Overview

More than 6.6 million Latinos voted in last year’s election — a record for a midterm — according to an analysis of new Census Bureau data by the Pew Hispanic Center, a project of the Pew Research Center.

Latinos also were a larger share of the electorate in 2010 than in any previous midterm election, representing 6.9% of all voters, up from 5.8% in 2006.

Rapid population growth has helped fuel Latinos’ increasing electoral participation. According to the Census Bureau, 50.5 million Hispanics were counted by the 2010 Census, up from 35.3 million in 2000. Over the same decade, the number of Latino eligible voters — adults who are U.S. citizens — also increased, from 13.2 million in 2000 to 21.3 million in 2010.

However, even though more Latinos than ever are participating in the nation’s elections, their representation among the electorate remains below their representation in the general population. In 2010, 16.3% of the nation’s population was Latino, but only 10.1% of eligible voters were Latino and fewer than 7% of voters were Latino.

This gap is driven by two demographic factors — youth and non-citizenship. More than one-third of Latinos (34.9%) are younger than the voting age of 18, a share greater than that of any other group. And an additional 22.4% are of voting age, but are not U.S. citizens.

As a result, the share of the Latino population eligible to vote is smaller than it is among any other group. Just 42.7% of the nation’s Latino population is eligible to vote, while more than three-in-four (77.7%) whites, two-thirds of blacks (67.2%) and more than half of Asians (52.8%) are eligible to vote.

Even so, the number of Latino eligible voters will continue to grow in the coming decades as a steady stream of U.S.-born Latinos become eligible to vote by turning age 18 — more than 600,000 did so annually between 2006 and 2010.

Yet, even among eligible voters, Latino participation rates have lagged that of other groups in recent elections. In 2010, 31.2% of Latino eligible voters say they voted, while nearly half (48.6%) of white eligible voters and 44.0% of black eligible voters said the same.

This gap in participation — 17.4 percentage points between Latinos and whites — has persisted in recent midterm election years, though it is down from a record 19.3 percentage points in 2006. A similar gap in voter turnout rates between Latinos and whites exists in presidential election years as well.

Latino voter turnout rates lag other groups partly because of the large share of Latino eligible voters that are younger than age 30. In 2010, 31.3% of Latino eligible voters were ages 18 to 29, while 19.2% of white, 25.6% of black and 20.7% of Asian eligible voters were under age 30. Historically, young people have voted at lower rates than older eligible voters. And among young voters, Latinos have had some of the lowest voter participation rates — in 2010 just 17.6% of young Latino eligible voters voted. In contrast, among Latino eligible voters ages 30 and older, the voter turnout rate was higher — 37.4% in 2010. However, among older voters the gap in voter turnout rates between Latinos and whites — 16.9 percentage points — is nearly as large as it is between all Latino eligible voters and all white eligible voters — 17.4 percentage points.

The gap in voter participation between Latinos and others is also partly due to fast growth in the number of Latinos who do not vote, but are eligible to do so. Between 2006 and 2010 the number of Latino voters increased by 18.8%, but the number of Latino non-voters increased more rapidly, by 25.0%.

Just as with other populations, differences in voter turnout rates exist among Latino eligible voters. In 2010, Latino college graduates had the highest voter turnout rate (50.3%) among Latino eligible voters, while young Latinos ages 18 to 29 had the lowest (17.6%). Differences in participation rates also exist by country of origin. Nearly half (49.3%) of Cuban-origin Latinos voted in 2010 compared with 29.6% of Puerto Rican-origin Latinos and 28.7% of Mexican-origin Latinos. Similarly, a greater share of naturalized foreign-born Latinos than native born Latinos voted — 36.6% versus 29.2%.

Read the full report and peruse 2010 Election State Fact Sheets at pewhispanic.org.

Summary of Findings

More than half of all American adults were online political users in 2010

Fully 73% of adult internet users (representing 54% of all U.S. adults) went online to get news or information about the 2010 midterm elections, or to get involved in the campaign in one way or another. We refer to these individuals as “online political users” and our definition includes anyone who did at least one of the following activities in 2010:

•  Get political news online – 58% of online adults looked online for news about politics or the 2010 campaigns, and 32% of online adults got most of their 2010 campaign news from online sources.
• Go online to take part in specific political activities, such as watch political videos, share election-related content or “fact check” political claims – 53% of adult internet users did at least one of the eleven online political activities we measured in 2010.
• Use Twitter or social networking sites for political purposes – One in five online adults (22%) used Twitter or a social networking site for political purposes in 2010.¹

Taken together, 73% of online adults took part in at least one of these activities in 2010. Although our definition of an online political user has changed significantly over time, the overall audience for political engagement and information-seeking has grown since the most recent midterm election cycle in 2006 — using a different array of activities to measure online political activity, we found at that time that 31% of adults used the internet for campaign-related purposes.

As an example of the changing landscape for online politics since the last midterm contest, the proportion of internet users who viewed campaign-related videos online jumped from 19% in 2006 to 31% in 2010. Similarly, as recently as the 2006 election cycle just 16% of online adults used online social networking sites; today roughly six in ten online adults are social networkers, and these sites have emerged as a key part of the political landscape in the most recent campaign cycle.²

The internet continues to grow in importance as a source of political news

One quarter of all U.S. adults (24%) got most of their news about the 2010 elections from the internet, and the proportion of Americans who get most of their midterm election campaign news from the internet has grown more than three-fold since the 2002 campaign.

