Parsing National Exit Data

Today I want to cut through our first exit poll data, beginning with the presidential election. While there are several exit polls conducted for the networks, CNN has always been kind enough to release its data once the race is over. I want compare many of the crosstabs from Tuesday's election to the 2004 race between George Bush and John Kerry. There is a lot of juicy stuff that gives us a good idea of how Obama was able to better Kerry's showing by a wide five points nationally. Let's get to it.



Gender


Among Men
(2004, 46%) Bush 55, Kerry 44
(2008, 47%) Obama 49, McCain 48


Among women
(2004, 54%) Kerry 51, Bush 48
(2008, 53%) Obama 56, McCain 43


Obama improved an equal amount over Kerry's showing with both men and women, going up five points with both sexes. Both years, more women than men voted, but the gap was a bit smaller this year. This is the first taste we get of the broadness of Obama's electoral coalition.


Gender and race


Among white men
(2004, 36%) Bush 62, Kerry 37
(2008, 36%) McCain 57, Obama 41


Among white women
(2004, 41%), Bush 55, Kerry 44
(2008, 39%) McCain 53, Obama 46


We see narrow improvement by Obama among white men and women, and in fact, greater improvement among the former. Relative to overall turnout, there were less white women this election than the last one, whereas white men made up the same percentage of turnout.


Race


Among whites
(2004, 77%) Bush 58, Kerry 41
(2008, 74%) McCain 55, Obama 43


Among blacks
(2004, 11%) Kerry 88, Bush 11
(2008, 13%) Obama 95, McCain 4


Among Latinos
(2004, 8%) Kerry 53, Bush 44
(2008, 9%) Obama 67, McCain 31


Among Asians
(2004, 2%) Kerry 56, Bush 44
(2008, 2%) Obama 62, McCain 35


Here we see dramatic improvement for the Democratic candidate. Obama improved an important two percent among whites over Kerry. Additionally, he won nearly all the black votes, picking up 95% there with black turnout increasing two percent, and eight percent of Asians. Perhaps most saliently, Obama improved 14% with Latinos, a fast-growing segment of the population. The last number is crucial. As we will see later, it played a big part in Obama's big wins in swing states like New Mexico, Colorado, and elsewhere. As the Hispanic population rises, Republicans must find a way to remain competitive with them as President Bush did. If the GOP cannot do so, it will be severely weakened in both select state races and national contests.


Age


Among 18-29 years old
(2004, 17%) Kerry 54, Bush 45
(2008, 18%) Obama 66, McCain 32


Among 30-44 years old
(2004, 29%) Bush 53, Kerry 46
(2008, 29%) Obama 52, McCain 46


Among 45-59 years old
(2004, 30%) Bush 51, Kerry 48


45-64
(2008, 37%) Obama 50, McCain 49


65+ years old
(2004, 16%) Bush 52, Kerry 47
(2008, 16%) McCain 53, Obama 45


Interestingly, the age break down in the two elections was pretty much identical. Perhaps the biggest surprise is that voters aged 18 to 29 made up 16% of all voters in both races. Of course, we might have seen more voters aged 18 to 24, or whichever split you would like, but we cannot see from this data as CNN did not do this level of break-down in 2004 (though the data is available this year).


Regardless of this, Obama's showing with younger voters was over 10% higher than John Kerry's, hardly a big shock. He was up about half that with voters 30 to 44, and he showed a slight improvement with voters 45 to 64, though the two year's data sets don't match up perfectly with age groups. Finally, Obama's numbers actually went down with older voters. The 65+ set made up 16% of the turnout both years, but here Obama's number was actually lower than John Kerry's. Keep that in mind, as it represented one of the President-elect's few vulnerabilities in the future.


