ABC early voter polling B-51 K-47 (don't panic)

The Freepers are having orgasms over this nugget of information contained in the latest ABC News tracking poll report (the overall result was K-49, B-48):

Nine percent of "likely" voters in the ABC News tracking poll say they've voted for president, either by absentee ballot or early voting, a number that's jumped in the last week. Fifty-one percent say they went for George W. Bush, 47 percent for John Kerry.

Full link here.  Why not to panic after the jump.

These numbers are de facto exit polling.  So we're fucked, right?

Not exactly.

First of all, those who have already voted early represent 9% of the total sample.  1,666 likely voters x 0.09 = 150 early voters.  Whaddya think is the MOE on that?  Probably something like 10%.

More importantly, if those numbers are accurate, they are actually GOOD for us.

Why?  Because the states that allow early voting are:

Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Iowa
Nevada
New Mexico
North Carolina
Oregon
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
West Virginia

By my count, that includes two dead-red states Bush should win by 20%+ (TX, GA), four Bush-leaners (NC, TN, VA, WV), four swing states (CO, FL, IA, NV), and only two leaning-Kerry states (OR and NM). NO deep blue states in the bunch.

So, bottom line is that Bush should be getting 55% or more of the early vote.  The fact that he isn't suggests that he's in trouble, and makes me suspect that we might have a slight lead in the early voting in FL, and maybe even some of the others.

(Sorry if this has already been diaried by now --my boss came by and I had to pretend to work for a while.)

Update [2004-10-26 18:27:15 by Buck Fush]: Thanks to Ben P for correcting me. The complete list of early-voting states is:

Idaho (solid R)
Montana (solid R)
North Dakota (solid R)
Iowa (swing)
Michigan (swing)
Kansas (solid R)
Oklahoma (solid R)
Texas (solid R)
Arizona (leans R)
New Mexico (leans D)
North Carolina (leans R)
West Virginia (leans R)
Tennessee (leans heavily R)
Georgia (solid R)
Florida (swing)
Arkansas (swing)
Louisiana (solid R)
Colorado (swing)
Vermont (solid D)
California (solid D)
Nevada (leans R)

Lots more R's than D's in that bunch. The poll also included absentee balloting so in that respect it is a national poll, but given the reports of huge lines at the early voting stations, I suspect the absentee-voter sample in this poll is much smaller than the in-person early-voter sample.

•  Good point

  Zogby found similar data. Bush up 52 to 45 or something amongst early voters.

  Ben P

  by Ben P on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 02:54:33 PM PDT

  •  my calcs say

    of the states you mention, bush captured 53% of the votes and gore captured 44% last time.

    So if it's 51-47 Bush over Kerry, that means Bush is UNDERPERFORMING by 2 and Kerry is OVERPERFORMING by 3. That's a five point swing!

    Extrapolate it nationally...and well...you know...

    by The Wolf on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:10:30 PM PDT

•  And BTW

  I would venture to guess that TN is not a "Bush leaner" but a solid Bush state. I bet he wins TN by 15 points. CO is not really a swing state but a Bush leaner. Overall, those states should definetly favor Bush.

  Ben P

  by Ben P on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 02:55:43 PM PDT

  •  hey now....

    nobody's winnin' TN by 15 points.

    by DonBinTN on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:15:09 PM PDT

•  Is anyone panicking

  from individual poll results anymore?

  What the heck is to panic about?  I don't get it.

  by reef the dog on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 02:57:17 PM PDT

  •  I sometimes feel

    a little uneasy because it seems like we have the momentum, yet these poll numbers, which could prove to be a rake in the spokes, don't always seem to reflect that.

    by theprogressivemiddle on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:16:49 PM PDT

•  Good analysis

  By the way, a ARG calculator I found calculates that 150 person sample has a margin of error of 8%, so it could be anywhere from Bush 59 Kerry 39 to Bush 43 Kerry 55 by my calculations.

  by FleetAdmiralJ on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 02:57:34 PM PDT

•  you forgot

  New Mexico (leaning Kerry).

  by all about meme on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 02:58:47 PM PDT

  •  He forgot Poland too.

    by briefman on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:22:23 PM PDT

•  Thanks for this good diary

  though I didn't really want to imagine freepers having orgasms.

  by missanthropy on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:00:09 PM PDT

•  Who does early voting favor overall?

