View
7.637
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
1
Michigan General Election Polling Study for
Presidential Preference
Wayne County Executive Ficano Scandal Impact
Collective Bargaining Rights
Public Act 4, the Emergency Manager Law Ballot Test
Automated Poll Methodology and Statistics
Aggregate Results
Conducted by
Foster McCollum White and Associates
And
Baydoun Consulting
June 12, 2012
By: Eric Foster – Chief Pollster
President – Foster McCollum White and Associates
By: Tarek Baydoun
President – Baydoun Consulting
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
2
Methodology
- Foster McCollum White & Associates, a Political and Governmental Affairs and
Organizational Development consulting firm based in Troy Michigan and Baydoun
Consulting, a political communications consulting firm based in Dearborn, Michigan
conducted a telephone-automated polling random survey of Michigan registered and
most likely November 2012 general election voters to determine their voting and
issue preferences on the issue of Presidential preference, collective bargaining rights
support, Public Act 4 ballot initiative and the impact of Democratic Wayne County
Executive Robert Ficano’s FBI investigation and criminal indictments on President
Obama and Democratic candidates across the Michigan November ballot.
- This ten question live call poll survey was conducted on the evening of June 12, 2012
between the hours of 6:30 pm and 8:30 pm.
- A list-based sample of traditional Michigan high participation registered voters.
These voters have participated in a minimum of 70% of the available primary and
general election and odd year municipal and county elections in Michigan since 1993.
- An initial qualifying statement was read to respondents asking them to participate
only if they were very likely to vote in the November General Election.
- Forty-four thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine (44,999) adults were called, and
1,783 respondents participated in the survey. The response rate for this survey was
3.96%.
- Our list-based sample pool was pre-weighted to the geographical regions and political
participation regions and the congressional districts in Michigan. For reporting
purposes, we will focus our findings on the following issue-based categories:
A. Baseline for Michigan Presidential campaign preference.
B. Impact of Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano’s scandals on
President Obama and Michigan Democratic candidate campaigns
C. Collective bargaining and public employee compensation reform
support measurement
D. Michigan Public Act 4 ballot test question.
- The margin of error for this polling sample is 2.32% with a confidence level of 95%.
Our polling study produced sub-populations within each of the surveyed election
contest. Results within the sub-populations will be reported with respect to the
individual cross-tab and sub-population group as it exist.
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
3
Cross tabulation groups for comparison purposes Age
Gender
Michigan Geographical Voter Regions
Major 17 voting counties (Counties combined that traditionally represent
75% to 83% of the total voter participation rate in Michigan’s State-wide
elections)
Next 7 Michigan County and Other 59 Michigan County regions
Race/Ethnicity
Religious affiliation – Evangelical Christian, Catholic, Baptist, Non
Evangelical Christian, Jewish, Muslim and other religious affiliations
Voter Political Party Preference – Democratic, Republican and Independent
Michigan Congressional Districts
Urban market communities (Detroit, Grand Rapids, Flint, Saginaw and
other urban population centers in Michigan)
Vote Region (Counties in parentheses) – Upper Peninsula Region - 311,361 Residents
(Gogebic, Ontonagon, Houghton, Keweenaw, Baraga, Iron, Marquette, Alger, Dickinson,
Menominee, Delta, Schoolcraft, Luce, Chippewa, Mackinac)
15 counties -18.1% of counties, 3.15% of state’s population 89.3% White, 2.18%
African American, 0.72% Asian American, 4.49% Native American, 1.09% Latino
American & 2.20% Other Ethnic American.
Projected weight of November General Election Population – 3.5%
The Upper Peninsula is traditionally a competitive region. Historically the voters tend to
swing between both parties in state and federal election. None of the major 17 counties
are located in the Upper Peninsula.