Income


< $15K
(2004, 8%) Kerry 63, Bush 36
(2008, 6%) Obama 73, McCain 25


$15K-$30K
(2004, 15%) Kerry 57, Bush 42
(2008, 12%) Obama 60, McCain 37


$30K-50K
(2004, 22%) Kerry 50, Bush 49
(2008, 19%) Obama 55, McCain 43


$50K-75K
(2004, 23%) Bush 56, Kerry 43
(2008, 21%) McCain 49, Obama 48


$75K-100K
(2004, 14%) Bush 55, Kerry 45
(2008, 15%) Obama 51, McCain 48


$100K-150K
(2004, 11%) Bush 57, Kerry 42
(2008, 14%) McCain 51, Obama 48


$150K-200K
(2004, 4%) Bush 58, Kerry 42
(2008, 6%) McCain 50, Obama 48


$200K+
(2004, 3%) Bush 63, Kerry 35
(2008, 6%) Obama 52, McCain 46


These are some interesting numbers, and again we see that Obama improved very well above Kerry in just about every subset. Turnout among people making up to $75,000 per year dropped a bit, while it rose among those making above that amount, steadily rising just a hair as income rose. Obama's biggest jump over Kerry was among the two groups at the poles: he was at +10% over Kerry's showing with those making less than $15K, and at +17% over Kerry with those making over $200K. This latter group was important, as turnout among those making the most in America doubled, and Obama won it decisively. The group that made big money during the Bush years perhaps paradoxically (or perhaps not) decided to support the Democrat in this race.


Party ID


Among Democrats
(2004, 37%) Kerry 89, Bush 11
(2008, 39%) Obama 89, McCain 10


Among Republicans
(2004, 37%) Bush 93, Kerry 6
(2008, 32%) McCain 90, Obama 9


Among Independents
(2004, 26%) Kerry 49, Bush 48
(2008, 39%) Obama 52, McCain 44


These splits tell us a great deal. In 2004, Democrats and Republicans made up an equal part of the electorate, and while Kerry did well with his base, Bush did even better among his base, so much so that Kerry's very slight advantage among independents did not close the gap.


This year is a somewhat different story for two reasons. First, more Americans identify themselves as Democrats than Republicans, with a split of 39-32, as opposed to 37-37 four years ago. Therefore, while both Kerry and McCain did pretty much the same among their bases, this change disadvantages the GOP side because of the simple fact that today there are so many more Dems.


Second, in addition to this advantage for Obama, there are more independents this year, and Obama won them by a strong eight percentage points, besting Kerry's one-point win with this key group four years ago. McCain, whose greatest asset was often seen as his ability to attract moderates did even worse with this group than George Bush four years ago. There are various reasons for this I won't delve into today, but needless to say it killed any chance for McCain to make up for the party ID gap which currently exists.


So, we can boil down Obama's win to two simple facts here: there are more Dems than GOPers right now, which puts the Republicans at one big disadvantage, and the voters in the center currently favor the blue team by a fairly wide margin, turning a closer gap into a rout.


Ideology


Among liberals
(2004, 21%) Kerry 85, Bush 13
(2008, 22%) Obama 89, McCain 10


Among moderates
(2004, 45%) Kerry 54, Bush 45
(2008, 44%) Obama 60, McCain 39


Among conservatives
(2004, 34%) Bush 84, Kerry 15
(2008, 34%) McCain 78, Obama 20


Note that with the exception of two tiny one percent movements, the numbers of liberals, moderates, and conservatives in the voting electorate is identical to what it was four years ago. This is fascinating, and it seems to go counter to the fact that there is now a 39-32 gap among self-described Dems and Republicans. I think what it demonstrates is that people pretty much continue to hold to their political preferences, but after the last eight years, a lot of conservatives chose not to describe themselves as Republicans for one reason or another. They are out there, but they are no longer all GOPers, at least for the time being.


Obama's improvement among the three camps was four, six, and five points from 2004 -- pretty consistent growth. He even garnered five more percent among conservatives, presumably many of them now disenchanted. I happen to think, however, that it was Obama's strength among moderates that made him a winner. A 21-point advantage with voters in the center is pretty hard to overcome in today's era of such entrenched political polarization.


First-time Voter?


Yes
(2004, 89%) Bush 51, Kerry 48
(2008, 89%) Obama 50, McCain 48


No
(2004, 11%) Kerry 53, Bush 46
(2008, 11%) Obama 69, McCain 30


One of the Holy Grails of Democrats is to register and get to the polls huge numbers of voters who don't get to the voting booth, most notably disengaged young people and poorer Americans who don't follow any politics. Oftentimes, these efforts have been met with mixed results. As 2004's numbers show, Kerry did well with first-time voters, but not as spectacularly as Democrats would have likely hoped.


And while the amount of first-time voters relative to all voters remained the same as four years ago, Obama turned a seven-point Dem advantage in '04 to a 39-point win this year. This stat is pretty amazing. Obama was not totally able to generate a new class of early voters, but he got their support by a nearly 7-to-3 margin. While this group only made up 11% of all voters, it provided a huge cushion. This is one of the key stats of this race.


When did you decide who to vote for?


Today (election day)
(2004, 5%) Kerry 52, Bush 45
(2008, 4%) Obama 50, McCain 45


Last three days (before election day)
(2004, 4%) Kerry 55, Bush 42
(2008, 3%) McCain 52, Obama 47


Last week (before the election)
(2004, 2%) Bush 51, Kerry 48
(2008, 3%) McCain 50, Obama 48


In October
(2004, 10%) Kerry 54, Bush 44
(2008, 15%) Obama 54, McCain 43


Before October
(2004, 78%) Bush 53, Kerry 46


In September
(2008, 14%) Obama 54, McCain 45


Before September
(2008, 60%) Obama 52, McCain 47


With regards to this year's election, this is evidence both for and against the generally-held belief that late-breaking voters go against the front-runner. McCain posted narrow wins among voters who decided in the last three days and in the last week, but Obama won voters who decided on their candidate on election day. In 2004, Kerry had posted strong victories among voters who picked their man in the final few days, but to no avail.


Obama won October-decided voters (15% of the electorate) by 11 points, September deciders by nine, and those who decided before September -- a huge 60% of voters -- by a key five points.


This data shows that Obama had this race won pretty early, despite some arguments that the economic turmoil in mid and late September turned the race. There is no doubt that the event benefited Obama, yes, but he also won by 5% those voters who had made their choice before September 1. Granted, Obama's big win among those voters who made a choice in October is easy to see, and it may have put the race out of reach, but he was already in a very strong position with voters on September 1. Like Bush in 2004, Obama won his base, and it is likely that both men locked up their keystones early.


By religion


Among Protestants
(2004, 54%) Bush 59, Kerry 40
(2008, 54%) McCain 54, Obama 45


Among Catholics
(2004, 27%) Bush 52, Kerry 47
(2008, 27%) Obama 54, McCain 45


Among Jews
(2004, 3%) Kerry 74, Bush 25
(2008, 2%) Obama 78, McCain 21


Other
(2004, 7%) Kerry 74, Bush 23
(2008, 6%) Obama 73, McCain 22


None
(2004, 10%) Kerry 67, Bush 31
(2008, 12%) Obama 75, McCain 23


In 2004, Bush's electoral bedrock was Protestants, which he carried by nearly 20 points. But his wild card, and the part of the country which gave him victory was the Catholic vote, once a reliable part of the Democrat base. In a fairly surprising ultimate split, Bush carried Catholics over the Catholic John Kerry by five points, sealing the Republican's re-election. This year, Obama flipped Catholics back into the blue camp and won them by nine points. His improvement among Protestants and Jews is important, but I think Obama's work with Catholics was key, and it accounts in large part for his strength in Rust Belt states like Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.


Church attendance


Weekly
(2004, 41%) Bush 61, Kerry 39
(2008, 40%) McCain 55, Obama 43


Occasionally
(2004, 40%) Kerry 53, Bush 47
(2008, 42%) Obama 57, McCain 42


Never
(2004, 14%) Kerry 62, Bush 36
(2008, 16%) Obama 67, McCain 30


As we saw above, Obama has improved numbers over Kerry with religious voters. There's no doubt about that. However, before you go too far in gauging his advances, consider this statistic:


Among Evangelicals


Yes
(2004, 23%) Bush 78, Kerry 21
(2008, 26%) McCain 74, Obama 24


No
(2004, 77%) Kerry 56, Bush 43
(2008, 74%) Obama 62, McCain 36


Here, we see that there are slightly more Evangelicals in the voting population, and Obama only slightly improved among them. The point? Evangelicals in the U.S. are by and large still staunch Republicans.

Marital Status

Married
(2004, 63%) Bush 57, Kerry 43
(2008, 66%) McCain 52, Obama 47

Unmarried
(2004, 37%) Kerry 58, Bush 40
(2008, 34%) Obama 65, McCain 33

Married with children?

Yes
(2004, 28%) Bush 59, Kerry 40
(2008, 31%) McCain 51, Obama 48

No
(2004, 72%) Kerry 51, Bush 48
(2008, 69%) Obama 56, McCain 43

Obama's improvement over Kerry among unmarried voters is impressive, but the number that really sticks out is his 47% among married voters and his 48% with those who are married with children. These are groups that helped form President Bush's 2004 re-election bloc, many of whom were attracted by Bush's national security credentials and who bought into the argument that Kerry was soft. More of the data teases all of this out.

