Exit Polls of the US Presidential Election, 2004 v.s 2008 - what changed?

Exit polls - what do they tell us about election(s)? From the readings and my own analysis, I have come to a clear conclusion that the 2004 election was largely decided on national security, whereas in 2008, the election was decided primarily on the economy [Thesis Statement].

It's hard to be really creative in a blog without taking a slightly opinionated view, however, being strictly objective, it's clear that in 2004 the Republicans decided to run on national security. I don't think that this is an opinionated view, this is as near to a cast iron fact as you're ever going to get. I think the reason the Republicans chose to do this was because terrorism and national security was one of the most forefront, national issues at the time. This is backed up by the readings, especially the Gapology report by Laura Olson and John Green. They state that, "Given the increased prominence of national security after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as well as the war in Iraq, voting in 2004 could reflect uncharacteristic unity between the genders on these topics of the day."

Link to Gapology report

That, in my view, provided the Republicans with a strong platform upon which to base their success in 2004 upon. The entire public was united on the theme that national security is important, and something I have yet to mention, the Iraq war. Although it's kind of debatable whether Iraq had anything to do with US national security, and I'm not going to go down that road - the Republicans did an EXCELLENT job of linking the two together.

And my independent research backs this up. according to CNN, terrorism was the third most important issue in 2004, with 19% of people saying that was their most important issue. The top two were economy/jobs with 20% and moral values with 22%. But look at the percentage of people who stated that terrorism was their most important issue, and an overwhelming 86% went for Bush, with only 14% selecting Kerry. That's as emphatic as a Texas Rangers grand slam in the 9th inning against the Boston Red Sox (the directions said to be creative....).

Now it's true that I stated that I thought that National Security was the issue that decided the 2004 election, but it is true that the "Religious Right", with their "moral values", played an important role too - you can't single that out of the equation in 2004. And, again, going by CNN's numbers, Bush again walloped Kerry in that issue by 80% to Kerry's dismal 18%. So if my terrorism analogy about the Texas Rangers beating the Boston Red Sox was relevant, maybe Bush's dominance on moral values could be likened to the Houston Rockets nailing a game winning 3 pointer in overtime against the Celtics....


Source for CNN poll data


Moving on to 2008, I think the poll data strongly backs up my view that the electorate had changed their views about National Security, and moved the economy to issue number one with regards to the election. According to ABC's national exit polls for 2008, the economy was BY FAR the most important issue, with a whopping 63% of people stating that as their most important issue in 2008, versus terrorism at only a meager 9%. So, to re-cap, in 2004 terrorism was the third most important issue at 19%, but in 2008, it was the 4th most important issue at 9%, with energy policy coming in at bottom place with 7%. And, unsurprisingly, the most important issue in 2008, the economy, led the voters to flock to Barack Obama. Voters who stated that the economy was the most important issue in 2008 voted with Obama 53% to McCain's 44%. OK, those numbers are not individually decisive - 53 versus 44 - but take into account that 63% of people stated it as the most important issue, and that extra 7% that Obama gained starts to look real big...


ABC Poll Data link


Furthermore, according to exit poll data by CNN, when the question of : "Worried that the Economic Crisis will hurt your family?" was put to the voters, a staggering 81% said "yes", with 18% saying "no". Among those who said yes, roughly four fifths of Americans, 58% went with Obama, versus 40% who went with McCain. Again, the 58 versus 40 on its own is not decisive, but when you consider that 81% thought the economy would get worse... it really tipped the scale in Obama's favor.


CNN link to 2008 exit poll data


On a final note, many were concerned that there could be the so called "Bradley effect", and that might change the election results dramatically. The Bradley effect relates to the 1982 governor's race in California in which exit polls predicted the African American candidate, Bradley to win, however in the end the white candidate, George Deukmejian, won. The reason I am mentioning this is that it is important to remember that exit polls are what people say they "intend" to do in the ballot box. What they actually do in the ballot box can be very different, because people can feel pressured psychologically whilst taking a survey. I think it's safe to say that we're all glad that this did not rear its ugly head in 2009, the election should be about issues, not race, whether the candidate is Black, White, or Hispanic, Asian... etc...


Link describing the Bradley effect


So, overall, in conclusion, I think I have accurately shown how the dynamics changed in the 2004 election - which was largely decided on national security, to 2008, where the election was decided about the economy.