In looking at the amendment vote across the state, we see some things that really shouldn’t surprise a lot of folks regarding the results, but then there are some aspects that, when you dig deeper, are surprising.

First, we heard a lot about the controversy within the black community regarding the vote on the amendment defining marriage, in particular the split between social conservatism and civil rights.

In the counties with a black population of over 50 percent, support for the amendment was an average of 68%. In these eight counties (Hertford, Edgecombe, Bertie, Northampton, Warren, Halifax, Vance, and Washington), voter turnout was at 36%, above the statewide average of 34%.

But what about the larger, urban areas? Did they vote like their rural counterparts?

In Mecklenburg County, 41 precincts are “majority-minority” precincts, with black voter population of 50% or more. These precincts voted, on average, 46% for the constitutional amendment, with majority-minority precincts in Mecklenburg voting 56% against the amendment.

Another difference between urban and rural black areas was voter turnout. Compared to the countywide turnout of 28% in Mecklenburg, majority-minority precincts had an average of 19% voter turnout.

More analysis will be needed, but the suspicion of a rural-urban divide seems to be more prevalent than the factor of race regarding the voting pattern on the constitutional amendment. I’ll be exploring more about that in later posts.

For now, what other factors may have influenced the vote for the constitutional amendment? With the aid of a statistical software program, I took the 100 county results for the amendment and ran several different factors that one would think would have some kind of effect on support for the amendment.

For example, the more a county voted for John McCain in 2008 (a sign of how Republican a county would be), would there be increased support for the constitutional amendment on marriage? Turns out, that was indeed the case: The more a county was a McCain supporter translated into more support for the constitutional amendment on marriage.

So if McCain support might indicate the level of support for the amendment, would the amount of support for Mitt Romney in the Republican presidential primary indicate amendment support as well?

Well, the more the county voted for Mitt Romney, the less likely it was to vote for the constitutional amendment. Granted (for the stats geeks out there), the predictive power is less than 5%, but this seems weird.

How about looking at the votes against Romney? Would a county that cast more votes for the other Republican candidates (remember, Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, and “no preference” were still listed on the GOP primary ballot) show an increased amount of votes for the amendment?

It appears that perhaps Republican support for the party’s presumptive nominee hasn’t quite solidified around Romney, as indicated by the fact that one-third of Republican voters voted for someone other than Romney.

In the 63 counties that cast more than 33% against Romney, the average level of support for the constitutional amendment was 72%, nearly 11 points higher than the statewide result of 61% support. And these counties, on average, voted 55% for John McCain in 2008 and has (again on average) 33% registered Republican voters. This indicates that, in some key counties, the base of the Republican Party isn’t sold on Romney.

So, would the percentage of registered Republicans in a county have any indication of the level of support for the constitutional amendment?

It would appear that as a county’s percentage of registered GOP voters increased, so to did support for the constitutional amendment. No real surprise there. But what about a county’s Democratic and unaffiliated registered voters?

One thing we saw in public opinion was as the primary date drew closer, the level of opposition by Democrats and unaffiliated voters seemed to swing against the amendment. Public Policy Polling saw a majority of Democrats (53%) express opposition to the amendment, while unaffiliated voters were nearly evenly split (47-46%). Republicans were overwhelmingly for the amendment (80%).

In counties where the percentage of registered Democrats increased, there seemed to be a slight decline in support for the amendment.

In areas that saw increased percentages of registered unaffiliated voters, the trend was also more pronounced in voting against the amendment.

One final analysis that I ran was the most surprising in the Democratic presidential primary. President Obama pulled only 79% of the support of Democrats and Democratic-unaffiliated voters in the state, with nearly 21% of the ballots cast expressing “no preference.” If one was to read that as a vote against Obama, what might have been the trend when voting for the constitutional amendment in comparison?

This is the most surprising of the county-level analysis that I’ve seen: as counties voted more “no preference” against their presidential nominee (the president), the support for the constitutional amendment rose.

What I take away from this is that there is still the conservative North Carolina Democrat present, especially in rural counties of the state.