Among internet users (32% of whom got most of their midterm election news from online sources), 18-29 year olds (36%) and those ages 30-49 (29%), the internet is now the second-most commonly mentioned source of campaign news, ahead of newspapers and trailing only television.

Americans feel that the internet makes it easier to meet others with similar political views, but also increases political extremism. They also feel that the internet opens people to a wider range of viewpoints, although many find it difficult to separate good political information from bad.

Americans hold diverse views — both positive and negative — about the internet’s impact on the political debate.

• 54% of online adults say that the internet makes it easier to connect with others who share their views politically: 44% say that the internet makes this “a lot easier” and 10% say that the internet makes this “a little easier.” The internet users who get news or take part in politically-related activities on social networking sites are especially likely to say that the internet helps them connect with others around political issues.
• At the same time, 55% of all internet users feel that the internet increases the influence of those with extreme political views, compared with 30% who say that the internet reduces the influence of those with extreme views by giving ordinary citizens a chance to be heard.
• 61% of online adults agree with the statement that the internet exposes people to a wider range of political views than they can get in the traditional news media. Young adults and political social networkers are more likely than average to view the internet as a source of information they can’t find elsewhere.
• At the same time, 56% of internet users say that it is usually difficult for them to tell what is true from what is not true when it comes to the political information they find online.

Despite some of these challenges, 22% of online political users who voted say that they were encouraged to vote by material they found online during the 2010 campaign, and an additional 42% say that political information they saw or read online encouraged them to vote for or against a specific candidate.

Led by online political video, a number of online activities were prominent in the 2010 race

Some 31% of adult internet users went online to watch political videos in the months leading up to the 2010 elections. When we asked this question after the 2006 midterm elections, just 19% of adult internet users said that they watch political videos-that makes online video watching the activity with the greatest amount of growth out of those we measured in both 2006 and 2010. Supporters of both parties exhibited significant growth in online video consumption over that time, with online video watching by Republican voters roughly doubling between 2006 and 2010.

These are some other activities that online adults engaged in during the 2010 campaign:

• 35% of online adults looked for information online about candidates’ voting records or positions on issues. Whites, college graduates and the financially well-off were especially likely to do this in 2010.
• 28% of online adults used the internet to research or “fact check” claims made during the campaign. This activity is also especially prevalent among whites, college graduates and those with relatively high household incomes.
• 16% of online adults sent email related to the campaign or the elections to friends, family members or others; this activity was popular with 50-64 year olds, as 21% of this group shared political emails in the months leading up to the 2010 elections.
• 12% of online adults revealed online which candidate(s) they voted for in 2010, with voters ages 18-29 leading the way.
• 8% of online adults signed up online to receive updates about the campaign or elections; another 8% of online adults shared photo, video or audio content related to the campaign.
•  7% of online adults used the internet to organize or get information about in-person meetings to discuss political issues.
•  6% of online adults took part in an online discussion group, listserv or other online group related to political issues. These online forums were particularly popular with political liberals and young adults.
• 5% of online adults used the internet to participate in volunteer activities related to the campaign, like getting lists of voters to call or getting people to the polls.
• 4% of online adults contributed money online to a candidate running for office; Republicans and Democrats were equally likely to donate money online in 2010.

Additionally, 20% of online adults used the internet to follow an interesting election campaign in another part of the country in the months leading up to the November elections. Males, whites and those with strong views (either for or against) the Tea Party movement were especially likely to use the internet to learn about or follow a race outside of their local area.

As was true in 2008, a plurality of partisan online political users gravitate towards news that shares their own political point of view

In the 2008 presidential election, we found for the first time that online political users were more likely to say that they typically got online political news from sites that shared their point of view, as opposed to sites that don’t have a particular point of view.³

This trend continued in 2010, as 34% of online political users said that most of the political news and information they get online comes from sites that share their point of view-compared with 30% who typically get news from sites that don’t have a point of view, and 21% who get news from sites that differ from their own point of view. As we found in 2008, views on this subject are correlated with partisan identification — both Republicans and Democrats were more likely than political independents to say that they typically get online political news from sources that share their political point of view.

The results reported here are based on a national telephone survey of 2,257 adults conducted November 3-24, 2010. The survey included 755 interviews conducted on the respondent’s cell phone, and interviews were conducted in both English and Spanish. For results based on internet users, the margin of error is +/-3 percentage points.

Read the full report at pewinternet.org.

 1. See Politics and Social Media.. 
 2. See Election 2006 Online.
 3  See The Internet’s Role in Campaign 2008.

Overview

Some 21% of online adults used social networking sites such as Facebook or MySpace in the months leading up to the November 2010 elections to connect with a campaign or the election itself, and 2% of online adults did so using Twitter. That works out to a total of 22% of adult internet users who engaged with the political campaign on Twitter or social networking sites in at least one of the following ways:

• 11% of online adults discovered on a social networking site who their friends voted for in the November elections.
• 9% of online adults received candidate or campaign information on social networking sites or Twitter.
• 8% of online adults posted political content on Twitter or a social networking site.
• 7% of online adults friended a candidate or political group on a social networking site or followed them on Twitter.
• 7% of online adults started or joined a political group on a social networking site.
• 1% of online adults used Twitter to follow the election results as they were happening.

