ABC exit poll analysis
ABC NEWS EXIT POLL ANALYSIS 11/8/06 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Much-Diminished GOP Absorbs the Voters Ire
A much-diminished Republican president and his party stood before the
voters Tuesday, their support corroded by an unpopular war. And the
voters let them know it.
Fifty-seven percent in the national exit poll disapproved of the way
George W. Bush is handling his job, 56 percent disapproved of the war
in Iraq and 55 percent the most since 1994 said the country is
headed seriously off on the wrong track.
It mattered: Each of these groups voted overwhelmingly for Democrats
running for the U.S. House, giving the Democrats a 53-45 percent
advantage in national House vote in the exit poll, their best since
1990.
Bush job approval 2006 2004 2002*
Approve 42% 53 67
Disapprove 57 46 31
Strongly approve 19% 33 45
Strongly disapprove 42 35 20
*ABC News pre-election poll
Indeed the Republicans lost huge chunks of crucial voting groups
they’d won in recent years. Most important were independents, the
quintessential swing voters: They favored Democrats by a huge 57-39
percent, the Democrats’ largest margin among independents in 20
years. Democrats won women by 56-43 percent, their best margin since
1986; they even eked out a 51-47 percent tally among men, their best
since 1992.
The president and the war were the lightning rods of the election.
Among Bush approvers, 84 percent voted for the Republican candidate
in House races. Among disapprovers the majority of voters 82
percent voted for a Democrat.
War in Iraq 2006 2004
Approve 42% 51
Disapprove 56 45
Strongly approve 19% 29
Strongly disapprove 40 32
Another sign of the glum mood: Forty percent said they expect life
for the next generation of Americans to be worse, up from 21 percent
in 2000 and 33 percent in 1996.
Given such sentiments, voters by a 14-point margin were more apt to
say they were voting to show opposition to Bush (36 percent) than to
show him support (22 percent). The gap was decisive. House
Republicans won voters who were supporting Bush, and also those who
said Bush had no impact on their vote. But the anti-Bush voters were
great enough in number to make the difference for the Democrats.
House vote
All Dem Rep
Voting to oppose Bush 36% 93% 5%
Voting to support Bush 22 7 93
Bush not a factor 39 42 56
The 36 percent who said they were voting to oppose Bush was higher
than the 21 percent who voted to show opposition to Bill Clinton in
1998, during the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal; and the 27 percent who did
so in 1994, when the Republicans took control of Congress.
In another measure, among voters who said they supported Bush in
2004, 15 percent supported Democrats for House this year. Only about
half as many John Kerry supporters six percent voted Republican
for House.
Another result shows the direction of the voters’ ire: In 1994, 65
percent of disaffected “wrong track” voters voted for Republicans for
House. This year, among disaffected voters, even more 79 percent
voted the opposite way, for Democrats.
Country is on 2006 2004 2000 1998 1996 1994
Right track 41% 50 65 59 53 39
Wrong direction 55 47 31 37 43 56
Similarly, among the 61 percent of voters who said they disapprove of
how Congress is handling its job, seven in 10 voted for Democrats for
House. In 1994, Republicans won House disapprovers, but fewer of them
58 percent.
GROUPS The vote patterns show other problems for the GOP: It was
isolated in the South, with the Democrats winning a majority in the
Midwest for the first time in a decade. GOP gains among Hispanic
voters in 2004 were reversed: This year 69 percent of Hispanic voters
favored Democrats for House, up 14 points.
Further:
-Young voters, age 18 to 29, voted for Democrats by a huge 60-38
percent margin. That compares to 55-45 percent in 2004, and was its
best for the Democrats back to 1986.
-College graduates voted 53-45 percent for Democrats the Democrats’
best margin in this group in exit polls since 1982.
-Ten percent of voters decided on their choice just on Election Day
and 61-36 percent voted for Democrats.
-White Catholics voted 50-48 percent for Democrats, their best in
this traditional swing group since 1992.
-Whites overall voted narrowly Republican, by 51-47 percent, again
the best for the Democrats since 1992.
-In 2004 married men favored Republicans for House by an 18-point
margin; this year it was four points. Married women in 2004 voted
Republican by nine points; this year they split about evenly, 49-50.