  I've been looking for some 2000 early voting data but I can't find any.  Does anyone know who absentee & early voting favors, Dems or Reps?  I seem to recall people saying it favors Reps but it might vary from place to place.  (The one tidbit I do know is that Dems won early voting in Iowa & Reps won early voting in NM in 2000)

  by asearchforreason on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:00:13 PM PDT

•  California

  California allows unlimited absentee voting, but historically it has skewed Republican.

  by CADem on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:00:32 PM PDT

•  This is a good thing

  Remember, early voters include absentee voters, who have historically trended GOP. But more importantly, this quells my biggest fear about early voting: If it was breaking heavily for the Democrats, then corrupt elections officials would have plenty of time to 'misplace' all those ballots. Oops, we forgot, we had so many early votes that we had to store a few boxes in a closet and then we left them there when it was time to count.

  by neil on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:00:38 PM PDT

•  West Virginia also

  has early voting. That's probably a leaning slightly Bush swing state.

  by Demomatt on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:01:07 PM PDT

  •  Oops

    will update.

    by Buck Fush on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:44 PM PDT

  •  Virginia does not

    Virginia has "in person absentee" but that's not really the same - you have to justify why you can't get to the polls on election day.  Not the most liberal rule, not the most strict.

    Since "absentee" was included with the already voted, I would say that this covers all 50 states.  This is not a good result but not a bad result either, it's just a result.  The MOE of a sample of 150 voters is 8.16%.  I'd much rather be up though.  Much much rather be up.

    -Fred

    by FredFred on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:07:46 PM PDT

    •  No doubt

      The states with "early voting" and not just "absentee voting" do look pretty GOP friendly. The diarist's list is actually incomplete:

      According to the DNC website, the following states have early voting:

      Idaho
      Montana
      North Dakota
      Iowa
      Michigan
      Kansas
      Oklahoma
      Texas
      Arizona
      New Mexico
      North Carolina
      West Virginia
      Tennessee
      Georgia
      Florida
      Arkansas
      Louisiana
      Colorado
      Vermont
      California
      Nevada

      Oregon requires all voters to vote by mail.

      by Ben P on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:15:04 PM PDT

•  Party ID

  The statistic is useless unless we know the party ID of those in that sample.

  by Semblance on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:01:14 PM PDT

•  How 'bout sending a little mojo my way?

  Also, check out the Free Republic thread on this (if you have the stomach to go over there) -- it's pretty funny the way they're wetting themselves over this.  If we win only 3 of the 10 EV states (OR, IA, FL), Bush is toast.

  I guess it's simple if you ignore the complexity (to quote my favorite Kos username). :)

  by Buck Fush on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:01:17 PM PDT

  •  I loathe them.

    by theprogressivemiddle on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:12:53 PM PDT

  •  See my analysis below

    You may want to change your diary title from "(don't panic)" to "(looking good for Kerry)"

    by Scott in NAZ on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:13:03 PM PDT

•  NEWS HEADLINE NOV. 3rd

  BUSH WINS 52%

  of people voting between 11am and 4pm!!!
  

  Kerry wins Presidency 51% to Bush's 48%

  by PBJ Diddy on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:01:32 PM PDT

  •  Or:

    "Kerry WINS Presidency" and right below it, "Military lockdown set to begin today at 5:00 PM."

    by theprogressivemiddle on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:14:05 PM PDT

•  Oregon

  Is different.  It's all mail-in voting, so you could argue that every voter is an "early" voter (except, of course, those who wait until the last day to turn in their ballots).