I’ll be looking at more of the internal party races in the next few entries, but seeing how these results line up against the upcoming general election will make for some fascinating analysis.

Michael Bitzer

The dust has partially settled on the May 8th primary, and here are some early thoughts on the results:

Turnout

While the statewide average voter turnout was 34.3 percent, over half of the counties have turnout above that average (56). But, in looking at those 56 counties, only four of the top 10 counties with the largest voter registration were above the state-wide voter turnout average: Wake (Raleigh), Buncombe (Asheville), Durham (Durham), and Guilford (Greensboro).

The top county — with 50 percent registered voter turnout — was Mitchell County. Camden County was the bottom county, with 19.6 percent voter turnout. Mecklenburg, the county with the most registered voters, was 91 out of the 100 counties in terms of voter turnout.

Counties that voted in favor the amendment (Green) vs. Counties voting against the amendment (blue) in the May 8th North Carolina primary election

The Constitutional Amendment

With no real surprise that the amendment passed, a couple of things did catch my eye about the vote. First, most of the polls had the amendment passing, but with an average in the high 50s. Most observers were surprised by the 61 percent approval of the amendment, with a significant support coming from rural counties.

In looking at the top 10 counties that gave the amendment the greatest percentage of support (the average of these 10 counties was 84 percent for the amendment), voter turnout averaged 40.8 percent. But these counties only delivered 98,250 votes out of the 1.3 million votes for the amendment (or 7.5 percent of the total votes for the amendment).

The top 10 counties that either voted against the amendment (8) or tied 50-50 (2) had voter turnout of 36 percent. Unlike the top 10 voting for the amendment, these 10 counties provided 55 percent of all the votes cast against the amendment from across the state.

I’ll be looking at more breakdowns of voting with the amendment in the future, but one other observation is that six of the eight counties that voted against the amendment have institutions of higher education in them. Perhaps a sign of the generation gap on the issue of marriage between the young and old?

President Obama

While he didn’t face a contested primary, President Obama only received 79.2 percent of all the votes cast in the Democratic contest, with “no preference” receiving 20.8 percent of the vote.

What this may mean is if Obama wants to repeat his 2008 general campaign, it appears that he may have some selling to do with that 20 percent of Democrats who didn’t support him. What we know from exit polls is that Democrats say they vote Democratic in general elections 90 percent of the time, both national and here in the state.

It looks like the base of the Democratic Party hasn’t truly solidified around the president yet, and he may have some work to do to bring these party supporters home. But he appears not to have as big of a job as his presumptive Republican rival.

Mitt Romney

Mitt Romney is the presumptive nominee for the Republican Party. But on Tuesday, Romney received only two-thirds of all the votes cast in the Republican primary contest. Candidates who had dropped out — Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich — but whose names were still on the ballot, along with Paul and “no preference,” managed to get 33 percent of the vote.

While he only made one campaign swing through the state before the primary election day, if Romney intends to win the White House this November, he has got to have North Carolina in his column. Using the primary as a chance to introduce himself to North Carolina voters was a missed opportunity — and with his visit to Charlotte three days after his victory at the polls, Romney may have some more “selling” to do to the base of his party.

I’ll be looking more in-depth at these contests and more races, like the 8th and 9th GOP congressional races, in future entries, but the main take-away from North Carolina’s primary continues a theme that I’ve been repeating to myself — the only prediction to make this year is that it will be unpredictable (witness Obama’s declaration of his personal support for gay marriage after the N.C. vote against gay marriage for just one example, but more on that later as well).

Tuesday’s primary election is full of interesting competitions on the ballot: several competitive U.S. House districts (including the 9^th and 8^th here in the Charlotte area), a battle among Democrats to go up against Republican Pat McCrory, and the constitutional amendment regarding marriage.

Along with these notable contests are 120 seats in the N.C. House of Representatives and 50 seats in the N.C. Senate that are up for grabs this November. But barring a massive write-in campaign in the fall, many of these contests will decide November’s winner in May.

That’s because 40 percent of the North Carolina State House of Representatives and 38 percent of the state Senate will already have their winners determined after Tuesday’s vote.