Children under 18?

Yes
(2004, 37%) Bush 53, Kerry 45
(2008, 40%) Obama 53, McCain 45

No
(2004, 63%) Bush 50, Kerry 49
(2008, 60%) Obama 53, McCain 45

Obama did equally well among those with and those without kids under 18 years old. Here, he flipped the 2004 in taking a healthy lead with those people with children. Let's take a look at some comparable data which is only available for the 2008 race.

Children under 18?
Fathers (19%) McCain 50, Obama 48
Mothers (21%) Obama 57, McCain 41
Men w/no kids (28%) Obama 51, McCain 48
Women w/no kids (32%) Obama 56, McCain 43

The stat that stands out most here? Obama won mothers by a whooping 16%. There is no way John Kerry got close to that in 2004 (though I don't have the data to prove it).

Vote by marital status and gender
Married mothers (15%) Obama 51, McCain 47
All other women (38%) Obama 58, McCain 40
All men (47%) Obama 50, McCain 48

Obama's strength among married mothers was one of his greatest assets. Again, this is a group that liked President Bush, and he likely won it by several points. This year, Obama won this group by four.

Vote by marital status and children
Married women w/kids (15%) Obama 51, McCain 47
Unmarried women w/kids (6%) Obama 74, McCain 25
Married women, no kids (17%) McCain 53, Obama 44
Unmarried women, no kids (15%) Obama 69, McCain 31

Married men w/kids (16%) McCain 54, Obama 45
Unmarried men w/kids (3%) Obama 68, McCain 26
Married men, no kids (17%) McCain 52, Obama 48
Unmarried men, no kids (11%) Obama 56, McCain 41

Not to beat a dead horse, but once we looking even more closely at the marriage crosstabs, Obama has great numbers with women except those who are married with no kids. I am most struck by his performance with married women with kids, as he leads there by four. I am betting John Kerry lost this group by high single-digits. This year, they were more comfortable pulling the lever for a Democrat for President than four years ago.

Vote by Size of Place

2004
Urban (30%) Kerry 54, Bush 45
Suburban (46%) Bush 52, Kerry 47
Rural (25%) Bush 57, Kerry 42

2008
Urban (30%) Obama 63, McCain 35
Suburban (49%) Obama 50, McCain 48
Rural (21%) McCain 53, Obama 45

Bush won by dominated rural voters, getting a good win with suburbanites, and hanging not-to-far away from Kerry in the urban areas.

Obama predictably won urban voters big, but where he really won the election was in the suburbs, where he posted a narrow win. Many of the voters who made this possible were married women and those with kids who voted Republican four years. McCain won the rural vote, but by not nearly enough to outset his losses in America's urban centers. McCain's results in the urban areas was pitiful. Interestingly, the urban voting bloc was the same as in 2004, so this dispels the view that Obama won by turning out more of his voters; he won because he turned a lot of voters who went with Bush back to the blue side.

Note that the rural vote dropped 4% relative to overall turnout, but judging by the results, even if it remained at 2004 levels McCain would have lost. The suburban vote rose, and it was Obama who capitalized.

Who You Supported to Win the Dem Nomination (2008 only)

Clinton Democrats (14%) Obama 83, McCain 16
Obama Democrats (20%) Obama 98, McCain 2
Dems for other candidate (2%) Obama 63, McCain 35
Dems w/no preference (2%) Obama 75, McCain 25
Indies/GOPers (59%) McCain 67, Obama 31

I only included this data for the first number which shows that Obama ended up with a huge majority of former Clinton supporters. While there was much fear that a huge of Hillary supporters would not join the fold -- enunciated by this author too -- in the end those concerns did not materialize. There was still that 16% die-hard quotient, but it was not nearly enough to make a difference. The sore losers probably remain sore today.

Campaign Contact?

Did the Kerry/Obama campaign contact you personally?
Yes
(2004, 26%) Kerry 66, Bush 33
(2008, 26%) Obama 64, McCain 34

No
(2004, 74%) Bush 57, Kerry 42
(2008, 72%) McCain 50, Obama 48

Did the Bush/McCain campaign contact you personally?
Yes
(2004, 24%) Bush 62, Kerry 38
(2008, 18%) McCain 60, Obama 38

No
(2004, 76%) Kerry 52, Bush 47
(2008, 79%) Obama 55, McCain 43

I do not include these numbers to show that campaign contact was more effective for the Democratic Party this year than in 2004, but rather to point out the ineffectiveness of the McCain campaign. Note that while both the Kerry and Obama campaigns were able to personally reach out to the same percentage of votes (26-26), McCain's campaign only hit 18% of voters, six points below Team Bush 2004. This is a weak showing, and a demonstration of the campaign's overall crumminess.

Vote in 2000/2004

2000
Gore (37%) Kerry 90, Bush 10
Bush (43%) Bush 91, Kerry 9
Other (3%) Kerry 71, Bush 21
Did not vote (17%) Kerry 54, Bush 45

2004
Kerry (37%) Obama 89, McCain 9
Bush (46%) McCain 82, Obama 17
Someone else (4%) Obama 66, McCain 24
Did not vote (13%) Obama 71, McCain 27

First, and a bit less important is that McCain bled out a lot more of Bush 2004 supporters than Bush 2004 did of his 2000 backers, with Obama getting 17% of Bush 2004 voters as opposed to Kerry garnering a paltry 9% of Bush 2000 people. The base mostly held for McCain but not as well as for Bush in 2004, whose entire re-election was owed to holding onto just about the entire base.

Second, and more key is the "did not vote" (last time) group. While new voters dropped 4% in their overall piece of the voting puzzle, Obama made the most of this group, and won it by an enormous 44%, five times better than Kerry's 54-45 win with new votes.

This is one of the key shreds of data in all of the exit polling. All of the talk that Obama would bring out more new voters than ever was both right and wrong. While there were many new voters this year, they were drowned out relative to the whole pool. That being said, Obama made the most of those newbies who did come out in winning an incredible 71% of new voters.

Experience

Does Obama have the right experience?
Yes (50%) Obama 93, McCain 5
No (48%) McCain 85, Obama 12

Does McCain have the right experience?
Yes (59%) McCain 69, Obama 29
No (40%) Obama 89, McCain 8

This is very telling information. More voters (59-50) thought McCain has the right experience to be President, but it did not matter. People who felt Obama had the necessary experience backed him almost unanimously. Conversely, McCain won those who thought he had the right stuff by 69-29. What this means, I think, is that while a lot of voters conceded that McCain had more experience than Obama, given numerous factors they were willing to take a chance on Obama and the Democrats.

Veep Qualified to be President (2008 only)?

Biden
Yes (66%) Obama 71, McCain 28
No (32%) McCain 80, Obama 17

Palin
Yes (38%) McCain 91, Obama 8
No (60%) Obama 82, McCain 16

Clearly, those voters who think Palin is qualified to be Commander in Chief are the GOP die-hards. Note that while two-thirds of voters found Biden to be qualified to take on the top job, only 38% felt the same way about Palin.

Issue: Worried about terrorist attacks?

2004
Yes (71%) Bush 53, Kerry 46
No (23%) Bush 50, Kerry 48

2008
Yes (70%) McCain 50, Kerry 48
No (28%) Obama 67, McCain 30

What's interesting is that basically the same number of voters are fearful of future terrorist attacks, but this year it is not driving the electorate. Bush had a healthy lead among worried voters, but this year McCain's lead was only two points. What this means is that while people are concerned about terrorism on U.S. soil, it is not driving their vote as much as in 2004.

Issue: National Economy

2004
Excellent (4%) Bush 89, Kerry 11
Good (43%) Bush 87, Kerry 13
Not Good (35%) Kerry 72, Bush 26

2008
Excellent (1%) Obama 59, McCain 39
Good (6%) McCain 75, Obama 23
Not so good (44%) McCain 59, Obama 40
Poor (49%) Obama 66, McCain 31

The above data on terrorism shows that it was the issue driving the electorate in 2004, whereas this year the economy is drove voters more than any other issue. Interestingly, McCain won by about 20 points voters who think the economy is not so good, but half of all voters rated the economy poor this year, and Obama won those voters by 35%. Bush won on terrorism fears, and Obama won on economic concerns. As Kurt Vonnegut would say, "so it goes."