Unmarried men voted for House Democrats by 62-35 percent, compared
with 53-44 percent two years ago.
MESSAGE The voters’ message was unmistakable. Just 42 percent
approved of Bush’s job performance, down 11 points from 2004 and a
vast 25 points below its level just before the 2002 midterm election.
Forty-two percent “strongly” disapproved, more than double the number
of strong approvers (19 percent). Intensity of sentiment by contrast
was about equal in 2004 33 percent strongly approved of the
president’s performance, 35 percent strongly disapproved. And in 2002
it was strong approvers who dominated.
Views on the war in Iraq have followed a similar path. In the 2004
exit poll, 51 percent approved of the war just enough to keep Bush
out of serious trouble. This year, just 42 percent approved. And 40
percent now “strongly” disapprove of the war, up from 32 percent two
years ago.
The Republicans’ pushback to concerns about the war in Iraq has been
the broader U.S. campaign against terrorism, the issue that won Bush
re-election in 2004. This year, it didn’t work: Just 29 percent of
voters said they trusted only the Republicans to make the country
safer, far down from the 49 percent who only trusted Bush to handle
terrorism in
2004.
Moreover, among terrorism voters people who said terrorism is
“extremely important” to their vote the Republicans held only a
53-46 percent advantage. By contrast, the Democrats won by 60-38
percent among people who called the war in Iraq extremely important,
and by a nearly identical 59-39 percent who said the same of the
economy.
Voters by 59-35 percent also said the war in Iraq has not improved
long-term U.S. security; that compares to 52-46 percent in 2004.
Indeed the election looks to have been nationalized around these
concerns. Sixty percent of voters said they were casting their House
vote mainly on the basis of national issues, vs. 34 percent voting on
local issues. But it didn’t much matter: Democrats won both groups,
albeit “national issue” voters by a wider margin.
STATES A state-by-state analysis of some of the leading Senate
races follows.
Connecticut:
Remarkably intense negative feelings about Bush and the war in Iraq
helped Ned Lamont give Joe Lieberman a run for his money; indeed
Lieberman lost overwhelmingly among Democrats. But, extraordinarily,
he won overwhelmingly among Republicans, as well as holding the center.
Lieberman, running as an independent after losing the Democratic
primary to Lamont, won just 32 percent of Democrats, but 54 percent
of independents and 71 percent of Republicans. He also won a majority
of moderates (55 percent) and two-thirds of conservatives. Lamont won
70 percent liberals.
Nearly all of Lamont’s voters disapproved of Bush and the war, but
Lieberman’s camp proved more complex. While 51 percent of his
supporters disapproved of Bush’s job performance, 71 percent of them
said he agrees with the president the right amount. And half of
Lieberman’s supporters disapprove of the Iraq war but voted for the
senator despite his support for the war.
Not only did 66 percent of Connecticut voters disapprove of Bush’s
job performance, but half “strongly” disapproved. Lamont won support
from 57 percent of Bush disapprovers, as well as nearly six in 10 of
the 66 percent who disapproved of the Iraq war.
Forty-one percent said they voted to express opposition to the
president, moreso than in other states; just 14 percent to show
support for Bush. Most of the pro-Bush voters (72 percent) voted for
Lieberman. Anti-Bush voters - 80 percent of them - backed Lamont.
Though the newly independent Lieberman is expected to caucus with
Democrats in the next Congress, the 56 percent of voters who want
Democrats to control Congress voted broadly (67 percent) for Lamont.
A weakness for Lamont was that 56 percent said he lacks the
experience to serve in the Senate; of those who felt that way, 14
percent still voted for him.
Missouri:
Souring views of Bush helped Claire McCaskill oust Republican
incumbent Jim Talent, in a race in which she accused her opponent of
trying to be Bush’s “best friend.” In 2004, 54 percent of Missouri
voters approved of Bush’s job performance. Two years later, 45
percent approved.
Moreover, 32 percent of Missouri voters said they were casting their
ballots to show opposition to Bush 13 points more than the number
saying they were showing support for him. They voted overwhelmingly
for McCaskill. That alone helped tip the scale to McCaskill; Talent
received majority support from those who voted to show support for
Bush, or said he wasn’t a factor.