Republicans, who lagged behind Democrats in the 2008 campaign in some key aspects of social media use, caught up with Democrats in the 2010 midterm election cycle. The “political social media user” cohort represented by the 22% of internet users voted for Republican congressional candidates over Democratic candidates by a 45%-to-41% margin, and Republicans’ enthusiasm for using social media matched that of Democrats.

Among social networking site users, 40% of Republican voters and 38% of Democratic voters used these sites to get involved politically. In addition, Tea Party movement supporters were especially likely to friend a candidate or political group on a social networking site during the 2010 election — 22% of such users did this, significantly higher than all other groups.

Compared with the rest of the online population (i.e. those who go online but did not use Twitter or social networking sites for political purposes in 2010) the “political social media” user group differs in some respects from other internet users:

• Political social media users stand out for their overall use of technology. They are significantly more likely than other internet users to go online wirelessly from a cell phone or laptop (91% vs. 67%), own a laptop computer (79% vs. 63%), have a high-speed broadband connection (94% vs. 80%) and use the internet on their cell phone (61% vs. 40%).
• Demographically, political social media users are younger and somewhat more educated than other internet users. Two-in-five (42%) are younger than age 30 (vs. 22% for the rest of the online population) and 41% have a college degree (34% of other internet users have graduated from college). However, they look quite similar to the rest of the online population in their racial, gender and income composition.

Continue reading the full report at pewinternet.org.

There are moments in media when all narratives point in the same direction, when the press seems to see events with an almost singular vision. Such a moment arrived for President Obama last week.

Driven by the ideas from President Obama’s bipartisan debt commission, and the vocal reaction to it, the U.S. economy supplanted the midterm elections atop the mainstream news agenda last week for the first time in two months.

From Nov. 8-14, the economy accounted for 15% of the newshole according to the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. About half that coverage focused on the draft proposal from the National Commission for Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, which — in calling for some tax increases and spending cuts — generated criticism from the left and the right.

The No. 2 story, at 12%, was the continuing fallout from the Nov. 2 congressional elections — which produced major Republican gains — with the narrative reinforcing a moment interpreted as a stinging rebuke for the president.

Obama’s trip to the G-20 summit and Asia registered as the third-biggest story last week, filling 9% of the newshole. Much of that coverage highlighted the president’s inability to secure a trade deal with South Korea and an apparent failure to ease economic tensions with China.

Indeed the media narrative last week portrayed a weakened president continuing to be buffeted by events from all sides. His commission’s suggestions on deficit reduction were nearly drowned out by widespread criticism of them. The election coverage highlighted the road ahead for newly ascendant Republicans in Washington and in state houses. And the message coming out of the Asian trip was of deals not consummated and expectations not met. To make things worse, the events on the foreign trip seemed to come as a surprise for a White House that by week’s end was being derided for not knowing what would await the president overseas.

One story on the Politico website — headlined “Obama arrives home to new reality” — tried to tie those themes together by declaring that the president’s “time overseas also underscored the trouble he’s having with the nitty-gritty of governing.”

Two very different subjects rounded out the top-five story list last week. It wasn’t exactly the “Love Boat” as the saga of a disabled Carnival cruise ship — with several thousand passengers on board — was the No. 4 story at 4% of the newshole. Rescued passengers told of overflowing toilets and scarce food supplies.

Next, also at 4%, was former President George W. Bush’s new memoir media tour — which included interviews with people ranging from Matt Lauer to Rush Limbaugh. The book itself appeared not to break much dramatic new ground. In the first week in November, Bush made news for acknowledging he had approved the waterboarding of terror suspect Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. One attention-grabbing nugget last week was a reconciliation of sorts between Bush and rapper Kanye West. In his book, “Decision Points,” the ex-president criticized West’s denunciation of him as someone who “doesn’t care about black people.” Last week, West offered a mea culpa for remarks made in “frustration” in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Continue reading the full report at journalism.org.

Overview

The public, voters and non-voters alike, has a subdued reaction to the Republican Party’s midterm election victory. Four years ago, the response to the Democrats regaining full control of Congress was far more positive, as it was in 1994 when the GOP won a historic victory. Fewer people today say they are happy about the Republican victory, approve of the GOP’s plans for the future, and far fewer believe Republicans will be successful in getting their programs passed into law.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Nov. 4-7 among 1,255 adults, finds 48% saying they are happy that the Republican Party won control of the House while 34% are unhappy. Four years ago, 60% said they were happy the Democrats won full control of Congress, compared with just 24% who were unhappy. That mirrored the public’s reaction in December 1994 to the GOP winning control of Congress for the first time in 40 years (57% happy vs. 31% unhappy).

In the current survey, 52% of those who said they voted in the Nov. 2 election were happy with the outcome compared with 42% of non-voters. Still, more voters in 2006 (60%) said they were happy with the Democrats’ victory.

The public has a mixed reaction to the Republican policies and plans for the future: 41% approve, while nearly as many (37%) disapprove. Approval is somewhat greater among voters (45%) than among non-voters (35%). But on balance, both the general public and voters express less positive views of the GOP’s policies than they did of the Democrats’ proposals after the 2006 election.

The public is skeptical that the GOP will be successful in getting its programs passed into law. About four-in-ten (43%) think they will be successful while 37% say they will be unsuccessful. Following the elections of 2006 and 1994, when the victorious parties gained majorities in both the House and Senate, far more people thought they would be successful in enacting their agenda (59% in 2006, 62% in 1994).

