)
by DeborahNC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:22:59 PM EST

been a real shift in popularity for Hillary in the last week or so. In fact, I thought that she might do a little better than this. Also, I thought that she would pick up a greater percentage of AA voters in NC than she has in other states. People in this state looooovve Bill Clinton, and he has been barnstorming the state recently. Go Hillary!!

I've been canvasing in Durham NC (none / 0) (#57)
by jimotto on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:33:10 PM EST

I certainly don't think there will be a shift in the urban african american vote. It is extremely enthusiasticly Obama. While I don't know what the sentiment is in North Eastern NC (ie rural), I suspect it similar...may not turn out in the same levels as in the cities though.


: I wouldn't expect to see that in Durham. My (none / 0) (#76)
by DeborahNC on Mon May 05, 2008 at 11:47:04 PM EST

impressions were based primarily on anecdotal evidence.

Feh, (none / 0) (#17)
by Ga6thDem on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:28:34 PM EST

I no longer know what to think. Anyway IA has a better track record with southern states than northern states.

Really? (none / 0) (#19)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:30:27 PM EST

I don't think they have a good track record period. Look at what they came up with for Mississippi.


Well (none / 0) (#21)
by Ga6thDem on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:34:59 PM EST

I missed MS but they did predict TX right. Generally, I agree with you about IA but they have gotten it right on occasion when others have gotten it wrong. And really this poll isn't that far off SUSA either.

Though I don't know why he thinks Hillary needs to get 60% of the white vote. I thought it was 70%.


70% is right (none / 0) (#23)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:38:01 PM EST

He's not just a wannabe pundit, he's a bad wannabe pundit!


He likes (none / 0) (#26)
by Ga6thDem on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:40:09 PM EST

to hear himself talk. He's often on the GA gang, which is a state political show, blathering about something. Did you know that his son is a Hillary supporter?


I had heard that (none / 0) (#29)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:44:41 PM EST

and actually I've read speculation that he cooks his numbers in Hillary's favor because of that. Hillary's Zogby, as it were.


James Zogby (none / 0) (#40)
by Jeralyn on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:03:13 PM EST

"(James) Zogby is also a senior analyst with the polling firm Zogby International, founded and managed by his brother John Zogby, and is a prominent lecturer and scholar on Middle East issues..."

He is an Obama superdelegate.


correct (none / 0) (#43)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:06:20 PM EST

And the pollster other-halves cancel one-another out in their hackery, (IMO, of course).


Zogby is an Obama SD? (none / 0) (#46)
by litigatormom on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:09:45 PM EST

And we're supposed to give his polls any weight because....?


: No, his brother is (none / 0) (#48)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:12:09 PM EST

: he's a senior analyst (none / 0) (#53)
by Jeralyn on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:25:40 PM EST

in his brother' Zogby polling firm.

GA6th?! (none / 0) (#63)
by Kathy on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:39:47 PM EST

TX = South????

Surely you jest!


VA comparison... (none / 0) (#25)
by p lukasiak on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:39:03 PM EST

if we go by the virgina primary (30% AA) vs the 2004 election exit polls (21%), AA participation in NC will be about 37%.

But I have the feeling that white turnout was relatively low for the Virginia primary, so 35% AA for tomorrow is probably about right.

ehhh, I'm going with SUSA (none / 0) (#31)
by goldberry on Mon May 05, 2008 at 07:46:56 PM EST

She wins IN by 10 and shaves Obama's lead to 3-4 in NC. He wins there but just barely.

One thing (none / 0) (#38)
by AnninCA on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:02:12 PM EST

is that there's not as much movement as in PA. I'm not sure what that means, other than there are simply fewer undecideds.

I'm still hoping that she'll chip into his white upper-class group by more than is expected and that there's going to be some fall-off in turn-out with the AA group.

There was an article that he brought in a lot of SC people to get out the vote, but I'm not reading about as much of his grassroots in NC as in other states.

I just want to see her be able to make a convincing argument that she is, at last, cutting in on his "turf."

60 percent of the white (none / 0) (#42)
by waldenpond on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:05:02 PM EST

vote? I don't think that gets Clinton a win. If Obama get 83% (I think he will get 88) of 35%(AA) vote, that's .291 pts. Add 42% of the 65% (White) vote, .273 pts for a total of .5635. So Clinton would get .4365. The difference is .127.

I think Clinton need more than 70% to get a win. Maybe Paul could check the math?