In another change since 2004, 51 percent of Missouri voters said they
disapprove of the war in Iraq; in 2004, by contrast, 54 percent
approved. This too boosted McCaskill.
Critically, independents backed McCaskill 51-43 percent. Sixty-one
percent of independents said they disapproved of Bush’s job
performance; independent voters were 24 points more likely to say
they were voting to oppose Bush rather than support him; and 56
percent disapproved of the war in Iraq.
McCaskill won women (who are more apt to be Democrats) by 51-45
percent; Tester won men 51-46 percent.
On the issues, Talent won nearly six in 10 voters who called
terrorism “extremely important” in their vote and two-thirds who said
so about same-sex marriage or abortion. McCaskill, for her part,
countered with six in 10 voters who called Iraq or the economy
“extremely important” in their vote.
Endorsed by the Missouri AFL-CIO, McCaskill was strong among union
voters, winning two-thirds of them.
Montana:
Conrad Burns suffered both from his own longevity and his association
with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, putting the three-term
incumbent at risk in a race that was too close to determine a winner.
Nearly six in 10 voters said Burns, a three-term incumbent, had been
in office too long and he lost this group to John Tester by 77-20
percent.
Just 36 percent said Burns had high ethical standards while 52
percent said Tester did. Indeed, among the 39 percent who called
corruption in government extremely important in their vote, Tester
won by a huge 46-point margin.
If that wasn’t enough, 52 percent of Montana voters disapproved of
Bush’s performance (up from just 39 percent in 2004) and 51 percent
disapproved of the Iraq war (up from 42 percent in ‘04). Both were
very strong groups for Tester.
Tester won broad support from swing independent voters, winning them
by a 24-point margin, 59-35 percent. In 2000, by contrast, Burns lost
independents by just five points.
Better for Burns was the Republican makeup of the state: Nearly four
in ten voters were Republicans, vs. 32 percent Democrats. And Burns
won in his party by 88 to 11 percent.
Burns also narrowly lost white Catholics, a swing group he carried in
2000. And he suffered a sharp decline among men, winning just 48
percent of their votes, 20 points fewer than in 2000.
The election may have been more a rejection of Burns and Bush than an
endorsement of Tester. More than six in 10 said their vote was in
support of their candidate and not against his opponent; people in
this group split between Burns and Tester. However, among the 34
percent who said their vote was against their candidate’s opponent,
Tester won the vote by 56-41 percent.
Late campaigning by Bush in Montana did not appear to help Burns
much: An overwhelming 82 percent said they made their vote choice
within the last month or earlier. Tester won in this group by 51 to
47 percent.
New Jersey:
Disapproval of Bush and the war in Iraq trumped concerns about ethics
to rally Democrats around Bob Menendez in New Jersey.
Of the majority who panned both the president’s job performance (65
percent) and the war in Iraq (63 percent), about three-quarters voted
for Menendez. The incumbent Democrat also won virtually all (90
percent) of the 52 percent of voters who want Democrats to control
Congress next year.
Thomas Kean Jr.’s criticisms took a toll, with 61 percent saying
Menendez lacks high ethical standards. But more than a third of those
people (34 percent) held their nose and voted for Menendez anyway.
Democrats, Republicans and independents showed up in virtually the
same proportions as they did in the 2000 race for this seat. But
Menendez enjoyed a more loyal base than his predecessor, winning 92
percent among Democrats (+7 points from 2000). And Democrats
predominated, accounting for four in 10 voters.
The electorate was somewhat more polarized, with slightly more
liberals and slightly more conservatives, but fewer moderates, than
in 2000.
Menendez won seven in 10 Hispanic voters, but they’re a small group
in the state, accounting for fewer than one in 10 New Jersey voters.
Other issues:
-The bruising nature of this campaign left a sour taste with voters;
56 percent said both candidates unfairly attacked each other.
-Five years after the attacks that killed nearly 3,000 in neighboring
New York, nearly eight in 10 voters worry enemies will carry out
another major attack in the US.
New York:
Independents and suburbanites broadly supported Hillary Clinton, a
shift from 2000 that helped her win a second term by a much larger
margin than she won her first.
