Posted on 02/11/2016 12:30:49 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Given continued coverage of Marco Rubio's claim that his poor performance in Saturday's debate caused his fifth-place finish in the New Hampshire Republican primary, we wanted to put some data behind the point --- that the exit poll just doesn't back him up.
We've got two ways to look at it, one direct, the other indirect, and neither shows any evidence that the debate harmed Rubio in terms of vote choices.
Indirectly: 47 percent of New Hampshire GOP voters said they finally decided on their candidate either on Election Day itself, or in the previous few days. Twelve percent of them voted for Rubio. The rest decided before the final debate. Ten percent of them voted for Rubio.
Directly: 67 percent called "the recent debates" an important factor in their vote. Ten percent of them voted for Rubio. The rest said the debates were not an important factor. Twelve percent of them voted for Rubio.
Two points is not a meaningful difference in the exit poll. Rubio's support was essentially the same whether people decided before or after the debate, and whether or not they said the debates were important to their vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Analysis: people lie.
Only lefties profit from being amnesty pimps in a year where immigration is one of the key issues. Perhaps Rubios problem is that he’s not running as a democrat.
I think this is flawed analysis. Rubio got 12% of the late deciders. The point is that he probably would have gotten many more of the late deciders perhaps 20% or 30% as he did in Iowa if it weren’t for his poor debate performance.
I don’t believe it hurt him. Criticizing Obama hurt him in a Republican primary?
“Analysis: people lie.”
Also candidates!
“Criticizing Obama hurt him in a Republican primary?”
Calling Obama competent in a Republican primary may have (although I tend to agree with his point that Obama is intentionally destructive). Repeating the same line verbatim when attacked for only being able to repeat the same line verbatim... that’s what hurt him.
Yeah the data suggest something quite different. This "analysis" had a headline in mind then stretchered the data just as far as they could to find a conclusion they wanted.
What we saw were former Romney counties (2012) going for both Rubio and Cruz. Couple that with a youth vote that went for the same, as per exit polling.
I can't prove it, but there appears to have been some big crossover voting, which would also be supported by the large voter turnout.
I truly don't believe the Cruz campaign would have been involved in such an effort as their campaign manager, interviewed shortly after the polls had closed, expressed concern about large turnout favoring Trump.
Basically, the so called “Surge” probably was never real and more than likely a Media Surge.
Regardless, the fact remains that crossover voting shouldn't be allowed.
There is simply no way that anyone who watched that unfold in real time wouldn’t know that the debate hurt. He was flustered stumbling and walked clear into Christie’s attack in the middle of the attack.
I can believe that people might not say that made the difference. But it did. It had to.
RE: Criticizing Obama hurt him in a Republican primary?
No, it was not that, it was the perception that he gave canned, programmatic answers (something that Chris Christie publicly criticized him for )... not that it helped Christie at all. After all, it was eventually Christie who dropped out.
I think your analysis is correct. He had late momentum from Iowa, and he destroyed it with his “pull the string” talking Marco doll act.
Amnesty Boy wrecked his political career by siding with McCain and Schumer and the rest of The Gang against the citizens and the rule of law.
We are not interested in surrendering our country.
Yeb! and YoungYeb! are the last hope of The Cheap Labor Express.
They have foisted an amnesty candidate on us in every Presidential election since the last amnesty.
Not this time.
Why is it strange that former Romney counties would go for Rubio and Cruz? It’s not.
I would think that Liberal/Moderate voters would be more attracted to other candidates.
During that so called debate Rubio was responding to the Christi charge claiming Obamas actions were due to his incompetence and not calculation, does not know what he was doing, to which Rubio insisted he does.
Rubio could have used the un or lightly reported score of racial murders by black youths whom attributed their action to revenge the Treyvon Martin death resulting from Obamas use of the Bully Pulpit during the Zimmerman trial. And Obamas silence once those murders and assults began to occur.
All of the media realizing what Rubios repeated response was about. Repeated Christi s robotic charge when Rubio repeated Obama knows what he is doing reponse. Unless that debate was being viewed the media knew they could spin it as they did and be believed. For anybody who did not watch that debate would believe them. And that includes ABC.
RUBIO CANNOT BE TRUSTED ON IMMIGRATION!
As Phyllis Schlafly said, “He betrayed us all.”
The caucus idea is ridiculous. And I don’t doubt for a moment that the results were manipulated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.