  Also, I think it's probably safe to put Oregon in the "solid Kerry" category, not just leaning.

  by Ernest T Bass on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:40 PM PDT

•  MOE

  Percent MOE = SQRT(150)/150 = 8.2%

  by mstarr77 on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:02:56 PM PDT

  •  Hey Statistics

    I love a political web sites that teaches mathematical equations.  good job.

    by Chilipalmer on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 04:27:04 PM PDT

•  great diary

  recommended

  by Joe B on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:04:03 PM PDT

•  according to my calcs

  of the states you mention, bush captured 53% of the votes and gore captured 44% last time.

  So if it's 51-47 Bush over Kerry, that means Bush is UNDERPERFORMING by 2 and Kerry is OVERPERFORMING by 3. That's a five point swing!

  Extrapolate it nationally...and well...you know...

  by The Wolf on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:07:00 PM PDT

  •  method?

    Did you use a weighted average to calculate that? California is a lot bigger than most of the other states.

    by jd in nyc on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 04:16:28 PM PDT

•  I would imagine

  this kind of voting process would favor the GOP. Is absentee voting traditionally a GOP strength?

  BTW, WA kinda has this voting too, but only partially. I think something like 50 to 60% of the state's voters vote by mail. I personally don't because I just don't trust voting by mai. I voted absentee in PA in 2000 and I do wonder if they even bother counting the vote if the state isn't that close.

  I also think AZ might have this kind of voting.

  Ben P

  by Ben P on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:08:07 PM PDT

•  It's a great news

  Suffice it to say that in 2000 Gore won only 2 of these states and by an extremely small margin:

  Oregon by 0.5% and Iowa by 4,000 votes.

  Bush won the rest of the states and in many cases (TX,GA, TN, NC, CO etc) with huge margin.

  by dvo on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:08:26 PM PDT

•  Without knowing party ID

  or state by state breakdowns, it's hard to really draw any conclusions.

  by Newsie8200 on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:09:35 PM PDT

  •  I can't draw any conclusions

    Every stae allows absentee ballots.

    I voted in MD 2 weeks ago.

    I can only conclude that people who don't want to stand in line or will be out of town favor Bush slightly. With a huge margin of error.

    by Foot of Pride on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:16:36 PM PDT

•  and we all know

  how correct the "likely voter" models use to be..

  by Joe B on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:10:34 PM PDT

•  Quick analysis

  I used the projected totals on race2004.net and took the weighted average of the numbers for the states you listed (plus AZ where I just early voted last week) by electoral votes (I know not a perfect substitute for population size).

  Anyway, if you use race2004's numbers, you should get Bush 53 Kerry 45 in the early-voting states.

  So, the poll results (B51, K 47) suggest that Kerry is outperforming his poll numbers...a good omen for things to come.

  by Scott in NAZ on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:10:35 PM PDT

  •  my calcs agree

    of the states here, bush captured 53% of the votes and gore captured 44% last time.

    So if it's 51-47 Bush over Kerry, that means Bush is UNDERPERFORMING by 2 and Kerry is OVERPERFORMING by 3. That's a five point swing!

    Extrapolate it nationally...and well...you know...

    by The Wolf on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:11:29 PM PDT

  •  New analysis with new list of states

    Expected vote in early-voting states, again based on Race2004.net: Bush 51- Kerry 47.  So, it sounds like the early voting sample is basically a reflection of the general voting population.

    Clearly, though, these early-voting states are more Bush-leaning than the country as a whole.  Race2004.net is projecting a 50-49 Kerry victory in the nationwide popular vote, so obviously blue states aren't well represented in this group.

    Final message - really nothing good or bad for either side in these numbers without more details.

    by Scott in NAZ on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:28:13 PM PDT

•  You're states are incorrect

  according to the DNC website, the following states have early voting:

  Idaho
  Montana
  North Dakota
  Iowa
  Michigan
  Kansas
  Oklahoma
  Texas
  Arizona
  New Mexico
  North Carolina
  West Virginia
  Tennessee
  Georgia
  Florida
  Arkansas
  Louisiana
  Colorado
  Vermont
  California
  Nevada

  Oregon requires all voters to vote by mail.

  by Ben P on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:13:37 PM PDT

  •  MI

    MI doesn't have early voting. It has absentee, and you can drop your absentee off at the polling location. But that's not early voting, IMO.

    by emptywheel on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:33:33 PM PDT

    •  OK

      I'm just going by what the DNC says.