Northern Lower Peninsula Region – 756,056 Residents
(Emmet, Cheboygan, Presque Isle, Charlevoix, Antrim, Otsego, Montmorency, Alpena,
Roscommon, Crawford, Oscoda, Alcona, Iosco, Arenac, Gladwin, Kalkaska, Leelanau,
Grand Traverse, Benzie, Manistee, Wexford, Mason, Lake, Osceola, Mecosta, Isabella,
Clare, Missaukee and Ogemaw)
29 counties – 34.9% of counties 7.65% of state’s population, 93.84% White, 0.96%
African American, 1.27% Native American, 1.84% Latino American, 0.84% Asian
American & 1.54% Other Ethnic American.
Projected weight of November General Election Population – 9.5%
The Northern Lower Peninsula region of Michigan is traditionally a Republican voting
pocket. None of the major 17 counties are located in the Northern Lower Peninsula.
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
4
Southwest Michigan Region – 1,881,212 Residents
(Oceana, Newaygo, Muskegon, Kent, Ottawa, Barry, Allegan, Van Buren, Kalamazoo,
Berrien, Cass, St. Joseph)
12 Counties – 14.5% of counties, 19.03% of population, 80.9% White, 7.67%
African American, 1.68% Asian American, 7.17% Latino American, 0.45% Native
American & 2.13% other Ethnic American.
Projected weight of November General Election Population – 18.5%
This region of Michigan is traditionally a strong Republican voting pocket. It is home to
three of the major seven Republican voting counties (Kent, Ottawa and Berrien) and one
of the four major swing counties (Kalamazoo). The Southwestern region is home to one-
of the major six Democratic counties (Muskegon); and has significant minority voting
constituencies in the major Republican and swing counties (22.2% of Kent County,
21.2% of Berrien County, 13% of Ottawa County and 16.4% of Kalamazoo County).
Central Michigan Region – 1,457,225 Residents
(Montcalm, Gratiot, Ionia, Clinton, Eaton, Shiawassee, Jackson, Calhoun, Branch,
Hillsdale, Livingston, Midland, Lenawee and Ingham)
Fourteen (14) Counties – 16.9% of counties, 14.74% of State’s population, 86.0%
White, 5.50% African American, 4.37% Latino American, 1.77% Asian American,
0.40% Native American & 1.96% Other Ethnic American.
Projected weight of November General Election Population – 15%
The Central region of Michigan is a very competitive region that tends towards
Republicans, but has one of the major six Democratic counties (Ingham) and a traditional
Democratic voting county (Calhoun) that helps make the region competitive. It is home
to three of the major seven Republican counties (Eaton, Jackson and Livingston).
Thumb Region – 954,010 Residents
(Huron, Bay, Saginaw, Genesee, Lapeer, St. Clair, Sanilac, Tuscola)
Eight Counties – 10.8% of counties, 9.65% of State’s population, 79.30% White,
13.41% African American, 4.29% Latino American, 0.77% Asian American, 0.41%
Native American & 1.82% Other Ethnic American.
Projected weight of November General Election Population – 13%
The thumb region of Michigan is traditionally a Democratic voting pocket. It is home to
two of the major six Democratic counties (Genesee and Saginaw), a traditional
Democratic voting county (Bay) and other counties where Democrats are competitive.
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
5
Southeast Michigan Region – 4,360,736 Residents
(Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, Monroe)
Five Counties – 6% of counties, 44.12% of State’s population, 66.52% White,
23.24% African American, 4.01% Latino American, 3.82% Asian American, 0.28%
Native American & 2.13% Other Ethnic American.
Projected weight of November General Election Population – 40.5%
The Southeastern region of Michigan is home to two- of the major six Democratic
counties (Wayne and Washtenaw) and three of the four swing counties (Oakland,
Macomb and Monroe) in the major 17 communities. This region is the most diverse
voting region and home to the largest block of Michigan voters.
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
6
Michigan Political Geographical Regions
Major 17 Michigan County and Next seven Michigan Counties Parameter -
Projected weight of November General Election Population – 81.5%
Upon review of Michigan’s general election contest dating back to 1970, we found an
interesting voter population trend that is a predictive indicator of the outcome of partisan
and ballot question campaign success. Over this time period, Michigan’s voter turnout is
weighted disproportionally to a small number of counties, 17 of the 83 with the state. In
each election since the 1992 Presidential election cycle, these 17 counties have produced
a consistent range of 75% to 84% of the total state-wide vote. These 17 counties are not
always reflected among the top 17 Michigan counties in voter registration, yet
consistently, they produce voter turnout results that lead the state’s turnout numbers per
county.