There is little optimism that, in the wake of the election, relations between the two parties will improve. Just 22% expect relations between Republicans and Democrats to get better in the coming year, 28% say they will get worse, while 48% say they will stay about the same as they are now.

Two years ago, after the presidential election, 37% of voters expected partisan relations to improve and just 18% thought they would get worse.

Most Americans (55%) say that Republican leaders in Congress should work with Barack Obama, even if that disappoints some of their supporters. Even more (62%) want Obama to cooperate with GOP leaders, even if that disappoints some Democrats.

Independents want the two sides to work together — 57% say GOP leaders should cooperate with Obama while about as many (59%) say that the president should work with GOP leaders. But as many Democrats say Obama should stand up to Republican leaders (43%) as say he should work with them (46%).

Republicans are even less interested in seeing their party’s congressional leaders work with Obama — and far fewer GOP voters want their party’s leaders to work with Obama than did so after the 2008 presidential election.

Currently 66% of Republicans and Republican-leaning voters want GOP leaders to stand up to Obama, up from 47% shortly after the presidential election two years ago.

On balance, more Americans say that Obama, rather than Republican congressional leaders, should take the lead in solving the nation’s problems. Nearly half (49%) say President Obama should take the lead, compared with 30% who say GOP leaders. Following the 2006 election, opinion on this measure was nearly reversed — 29% said President George W. Bush should take the lead, while 51% said Democratic congressional leaders.

At the same time, however, the public says that Republicans will have a better approach than Obama on taxes, the budget deficit, and jobs and economic growth. On Social Security and health care, neither side’s approach is favored, while Obama holds a modest advantage on foreign policy.

Cut Government But …

Americans express more conservative views about the role of government than they did just two years ago. However, when it comes to the major policy decisions that will arise in coming months, the public is closely divided.

Nearly as many approve (43%) as disapprove (47%) of the new health care law, and opinions are split over what Congress should do about the legislation. Four-in-ten (40%) favor repealing the health care law, but a larger proportion (52%) says that the law should be expanded (30%) or kept as it is (22%).

Opinion about what to do with the tax cuts passed during the Bush administration is divided three ways: 34% favor keeping all of the tax cuts; 30% say the tax cuts for the wealthy should be repealed while other reductions stay in place; and 28% say all the tax cuts should be repealed.

More people say that if they were setting priorities for the government, they would place a higher priority on reducing the federal budget deficit (50%) than on spending more to help the economy recover (43%). Those who cast a midterm ballot are more likely than nonvoters to see reducing the budget deficit as a higher priority (55% to 41%).

Substantial partisan gaps are evident in attitudes toward all of these issues. However, Republicans are more unified than Democrats in their views of what to do about health care legislation and tax cuts. Fully 77% of Republicans favor repealing the health care bill, while Democrats are split between expanding the measure (48%) and keeping it as it is (33%). And while 56% of Republicans favor keeping all the tax cuts, about as many Democrats favor repealing just the tax cuts for the wealthy (41%) as support getting rid of all the tax cuts (38%).

These attitudes reflect a continuing difference between Republicans and Democrats over the parties’ ideological directions. Over the past two years, Republican and Republican-leaning independents have consistently favored the GOP moving in a more conservative direction. Democrats and Democratic leaners have been just as consistent in their preference that their party move in a more moderate direction.

Republicans and Republican leaners who agree with the Tea Party overwhelmingly favor the GOP moving in a more conservative direction: 71% express this view compared with just 40% of Republicans who have no opinion of the Tea Party or disagree with it.

Lower Grades for Campaign 2010

Voters express somewhat more negative views of the just-concluded campaign than they did of the 2006 midterm election. Fully 77% of voters say there was more negative campaigning or mud-slinging than in previous elections; 69% of voters expressed this view after the 2006 election.

Most voters (64%) say they learned enough to make an informed choice, but an even higher percentage said this in November 2006 (72%). And slightly fewer voters say there was more discussion of issues than did so after the 2006 election (35% today, 40% then).

Far more Republican voters (50%) say there was more discussion of issues than said that in 2006 (32%). By contrast, just 28% of Democratic voters said issues received more attention — down from 50% who said this after the Democrats regained control of Congress in 2006.

Other Important Findings:

• President Obama’s approval rating stands at 44%; an identical percentage disapproves of his job performance.
• Roughly a third of Democrats (34%) say they would like to see other Democratic candidates challenge Obama for the party’s nomination in 2012. In December 1994, far more Democrats (66%) supported a primary challenge to President Bill Clinton.
• Just 16% of registered voters who attend religious services at least once a month say election information was available at their place of worship, down from 25% after the 2006 midterms.
• The GOP continues to be seen as a leaderless party: 51% say they don’t know who leads the Republican Party, while 14% volunteer that no one does. More now see John Boehner as the leader of the GOP (10%) than did so in September (4%).
• There is no clear front-runner for the 2012 Republican nomination for president: Sarah Palin (15%), Mike Huckabee (15%), and Mitt Romney (13%) all receive about the same levels of support.

Continue reading the full report at people-press.org.

In today’s news landscape, both mainstream and new media sources shape the narrative. A new PEJ study finds that no single unified message reverberated throughout the media universe in the wake of the Nov. 2 voting, and what one learned depended largely on where one got the news. How did the post Election Day narrative differ from the front pages to the television studies and from bloggers to Twitterers?