A Helpful NC Widget (none / 0) (#47)
by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:11:01 PM EST

Similar to Jay Cost's popular vote spreadsheet, here is a little application that permits you to fool around with the NC vote to see who wins under what scenario.


D'Oh Wrong Link (none / 0) (#52)
by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:21:00 PM EST

Here's the right one.


: Cool (none / 0) (#58)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:33:48 PM EST

Plugging my projections in SUSA makes this a 5 point race in Obama's favor. Whites 65/35 Hillary, Blacks 90/10 Obama, Whites 68% blacks 32% (per SUSA).

you're math is fine... (none / 0) (#49)
by p lukasiak on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:14:10 PM EST

I just don't think that Obama is gonna get over 35% of the white vote...unless there is a strong 'pro-McCain" bloc of indenpendents who want to see Obama be the nominee....


: thanks and coming from you (none / 0) (#55)
by Jeralyn on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:29:01 PM EST

that is great to know. It's the first time I've taken the calculator out of my desk drawer since last year. It really took an absurd amount of time.

I think something is being missed (none / 0) (#60)
by Marvin42 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:34:35 PM EST

I am not sure its all about her winning. If she gets 60-65% of the white vote that is bad news for the Obama electability argument. Obviously if she gets enough she wins, but we are sitting here arguing about how badly Sen Obama will win a crucial demographic.


IA may not be right, but their math does work out. (none / 0) (#68)
by Amileoj on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:59:35 PM EST

They're giving him 32.6% of the White vote, not 42%. (They have 9% of Whites, and 3.7% of African-Americans, undecided.)

32.6% of 60.1% is 19.6%. Add this to his projected 27.5% (78.6% of the 35%) from the African-American vote, and you have 47.1%.

Their comparable numbers for Clinton are: 35.2% from White voters (58.5% of 60.1%) and 6.2% from African-American voters (17.7% of 35%). That gets her to 41.1%.

The rest of HRC's projected 44.5% total comes mainly from the small (4%) Hispanic turnout, which IA has going for HRC by a almost as big a margin as BHO's among African-Americans (71.3%).

Obviously, IA's turnout model could be seriously understating the AA share of the vote. Or they could be overestimating HRC's share of that share. And even assuming neither of those things is true, the undecideds would have to break overwhelmingly for her to make an HRC win consistent with these data. But the poll's internals are not self-contradictory. Teh math works out.


Half off topic... (none / 0) (#50)
by Marco21 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:15:31 PM EST

but Lawrence O'Donnell just wnet after Bill for his 1990s gas tax. Larry. what was hte average cost of a gallon of gas during his term adjusted for inflation?

Lordy.

i hate these wormy Obama trolls masquerading as reporters and analysts.

On topic. I think NC will be mighty tight and she'll take Indy by 7.

That's my stroy and I am sticking to it. I;d love nothing more than to switch from the NBA finals tomorrow night to find out she squeaked by his holiness in NC, though.

: I am not dyslexic (none / 0) (#72)
by Marco21 on Mon May 05, 2008 at 09:18:01 PM EST

despite the horrid typos above. Yikes.

Sean Oxendine's Regression Analysis with Cool Map (none / 0) (#51)
by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:17:13 PM EST

Sean Oxendine has tried to look at North Carolina county by county and tried to figure out how the election should turn out if NC follows the same voting patterns as other Southern states. The answer is Obama gets 50-55% of the vote in NC.

You can read the entire thing here.

Thanks (none / 0) (#56)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:31:54 PM EST

That looks right to me. I am happy to note that he picked out TN as an anomaly too.

More than one person is paying attention!


If You Liked That Oxendine Post (none / 0) (#64)
by BDB on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:55:08 PM EST

Have you seen this one with cool maps for Appalachia.


: Indeed I have (none / 0) (#65)
by andgarden on Mon May 05, 2008 at 08:56:32 PM EST

Thanks.

E. TN and W. NC (none / 0) (#77)
by tnjen on Tue May 06, 2008 at 01:17:23 AM EST

..are a whole lot alike -- E.Tn used to be NC. NC also has three distinct regions (just like TN). I've wondered myself, whether or not NC will follow TN's pattern but I don't know enough about the central and eastern regions of NC to really do more than speculate. Superficially, the central portion of NC (particularly the white electorate) resembles to me the the mix of white voters in the Nashville area but with more cities and more latte types.