In these 17 counties, six are consistently strong Democratic voting communities in
state-wide elections. The counties are Wayne, Washtenaw, Muskegon, Ingham,
Genesse, and Saginaw.
Six Counties – 7.2% of counties, 33.8% of state’s population, 71% White, 18.9%
African American, 4.8% Latino, 3.1% Asian American
Seven of the top 17 counties are consistently strong Republican voting communities
Berrien, Eaton, Jackson, Kent, Lapeer, Livingston, and Ottawa.
Seven Counties – 8.4% of counties, 15.7% of state’s population, 86.3% White, 5.7%
African American, 4.9% Latino, 1.4% Asian American
Notable stat, five of these seven counties have a significant non-white voting population.
Kent County – 22.4% of total population (Latino American & African American are
largest two voting groups).
Berrien County – 21.2% of total population (African American and Latino American are
largest voting groups).
Eaton County – 13.7% of total population (African American and Latino American are
largest voting groups).
Jackson County – 12.8% of total population (African American and Latino American are
largest voting groups).
Ottawa County – 11.8% of total population (Latino American and Asian American are
largest voting group.
Four of the 17 have become the swing counties, the harbinger to predict success in a
partisan election. These counties are Oakland, Macomb, Kalamazoo, and Monroe.
Four Counties – 4.8% of counties, 24.3% of State’s population, 84.5% White, 8%
African American, 3.3% Latino, 2.9% Asian American
Next Seven Michigan Counties Parameter - Projected weight of November General
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
7
Election Population – 8.0%
Next Seven Counties:
(Bay, Calhoun, Marquette, Allegan, Lenawee, Midland, and St. Clair. Seven Counties – 8.4% of counties, 7.7% of state’s population, 90.3% White, 2.9%
African American, 4.0% Latino, .9% Asian American
Three of these counties consistently lean or strong are Democratic voting counties (Bay,
Calhoun and Marquette) and four consistently lean or/are strong Republican voting
counties (Allegan, Lenawee, Midland and St. Clair). Calhoun has the largest non-white
voting population at roughly 18.4% with 10.2% of that population being African-
American. Allegan and Lenawee also have non-white populations (Allegan – 10.2% of
the total population, Lenawee – 11.6% of the total population).
Congressional Districts
1st Congressional District Region
Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.45%
2nd
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.19%
3rd
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 6.97%
4th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 6.68%
5th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.25%
6th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.09%
7th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.12%
8th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 8.06%
9th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.60%
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
8
10th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.07%
11th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.87%
12th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 7.20%
13th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 5.86%
14th
Congressional District Region Traditional weight of State-wide Presidential General Election turnout – 6.55%
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
9
Data Analysis Statement
The data has been separated analytically into cross tabulation results that are statistically
significant with respect to Michigan November election cycle. Any sectional analysis
within the aforementioned categories can be useful when inferring strengths and
weaknesses and possible strategy. For the purposes of this poll, we have included voters
who responded no, leaning no and undecided to questions numbered eight and twelve, as
a key cross tab for consideration.
For the assessment of individual cross tabulation categories, we use a correlation
coefficient model based on the Pearson r correlation, also called linear or product-
moment correlation. Pearson correlation (hereafter called correlation), assumes that the
two variables are measured on at least interval scales and it determines the extent to
which values of the two variables are "proportional" to each other. The value of
correlation (i.e., correlation coefficient) does not depend on the specific measurement
units used. Our proportional model for correlating the statistical relevance of a
geographical region, age grouping or congressional district is based on the random
proportionality of our respondent pool to the specific proportionality of the group’s
weight to the aggregate model. The correlation coefficient (r) represents the linear
relationship between these two variables (aggregate and cross tabular category).