The media serve several functions when it comes to coverage of election results, whether it is the mainstream press engaged in reporting news or citizens using technology to share and participate in it. The most basic function is to report the vote. Another more complex task is to assign some meaning to those results, to fashion a narrative that resets the political landscape and leans forward toward the next election cycle.

No single unifying 2010 Election Day message reverberated through the news ecosystem — even with results as decisive as those on Nov. 2. Rather, the media conversation was more diffuse than it might have been in a simpler, more homogenized, media era and it varied substantially depending on what media one looked at.

These are among the findings of a new report by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism of election coverage on four distinct media platforms, produced in conjunction with social media analysis technology from Crimson Hexagon. A basic narrative of historic Republican gains and the voters’ rebuke to Democrats certainly gained traction in the press. To some extent, however, that GOP romp theme was balanced by projections about future politics and policy debates, a focus on the electoral process itself, and grassroots calls to action.

To some degree, different sectors performed differing functions: Newspapers, particularly on their front pages, offered synthesis and unified verdicts (GOP triumph). Television leaned more toward speculation and differing narratives (coming from talking heads). Blogs offered more ideologically oriented commentary and scrutiny of the process, while Twitter functioned largely as a clarion call to citizen activism and participation.

The findings also offer significant evidence that social media aren’t necessarily derivative of and dependent on the mainstream media. In this case, bloggers and Twitterers clearly went their own way, focusing on elements of the election that were largely missing in the mainstream narrative.

Among the findings:

• Probably nothing in media comes closer to a simpler and more singular narrative than the headlines on the front pages of newspapers. These offered the broadest, boldest snapshot of the voter’s verdict the day before. And they overwhelmingly drove home one unadulterated message, that of a Republican triumph, even as Democrats held the Senate. “GOP Tidal Wave,” declared the St. Paul (Minnesota) Pioneer Press. “GOP Gallops” echoed the Austin American-Statesman.
• On network and cable television, a key factor in that Republican showing — the role of the tea parties — was a major topic, receiving 364 mentions across the six networks during the course of their election night programming. That ranked behind only attention to Barack Obama (473 mentions). That coverage also quickly pivoted from reporting the results to speculating on everything from the future of the Obama health care law to the political fortunes of such key Republican players such as Sarah Palin and John Boehner.
• Bloggers offered a more mixed election verdict than much of the rest of the media. While the themes of GOP and tea party victories accounted for about 42% of the conversation, the competing idea of a mixed result or a setback for the tea party accounted for about one-quarter of the discussion. And the second-biggest election theme among bloggers (at 18%) was allegations of, and concerns about, possible voter fraud.
• Twitter users demonstrated their platform’s function as an organizing and galvanizing tool. About two-thirds (64%) of the Twitter conversation monitored by PEJ focused on calls to action, on encouraging people to vote. And most of that (41%) came in the form of non-partisan appeals. One other theme to emerge on Twitter was that people were tired of what they perceived as a nasty and negative campaign season (9%).

Read the full report at journalism.org including:

• Newspaper Headlines – A Republican Romp
• Television – Tea Party and Tea Leaves
• Blogs – Commentary and Conspiracies
• Twitter – a Call to Action

To do the study PEJ used three different methods to analyze four different media: newspapers, television, blogs, and Twitter. For newspapers, researchers looked at front page headlines from Nov. 3, 2010 archived on “Today’s Front Pages” section of the Newseum website . For television, researchers conducted keyword frequency search using a software called Snapstream that recorded the three major cable news networks between 6 p.m. Nov. 2 and 2 a.m. on Nov. 3, and the three major commercial broadcast networks between 9 p.m. and 2 a.m. Finally, for blogs and Twitter, PEJ used another technology provided by the social analytics firm Crimson Hexagon. The technology analyzes online media by identifying statistical patterns in the words used to express opinions on different topics. For this analysis PEJ looked at blog posts and Twitter on Nov. 2 and Nov. 3.

Find a more a detailed description of the methodology of the study at pewjournalism.org.

Analysis by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life of National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll data reported by CNN shows that white Protestants,¹ a group that has long been one of the key components of the GOP coalition, voted for Republicans over Democrats in their congressional districts by a 69%-to-28% margin. This marks an increase of six points in Republicans’ share of the white Protestant vote compared with 2008, and an eight-point gain for Republicans compared with the last midterm election in 2006.

At the other end of the spectrum, the religiously unaffiliated supported Democrats over Republicans by an overwhelming margin in 2010 (68%-30%). But the exit polls also show that Republicans made gains even within this staunchly Democratic group, picking up eight points compared with 2006. This increase is comparable in size to the GOP’s gains among white Protestants, a traditionally Republican group.

Among all Catholic voters, 54% voted for Republican congressional candidates in 2010, up 12 points compared with 2008. Among white Catholics, nearly six-in-ten (59%) voted Republican in 2010, compared with 39% who voted Democratic. By comparison, 52% of white Catholics voted for Republican congressional candidates in 2008, and 49% voted Republican in 2006.

Initial reports based on exit poll results make it impossible to analyze voting trends of white evangelical Protestants relative to white non-evangelical (or mainline) Protestants. However, among all white voters who describe themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians — a group that includes Catholics and members of other faiths in addition to Protestants — 77% voted Republican in 2010, compared with 70% in the last midterm election.