Sixty-four percent of independents backed Clinton, compared with 46
percent in 2000. And she won 62 percent of suburban voters, compared
with just 43 percent in 2000.
Clinton increased her support among Democrats and Republicans alike,
but more slightly in both cases. Twenty percent of Republicans
supported her, compared with 14 percent in 2000 six points better,
compared with her 18-point improvement among independents.
Similarly, compared with liberals and conservatives, Clinton gained
the most ground 15 points among moderates, who backed her by
69-29 percent. She won 28 percent of conservatives, nine points more
than in 2000, but seven in 10 conservatives still backed her opponent.
% Vote for Clinton
2006 2000
Democrats 94% 85
Republicans 20 14
Independents 64 46
Liberal 91 82
Moderate 69 54
Conservative 28 19
City>50K 80 72
Suburbs 62 43
Town/Rural 56 51
Clinton was helped by broad disapproval of Bush 74 percent of New
York voters disapproved of his job performance, including 56 percent
who disapproved “strongly.” These groups voted overwhelmingly for
Clinton. Similarly, 72 percent disapproved of the war in Iraq and
more than eight in 10 of them backed Clinton.
Some other highlights:
New York voters were more likely to say the country is less safe from
terrorism today than it was before September 11, 2001 51 percent
said so, compared with 42 percent who said the country was safer.
Indeed, 76 percent said they were worried that there will be another
major terrorist attack in the country.
Fifty-seven percent of New York voters said Clinton would make a good
president. Fewer, 46 percent, said so of Giuliani, and just 15
percent said so of Pataki.
Ohio:
Ohioans voted heavily against the Republican administration in
Washington, resulting in incumbent Sen. Mike DeWine’s defeat in his
bid for a third term.
Exit poll results found that nearly six in 10 voters disapproved of
Bush’s performance in office, and 85 percent of them voted for
Sherrod Brown. Fifty-six percent voters disapproved of the war in
Iraq, up sharply from 40 percent in 2006. And again, among war
disapprovers, 82 percent voted for Brown.
Indeed Ohio voters by a nearly 2-1 margin said they were voting to
show opposition to Bush (34 percent) as to show support for him (19
percent).
Independents the classic swing voters - broke for Brown by more
than 30 points, 65 percent to 35 percent. But Brown also did better
in his base, winning 91 percent of Democrats. DeWine had siphoned off
a quarter of Democrats in 2000.
Brown even edged DeWine among white voters, 52-48 percent a group
DeWine won by 2-1 in 2000 while Brown won more than eight in 10
black voters, customary for a Democrat. And 68 percent of union
households went for Brown; DeWine had won 50 percent of the union
vote in 2000, compared to just 32 percent in his defeat this year.
The economy was also a factor for voters: Among Ohioans who said the
state’s economy is in good shape, 71 percent voted for DeWine; but of
those who rated the economy negatively, three-quarters voted for
Brown. And Ohio voters were negative rather than positive on the
economy by a huge margin, 62 to 37 percent.
Voters who decided in the last three days broke for Brown, 52% to 48%.
Ethics brought a pox on both houses: About four in 10 voters said
neither the Republican nor the Democratic parties had high ethical
standards. But only those who said the Democrats had high ethical
standards were far more likely to vote for Brown, the Democrat.
Pennsylvania:
Exit poll results indicate that Bob Casey Jr.’s victory today a
product of a disgruntled Pennsylvania electorate, dissatisfied with
Bush’s job performance, and unhappy with the conduct of the Iraq war.
Rick Santorum was not able to win the vote among key swing groups in
this state. More than six in ten voters disapproved of Bush and
disapproved of the war in Iraq alike. Casey won these groups by 76
and 70 points respectively.
The political independents who voted convincingly for Santorum in
2000 (by a 14-point margin) went overwhelmingly for Casey his year -
by a 44-point margin. Another group where Santorum suffered was among
Pennsylvania’s Catholic voters, a traditional swing group. Casey,
also a Catholic, won among this group by 59-41 percent, compared to
Santorum’s seven-point victory margin in 2000. Another swing group
that swung away from Santorum is married women, whom he won by eight
points in 2000. Tuesday, Casey captured this group’s vote by 58 to 42
percent.