The aggregate Michigan sample size of 1,783 respondents has a 2.32% margin of error,
any review of the polling report can allow for the statistical relationship between the
aggregate and cross tabulation margin of error for the reported clusters. The poll sample
was pre weighted for gender and ethnicity based upon Foster McCollum White and
Associates Predictive Voter Behavior Analysis Model for historic November
participation demographics throughout Michigan. This poll was commissioned by Foster
McCollum White and Associates & Baydoun Consulting and not commissioned on
behalf of or by any candidate or political organization. We strive to adhere to the
principles and standards of the National Council on Public Polls in the gathering and
reporting of polling data.
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
10
State - Wide Aggregate Results – 1783 Respondents MOE +/- 2.32%
Question 1: The 2012 United States Presidential election will be held on November 6, 2012. Who are
you more likely to vote for in the election??
1- President Barack Obama, 2- Mitt Romney, 3- Another candidate or 4- Undecided
(Barack Obama): 46.89%
(Mitt Romney): 45.48%
(Another candidate): 3.56%
(Undecided): 4.07%
46%
4%4%
46%
Barack Obama
Mitt Romney
Another Candidate
Undecided
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
11
Question #2: The ongoing scandal of Wayne County Government and the Democratic County
Executive Robert Ficano has dominated the news for the past 10 months. Does this
continuing scandal impact your view of President Obama and Democratic candidates for
the general election?
1 - It makes me view President Obama and Democratic candidates very unfavorably, 2 -
For it makes me view President Obama and Democratic candidates somewhat
unfavorably, 3 - it does not impact my view of President Obama and Democratic
candidates or 4 - unaware of the issue.
(View President Obama/Democratic candidates very unfavorably): 27.43%
(View President Obama/Democratic candidates somewhat unfavorably): 9.84%
Total Unfavorable 37.27% (It does not impact my view of President Obama/Democratic candidates): 53.45%
Total Awareness factor 90.72% (Unaware of the issue): 9.28%
27%
54%
9%
10%
View President Obama &Democratic candidates veryunfavorably
View President Obama &Democratic candidatessomewhat unfavorably
Does not impact view ofPresident Obama andDemocratic candidates
Unaware of the issue
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
12
Question #3: Considering the negative attention toward Wayne County government and its possible
impact on the Democratic party and President Obama's campaign, should Wayne County
Executive Robert Ficano resign from office, be removed from office, or remain in office?
1- If you believe he should resign from office, 2- If you believe should be removed from
office or 3- If you believe he should remain in office.
(Resign from office): 57.96%
(Be removed from office): 19.93%
(Remain in office): 21.71%
Resign from
Office
58%
Remain in
Office
22%
Be removed
from Office
20%
Resign from Office
Be removed from Office
Remain in Office
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
13
Question #4:
Governors and legislatures in states like Wisconsin and Ohio have passed laws to reduce
employee salary, pension and health care benefits and limit public employee unions'
collective bargaining rights to fix budget deficits. Do you support Governor Snyder and
the Republican legislature’s efforts to limit the collective bargaining rights and reduce
salary and employee benefits for Michigan’s public employees?
1- Yes, 2-No or 3- Undecided
(Yes): 40.07%
(No): 49.04%
(Undecided): 10.90%
Undecided
11%
No
49%
Yes
40%
Yes
No
Undecided
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
14
Question #5:
Michigan Public Act 4, also known as the Emergency Manager Law, allows the State to
put an emergency manager in charge of cities, townships, school districts and counties
that are financially distressed. Democrats, labor unions and civil rights organizations
oppose it because they believe it violates local voting rights and eliminates fair workplace
bargaining to protect workers. Republicans, Tea party activists, taxpayer groups and
business groups support it because it forces governments to stop wasteful debt spending,
reduces unsustainable pension and health care cost and can bring consolidation to
redundant governmental bodies. If Public Act 4 was on the ballot for a vote to maintain it
or repeal it, how would you vote?