The overall religious contours of the electorate in 2010 are quite similar to other recent elections. GOP support from white Protestant voters exceeded Republican support among the unaffiliated by 39 points in 2010 (69% of white Protestants voted Republican compared with 30% of the religiously unaffiliated); in 2008, this gap was 38 points and in 2006 it was 39 points.

Similarly, voters who attend religious services regularly continued to support Republicans at much higher rates in 2010 than voters who attend worship services less often. Nearly six-in-ten of those who attend religious services at least weekly voted for the Republican House candidate in their district (58%), compared with 44% Republican support among those who attend religious services less often. Though changes in the exit poll question about religious attendance make direct comparisons with previous years impossible, previous analysis shows that frequency of worship attendance has been a remarkably strong and consistent predictor of the vote.

This analysis was written by Greg Smith, a senior researcher at the Pew Forum, and Scott Clement, a survey research analyst at the Pew Forum. It was orginally published on Nov. 3, 2010 and was updated on Nov. 12 to reflect reweighting of 2010 exit polls by the NEP. The report is based on a preliminary analysis of NEP exit poll results as reported by CNN.com as of 9 a.m. on Nov. 12, 2010. If data are subsequently reweighted by the NEP, the numbers reported here may differ slightly from figures accessible through the websites of NEP member organizations. More comprehensive analyses, including examination of subgroups of major religious traditions, will not be possible until the raw exit poll data are published sometime in 2011.

_{1. Throughout the report, “Protestant” refers to people who describe themselves as “Protestant,” “Mormon” or “other Christian” in exit polls.}

Fueled by economic anxiety and unhappiness with Democratic stewardship of the country, an older and much more conservative electorate than in 2006 and 2008 propelled the Republican Party to a broad victory in yesterday’s elections.

As pre-election surveys had predicted, the Republican Party enjoyed a wide enthusiasm gap. Conservatives and older voters made up a much greater share of the electorate than they did in 2006; and more voters opposed activist government than did so two years ago. These groups all voted for Republicans by wide margins, according to exit polls by the National Election Pool, as reported by CNN.

The proportion of self-described conservative voters increased by nearly a third from 2006 — from 32% to 42% — and is the highest percentage of conservative voters in the past two decades.

However, the single biggest factor in the GOP’s victories was its striking gain among political independents. By 56% to 37%, more independents voted for the Republican candidate this year; four years ago, independents favored the Democrat by nearly an identical margin (57% to 39%). And just two years ago, Barack Obama won the votes of independents (by 52% to 44%) on his way to the White House.

Despite the Republicans’ sizable gains among virtually all demographic groups — with the exceptions of African Americans and young people — voters express a negative view of the party. The outcome of this year’s election represented a repudiation of the political status quo, rather than a vote of confidence in the GOP or a statement of support for its policies.

By 53% to 41%, more voters expressed an unfavorable opinion than a favorable opinion of the GOP. Indeed, views of Republican Party are no more positive than those of the Democratic Party (52% unfavorable vs. 44% favorable), which was roundly defeated.

Voters expressed great unhappiness with national conditions and with the performance of the federal government. Half (49%) said they were very worried about economic conditions and another 37% were somewhat worried; most (61%) said the country was on the wrong track. Fully 73% said they were either angry or dissatisfied with the federal government, and 73% disapproved of the job Congress is doing.

As was the case in 2006, an overwhelming percentage of those who said the country was on the wrong track voted for the party out of power — 76% supported Republican candidates in Tuesday’s elections. But there is greater dissatisfaction now than there was four years ago. Similarly, views of national economic conditions are far more negative — with nearly triple the percentage rating conditions as poor than did so in 2006; those voters voted Republican this year, by 68% to 28%.

Voters registered their opposition to a more activist federal government: fully 56% said government is doing too much better left to businesses and individuals, while 38% said the government should do more to solve problems. In June, opinion on this issue among the general public was more narrowly divided — 47% said the government was doing too much while 43% said it should do more. And two years ago, when Obama was elected, more said the government should do more to solve problems than disagreed (by 51% to 43%).

Yet while a majority of voters favor a smaller government, there was far less agreement about congressional priorities or the policy proposals before Congress.

Four-in-ten (40%) said that reducing the deficit should be the highest priority for the next Congress while nearly as many said spending to create jobs (37%). And while fewer voters (18%) rated cutting taxes as the highest priority, more Republican voters viewed tax cuts as the top priority than cited reducing the deficit (71% vs. 65%).

Similarly, voters were divided over whether to repeal health care reform (48%) or maintain or even expand it (16% leave as is, 31% expand). And there was no agreement on what to do about the Bush-era tax cuts. About as many favored extending them only for families with incomes under $250,000 (36%) as favored extending them for all Americans (40%); 15% said they should not be extended for anyone.

A sizeable number of voters (41%) said that they support the Tea Party political movement (including 21% who strongly support it). Fewer (30%) said they oppose the movement (23% strongly); another 24% said they neither support nor oppose it. Agreement with the Tea Party was considerably higher than in most pre-election polling, reflecting the greater enthusiasm of conservative voters to turn out. Tea Party supporters overwhelmingly supported Republican candidates for the House nationally, and in key Senate races such as Nevada. Those who support the Tea Party voted 86% to 11% for Republican House candidates, while those who oppose the movement voted 86% to 12% for Democratic candidates. Those who are neutral about the Tea Party divided their votes about evenly (50% Republican, 47% Democratic).