In the N.C. House, 48 seats have candidates who will win on May 8^th due to either not having an opposition party challenger and no intra-party challenger, or only have an intra-party challenger for the party nomination. 

Among Democrats, 13 house districts have candidates who face no opposition from their party nor from the opposition. Another 10 districts have contests for the Democratic nomination, but no Republican opposition come November’s general election.

Likewise, Republicans have 15 house districts with candidates facing no opposition from either their party nor from Democrats in the fall, while another 10 districts have only Republican nomination contests, but no Democratic candidate opposing them come November.

In Mecklenburg County, three house districts — 103, 104 and 106 — can have their nominees and November winner already declared before the votes are counted on May 8^th: Bill Brawley, Ruth Samuelson and Carla Cunningham, respectively.

Among the 18 state senate districts with a pass once they get through the May 8^th primary, 3 districts have Democrats with no opposition — either within the party or from Republicans — while another 4 districts have only Democrats vying for their party’s nomination.

For the Republicans, 6 districts have Republican candidates who face no contest from within the GOP party or from the Democrats, while another 5 districts face only opposition for the party’s nomination. 

For example, once the voters pick from among five candidates in the GOP primary for Senate District 41 in Mecklenburg County, that nominee faces no Democratic opposition..

As we try to decipher the voters’ intents following May’s primary election, we have to be cognizant of the fact that for a vast number of contests for the fall, the winner—in well over a third of all the legislative races—is already determined by this point in the game. 

And with the power of political gerrymandering determining (for the most part) who will fill many of the other seats, the job of political analysts will be much easier to determine over the next six months.

Michael Bitzer

As we get to the May 8^th primary election, we are seeing more and more television advertisements for various candidates, particularly in the hotly contested 9^thCongressional District, but also in the 8^th Congressional District just to the east of Charlotte.

In modern campaigns, the vehicle of choice among candidates has consistently been television. For political advertisers, TV offers a number of advantages that other forms of political communication can’t meet.

TV appeals to two critical senses: visual and oral. With the combination of both senses, effective advertisements can attract the attention and dispense critical information, all in 30 seconds or less.

Another advantage that TV offers is the sense of credibility.  Whether a voter knows the candidate or not, seeing a candidate on TV sends some cue or signal that this candidate must be viable because the candidate is on TV.

Yes, it can become a circular argument, if someone is on TV that builds their credibility, and to get on TV you have to have credibility. But in today’s quick-paced political environment, nobody ever said that politics had to be logical in its reasoning, especially in the middle of a campaign.

One influential factor of television advertising is based on reaching as many potential voters, as well as targeting those potential voters.  Even with hundreds of channels in the line-up, candidates can blanket both the general airwaves (typically your 5-7 PM time slots during the evening news, as well as prime time), as well as targeting specific demographics based on their channel preferences.

Whether it’s the WE Network or ESPN or one of the cable news networks, campaigns have become sophisticated in micro-targeting the type of voter they want to go after in their advertising.

One thing that I have noticed in this year’s crop of campaign ads is something that I think most campaigns — if they had the opportunity to revisit their advertising — would be more cognizant about.  But it is one of the downfalls of television advertising — geography.

The Charlotte TV market is made up of over 20 counties that cross over two states; but within this one market, there are six different congressional districts:

• 5^th, containing Alexander, Ashe and Watauga counties, along with parts of Catawba, Iredell and Rowan counties
• 8^th, containing parts of Rowan, Cabarrus, and Union and all of Stanley, Anson, and Richmond counties
• 9^th, containing parts of Mecklenburg, Iredell, and Union counties
• 10^th,  containing Caldwell, Lincoln, and Gaston counties along with parts of Catawba County
• 11^th, containing  Avery, Caldwell, and Burke counties
• 12^th, containing parts of Mecklenburg, Cabarrus and Rowan counties

So, if you are in the high country of Ashe and Watauga counties, you are probably seeing a ton of advertisements for candidates who aren’t in your district.

For the average voter who may think about participating in the primary election (and that’s going to be rather small amount), with the recent redistricting and changes in the districts, do you know which candidates are running in your district?  I guess an easier question to ask (but harder to answer) is, which district do you live in to begin with?

