Early Voting Will Skew Tuesday's Results

The Nation: With Millions Of Early Ballots, Current Public Sentiment May Not Be Reflected

(The Nation)  This column was written by John Nichols

---

How likely is it that the Super Tuesday results will give us an accurate read of public sentiment regarding the Democratic presidential race? Not very.

With millions of voters casting "early ballots" - some of them marked and sent weeks ago - a substantial portion of the votes will reflect sentiments framed before the contest took its current form.

Thus, major developments like Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama, or the Illinois senator's big win in South Carolina - in a race that caused many Democrats to rethink their feelings regarding Bill and Hillary Clinton - won't be reflected in the final results from critical states.

Additionally, there is every reason to believe that hundreds of thousands of early votes in California and hundreds of thousands more nationwide have already been cast for candidates who are no longer in the race, such as John Edwards.

Early voting has become increasingly common in states across the country in recent years. Promoted as a procedural shift to increase participation in elections, it has been embraced by political parties and candidates as a vehicle to "lock in" votes before election day.

Little examined for its impact on actual results, early-voting's influence could - and should - be one of the big stories of Super Tuesday.

Early-voting patterns will warp Tuesday's results - perhaps dramatically.

Consider the case of California: In the "Super Tuesday" state with the largest number of delegates at stake, it is estimated now that as many as half the votes will end up having been cast prior to February 5. That's more than 2.3 million votes, some of which were cast around the time of the New Hampshire primary.

Among the other Super Tuesday states that allow "no-excuses" early voting - as opposed to the old tradition of tightly-controlled absentee voting - are Illinois, Arizona, Georgia, New Jersey, New Mexico, Tennessee and Utah. And the patterns are similar to California. In Tennessee, for instance, a record number of presidential primary votes were cast in the form of early ballots - 320,939 - by the time early voting ended this week.

In Georgia, estimates are that roughly 200,000 early votes have been cast, another record.

In just one Illinois County, Cook, voters in Chicago and its suburbs have cast more than 130,000 early ballots. That's Barack Obama's home county, so he can feel good about those numbers.

But, in most other states, Hillary Clinton is the one who is likely to get a boost from early voting -- since many of those ballots were cast at a point where she was the clear front-runner in the race.

This certainly seemed to be the case in Florida.

One quarter of Florida Democratic primary voters said they cast their ballots early - usually in the form of "no-excuses" absentee ballots. Among these voters, Clinton won 50 percent, Obama won 31 percent and Edwards took 14 percent.

Among voters who said they decided in the final days before the primary and cast their ballots after the early-voting period had closed, Obama won with 37 percent to 34 percent for Clinton and a significant 24 percent for Edwards.

None of this means, of course, that if early voting was eliminated the final results on election night would precisely reflect the sentiments expressed by those late deciders. Some early voters are the most committed partisans, and would carry their choices through to the end. But, certainly for Edwards and Dennis Kucinich voters in California and other states, developments that took place after they cast their ballots would have been likely to change their choices. And, if we believe the shift is polling positions over the past month, the same can be said for a number of early Clinton backers.

Bottom Line: There is a very good chance that, for all the hype, Super Tuesday will not present America with a precise reading of who Democrats want as their nominee.

[rowdytexan2]

I think the opinion in this article is skewed. The people who voted early had already made up their minds would they would vote for, or they wouldn''t have voted.

I don''t think Ted Kennedy''s or anybody elses endorsement would make a hill of beans. And I know it''s not made any difference to my vote.

[runningralph]

I agree with RowdyTexan2. If people had their mind made up these late endoesements are not likely to sway them. What I don''t understand is why so many people are voting absentee. Half the voters in California? There can''t be that many traveling I wouldn''t think. Is there some adavntage to voting early? Could it be that there is some sort of hanky-panky going on- like people voting more than once, for instance?

[michellem99-2009]

I vote by mail. And have voted. It is easier for me to voe by mail as I can do so in my home and I read the ballot with magnifier of 4x. I vote once. I am a legally blind voter. I sign my name and date it..I have voted this way for years, I would have to ask the poll worker to read the ballot to me and mark it. At home I can ask my room mate to read it to me and then in the queit of my room vote . i tell my friend I be voting and not bother me..There is not hanky-panky. Some places are all vote by mail..

[mrrobur]

What''s being overlooked is that there is no reason to assume that those people who voted early were representative of the larger polling samples of the time. If they were, a significant portion of the early voters would have had to have voted "Undecided." Notice also that while Clinton won 50% of the early voters, she actually won the Florida primary by 55% of the total vote.Try that again?

[mrrobur]

What''s being overlooked is that there is no reason to assume that those people who voted early were representative of the larger polling samples of the time. If they were, a significant portion of the early voters would have had to have voted "Undecided." Notice also that while Clinton won 50% of the early voters, she actually won the Florida primary by 55% of the total vote.Try that again?

[rjs1955]

To suggest that early voting "skews" the results is fatuous. "One man one vote" is the well-reasoned expression, not "one man one vote when someone other that the voter wants it." Only pollsters, pundits, Monday morning quarterbacks, and others who think like them would come up with drivel like this.

[excoachken]

What has skewed this election is the corporate news world''s not covering Kucinich, Edwards and even Ron Paul fairly. The only news that counts is news that make money. CBS, Fox, NBC, and others act as if our country''s leader should be chosen like a new product in an ad campaign. We will all pay for their greed.

[tucano2]

Like millions of others I voted absentee. In my case I voted for NOTA (none of the above).

I really wonder why it is that they don''t let all states in on this voteing day? It seems kind of odd to me, how does that work? The hole country should have a say if you ask me.

[teamsterwif1]

John Edwards did not drop out of the race, he suspended his campaign. He got two votes from my house today in the Illinois Primary! My vote, my voice, my choice.

[bungalow122]

How sad when voters first choices are considered "skewed"! This article fails to mention the benefits of early voting -particularly in a primary...
#1 benefit- with early voting, the individual citizen generally has the opportunity to actually choose their first choice and hope for the presidential candidate w/o the bias of the media or who''s up in polls etc -truthfully this is how it should be!
#2 the weather could and is harsh with a Feb 5 Super Tuesday which hinders elderly, students, handicapped, double employed persons, etc from making it to the polls
#3 - the media sometimes makes people second guess what they feel is right. Do you change teams just because you aren''t quote "winning" or do you stick to your beliefs? A primary is supposed to be about picking the best candidate to lead or country -not the most popular or endorsed, or funded!
and the list could go on.

Early votes count just as real time votes and should not be discounted or considered "skewed"

I voted for Edwards and am proud that I made that choice and hope other concerned citizens with a strong social conscience did as well- my first choice of the best candidate was without a doubt Edwards!
I will support the candidate of my parties choosing in November but always vote for my personal choice in primaries.