Santorum also received significantly less support from white
Protestant voters today then he did in 2000. Then he won this group
by 21 points; today, by 10 points.
This elections was more a rejection of Santorum and Bush than it was
an endorsement of Casey. More than four in ten Pennsylvania voters
said their vote today was in opposition to George W. Bush; just 15
percent were voting to show support for Bush. More than one-third
also said their Senate vote today was against their opponent rather
for their candidate. Casey won by big margins in each of these groups.
Among the several issues which Pennsylvania voters were asked to rate
as important in their vote economy, values, Iraq, terrorism and
illegal immigration none stood out as significantly more important
than any other. However, the Iraq war did stand out when looking at
vote choice. Casey won by a decisive 42-point margin among the 40
percent of voters who said the Iraq war was “extremely important”
issue in their vote.
Rhode Island:
Being a Democrat in an overwhelmingly Democratic state and one bent
on change in control of Congress enabled Sheldon Whitehouse to
defeat incumbent Sen. Lincoln Chafee in Rhode Island. Nearly four in
10 voters (38) percent identified themselves as Democrats, and 84
percent of them voted for Whitehouse. Fewer than two in 10, by
contrast, identified themselves as Republicans.
Indeed Chafee won independents swing voters in most states by
55-45 percent. But it wasn’t enough to overcome Whitehouse’s huge
partisan advantage.
An irony in the outcome is that, even as he lost his office, 63
percent of Rhode Island voters said they approved of the way Chaffee
had handled his job as a Senator. What did him in was demand for
change: Sixty-three percent of voters also said they wanted the
Democrats to win control of the U.S. Senate.
Seventy-five percent of Rhode Island voters disapproved of George W.
Bush’s job performance 56 percent strongly so and they voted for
Whitehouse by 67-33 percent. Similarly, 73 percent disapproved of the
war in Iraq, 52 percent strongly so; and Whitehouse won 65 percent of
them.
Women voters mattered as well: Whitehouse won them by 57-43 percent,
while men split evenly.
Tennessee:
Bob Corker won substantial majority of whites and benefited from a
boost in conservative voters to narrowly defeat Rep. Harold Ford in
one of the most fiercely contested Senate races in the country.
Together, those factors were enough to counter sharply divided views
on Bush and the war in Iraq in this usually reliable Republican state.
Corker claimed 79 percent of all conservatives, who made up 45
percent of the electorate
- a nine-point increase in conservative turnout from 2000. Ford won
63 percent of moderates and even more broadly among liberals, but the
size of and strength of the conservative vote told the tale.
Political independents, a traditional swing group, divided about
evenly. More than nine in 10 Republicans voted for Corker; and an
equally large proportion of Democrats for Ford. The contest was not
particularly racially divisive. White voters supported Corker by a
58- 41 percent margin - but that’s less than the 74 percent of whites
vote won by Bill Frist in 2000. More than nine in 10 black voters
supported Ford; blacks are a core Democratic group.
Corker’s victory was won on the margins. Fifty percent said they
disapproved of the job Bush was doing as president and among these,
84 percent voted for Ford. Slightly fewer 48 percent supported
Bush; Corker won 89 percent of their number. Attitudes toward Iraq
mirrored the divided views on Bush, who got 57 percent of the vote
here in 2000. Fifty percent approved of the war in Iraq, 47 percent
disapproved. Among those who approved of the war, 84 percent voted
for Corker; opposed to the war, 83 percent went for Ford.
Ford was able to peel off 13 percent of 2004 Bush voters. Corker was
less effective in luring Kerry voters, claiming five percent of their
vote.
More than four in 10 44 percent said one reason for their vote
was to send a message to Bush. But unlike elsewhere in the country ,
the message these voters were sending was mixed: 21 percent said they
had voted to show support Bush while 23 percent said they were
signaling disapproval. Nationally, anti-Bush voters outnumbered pro-
Bush voters by 15 points.
Indeed Corker may have been hurt by his sometimes controversial
attacks on Ford, though a majority of voters criticized both
candidates for waging negative, attack-based campaign. Voters were
more likely to blame Corker for negative attacks than to criticize
Ford. Seventy-five percent said Corker had made unfair attacks on
Ford, while 63 percent said Ford had done the same to Corker.
