one thing I dont understand about the exit polls (re Dean)

[bhunt70]

This is not a hate thread, Im just asking for clarification. HD is the first person I took note of for the exit polls and started looking into that. It could've been done with any candidate.

Look here first and notice two parts (actually the whole thing is interesting)...

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/epolls/NH/index.html


Notice two areas for HD.

1. Vote by Ideology - where he has his majority of support as "Very Liberal" followed by "Somewhat Liberal" then tapering down through moderate, somewhat conservative, and conservative.

Next note

2. More important to you vote - where his "Issues" are twice as important than whether "he can beat Bush".

For some reason this sticks out to me, that for the majority of the people asked at the exit polls Issues twice as important to the voters, and that an overwhelming group of people consider themselves "Very Liberal" or "somewhat liberal". I think it is because HD's views don't strike me as greatly liberal, more of a moderate (his issues and positions have been stated here many times so I wont do it again). At first glance it seems to me that it's a small anomoly.

I checked out Kerry on this same issue since he is at the same level for Issues/Beat Bush , but his base of support ideologically seems to be spread about even.

Is there a reason I'm not seeing why some HD supporters opted for HD as opposed to another "more liberal" candidate?

Once again, this is not a flame.

[ShaneGR]

1. Among voters who considered "electabilty" a central factor

Kerry won 50% to Dean's 18

[bhunt70]

3. true, but not exactly my point.

I'm just trying to see if I can bridge the liberal support with the issues support.

Could it be one-issue voting that would skew it this way?

[Eric J in MN]

2. If you oppose one war, that makes you a "liberal" to some people

If you oppose one war (such as the Iraq War), that makes you a "liberal" to some people, no matter how many other wars you approve of.