Saturday, November 14, 2020

A look at Biden's 2020 performance in Massachusetts compared to Clinton in 2016

Biden did better overall with some evidence of underperformance in municipalities with large numbers of hispanic voters

by BRENT BENSON

While we have yet to get the final results of the 2020 presidential election in Massachusetts, unofficial results show that President-elect Joe Biden outperformed Secretary Hillary Clinton in the Commonwealth, and that this better performance was exhibited in most cities and towns. Four of the municipalities where Biden did significantly worse than Clinton are distinctive in terms of having the highest percentage of hispanic residents, giving some evidence to what seems to be a nationwide phenomenon of Biden doing worse than Clinton with hispanic voters.

This graphic shows the actual relationship between Biden'20 and Clinton'16 two-party margin as a solid blue linear regression line. Compare this to the dashed black line which represents a hypothetical identical margin in 2016 and 2020 and you can see the overall improvement in Biden's margins. 

Municipalities below the dashed black line are cities and towns where Biden underperformed Secretary Clinton and the vertical distance below the line is the magnitude of the margin difference.

The four cities of Lawrence, Chelsea, Holyoke, and Springfield have significantly worse numbers for Biden, with Lawrence giving Clinton a margin of 70 points and Biden a margin of 49—a pretty amazing 21 point swing. It is also notable that these four cities have the highest percentage of hispanic residents in Massachusetts according to 2017 American Community Survey of the U.S. Census Bureau.


We need data at a finer granularity to see how significant the relationship is between Biden/Clinton margin change and percentage of hispanic voters. In particular, it is important to compare areas of similar population (as opposed to municipalities that go from towns with 100s of voters to cities with 100s of thousands of voters) and to control for other demographic differences.

It is also worth noting that while we are focusing on changes in the margin, all of these mentioned margins remain incredibly blue/Democratic. 

Here are the Clinton to Biden margin changes for all 351 municipalities in the Commonwealth.








Saturday, August 29, 2020

Comparing the latest Markey/Kennedy US Senate polls

Markey leads by an average of 10 points with few positives for Kennedy
by BRENT BENSON

Three recent polls of the Massachusetts race for U.S. Senate between Senator Ed Markey and Congressman Joe Kennedy III all have positive news for the incumbent, Markey. While Kennedy leads with voters with no college degree, non-white, low-income, moderate, and conservative voters, Markey leads in the larger groups of likely Democratic voters—college graduates, whites, mid- and high-income, and liberal voters—giving him a relatively large lead of 10 points, considering all three polls.

The polls were conducted by Suffolk University Political Research Center, UMass Lowell Center for Public Opinion Polls, and Data for Progress between August 13 and August 25.  The Suffolk poll was conducted with live phone interviews. The UMass Lowell poll was conducted with an online panel matched to sample demographics, and the Data for Progress poll used text-to-web and online modes.

The sample sizes varied from 500 to 800 respondents and all numbers in this article are the leaned voter preference, meaning that voters who were unsure were asked again to make a choice for whom they would likely vote.

Averaging all of the interviews together puts the Markey margin at 10 points.

Comparing the available cross-tabs for the polls gives some useful information and also raises some questions.

The polls are not in agreement on male/female voter preference. The Suffolk poll shows males preferring Markey at a higher margin than female voters, 21 to 1, while the UMass Lowell poll shows an almost opposite finding with male/female Markey margins of 5 to 18. Data for Progress shows similar voter preferences for men and women with margins of 10 and 6 for Markey.


The polls were also not in agreement on age-related candidate preference with the Suffolk poll showing relatively little difference between the preferences of respondents over and under 45 years old (8/10 for Markey), while UMass Lowell and Data for Progress polls showed Kennedy with much higher support with those under 45 (with 16 and 15 point margins for Kennedy) and Markey with much higher support among those 46 and up with margins of 27 and 37 points.

All of the polls agreed that Kennedy is more popular with respondents without a college degree, while Markey is more popular with college degree-holding voters.

Data for Progress did not provide cross-tab breakdowns for our other areas of consideration, but the Suffolk and UMass Lowell polls agree that Markey is more popular with self-identified liberals, while Kennedy does better with self-identified moderates and conservatives. Both polls also point toward a preference for voters with incomes of less than $50,000 being more favorable to Kennedy, while mid- and high-income voters are better for Markey.

Suffolk also included information on region and urbanicity, which show Markey doing better in rural areas and the western and northeastern parts of Massachusetts, while Kennedy keeps it about even in the Boston/Suffolk region, and out-performs Markey in the Southeast and Cape/Islands region. Most of Kennedy's congressional district is in the Southeast region.

Early Voting 

Suffolk provided a breakdown of how many respondents had already voted (21%) and the preference of those voters—62% for Markey and 32% for Kennedy—with margin of +20 for Markey. 

While polling primary elections is very difficult, given problems with identifying likely voters exacerbated by the uncertainty introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic, these polls are good news for Markey and bad news for Kennedy. Even if there is a large polling error and/or an ongoing shift and movement toward Kennedy underway, there is already some locked in early vote which looks like it was positive for Markey. That being said, the race has already shifted multiple times and a Kennedy win is not out of the question.



Friday, March 6, 2020

Partisanship, education, and income were significant factors in MA presidential primary vote share

by BRENT BENSON

The big story out of the Super Tuesday Presidential primaries was the unprecedented Biden surge that put the former Vice President in the strongest position to win the 2020 Democratic nomination. The surge was so strong that it pushed Joe Biden past both Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts. Warren and Sanders had been vying for first place in the pre-South Carolina polls, with Biden running a distant third.

I was interested in looking a little deeper at the relative performance of the three major candidates in Massachusetts among different demographic groups to see which types of voters voted for each candidate.

I combined the unofficial city and town election results as reported by the AP and the Boston Globe and joined it together with American Community Survey Census data and results from previous presidential elections to look for relationships.

The city/town comparison is not ideal, in that we lose a lot of interesting variation in the large cities which are aggregated into a single number for each variable, but there was still enough variation to support interesting findings.

The three most significant factors turned out to be the extent of Democratic/Republican partisanship in each municipality as measured by Partisan Voter Index (PVI), the percentage of people with a college degree, and the percentage of people below the poverty line.

Partisanship

Elizabeth Warren had a much higher percentage of votes in more liberal municipalities and Joe Biden had a higher percentage of votes in more conservative cities and towns. Bernie Sanders did marginally better in more liberal areas, but the partisanship score did not explain a significant difference in his performance.


The partisanship score I used was the Partisan Voter Index (PVI) which is an average of the Democratic vs. Republican vote share in the last two presidential elections as compared to the United States as a whole.

Education

Bernie Sanders performed significantly better in cities and towns with a lower percentage of college educated voters, while Elizabeth Warren performed much better in municipalities with a higher percentage of college voters. Education did not make a significant difference in Joe Biden's vote percentage.


Income

The income level in a city or town made a measurable difference to Sanders's and Biden's electoral performance, while not factoring a great deal in Warren's vote share. Bernie Sanders performed better in areas with a larger percentage of people below the poverty line, while Biden performed better in more affluent municipalities.