But fewer voters (22%) said their vote for the House was meant to send a message in favor of the Tea Party; nearly as many (17%) said they were casting a vote against the Tea Party, while a majority (57%) said the Tea Party was not a factor in their vote.

Opinion of President Obama was negative factor for Democratic candidates yesterday. By a 55%-to-44% margin, voters expressed disapproval of his job performance, and 52% said they thought the president’s policies would hurt the country in the long run. On balance more voters said they were casting a ballot to express opposition to him (38%), than to voice support for him (23%), while 38% said Obama was not a factor in their vote.

Also see:

An exit poll analysis of the Latino vote from the Pew Hispanic Center.

An exit poll analysis of the vote by religious groups from Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life.

*The vote share results shown in this report reflect a revised weighting of the National Election Pool’s national exit poll on Nov. 9, 2010 . The reweighting resulted in small changes in the Republican vs. Democratic share of the U.S. House vote.

Both the public and the media focused most closely last week on the congressional elections as Tuesday’s midterm vote approached. Still, the public’s interest in election news did not increase in the final days of the campaign, despite heavy news coverage.

The latest News Interest Index survey, conducted among 1,003 adults from Oct. 28 to Nov. 1, the day before the midterm elections, finds that 29% said they were following news about the congressional elections very closely; that is little changed from 30% a week earlier and 33% in mid-October.

The elections were the week’s most closely followed news story: 24% said they followed the elections more closely than any other story compared with 18% who cited news about the economy. However, coverage of the elections accounted for 42% of coverage, far outpacing any other story, according to a separate analysis by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (PEJ).

Throughout the campaign season, Republicans have tracked election news more closely than Democrats. Last week, 40% of Republicans said they followed this news very closely, compared with 31% of Democrats and 22% of independents.

California Marijuana Proposition Registers

Going into Tuesday’s voting, three-quarters of the public had heard at least a little about the California ballot proposal that would have legalized the use of marijuana in the state. About a third (34%) said they heard a lot about the initiative, while 41% said they heard a little. About a quarter (24%) heard nothing at all.

Six-in-ten had heard at least a little about spending on campaigns by groups with funding from anonymous donors. About a quarter (27%) said they heard a lot about this, while 33% said they heard a little. Four-in-ten (40%) had heard nothing at all.

Two-in-ten (20%) said they had heard a lot before Election Day about potential problems with the accuracy of voter registration records and concerns about voter fraud or suppression. About a third (34%) had heard a little about this, while 45% said they had heard nothing at all.

Nearly half had heard at least a little about the rally on the National Mall held by Comedy Central hosts Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert (19% a lot, 28% a little), but a majority (52%) said they had heard nothing at all about this. In late August, 16% said they had heard a lot about another rally on the Mall held by conservative talk show host Glenn Beck; 26% had heard a little and 58% had heard nothing at all about that rally.

Among partisans, there was little difference in the percentages that had heard a lot about the California marijuana ballot initiative. About a third of Republicans (32%), Democrats (35%) and independents (34%) said they heard a lot about this story.

Democrats (29%), Republicans (24%) and independents (27%) were about equally likely to say they had heard a lot about news about spending on this year’s campaigns by groups with funding for anonymous donors.

More Republicans than Democrats or independents said they heard a lot about the possibility of voter fraud or voter suppression in this year’s elections. Three-in-ten Republicans (30%) said they heard a lot about this, compared with 19% of Democrats and 16% of independents.

On the other hand, Democrats were more likely to have heard a lot about the Stewart-Colbert event on the Mall than Republicans (24% vs. 14%). About two-in-ten independents (19%) say they heard a lot about last weekend’s rally.

Though young people generally follow news less closely than older age groups, those younger than age 30 were as likely as older Americans last week to say they had heard a lot about the California ballot initiative and the Stewart-Colbert rally. Those in the Northeast were most likely to say they heard a lot about the Stewart-Colbert rally. Three-in-ten (30%) say this, compared with 14% each in the Midwest and in the South. A quarter of those in the West (25%) say they had heard a lot about the rally.

The Week’s News

Despite the long election year, the public often paid more attention to other major, long-running stories — such as the troubled economy or the Gulf oil spill.

About a quarter (24%) said the congressional election was the news they most closely followed last week; 18% say they followed news about the economy more closely than any other news story.

Still, a greater percentage (39%) said they followed news about the economy very closely than said the same about the midterm elections (29%). With ongoing concerns about the strength of the economic recovery, this has been the case for much of 2010.

About one-in-ten (12%) said they followed news about the World Series that pitted the San Francisco Giants against the Texas Rangers most closely. Fewer than two-in-ten (16%) said they followed the Major League Baseball championship very closely, matching the 16% that said they followed the 2009 series between the New York Yankees and the Philadelphia Phillies very closely.

One-in-ten (10%) said they followed developments in the government investigation into the causes of the Gulf oil spill more closely than any other news; 19% said they followed this news very closely. Reports that the companies working on the well had been aware of potential flaws in certain materials accounted for 3% of coverage.

Nearly three-in-ten (28%) said they followed news about recent terrorist plots in the U.S. and Europe very closely; 8% said they followed these reports more closely than other stories. News about explosives discovered on two flights from Yemen accounted for 5% of coverage, while news about the arrest of a man allegedly plotting to bomb Washington, D.C. Metro stations accounted for another 2%.

