Even more poll analysis

12.06.2005

Technorati tag:

Today's El Deber has a good roundup of even more analysis of the latest Bolivian poll. I'd like to just emphasize some interesting highlights. In large measure, this rehashes some of the data from my previous post. Skip to the last paragraph if you just want the concluding thoughts.

Tuto Quiroga (PODEMOS) & Evo Morales (MAS) are the two candidates w/ the most solid voting blocks. Evo has more voters who would not consider voting for another candidate (28.4%) than Tuto (24.8%). But in terms of "potential" voters (those who might migrate from one candidate to another), Tuto leads (29.4%) over Evo (20.5%). This means that while Evo is slightly ahead of Tuto in terms of "solid" votes, Tuto has an advantage in capturing other voters.

Interestingly, the candidate w/ the largest share of "potential" voters is Samuel Doria Medina (UN) w/ 41.4%. But the similarities between UN & PODEMOS voters suggests a stronger ideological convergence between them, than between UN & MAS. Thus, Doria Medina could be a "compromise" candidate — but to win the presidency, he'll have to place second in the national vote (and he's not likely to do that, while trailing a distant third).

The poll also asked voters to identify candidates they would never vote for. The most disliked candidate is MIP's Felipe Quispe (52.6%), followed by MNR's Michiaki Nagatani (39%), followed by Evo (33.3%). This suggests that opposition to Evo is stronger than his support. But Tuto doesn't fare much better, w/ 23.6% saying they would never vote for him.

Age

But here's the interesting demographics stuff: Evo's strongest support comes from older voters (age 55-70), while Tuto holds a solid lead among younger voters (age 18-22). The two virtually split the rest of the age groups. This generational polarization suggests that Evo's appeal may be stronger among those voters who grew up during the MNR's 1952-1964 corporatist state, rather than those who grew up under liberal democracy. This shouldn't be surprising, since Evo's platform is essentially a return to the 1952 corporatist state model, while Tuto's is an expansion of the neoliberal market model.

Class

Of course, not surprisingly, Evo has most of the poor vote (36%), though it's interesting that he doesn't have a solid majority among even this group. But neither does Quiroga have a clear majority among the wealthy (37.8%). If we use income as a proxy for "class", it seems that voters aren't as polarized along class divisions as many suggest. Instead, the fact that the strongest polarization is between other factors — mostly, regional polarization.

Urban v. rural

Again, interestingly, Evo has stronger support among urban voters than among rural voters. In contrast, Tuto fares better among rural voters than urban ones. This raises questions about Evo representing the indigenous "peasant" voters, if his support actually is more heavily concentrated among the urban working class. Again, this suggests that the ethnic or class divisions frequently used to describe the contest are (perhaps) a bit exaggerated.

Gender

Finally, Tuto has stronger support among female voters than Evo. But this is blunted by the fact that female voters are also more likely to be undecided or to cast blank ballots. This suggests that, along w/ the important "battleground" contests in Potosí & Chuquisaca, the female vote will have a huge impact on the final outcome.

The final conclusion that most analysts have come to, is that the election is mostly polarized regionally. Or, rather, than the ideological polarization has converged w/ a regional dimension: the Andean highlands support Evo while the Eastern lowlands support Tuto. This suggests that the contest is as much about regional differences — especially the question of regional political autonomy — as it is about class or ethnic divisions. And since Evo & Tuto have more complex voter preferences along the above dimensions than they do if we look at regional discrepancies, we should be very cautious about assuming that this is solely a contest about class or ethnic issues.

Posted by Miguel at 02:03 PM