      Ben P

      by Ben P on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:34:58 PM PDT

•  asdf

  New York doesn't have early voting either - which annoys me to no end. And I know a lot of people (like me) who won't vote absentee because they are afraid it will get lost in the mix.  Long lines are a coming.

  by GregNYC on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:14:15 PM PDT

•  Undecideds breaking for Bush?

  How can someone conclude that the undecideds were breaking for Bush, which is what a goon at Free Republic did?

  by theprogressivemiddle on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:17:36 PM PDT

  •  Break

    The "break" doesn't happen until election day. They are just delirious.

    by Semblance on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:24:34 PM PDT

    •  Zogby

      Actually, in today's narrative, Zogby said that voters were beginning to break, and that Kerry shouldn't hold out hope for numbers to change THAT drastically. It's about the most pessimistic thing he has said about Kerry in a bit of time.

      by emptywheel on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:35:10 PM PDT

      •  I've never believed

        the whole "undecideds break for the challenger thing." I don't think this election is going to be that way. I think it will be a more even split.

        Look at how solid polls like WaPo and LATimes are. There simply aren't going to be many undecideds on 11/2.

        ben P

        by Ben P on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:38:51 PM PDT

      •  Where did he say that?

        by theprogressivemiddle on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 05:54:13 PM PDT

•  For what it's worth,

  the rumor being passed around FreeRepugnant yesterday was that based on Repug internals Bush was NOT doing well at all in early voting, particularly in Florida, but nationwide as well.  I suspect that that is more likely closer to the truth than some polling sample of 150 which does not include all 51 jurisdictions.

  by briefman on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:28:45 PM PDT

•  All this says is

  that Bush voters are slightly more likely than Kerry voters to vote early.  Nothing more.  

  One possible explanation is that liberals are far more concerned about voting fraud and so plan to vote on election day to minimize the risk of tampering.  This could easily produce the numbers reported.

  I also seem to remember reading somewhere that republicans are more likely to vote absentee ballot.  I don't know why, but if so it's another reason for the data.  

  Don't panic--there many far better reason to get our panties in a bunch than this one.

  by Subterranean on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:30:51 PM PDT

•  More Data

  If 1666 were polled and it went 49-48 for Kerry that means Kerry got 816 and Bush 800.  If 9% or 150 were early voters and they went 51-47 for Bush then Bush got 77 of those and Kerry 71.

  First, the small numbers here show how stupid this concept is.  If one or two early voters switched in either direction or lied to the pollster, the data is a waste.  Another way of saying MOE.

  Second, if you back out the early voter totals from the total voter totals, you get a picture of how this sample will vote on election day:  50.7% Kerry, 49.3% Bush.  I'll take that.  Freepers must not be able to do math :-)

  by Direwolf on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 03:40:40 PM PDT

•  MyDD has a post on this

  Chris Bowers writes over at MyDD:
  

  According to Dave Leip, in 2000 Bush received 24,451,519 votes in these states, while Gore received 20,910,580. In other words, Bush won 53.9% of the two-party in these states, while Gore only won 46.1%. Thus, if the ABC poll is accurate, Bush is under-performing his 2000 levels by 2-3 points, while Kerry is over-performing Gore's level by 1-2 points. This is actually horrendous news for Bush.

  Further:

  However, 51-47 is clearly lower than Bush's margin among early voters in 2000, which according to NAES actually was in the double digits with Bush hovering just above 55%. Further, Kerry's over-performance on Gore among early voters also seems to be real, as Democrats in Florida and Iowa are voting at a rate higher than their share of registered voters. These are definitely reason to be chipper.

  by Fleischer on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 04:31:43 PM PDT