About one-in-ten (11%) said they very closely followed news about the tsunami and earthquake that hit Indonesia last week; 4% say this was the news they followed most closely. The natural disasters accounted for 1% of coverage.

These findings are based on the most recent installment of the weekly News Interest Index, an ongoing project of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. The index, building on the Center’s longstanding research into public attentiveness to major news stories, examines news interest as it relates to the news media’s coverage. The weekly survey is conducted in conjunction with The Project for Excellence in Journalism’s News Coverage Index, which monitors the news reported by major newspaper, television, radio and online news outlets on an ongoing basis. In the most recent week, data relating to news coverage were collected Oct. 25-31, and survey data measuring public interest in the top news stories of the week were collected Oct. 28 to Nov. 1, from a nationally representative sample of 1,003 adults.

View the topline and survey methodology at people-press.org.

Note: Updated Nov. 17, 2010*

Tuesday’s midterm elections were historic for Hispanics. For the first time ever, three Latino candidates — all of them Republicans — won top statewide offices. In New Mexico, voters elected the nation’s first Latina governor, Republican Susana Martinez. In Nevada, Republican Brian Sandoval won the governor’s race and became Nevada’s first Hispanic governor. And in Florida, Republican Marco Rubio won the U.S. Senate race.

Despite these big top-of-the-ticket wins for Republican Hispanic candidates, Democratic candidates won the Latino vote, usually by wide margins. For example, according to the national House exit poll, 60% of Latino voters supported Democratic candidates in House races while 38% supported Republican candidates.

This majority support for Democratic candidates continues a pattern among Latino voters. In 2006, according to the national exit poll, 69% of Latinos voted for Democratic candidates in their congressional district races, while 30% supported Republicans. In the 2008 presidential election, Latinos supported Democrat Barack Obama by a margin of more than two-to-one over Republican John McCain — 67% vs. 31% according to a Pew Hispanic Center analysis of the national exit poll.

The candidacies of Republicans Rubio and Sandoval drew sharply different levels of support from Latino voters. In Florida, Rubio captured 45% of the Latino vote in his race for the Senate — nearly identical to the share of the white vote he won (48%). In Nevada, however, Sandoval won a third (33%) of the Latino vote in his race for governor; he did much better among whites, winning 62% of the vote according to the state exit poll. No exit polls were done in New Mexico, so it is not possible to analyze the voting patterns among Latinos and other groups in Martinez’s victorious gubernatorial campaign.

According to the national House exit poll, Latinos represented the same share of all voters this year that they did in 2006 (8%). Overall, more than 19 million Latinos were eligible to vote in this year’s midterm elections, more than in any previous election. Latinos also represent a growing share of all eligible voters and substantial shares of eligible voters in many states. More than 9% of eligible voters nationwide are Latino, up from 8.6% in 2006.

With the exception of Florida, in states where exit polling data is available, Democratic candidates won the Latino vote, usually by wide margins. In California’s senate race, Democrat Barbara Boxer won 66% of the Latino vote while Republican Carly Fiorina won 31%. In California’s gubernatorial race, Democrat Jerry Brown won 63% of California’s Latino vote while Republican Meg Whitman won 34%. In Nevada, Latinos supported Democrat Harry Reid over Republican Sharron Angle by a greater than two-to-one margin — 69% vs. 27%. Latino voters in Arizona, Nevada and Texas similarly supported Democratic candidates over Republican candidates in Senate and gubernatorial races.

In Florida, Hispanic voters gave greater support to Republican candidates than elsewhere. As noted above, in Florida’s Senate race, nearly half (45%) of Hispanic voters supported Republican Rubio over independent Charlie Crist (33%) and Democrat Kendrick Meek (22%). In Florida’s governor vote, 48% of Hispanic voters supported Democrat Alex Sink and half (50%) supported Republican Rick Scott, according to the state exit poll. The Hispanic vote in Florida has traditionally tilted more Republican than in other states, owing largely to the presence of the GOP-leaning Cuban-American community.

Just as in previous elections, Hispanics nationwide voted differently than white non-Hispanic voters. According to the national exit polls, white non-Hispanics supported Republican congressional candidates over Democratic candidates 60% to 37%. In 2006, half (51%) of white non-Hispanics voted for Republican candidates and 47% voted for Democratic candidates. In many state races, Republican candidates won the white non-Hispanic vote while Democratic candidates won the Latino vote.

For an analysis of exit poll results for the Latino vote for the gubernatorial and Senate races in the states of Arizona, California, Florida and Nevada, and the gubernatorial race in Texas, download the full report at pewhispanic.org.

*Note: The vote share results shown in this report reflect updates to the

several statewide races.

<sub>1. According to election results as posted by CNN, five Hispanic Republican candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives have won their elections. While final election results are not in, the partisanship of the Hispanic Congressional delegation is likely to become more Republican.
2. The analysis in this report is limited to the national House exit poll and exit polls from five states. These states are Arizona, California, Florida, Nevada, and Texas. Voter survey results from the National Election Pool’s National Exit Poll and State Exit Polls were obtained from CNN’s 2010 election website on Wednesday November 3, 2010 at 1PM EDT. The House National Exit Poll and State Exit Polls are conducted by Edison Research.
3. These results were reported by CNN on its 2006 election website.
4. An eligible voter is a U.S. citizen 18 years of age or older.</sub>