1- Vote to maintain Public Act 4, 2- Vote to repeal Public Act 4, 3- Undecided on Public
Act 4’s merits, 4- Would skip voting on Public Act 4
(Vote to maintain Public Act 4): 35.32%
(Vote to repeal Public Act 4): 27.30%
(Undecided on Public Act 4’s merits): 35.04%
(Would skip voting on Public Act 4): 2.33%
27%
2%35%
36%Vote to maintain Public Act 4
Vote to repeal Public Act 4
Undecided on Public Act 4
Skip voting on matter
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
15
Question #6:
In Which Age Range Do You Fit?
1- Between 18 to 30 years old, 2- between 31 to 50 years old, 3- between 51 to 65 years
old, 4- ages 66 and older
(Between 18 to 30 years old): 3.73%
(Between 31 to 50 years old): 13.24%
(Between 51 to 65 years old): 37.10%
(Ages 66 and older): 45.93%
Age Distribution of Aggregate Poll Respondents
45.93
3.73
37.1
13.24
0
10
20
30
40
50
Ages 66 & older Ages 51 to 65 Ages 31 to 50 Ages 18 to 30
Age Dist.
Linear (Age Dist.)
Question #7: What is your gender?
1. Male 40.41%
2. Female 59.59%
Female Voters60%
Male Voters40%
Gender of Aggregate Poll Respondents
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
16
Question #8 Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a Democrat, an Independent, a Republican
or a Tea Party member?
(IF DEM) Do you consider yourself a solid Democrat or leaning Democrat?
(IF REP) Do you consider yourself a solid Republican, leaning Republican or a Tea
Party Republican?
Response Code 1 (Solid Democrat): 31.69%
Response Code 2 (Leaning Democrat): 10.36%
Response Code 3 (Independent): 25.58%
Response Code 4 (Solid Republican): 16.75%
Response Code 5 (Leaning Republican): 8.89%
Response Code 6 (Tea Party Republican): 6.68%
7%
10%
9%
17%
26%
31%
Strong Democrat
Leaning Democrat
Independent
Solid Republican
Leaning Republican
Tea Party Republican
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
17
Question #9 What is your nationality/heritage?
Response Code 1 (African American/Black): 9.32% Response Code 2 (White/Caucasian): 83.58%
Response Code 3 (Hispanic/Latino): 1.02%
Response Code 4 (Arab American/Chaldean): 0.63%
Response Code 5 (Asian/Pacific Islander): 0.68%
Response Code 6 (Native American): 1.65%
Response Code 7 (More than one racial/ethnic identity): 3.13%
Black Percent of 18+ population, 9.32
White Percent of 18+ population, 83.58
Hispanic Percent of 18+ population, 1.02
Asian Percent of 18+ population, 0.63
Native American Percent of 18+
population, 1.65
Other Ethnic Percent of 18+ population,
3.76
Ethnic Concentration for Aggregate Poll Responders
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
18
Question #10:
Which of the following most accurately describes your religious background?
