Though I have often looked at the white male swing vote here at pw, Gallup notes that the current head-to-head match-up has Barack Obama losing white women to John McCain by 9 points.ÂÂ
It is possible that this reflects some latent disgruntlement among some women over the technically ongoing contest between Obama and Hillary Clinton. But it is also more consistent with a broader trend. Ruy Teixeira, co-author of The Emerging Democratic Majority, noticed the following about John F. Kerry’s 2004 electoral slippage relative to Al Gore’s performance in 2000:
3. Whites by Gender. Democrats’ falloff among whites appears to have been concentrated almost entirely among white women, rather than white men. This year, Bush carried white men by 25 points (62-37), only a point more than his 24 point margin in 2000 (60-36). In contrast, he carried white women by 11 points (55-44), a big improvement over the single point (49-48) by which he carried this group in 2000.
4. Education. Democrats’ slippage by education group was concentrated entirely among the non-college educated…
Given that Bush’s increased margin came entirely from the non-college educated and given the increase in Bush’s margin among white voters, we would expect that Bush’s performance among white working class voters must have improved substantially. This cannot be estimated directly from the NEP poll because they haven’t yet released that level of detail on their data. However, the Institute for America’s Future and Democracy Corps conducted an extensive (2000 interviews) post-election survey and they found Bush winning white working class voters by about 24 points. The compares to a 19 point margin in Democracy Corps’ 2000 post-election survey and a 17 point margin in the 2000 VNS exit poll.
Arguably, that’s the story of the election right there. An additional wrinkle on the white working class vote is that this falloff was likely concentrated among white working class women, not men, judging from the figures cited above on Bush’s big gains among white women, but no change among white men (however, this is an inference from the pattern of the data; no direct evidence on white class women vs. men is available from the NEP or DCorps surveys).
Between 1988 and 2004, the exit poll date suggests that the Democratic nominee won 36 percent, 37 percent, 38 percent, 36 percent and 37 percent, respectively, of votes cast by white men. The Gallup data has Obama winning 36% of the white male vote, which is obviously right in line with that history. Obama’s performance with white women at this point is similar to Kerry’s — which remains consistent with Gallup data from early May.
Of course, Obama will have to do better than Kerry to beat John McCain in a general election. And one wonders whether Obama should not be doing better, given that the overall political envronment favors the Democrats more than it did in 2004. Obama’s superiority over McCain in money, organization and partisan intensity may go a long way in that regard. But for all of the discussion over whether Obama’s race will be a significant factor in the general election, it is worth noting that he is doing just about the same demographically as the more pasty John F. Kerry.
given that the overall political environment favors the Democrats more than it did in 2004
I’m not so sure about this anymore. The Iraq war is going OK (people may not hear about it over the news, but returned soldiers do have a tendency to pass the word), and disillusionment over AGW is setting in. Also, despite the congressional Inquisition into Big Oil, I think/hope people understand that the moronic laws against drilling domestically are a large part of the problem.
IIRC, 2004 was also being presented as a favorable environment for the jackass party as well.
Hmm. Perhaps I should clarify: I was referring to the Democrat party in this case. God knows the GOP is plum full of jackasses these days.
My “We’re Screwed ’08” t-shirt came in the mail yesterday.
But I do agree that Gaia isn’t helping the AGW harridans these days. Cold, windy Memorial Day for us. Gaia’s a real bitch.
C’mon, the right track/wrong track numbers are huge for the Dems.
“C’mon, the right track/wrong track numbers are huge for the Dems.”
How do you square that with the dem congress’ numbers in the toilet?
Otis! My man!
The same way I square it with the data showing Dems poised to pick up seats in the House and Senate, the data showing people think the economy is weak, that invading Iraq was a mistake, etc. I’m not arguing the validity of any of the above. I’m saying that in politics, perception is reality. People think we’re doing better in Iraq, but (a) still think it was a mistake; and (b) don’t see it as the top issue. Now they are more worried about the economy, and people aren’t bullish on it. Besides which, McCain isn’t running against Pelosi; he’s running against Obama. And if Obama has his way, Obama will be running against Bush.
We wanna dance wif yo dates.
“McCain isn’t running against Pelosi;”
Didn’t hurt Truman to run against a do nothing congress. SanFranNan is do nothing or do it incompitently in pig latin.
Shama lama ding dong.