For candidates fighting within the same party, they have to differentiate themselves from their own party opponents, and TV ads can certainly do that.

But in the ads that we are seeing for the various congressional district primaries, especially on the Republican side of the ballot, few — if any — candidates are indicating which congressional district they are running in.

It would seem necessary for candidates, especially those on TV, to identify which one of these six congressional districts they are competing in. 

For example, Club for Growth’s advertising campaign for Scott Kaedle is prominent on the Charlotte airwaves, but the district that he is running in is mostly in the eastern part of the media market.

Another frequent advertiser is Robert Pittenger, but the office he is campaigning for covers only three of the 20-plus counties in the media market. And yet do you hear his advertisements indicate where the district is that he wants to serve?

So an average voter may be watching the 6 o’clock news and see an ad for a candidate they may want to vote for, but when the voter gets into the voting booth and can’t find that candidate (because the voter doesn’t live in the district), how effective was that ad?

Television advertising in political campaigns is a core component of any viable candidate’s campaign strategy.  But while the advertisement’s message may be to attack or defend, if the voters don’t know where the candidates are fighting for, what difference might it make?

With President Obama’s visit to North Carolina and to UNC Chapel Hill last week, commentators have been observing that it’s the opening salvo in the Democrat’s attempt to re-energize the youth vote — a critical bloc that in 2008 helped to give Obama the win.

In a recent national Gallup Poll, Obama enjoys a commanding 64-29 lead among those 18-29 year old—but the danger is that fewer of them will vote than other generational cohorts.  Only six in 10 young voters across the nation indicate that they registered to vote, and only 56 percent say they will vote come November. 

This compares to well over 75  percent of other age groups saying they are registered, and that between 77 and 86  percent of registered voters in those other age groups saying they will definitely vote this fall.

With the continued emphasis that the Obama campaign is placing on North Carolina and attracting the youth vote, 2008 offers us a baseline to compare whether Tar Heel young voters are comparable to the national averages.

In 2008, the national exit poll findings show that 18-29 year olds went for Obama by a two-to-one margin.  Obama had a tighter win among 30-44 year olds, while he tied McCain in the 45-65 and lost those over 65 years old.

2008 National Exit Poll Results by Age (percents under age groups indicate percentage of the electorate)

In comparison to the national results, the youth vote in North Carolina was even stronger for Obama, with a 47 point spread between he and McCain.  But that was the only age group that Obama was able to beat the Republican: with a range of 3 to 13 points, Obama lost those over the age of 30 in North Carolina.

2008 NC Exit Poll Results by Age (percents under age groups indicate percentage of the electorate)

 Other findings from the 2008 battle in North Carolina show what we would typically think of when it comes to younger voters: ideologically, slightly more liberal than their older counterparts (but half identify as “moderate”), and, with the increased focus of the Obama grassroots mobilization effort, identifying more Democratic in their party affiliation. Only 18  percent of 18-29 year olds say they see themselves as Republicans.

2008 NC Exit Poll Results: Ideology by Age

2008 NC Exit Poll Results: Party Identification by Age

So how might things stack up four years later among the age groups? 

In comparison to the exit poll findings, the latest results from Public Policy Polling indicate some work that the Obama camp needs to do within the state.  By a 61-33 spread, Obama is certainly commanding a lead within the 18-29 year old voting bloc — but not at the levels he saw in 2008. 

April 4-7, 2012, Public Policy Polling Results by Age (percents under age groups indicate percentage of the sample)

But within the PPP findings, Obama could “give up” some youth vote if he was to hold the other age groups.  The president leads among both 30-44 and 45-65 year olds, two groups of voters who are more reliable in turnout than their younger counterparts, and who went for McCain in 2008 (especially 45-65 year olds). 

Granted, Obama didn’t need to come to North Carolina to deliver his remarks specifically to college students. In fact, if Obama retains all the other states he won in 2008, he could loose North Carolina and still be re-elected.  But Romney needs North Carolina, and it appears that Obama is going to make the Republican work for it — whether  young or old.