Overall, a 56-percent majority said both candidates engaged in unfair
attacks.
Finally, Frist, nursing presidential ambitions, leaves with a bit of
a razz: Slightly more Tennessee voters said he’d make a bad president
(44 percent) than a good one (36 percent).
Virginia:
Voters in Virginia narrowly disapproved of the job Bush was doing as
president and the war in Iraq in a state that gave 54 percent of its
vote to the president six years ago. Fifty- four percent of voters in
the Commonwealth disapproved of Bush’s performance while 45 percent
disapproved; similarly, 52 percent disapproved of the war in Iraq
while 46 percent approved.
Views on Bush and the war translated into voting decisions in the
Virginia Senate race: 93 percent of all Bush supporters voted for
George Allen while a slightly smaller share of disapprovers 87
percent supported Jim Webb. Among Iraq opponents, 83 percent
supported Webb while 90 percent of all war supporters voting for
Allen. Virginia voters by 10-point margin said they were casting
their ballots to show opposition to President Bush than to show him
support.
Allen won 55 percent of the vote in the suburbs who constituted 39
percent of the electorate while narrowly winning among the 26 percent
of voters who lived in rural areas or small towns. Webb won six in 10
votes cast by city dwellers. Webb managed to win among Virginia’s
most affluent residents, a group that Allen had captured handily six
years ago. Voters with household incomes of $100,000 or more
supported Webb 53 percent to 47 percent. In 2000, it was Allen who
won 59 percent of these voters. Webb made critical inroads into
another Allen source of support in 2000: white Catholics, who gave
Allen 52 percent of their vote Tuesday, a 12-point drop from six
years ago
The exit poll suggests Webb also made gains among independents and
moderates while Allen countered with overwhelming support among
conservatives. Webb claimed 56 percent support of independents while
Allen got 44 percent 14 points fewer than the Republican got in
2000. More than nine out of 10 Republicans supported Allen while an
equally large proportion of Democrats supported Webb. At the same
time, Allen claimed 40 percent of all moderate voters, six points
below his showing six years ago. Allen also lost ground among
liberals, who voted overwhelmingly for Webb, but held his own with
conservatives, a group where Allen held a 7-1 advantage.
Allen won 55 percent of the men’s vote while Webb won 55 percent of
the women’s vote.
Nearly four in 10 voters 37 percent said Allen was insensitive to
minorities, a charge that surfaced after the “Macaca” gaffe. Among
those who believe Allen was racially insensitive, nine in 10 voted
for Webb. Somewhat fewer thought Webb was insensitive to women–about
three in 10 voters said they did not did not think Webb respected
women– and among these voters, nearly nine in 10 voted for Allen.
Women were no more likely than men to say Webb was disrespectful of
women.
Iraq and personal issues had dominated the Virginia Senate campaign.
Webb, a decorated Vietnam veteran who had served as President
Reagan’s Secretary of the Navy, had been a longtime critic of the war
while Allen had supported the president. Forty-two percent of
Virginia voters rated Iraq as “extremely important” to their vote and
nearly six in 10 supported Webb. At the same time, 44 percent of
voters said terrorism was “extremely important” to their vote and six
in 10 of these voters supported Allen.
A key region for Webb: Vote-rich northern Virginia, home to nearly a
third of the electorate. There Webb handily defeated Allen 60 percent
to 40 percent. Allen had run significantly better in the region six
years ago. Allen won in the largely rural Shenandoah Valley and in
the southeastern part of the state.
Allen apparently received little help from Amendment 1, which would
define marriage only as a union between a man and a woman.
Republicans had counted on the amendment to boost turnout among white
religious, socially conservative voters. But the exit poll suggested
that these voters accounted for about the same proportion of the
electorate Tuesday as they did in 2000.
The amendment passed with a comfortable margin, winning nearly nine
in 10 Republicans, splitting independents but losing among Democrats.
Eight in 10 born-again Christians voted for the amendment. Among
those who voted in favor of the amendment, seven in 10 voted for
Allen. But among opponents, eight in 10 supported Webb.
-By Gary Langer, Dalia Sussman, Peyton Craighill, Rich Morin, Brian
Hartman and Bob Shapiro.