Community Organizing in the west
“You’ve got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know… morons. “
Karl,
I do wonder, however, if the core issues for Democrats have peaked too early. My sense is that AGW has already crested, and that Iraq has jumped the shark. While the right track/wrong track numbers are certainly lousy, I don’t have a good sense one way or the other if they will stay there.
BRD
The consistent underplaying and/or dishonest inversion of the gender-race D primary vote gap has been a general-election rhetorical strategy, not a set of faulty analyses.
The “white male swing vote” (which doesn’t exist, statistically; they split very predictably) = “racist Republicans” memetic groundwork is already solid. They’re building on that, weaponizing it, not explaining what’s happening, or what Obama needs to do. This is the doing.
So, as usual, there’s no argument to be made. The numbers are figures in a myth, not an equation. You can’t refute a fable.
I’m pretty sure O! is counting on this, actually.
People are hearing about it dicentra – because they aren’t hearing about it. It’s kind of counter-intuitive, but no news is good news.
heh
BRD:
AGW is a non-issue; the poll numbers haven’t moved on it in 10 yrs. The perception of the economy may change, but it usually settles in some time prior to Nov (ask GHWB).
All:
Dan has led you astray on the movie reference. Check my asterisk.
Actually, the Dem gains in 2006 were mostly due to the white male vote. Whether thta carries from a midterm to a presidential election remains to be seen. Plus, white males have been a swing vote in the Democratic campaign this year — it’s the Appalachia vs. Vermont/Wisconsin thing.
dre,
Truman ran against Congress — as the incumbent POTUS. Harder for Sen. McCain, touting his bipartisan cred, to do that. ;-)
Oh, I got your movie reference, Karl. Your post title still led me (and, apparently, Dan) to another movie. Maybe it’s because I watched the movie you’re alluding to again a few years ago after not seeing since the big screen and I couldn’t even finish it whereas the scene I’m alluding to still brings a sly smile to my face just thinking about it.
Boon, I’m anticipating a deeply religious experience.
“Truman ran against Congress  as the incumbent POTUS. Harder for Sen. McCain, touting his bipartisan cred, to do that. ;-)”
You’re right. I keep forgetting that John McCain is in the
RepublicanMcCain PartyWhat is Drudge’s fascination with stupid? Is he maybe latent autistic or something?
Hahahaha, docweasel!
Last time it didn’t detonate right. I read it as Stop Whitney.
I can still watch both movies. The ending of Mel’s is wonderfully surreal.
“Also, despite the congressional Inquisition into Big Oil, I think/hope people understand that the moronic laws against drilling domestically are a large part of the problem.”
Not so sure about that. Our local news last night didn’t play the best clip of the day when the dude from Shell spelled it out how Congress has been a bunch of butt weasels. Just showed a couple of politicians making their talking points and then interviewing a few stiffs at the gas pumps. You know, the usual in depth reporting.
Karl #25:
Isn’t it odd, though, to consider that as good as Blazing Saddles is, it could never be made today?
“Isn’t it odd, though, to consider that as good as Blazing Saddles is, it could never be made today?”
The revenge of the humorless scolds.
It couldn’t be made by a white man. Ice Cube or Spike could do it no problem.
“Check my asterisk.”
Generally that’s an opening for “Well, that skirt isn’t very flattering.” In this instance I suppose “I wouldn’t advise spandex.” works better.
[…] Protein Wisdom – “Hey, where the white women at?â€Â* [Karl] […]
That’s the funny thing, dre – all of the Mrs. Grundy’s seem to be on the left these days. ‘Don’t do that, don’t say that, don’t think that’ else censure fall on you. To my ears it sounds like an established order trying hard to hold back the tide, and fearing that they are losing.
Independent thought and freedom of speech threaten their control of the narrative. It’s the sort of fear that also gives us things like McCain-Feingold and the Fairness Doctrine and Keith Olbermann.
Jim – Whoever brought us Olberdouche ought to be drawn and quartered, tarred and feathered, and forced to listen to nothing but a cacophony of Olberdouche, the nasally Gleeeens, and Excitable Andy from now until eternity.
Well, that goes without saying, JD. Seems there is a big market for whining, though, so we won’t be done with them anytime soon.
Work, work, work, work, work, work, work.
But then it wouldn’t be funny. I mean, compare “Airplane” to “Soul Plane”.