Dispelling the Bradley Effect (2008 stats only)

Race of the candidates was...
Most important factor (2%) Obama 58, McCain 41
Important factor (7%) Obama 52, McCain 47
Minor factor (10%) Obama 54, McCain 45
Not a factor (80%) Obama 51, McCain 46

Race an important factor?
Yes (9%) Obama 53, McCain 46
No (90%) Obama 52, McCain 46

Race a factor at all?
Yes (19%) Obama 53, McCain 45
No (80%) Obama 51, McCain 46

The media harped about the specter of the Bradley Effect the entire election, even though there was little evidence that it would impact this race, or really that it had had a major impact on many races in the past. The thing to take away from the above splits is one thing: consistency. The numbers are remarkably fluid as Obama did well with just about all voters, the great majority of whom did not consider race as a factor in their voting decision. Hopefully, this data and more, the broader election results can put the final nails into the coffin of silly Bradley Effect talk.

Sarah Palin

McCain's choice of Palin
Most important factor (7%) Obama 52, McCain 47
Important factor (33%) McCain 52, Obama 47
Minor factor (20%) McCain 66, Obama 33
Not a factor (33%) Obama 65, McCain 33

Personally, I find these results fascinating. Let's go through them one-by-one. First, for those where Palin was the biggest factor, Obama won by just five points, which shows that a lot of people were motivated on both sides by the Palin pick. In the middle two, McCain won, which is interesting to me, as it shows that Palin did not impact a lot of Democrats. The last one may be most telling: of the one-third of voters for whom Palin was not a factor, Obama won these people by 2-to-1. The lesson from this one? A huge chunk of voters had decided on Obama, and Palin's pick -- good or bad -- didn't impact their choice.

The Bush Albatross

Would McCain continue Bush policies?
Yes (48%) Obama 90, McCain 8
No (48%) McCain 85, Obama 13

How is George Bush handling his job?
Approve (27%) McCain 89, Bush 10
Disapprove (71%) Obama 67, McCain 31

Yup. Bush was not much help to John McCain.

Vote by Region

2004
Northeast (22%) Kerry 56, Bush 43
Midwest (26%) Bush 51, Kerry 48
South (32%) Bush 58, Kerry 42
West (20%) Kerry 50, Bush 49

2008
Northeast (21%) Obama 59, McCain 40
Midwest (24%) Obama 54, McCain 44
South (32%) McCain 54, Obama 45
West (23%) Obama 57, McCain 40

Obama expanded Democratic dominance of the Northeast, and he too continued to experience problems in the South, though not by as much as Kerry. The key takeaways are in the Midwest, where Obama made strides in places like Indiana, Ohio, Minnesota, Michigan, and other states, and more in the West.

Turnout in the West improved more than in any other region, and Obama took what was a one-point edge four years ago, to a 17-point crushing. That is a huge thing to keep in mind for the future. Obama's growth in Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada is critical, and as the West grows, if Democrats can sustain that success in the region, the GOP may be in big trouble.


Key Take-Aways

*Obama's improvement among white women and women with children was striking.

*Democratic improvement with Hispanic voters was big, and if Democrats can hold two-thirds of this growing group again, the GOP will be in huge trouble.

*Democrats and Republicans both remained mostly loyal to their candidates this year, though GOPers peeled off a little bit from 2004. But the difference this year was that there are considerably more self-identified Democrats than Republicans, and Obama convincingly won indies and voters in the middle.

*Obama got Catholics back. Whether he can hold them will be a big issue in 2012.

*First-time voters actually made up a smaller part of these year's electorate, but Obama absolutely dominated among them. This was one of the very top factors for why Obama won.

*Obama was able to win back a super-majority of Hillary supporters, and the scorned ones who backed McCain made no impact.

*In 2004, terrorism was the dominant issue, and Bush capitalized. This year, the economy was the biggest issue, and Obama capitalized. Terrorism remains an important issue with people, but it is no controlling over the economy. This played a big part of why Obama did so well with women with children.

*John McCain had a bad national outreach campaign compared to President Bush. It may not have decided the election, but it reflects poorly on his organization.

*The Bradley Effect is dead; assuming that it was ever really alive.

*Obama's dominance in urban centers, competitiveness in rural areas, and his narrow win in the suburbs made him impossible to overtake in the end.

*Palin did not make a huge difference in the end; though she clearly did not help John McCain.

*Obama's strength in the Midwest was impressive, but his dominace of the West most striking. The West is growing fast, and Obama's strength out there puts all Democrats in a better position to expand.