1- Evangelical Christian, 2- Catholic, 3- Baptist, 4- Non Evangelical Christian, 5- Jewish,
6- Muslim 7- Other religious affiliation or 8 - No religious affiliation
(Evangelical Christian): 17.25%
(Catholic): 30.76%
(Baptist): 11.18%
(Protestant/Non Evangelical Christian): 24.40%
(Jewish): 1.65%
(Muslim): 0.79%
(Other religious affiliation): 4.43%
(No religious affiliation): 9.53%
Other Religious
Affiliation
4%
Baptist
11%
Jewish
2%
Muslim
1%No Religious
affiliation
10%
Evangelical
Christian
17%
Non Evangelical
Christian
24%
Catholic
31%
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
19
Geographic considerations of polling study respondents
Southeastern Michigan 39.09%
Southwestern Michigan 18.34%
Central Region of Michigan 15.31%
Thumb Region of Michigan 12.00%
Northern Lower Peninsula 11.27%
Upper Peninsula 3.98%
39.09
18.34 15.3112
11.27
3.98
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Southeast Southwest Central Thumb Northern
Lower
Upper
Peninsula
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
20
Geographic Electoral Weight considerations of polling study respondents
Major 17 Counties 68.54%
Next 7 Mid-Major Counties 8.41%
Rest of Michigan (Other 59 Counties) 23.05%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Major 17 Counties Next 7 Mid Major Counties
Other 66 Counties
68.54
8.41
23.05
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
21
Major 17 Counties partisan historical considerations of polling study respondents
Republican 7 Counties 22.42%
Democratic 6 Counties 45.34%
Swing 4 Counties 32.24%
22.42
45.34
32.24
05
101520253035404550
Republican 7Counties
Democratic 6Counties
Swing 4 Counties
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
22
Urban Market Community weight based on historical considerations of polling study respondents
Urban Market Communities 16.15%
All other Michigan communities 83.85%
16.15
83.85
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Urban Markets All other communities
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
23
Michigan Congressional Districts
C.D. 111%
C.D. 27%
C.D. 37%
C.D. 48%
C.D. 58%
C.D. 67%
C.D. 710%
C.D. 85%
C.D. 96%
C.D. 107%
C.D. 117%
C.D. 126%
C.D. 136%
C.D. 145%
Michigan Congressional District Respondent Participation Weight
C.D. 1
C.D. 2
C.D. 3
C.D. 4
C.D. 5
C.D. 6
C.D. 7
C.D. 8
C.D. 9
C.D. 10
C.D. 11
C.D. 12
C.D. 13
C.D. 14
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
24
Demographic Sample Report
Our polling sample was very consistent with the projected voter demographic
considerations for a Michigan November General election. We have a number of
variance items that we will report.
Age:
Our study skewed significantly higher with voter cluster of persons over the age of 51.
This sampling was 83.03% of all polling study respondents. Despite efforts to adjust the
call volume to move the weight of this group closer to the projected 59% weight that they
will have in the General election, we were not successful. Our data also skewed
significantly lower among the voter cluster of persons ages 18 to 30. This cluster was
roughly 12 points lower than their projected November General turnout weight. One
challenge could exist from the disconnect from younger respondents using
communication tools outside of traditional landline and cell phone. Despite the variance,
we believe the overall polling study’s quality of pooling sample and reporting
effectiveness will not be hampered. The potential exists for a higher weight of persons
over the age of 51 in the 2012 November General election.
Gender:
Our aggregate respondent pool skewed slightly higher for female respondents. Our
predictive voter behavior analysis model projects that typical Michigan Presidential
election turnout is 54% female and 46% male. Our polling study results produced a
59.59% female and 40.41% male respondent pool. Traditionally, this is the most sensitive
question for respondents to answer and typically has the highest refusal rate of any
demographic question.
Nationality/Heritage:
Our aggregate respondent pool skewed higher for White voters then our predictive voter
behavior analysis model projects for the 2012 Michigan November General election. Our
respondent pool was 83.58% white, while our predictive voter behavior analysis model
projects that 74.5% of Michigan’s Presidential General election will be white. African
American respondents were correspondently skewed lower than our predictive voter
behavior analysis model projects for the 2012 Michigan November General election. Our
respondent pool was 9.32% African American, while our predictive voter behavior
analysis model projects that 17.5% of Michigan’s Presidential General election will be
white. In spite of these two variances, we believe the quality of the sample pool and
quantifiable data derived is statistically accurate to the 2.32% margin of error factor.
Major 17 County population distribution:
Our aggregate respondent pool skewed higher for Major 17 Democratic Counties and
lower then predictive voter behavior analysis model for the 2012 November general. In
spite of these two variances, we believe the quality of the sample pool and quantifiable
Foster McCollum White & Associates
______________________________________________________________________________________
25
data derived is statistically accurate to the 2.32% margin of error factor.
Please contact Eric Foster of Foster McCollum White & Associates at either 313-333-7081 or
efoster@fostermccollumwhite.com or Tarek Baydoun of Baydoun Consulting at either 313-729-
3737 or baydounconsulting@gmail.com for a more detailed summary of our polling report.
Recommended