Romney will get close to 55% tonight in NV.
Nate said the entrance poll shows Romney getting 31 percent of the vote among those whose households made under $30,000 per year. But he won 48 percent among households between $30,000 and $50,000 per year, 58 percent among those making between $50,000 and $100,000 and 62 percent among those with six-figure incomes.
Nevada’s electorate tonight was relatively well off. As many voters today made over $100,000 per year as under $50,000, according to the entrance polls.
Earlier on the NYT site, David Jones said those making 100k a year were about 25% of the electorate.
So, do the math:
25% of the caucus goers made 100k or more * 62% for Romney = 15.5% of total vote.
50% of the caucus goers make between 50 and 100k * 58% for Romney = 29% of total vote
25% of the caucus goers make less than 50k. If they split evenly between those making less than 30k and those making between 30 and 50k, we get
12.5% of the caucus goers make less than 30k * 31% for Romney = 4.1% of the total vote
12.5% of the caucus goers makes between 30k and 50k * 48% for Romney = 6% of the total vote.
15.5 + 29+ 10.1= 55.6%
This calculation is not very sensitive to the split between those making more or less than 30k. If those making 30-50k are 60% of the total making less than 50k, for example, then Romney’s total vote share goes up only .2%.
Separated at Birth: Mitt Romney and ...?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNRO must have bad spam filtering/monitoring to keep letting you through. Annoying NRO readers with your spam posts is a bad way get business to your website.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI bet Ron Paul's numbers are the inverse of romney's. That college kid demographic that's so rabid for Paul has got to really skew these numbers.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMr. Olsen, thanks for this post, but I'm not sure what's the significance of these numbers. Is it that rich people like Mitt more than poor people? Okay, if that's what the numbers mean, then ... so what, exactly?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOh give me a break. You Romney apologists are something else. The sophistry that spews forth is as degenerate as what we find from the left. Funny how those who support Bishop Willard, are so comfortable with their sophist spin.
The Bishop won because 30% of the NV electorate tonight was Mormon and Mormons supported their Bishop by a margin of 9-1. If Catholics voted that way, Gingrich would have won. But Catholics aren't a special interest monolithic group motivated to vote their prejudices and biases the way Mormons (or African-Americans) are.
It's disgusting. I never thought I see the day where the GOP had its own fascistic special interests. And BTW, if you don't know your history or understand the origins of fascism, that's exactly how it started - a collection of different special interests or unions (guilds).
Before I moved to DC, I ran a number of campaigns in AZ, so I know firsthand the way Mormons operate. There's a reason that AZ politicos refer to the Mesa Mormons as the Mormon Mafia.
As I've stated before and will continue to yell from the mountaintops, I will NOT vote for a person whose personal philosophy is so absurd and unbiblical that he dares to follow the false prophet Joseph Smith, who believes that heaven is on the planet Kolob, who believes Native Americans were turned brown for their sins and who believes that the Garden of Eden is in Missouri. Anymore than I'd vote for a false Christian who worships at a racist church that openly asks God to dam us. (I'd spell it correctly but apparently you can't use biblical language on National Review).
So unless Newt pulls out a miracle, I will not be voting in the General. I will not be amongst the "elect that was deceived".
How far we as a nation of turned from Providence - what a shameful day!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd the point of this 'analysis' is what exactly?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse