Feb 11, 2008 12:26pm

In the Democratic Race, Whither White Men

Tomorrow’s primaries may present an opportunity to look at the preference of white men for Obama over Clinton in some contests. While far from consistent in primaries, it’s been an important factor in their support profiles: Where white men favor Obama, he's far likelier to win.

Mason Dixon’s polling has Obama winning 41 percent of whites in Virginia and 40 percent in Maryland; that’s essential to his overall lead in these two states, since in neither of them are African-Americans predicted to have a large enough share to carry Obama themselves (as in Louisiana on Saturday, and in some previous Southern states). That suggests Obama could win white men on Tuesday, as he has in seven of the 23 previous states for which we have data. (Clinton's won them in 11, and they've tied in five.)

In some states to date where Clinton has not won white men – California and Arizona – there’ve been enough Hispanics to make the difference for her. In some others (New Hampshire, Massachusetts) there have been few blacks, and enough white women to outweigh white men. But in states with significant but not vast numbers of black voters, and few Hispanics, white men are critical. Per the table below, Clinton’s won the primary in eight of the 11 states where she won white men, a 73 percent success rate; but in only four of the 12 where she didn’t win them, 33 percent.

When we look at issue preferences, we find white men generally less attuned to Clinton across a range of parameters. In aggregate data, white men have been 17 points less apt than white women to say Clinton would be the best commander-in-chief; 17 points less apt to call "experience" the most important attribute (it's a strong Clinton quality), 17 points less apt to say Clinton would do the most to unite the country and 14 percent less apt to call health care their top issue (also strong for Clinton).

Naturally, affinity voting plays a major role. White women are twice as apt as white men to call the sex of the candidate important in their vote, 35 percent to 17 percent. And white women who call the candidate's sex important have favored Clinton over Obama by a huge 78-17 percent margin; white men who call it important also have favored Clinton, but by a much closer margin, 54-35 percent.

Addendum: With thanks to Ron Brownstein of the National Journal, there’s a further point of differentiation here – the additional role of socioeconomic status. Education provides the clearest view: Combining all primaries to date, white men who’ve attended college have gone to Obama over Clinton by 51-38 percent, while white men without a degree have gone the other way – 52-31 percent for Clinton; he does 20 points better, she 14 points worse, among college educated white men vs. non-graduates. There’s a similar division among white women, albeit a little less pronounced – among those with college degrees, Obama is +14 points, Clinton -10, compared with those who haven’t earned a degree. There’s less of an education gap among nonwhites.

Table's below. One note – apart from Iowa and Nevada we have no data for caucuses; just primaries. Caucuses, with their very low turnout, can be something of a different animal.

            Vote preference             among white men         Clinton Obama Edwards  WinnerClinton:Arkansas   71%    24            ClintonAlabama    70     27            Obama New Jersey 58     39            ClintonTennessee  58     32            ClintonOklahoma   55     32            ClintonMissouri   55     41            NAMichigan   54     38*           ClintonNew York   52     43            ClintonLouisiana  51     31            ObamaFlorida    45     27     25     ClintonNevada     46     40     10     Clinton

Tied:Mass.      48     49            ClintonDelaware   47     47            ObamaArizona    46     45            ClintonGeorgia    46     48            ObamaS.C.       28     27     45     Obama

Obama:Utah      29      64            ObamaIllinois  37      59            ObamaN.M.      38      59            NAConn.     40      57            ObamaCalif.    35      55            ClintonN.H.      30      38     20     ClintonIowa      23      33     25     Obama


*uncommitted

User Comments

Where will all those white men go that did not vote for Obama? If half of them go McCain can we still win? My gut tells me we will be in Iraq for 100 years and we will have a new war with Iran. GOD help us.

Posted by: David | February 11, 2008, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm

I may be wrong . . . . but isn’t Obama HALF-WHITE, as well as HALF-BLACK??????

Posted by: ithinkurstupid | February 11, 2008, 1:54 pm 1:54 pm

ithinkurstupid: PLEASE tell Obama THAT!

Posted by: A. Concerned Citizen | February 11, 2008, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm

Oprah will make billions when Obama becomes President. She rules NBC and MSNBC she makes people do what she wants. You have been even reading what she tells you. Just remember better Obama then McCain. Theres no other choice so live with it.

Posted by: Jack | February 11, 2008, 2:12 pm 2:12 pm

The media tells us it is Clinton or Obama that brings up race. However, all I see is the media bringing it up!!! Constantly writing about it throwing it in our face.

Posted by: TheDiplomat | February 11, 2008, 2:37 pm 2:37 pm

now, are we talking about 100% white men? or are we talking about 3/4% white men? or—are we talking about MIXED men, that are 1/2 white and 1/2 black?

Posted by: Illinois for Hillary | February 11, 2008, 2:39 pm 2:39 pm

Hey White Men! Here are the facts to chew on. Hillary has been to Iraq multiple times and met with military leaders in order to educate herself about the situation there. Obama has NEVER been there. Hillary is a leader who has the courage to vote Yes or No. Obama voted “Present” over and over again in Illinois. Leadership requires hands on education and experience AND the courage to make decisions.

Posted by: White Man Thinks | February 11, 2008, 3:39 pm 3:39 pm

White men can vote? Wow! When did that happen?

Posted by: jijalagi | February 11, 2008, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm

“Jack”: There IS another choice—Mike Gravel!!! I & MANY OTHERS are voting for Gravel…DESPITE the fact that mainstream media never acknowledges him, he IS still running (he’s currently considering an “Independant” ticket)!!! =) SPREAD THE WORD!!!

Posted by: jcamron | February 11, 2008, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm

Ps. I’m with YOU, “jcamron”!!! MIKE GRAVEL FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!

Posted by: Kim Donnelly | February 11, 2008, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm

Reading, too many questions of what, who, where, and when for OB. Not great qualifications to be Commander in Chief, the one who leads this nations safety. Republicans might not have a great record but they don’t bring out the words OB does. Indians, white, black, latino, kkk, getto, etc…it is reality, but not suppose to be a factor, if your true to freedom. Tired of this through Obama’s media hype. God bless America.

Posted by: callenfallen | February 11, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm

Dont expect white men to vote for Obama over Mc Cain. No matter what these ridiculous ‘tapdanced’ LIAR polls show.
Watch the polls DRAMATICALLY change the minuite Clinton has been OUSTED and now they can all switch their vote over to Mc Cain.
The media has GONE WAY TOO FAR in its psychological warfare against Clinton.
The headlines are beginning to write her off YET AGAIN.

Posted by: tom | February 11, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm

Hey Obama lovers.
Go look the name ‘George Mc Govern’ . You may find a PILE of similarities to the hype Obama is bringing compared to him.
Kinda the reason super delegates were created in the first place.

Posted by: tom | February 11, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm

The Winner section of the above table needs to be revised. It seems that some of those states (Calif. NH and a few others) should actually be listed for Obama. It is really questionable whether the information can at all be relied on.

Posted by: Maverick | February 11, 2008, 7:07 pm 7:07 pm

UNIVERSECREATOR: Obama HIMSELF, constantly speaks about different “groups” of people (HE’S the ONE that BEGAN all that kind of talk)! IN FACT, last time I checked out HIS OWN website, he actually had different “messages” for each different “group” of people!!!!! CHECK IT OUT FOR YOURSELF!!!!!

Posted by: truemaven | February 11, 2008, 7:47 pm 7:47 pm

White males have always matched minorities against each other to fight their fight. They look good, minorities look stupid. The only minorities they cannot manipulate are the asians because the asians are smarter than them and can always see through their games.
What are they doing now, they want to rid of a female. The female is white, christian with a famous name. Its harder to beat her. So they play the morons for now, making a play to the easy to target school-educated/brainwashed children, all that hype of the great black hope. Those people have not lived in South Los Angeles or Long Beach pier area where you can get mugged by a black dude at 12 noon.
So the white males are brainwashing the so called book-educated to get rid of the better opponent – Hillary.
Obama hasnt been attacked by GOP yet. THE GOP LIKES him FOR NOW, duh, why do you think?
IF he wins nomination, then the real enemy would step in. He wont last. Besides if Obama wins nom, the Latinos would vote McCain. See, thats why they want Obama. The Latinos would vote for Mccain, never Obama.
Mensan Asian Girl

Posted by: Liz Wetzel | February 11, 2008, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm

Race and Gender is playing a great role in this election. Only thing is white not voting for white but not in case of black. That’s why obama is doing great.

Posted by: sb | February 11, 2008, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm

Some analysts and Obama supporters question Hillary Clinton electability among men. However, Hillary Clinton is getting more votes among men than John Kerry who lost the 2004 election by 11 points among men (55% for Bush, 44% for Kerry) while splitting the women votes (51% for Kerry, 48% for Bush).
Considering that during the general election more women vote than men (54% women, 46% men in 2004), Hillary Clinton votes among women should exceed the 54% that Al Gore received during the 2000 election, offsetting the usual advantage among men by a Republican candidate including John McCain. Democratic candidates Bill Clinton, Al Gore and John Kerry did not receive more than 38% of the votes among white men in 1996, 2000 and 2004.
Some polls on the Obama vs. McCain or Clinton vs. McCain may be wrong because they underestimate the big increase of women voters with Hillary Clinton as candidate.

Posted by: Angel | February 11, 2008, 9:31 pm 9:31 pm

The blacks are the racist in this election. Over 85% of the blacks will vote for Obama, simply because he is a black muslim, whom they can associate with. The Whites also vote for him, because they don’t want to be perceived as racist. Any white who is racist will face saction or lose their jobs. So, it is great for the media to praise Obama, and would not dare to explore his NO ACCOMPLISHEMENT in his home state of Illinois. The WHITES are tired to be called racist if they critize Obama.

Posted by: tigerjcs | February 11, 2008, 9:34 pm 9:34 pm

Angel and David to name a few. How many white people have you voted for? Were you asked to explain yourself? I don’t have to explain myself for voting for an intelligent, capable and charismatic individual who happens to look like me. You are sad, pathetic individuals holding on to an American that is vanishing before your eyes. American will NEVER again be what you want it to be thanks to Obama and the voters who have raised their hands and voices for him. Whether he wins or not, the noise you’re making is nothing more than a tantrum of an unevolved mind wishing things would forever remain the same. Are you afraid that the scales are finally balanced and everyone gets a chance at the prize? Afterall — what next — a Hispanic President or VP? I hope I live long enough to see that happen as well. Time is marching on — time to evolve.

Posted by: Diane | February 11, 2008, 9:43 pm 9:43 pm

I don’t care what color, race, religion, gender a candidate is or even his favorite bubble gum flavor. I don’t like Obama’s politics or Clinton’s. I’m not too much on McCain’s. Huckabee is better but he isn’t perfect. Clinton and Obama voted to give amnesty to illegal aliens. McCain wrote the bill! Huckabee wants to give college educations to illegal aliens, before Americans get it. McCain is willing to circumvent the Second Amendment to an extent. Hillary wants to totally disregard it. Obama makes Hillary look like the president of the NRA. Huckabee says he will enforce the First Amendment but I’m still not sure. The last time we elected a preacher we ended up in WW1 and the League of Nations which became the UN. I shudder to think what the next one will do. … Face it, there are no good choices left. It will come down to Hillary or Obama vs McCain. It’s just a matter of America losing a lot or a little. Either way we lose. I’m just glad Giuliani is out of it.

Posted by: jijalagi | February 11, 2008, 10:20 pm 10:20 pm

I am the lowest of the low: a WASP male conservative- I am scum, I know that. However in my pitiful little brain I know that I am NOT voting for Hillary Clinton and that this is because she is a Communist. It has nothing whatsoever to do with her being a woman.
I also know that I am NOT voting for BO because he too is a Communist, at least insofar as he has thought about it. It has absolutely nothing to do with his being Black and/or white.
These things I know.

Posted by: WBJR | February 11, 2008, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm

Defining the voters by college education may be a non-issue like the last 3 elections (1996, 2000 and 2004) with both, Democrat and Republican splitting those voters 50-50. I assume that some policies like the expiration of the Bush Tax cuts in 2010 may drive voters with college education with high salaries to vote Republican and away from any democratic candidate, Clinton or Obama.

Posted by: Angel | February 11, 2008, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm

I forgot to mention that I will not vote for McCain because he thinks it is virtuous to consort with and “work with” Communists such as the 2 Dem Candidates.

Posted by: WBJR | February 11, 2008, 11:01 pm 11:01 pm

In the past decades in the different parts of the world, women has exemplied themselves in politics became presidents and prime ministers but not in the United States. The US being the symbol of democracy and freedom and yet no woman has ever got the presidency. It is always the MEN who rules and wins but stumbles. Men should not have the monopoly of power but instead recognize also that women are capable of leading, nurturing, caring, and etc….
I guess it is high time for America (US) to have their first woman president. America must be proud to have a woman like Hillary standing up in this presidential election. She has the brain, intelligence, passion, education, vision and the experience. She is not perfect but she can be a good leader to give a NEW FACE to America (US) in a Woman’s perspective. Since America was born we have been lead by men, let us have a change of mentality in the perspective of a WOMAN.
I would love to see America (US) leading and making a herself a good model for the whole world in another perspective.
This is just my 1 dime opinion.

Posted by: philboni | February 12, 2008, 12:32 am 12:32 am

Dianne, I hope you will allow me to vote for a white man because he looks like me without calling me a racist. The one thing I would ask of you is to actually listen to Obama and not be swayed by words like hope and change and concentrate on what he is likely to accomplish. I guess you know that the country is several trillion dollars in debt and the only way we are going to be able to pay that debt is with a lowering of our standard of living. There is just no money to keep any promises with. Those are facts that none of the candidates are going to tell you. So you go out and vote for Obama and I will kill your vote by voting for a white man who is going to continue the fight against radical Islam and keep it overseas rather then in our backyard. That is the most overiding issue that we will ever have to face in our lifetime and cutting and running isn’t an option.

Posted by: Jim from KC | February 12, 2008, 12:45 am 12:45 am

Black or White, male or female, democrat or republican it would behoove you to consider that we are all living in the United States and we will all fall as will our fortunes if we don’t learn to respect the people that make up our diverse culture. You see the party is over. You can ot expect your economy to thrive if market share can not be increased globally. We are into a NEW part of the globe. One that knows you better than you know yourself. Do you really think a white woman can cut a deal that will keep you out of war for the rest of your life among a people who are non-white? The inability for the white male to do this has already been established. So how many of you are willing white man to kill yourself off to extinction? It’s not like your families are made up of 8-10 children like back in the days of the civil war. You don’t even number 5-6 as during WWII. So truth be told you can’t “win” your way anymore by fighting a war. The gigg is up so to speak. There are things you do not know because you have never been taught. Thank goodness many of you have made friends among non-white people so it is to you I say lead the way for the sake of your people for the sake of this country. After thousands of years of of whites against non-whites the United States is uniguely position to tapp it’s diversity to lead in a “NEW” way.
Stop being afraid to embrace it.

Posted by: inside the beltway | February 12, 2008, 2:01 am 2:01 am

It’s not that I don’t like Hillary or her policy positions, She seem likeable enough and could make a good president in a managerial way, although not really inspiring.
But, it’s her voice. I just can’t stand listening to it anymore and the more I hear it on TV the more I realize I just can’t see hearing for four to eight years. It is like hearing that Chimp Bush talk, but different.
I know it’s not a particularly intellectual point but it’s important anyway. You have to be able to listen the president speak. Sorry Hillary, you are just too shrill.

Posted by: Michael Robinson | February 12, 2008, 4:35 am 4:35 am

I think this is also a sexist issue, men are threaatend by clinton being a woman so they vote for who obama the preacher. A true man would vote for obama

Posted by: barb | February 12, 2008, 6:15 am 6:15 am

I THINK IT BECOMES IMPORTANT WHAT WHITE MEN ARE DOING-and WE ALL KNOW WHAT IT IS-SEXIST–BECAUSE WHITE WOMEN DID NOT EXPECT IT. SO HERE IS A WHITE WOMAN, CLINTON, DUKING IT OUT ALONE WITH THE SUPPORT OF WHITE WOMEN WHO ARE SHOCKED BY WHITE MALE BEHAVIOR.
THOSE OF US WHO KNOW WHITE MALE EXPECTED THAT.WHEN HE NEEDS VOTES, HE PlaYS THE WHITE WOMAN LIKE a GUITAR.
ONCE THE WHITE WOMAN NEEDS HELP, HE BECOMES THE WEASEL THAT HE IS. WHITE WOMEN LEARN SOMETHING FROM THIS. IN THE END mCAIN WILL BE PRESIDENT BECAUSE THE SAME WHITE MALES WILL VOTE AGAINST OBAMA IN THE GENERAL ELECTIONS.

Posted by: TJ | February 12, 2008, 6:40 am 6:40 am

HILLARY’S HANDS ARE TIED -BILL’S HANDS ARE TIED. OBAMA CAN THROW ALL THE MUD HE WANTS,,,,,,,,,IF YOU RESPOND TO OBAMA -IT’S RACISM – THIS IS CRAZY, MEN
HAD HILLARY ASKED OBAMA TO RELEASE DETAILS OF HIS TAXES, DEALINGS WITH REZKO AND to tell us WHO IS SENDING $32 MILLIONS TO OBAMA—THE MEDIA WOULD BE UP IN ARMS. TED KENNEDY WOULD BE ALL OVER THE STAGE JUMPING LIKE AN OLD FOOL AND SHUSTER WOULD CLAIM CLINTON GOT THE MONEY PIMPING HER PRECIOUS DAUGHTER…WHO IS THIS OBAMA AND WHY DOES HE THINK HE IS IN A POSITION TO INPUGNE THE INTEGRITY OF CLINTONS-
THIS GUY OBAMA IS CRAZY POWER HUNGRY. THIS WILL BACKFIRE!HOPEFULLY, THE MEDIA WILL BE FAIR FOR ONCE. BILL CLINTON GETS PAID $1,000,000 TO SPEAK AT ONE GATHERING. THEY HAVE UNBELIEVABLE REVENUES COMING FROM BOOKS—-OBAMA IS NOTHING BUT AIR-

Posted by: TJ | February 12, 2008, 6:49 am 6:49 am

Obama cries for Hillary to release her tax returns. She has until April just like every American. Why doesn’t Obama explain his relationship with Nulcear Exelon? According to an analysis by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics of donations over $250, Obama’s presidential warchest has received $194,750 from 150 Exelon employees, with top executives of the company sending in the checks. Exelon workers, bundled together, rank sixth in Obama’s top donor groups. Obama protects those who lines his pockets. Do a google search on Obama and Exelon and educate yourself on how Obama is just out to line his pockets. His real estate deals further prove this trend with him.

Posted by: White Guy Voting | February 12, 2008, 8:36 am 8:36 am

It saddens me to read the anonymous fear you all display so readily on a computer blog and in a ballot booth. It is this mentality that fed into and supported terror groups like the KKK. It is this mentality that led the South to want to try and cede the Union. But, this fear really is based in ignorance. After all, the South itself is even showing more progressiveness than you are in 2008.
To vote for a man because he is white is just as racist as not voting for a man because he is black. The same applies when voting for a woman. Voting for a woman because she is a “white” woman is also too considered racism.
(continued below)

Posted by: The Only Thing To Fear... | February 12, 2008, 10:27 am 10:27 am

And when you look at it more in depth, what truly has Hillary done? She keeps saying she has 35 years of experience? We’ve known of her for about 16 years of that so-called 35 years of experience, 8 of those years she spent as First Lady, where she tried to get Universal Healthcare passed without the consent or approval of Congress or the Senate. The next 8 years she spent as an elected US Senator for NY, during 9/11. What did she do during this time that was so astounding outside of strategically preparing to run for President? And what rallies, protests and bills did she get passed for poor people to vote for her? And to top it off, she has 2 terms in Senate to Obama’s almost 1 term. Outside of her “remarkable” Senate career, she has been a part of Bill Clinton’s inner circle. She has had the opportunity twice as a Senator to manage people, yet somehow when she expands that management to a national scale it buckles. She’s now bailing herself out, “loaning” money to her campaign, full time staffers now have to decide between taking no pay and jumping ship, her own campaign staff members don’t know who they are suppose to report to. What’s interesting here is that you are so consumed with race that you look past all this and focus on the fact that “she’s not a black man”. Ignorance at its core. In Obama, here is a man that served as an Illinois state senator for 8 years prior to his US Senate election, was able to get universal healthcare for 150,000 Illinois mothers and children, spoke out against the war and has done an record-breaking job raising money for his presidential campaign and inspires his staff and volunteers to organize in a way that is both successful and unseen. Yet, you immediately try to diminish his credentials to “black”. Its fear and ignorance. The media has shown you so many negative images of blacks, you only speak to Black Americans when forced (i.e. work or to say “excuse me” when passing, IF you even do that) and therefore have a very 1 dimensional view, especially the person who commented on Long Beach as if no stereotypes exist about Asian men and women.
(continued below)

Posted by: The Only Thing To Fear... | February 12, 2008, 10:28 am 10:28 am

Everyone on this blog, the world is passing you by. And the world is not white. White power only exists in your minds. Your children are moving beyond it because they see the world as it exists today and tomorrow, not as it existed yesterday. And considering Obama’s ethnic background, I would highly suggest that all of you also research your own backgrounds and discover who is also in your family lineage — regardless of which part of the nation you now live in. Slavery not only strong impacted and built this country economically, but also genealogically. Change is the only constant in life people. Reality check yourselves and do not let your decisions be driven by fear and ignorance.

Posted by: The Only Thing To Fear... | February 12, 2008, 10:29 am 10:29 am

To The Only Thing To Fear;
As a white man the only thing I fear is ignorance on a mass scale, and this is what we are getting with the Obama crowd. I bet if you went to one of his rallies of star-stuck worshipers and pulled some of them aside for an impromptu interview, you could not get a decent answer as far as what they think of his actual POSITIONS on ISSUES!. All you will get are teary eyed wails of “hope” and “change”, I swear some of these Obamites look like they are in one of those brainwashing cults – scary. One word descriptions I have NOT heard from Obama fans are; integrity, principled, substantive, open.

Posted by: libsukbad | February 12, 2008, 10:45 am 10:45 am

One more thing that’s been driving me nuts about the fawning Obama coverage – they keep talking about the college educated voters going for him, well my retort to that is point out how watered down and weak most majors at universities has become. It is NOT by coincidence that MOST of our country’s best, brightest and biggest innovators are either college dropouts or never attended at all. The university experience in malleable fields such as political science, history, philosophy/psychology and other “liberal arts” type disciplines are now nothing more than PC liberal indoctrination centers. It is in fact a joke that they are even allowed to teach economics because the liberal, tenure system they use ensures non-competitive, poorly balanced and costly education, it is no wonder that the cost of education is rising at a pace even much faster than health care. Yet no one rails against “big education” – wonder why that is?.

Posted by: libsukbad | February 12, 2008, 11:05 am 11:05 am

I am a white male 33 and first the firs time in my life I will be voting for a republican Mcain. This has nothing to do with race. Obama one I do not belive he is not Muslim. Two whare is the American flag during his events.
Go Hilliary-Then if HIlliary does not get the nomination Mcain.

Posted by: chris | February 12, 2008, 11:33 am 11:33 am

libs…bad, have you ever gone to Obama’s website and read under ‘issues’ his positions on healthcare, seniors, social security, national defense, etc.? Perhaps if you had you would understand why more and more people are joining him. His ideas are much better than Hillary’s because he doesn’t ‘owe’ corporate America anything, like Hillary does for the huge donations they gave her. Just like Bill before her. Obama has proven his heart is in the right place to lead us by not taking corporate dollars and his extensive, intelligent plans on his website shows he is prepared to be our leader. Read, then you’ll understand.

Posted by: Lydia | February 12, 2008, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm

Could the greater preference among white college-educated men and women for Obama be the result of them being more likely to read the details? In college, one has to do a lot of reading and when writing, one has to ‘back up’ statements with facts. This is the argument I keep making, that if folks actually went to the candidates websites, read their positions under ‘issues’, they would see the huge difference between Obama and Hillary. Obama’s plans are much more detailed, workable and encompass much greater change for good. Whether it is helping seniors, (no income tax on those who earn under $50,000) energy, (real changes in mpg, helping American companies re-tool for more efficient models, etc.)affordable health insurance for all who want it, he outlines why, and how we’ll pay for it. Hillary’s plans are too little to really make a difference. (Except her health insurance where it is mandatory you buy it. Big Brother lives!) Personally I’ve never gone to college but I do like knowing the facts before I make big decisions.

Posted by: Lydia | February 12, 2008, 12:34 pm 12:34 pm

Ps. “Thee most anti-corruption candidate” who is STILL running (though you’d
NEVER
KNOW it) is MIKE GRAVEL!

Posted by: Gene Yuss | February 12, 2008, 1:34 pm 1:34 pm

If Obama wins the nomination angry white women and white men will flock to McCain. When faced with the choice of a black male or white male candidate, white men will vote for their race over their party. Men in general dont vote with their emotions so when faced with a candidate with military and government experience over a cult leader who uses oratory and emotion odds are that white men will vote logically.

Posted by: moddem | February 12, 2008, 2:38 pm 2:38 pm

I would think that white men would vote the opposite of Oprah (my husband can’t stand her)

Posted by: Christine | February 12, 2008, 2:42 pm 2:42 pm

To all of those who voted for Obama I have one thing to say:
You’re only young and stupid once!

Posted by: Cynic | February 12, 2008, 2:45 pm 2:45 pm

A vote for Obama is a vote for Ted Kennedy

Posted by: Independent | February 12, 2008, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm

It doesnt matter who wins because what we have here are the corporate-owned Republicrats who pander to all of us to win our votes only to turn around and stick it to us

Posted by: SportsFan | February 12, 2008, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm

moddem, I agree with you, especially when it comes to whites over 60. Sorry to say it, but I don’t think older folks will vote for a woman or anyone of color. With luck and more open minds, in a few years, it won’t make a difference. I’m a white woman, not affiliated with any party, who would never vote for McCain. After his amnesty proposal and reading recently about how his first marriage ended, he will never get my vote. I always say if someone is willing to treat the other parent of their children in such a manner, imagine what they’d be willing to do to the rest of us.

Posted by: LagunaTriMom | February 12, 2008, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm

“Gene Yuss”: Your two comments above, ARE GENIUS!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

Posted by: partylinesRbs | February 12, 2008, 4:32 pm 4:32 pm

Gene Yuss: I MEANT to ask you—ARE you going to vote AT ALL? Even though I KNOW what you said IS MOST PROBABLY TRUE, I MYSELF, am going to give it a shot, & am going to vote for MIKE GRAVEL…HOPE you do TOO!!!

Posted by: partylinesRbs | February 12, 2008, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm

Folks, white men know exactly what they are doing and let me break it down to you on POLITICAL STRATEGY 101.
1.FIND YOUR STRONGEST THREAT
2.FORM AN ALLIANCE
3.SEPERATE THE WEAK AND THE STRONG
4.USE THE WEAK TO GET RIDE OF YOUR
STRONGEST OPPONENT
5.THEN DESTROY THE WEAK AT THE END
The republican party knows too well that Hillary is their biggest threat.
They and the media know how Bill Clinton is loved by the blacks and the
hispanics,then in south carolina they
injected race and the black community
fell for it.In california and nevada,
they tried on the hispanics,but they did not fall for it.What makes me so mad about the african americans right now is that they tend to forget what Bill Clinton went through for them from the white community just because he
embraced them in his life as soon as
he became the president of the United
States.He on behalf of the country
appologized for the Tuskegee experiment,he passed the family leave act which Reagan and Bush refused to sign.The most beneficial of this piece of legislation are women.Obama can not win in the general election.When senator Edward was in the race,most of the white men voted for him and not Obama so what make anyone think that if Obama becomes the nominee which I hope not that white men will chose that liberal senator over McCain?.Two things that I want all the Obama supportes to pay close attention to,
1.When Mitt Romney left,he made one
statement that I felt is a warning
to the democrats quote”I LEFT FOR
THE SAKE OF OUR PARTY” unquote.
2.All the states that Obama won,are all
republican strong hold.They will not
vote for a democrat in november.

Posted by: UGOCHUKWU | February 12, 2008, 6:16 pm 6:16 pm

How refreshing it would be if ABC and others broke down the election according to the AMERICAN vote. We ARE still one country, aren’t we? You know, the Melting Pot? E Pluribus Unum and all that crap?
I wouldn’t expect this racial dissection and backbiting to stop even with an Obama presidency. Too many people have a stake invested in stoking racial divisions, including ABC. It’s copy too good to let go. This blog is a perfect case in point.
Think of it this way: if racism were declared dead in an Obama election, what then would Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and all the other so-called “black leaders” do for work without Whitey to kick around anymore?
Without being able to claim oppression with a black president steering the Ship of State? Take ‘The Man’ away, and what have they got? What do they do when their man is ‘The Man’?
They’d be in the same state of hurt Al Gore, all the thousands of junk scientists and overpaid UN bureaucrats would be in if Global Warming was definitively exposed as a hoax. Never forget that for some people, stirring social and racial discord, and instilling groundless fear and panic isn’t just an adventure, it’s a job. Well-paying, most of them too.

Posted by: JohnnyT | February 12, 2008, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm

Attention Delegates & Super Delegates, ya need to take notice; American has spoken we want Obama as the Demo. Nominee

Posted by: Demo Rules | February 12, 2008, 11:57 pm 11:57 pm

Well.
The sheer number of conspiracy-theorists in the thread (those who say “[white] men” are voting strategically for Obama to ensure a win by McCain – obviously, since he’s THE white male) proves that there is a high degree of illiteracy and inumeracy among those who are upset about Clinton’s defeat. The article clearly SAYS that white MEN are 50% LESS likely than white women to vote on the basis of sex, and STILL there are female gender warriors writing in to claim a conspiracy of promoting white males in their support of Obama. Such gender warriors – and one of them even claims to be a member of MENSA – who are likely a part of or related to this 30+% phenomenon of sexist women, only prove how idiotic they are when they spout this sort of illogical garbage and nonsense. And they only perpetuate a stereotype of women being less likely to possess the capacity for logical thought. A truly fatuous exercise in self-parody if ever there was one.
It was one thing to argue how Hillary’s candidacy would be a good thing as a role model for girls – which I was cynical about given her greater resemblance to a female Nixon than to a female Washington or Lincoln – but it is entirely another to witness a candidacy that for so many revolves as meaninglessly around sisterhood as Bush’s presidency revolved around nationalism. Some 20% of the electorate would support Bush no matter what because of the power of that theme. Luckily, the 30 some odd percent of white women who have the same mental deficits when it comes to their own form of solidarity comprise an even smaller share of the electorate, though. But they are just as die-hard in their passionate obsession with a meaningless criterion in the candidates. And the clincher is that, the reason Hillary is doing so comparitively poorly – given her extraordinary privileges, and YES, I mean PRIVILEGES, coming into this race – is that she is one of them. Just the same way BUSH is one of his own crowd of merry band of idiots.
There is nothing more pathetic than someone so willing to die-hard for something so removed from reality. I always thought there was something to I needed to find more respect for when it came to feminism, but now this finally proves that I don’t. The downfall of Hillary’s ignominous candidacy marks the quixotic death of second-wave feminism more capably than any MAN could have demonstrated it. Short of depriving their male citizens the vote, women will now have to accept that if they want to compete politically in a democracy, they will have to do it in the only way that it makes sense to – as INDIVIDUALS and not as members of a hive-minded collective of biological identity-obsessed freaks. Keep evolving to the Third Wave, Ladies and learn to embrace individuality – as the rest of the grown-up world has done. It can be a scary concept, I know, but so can be a state of permanent infantilization. Grow up already, as the generation of males and females who have followed you already have done so.

Posted by: Zarathustra | February 13, 2008, 1:22 am 1:22 am

Believe it or not, you will see the real White Men voters in this November. Be patient.

Posted by: stock_craft | February 13, 2008, 2:26 am 2:26 am

Reading these comments should raise concern for any intelligent person who has managed to venture beyond the daily onslaught of rhetoric and untruths inundating the blogs, media, and spinmeister’s such as Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin and others. On this post alone we have one who declared IRS a non-federal agency, owned by a cartel (possibly he might have been referring to the Federal Reserve). One posted Hillary as having served two Senatorial terms, (she has served one full six year term and was re-elected to a second term beginning in 2007 and has spent that entire year campaigning). One’s who keep posting that Senator Obama said he did not VOTE for the Iraq war. (he said he COULDN’T SUPPORT the action, never has he said he didn’t vote for the resolution). One posted he will not vote for McCain because he consorts with the two Communist Democratic candidates, (so I guess he’s not voting at all and I wonder why he’s bothering to post). Probably less than 5% of people posting on blogs mentions anything at all about these candidates records. Very few note that while Hillary Clinton in her first six years was authoring and getting passed into law, only 20 pieces of legislation, (most of which was totally without meaning,{naming post offices, congratulating soccer teams, declaring forest in Puerto Rico part of Nationally protected reserve, etc.}). Barack Obama was authoring and passing legislation dealing with Government Transparency, Illegal Immigration, Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Scaling back of earmarks, ending lobbying as we now know it. If you like I can post both of these Senator’s records straight from the Senate floor. Not one person has mentioned that John McCain has a 51% absentee record from the Senate over his entire career. Not one has mentioned the fact that Barack Obama has proposed more legislation benefiting our veterans than any other Senator in three decades, while John McCain talks about being a veteran. Not one mentions the fact Senator Obama who proposes strong social infrastructures as well as strong national defense introduced legislation to overhaul our tax structure and close tax loopholes that presently allow the modern day robber barons to continue to drain this nation of capital. Not one of you has commented on the fact that Hillary Clinton in her first year earned the title in the Senate as “earmark queen” (Google the phrase) , favoring mainly New York defense and pharmaceutical industries, who in turn have become huge contributors to her campaign. A practice Barack Obama shuns and has introduced legislation to stop. It’s really scary to know that so few actually take take the time to study these candidates and will have a huge impact in the decision of who will lead this nation’s government. Also the writer of this article points out the statistic that those of the caucasian race favoring Senator Obama are those of higher education, if he were to take his statistics even further, he would find that not only white, but also black, hispanic, and asian people of higher education lean heavily toward Senator Obama.

Posted by: GC | February 13, 2008, 8:06 am 8:06 am

Daily Proof that Sexism is Greater than Racism in America! White Males are sick and tired of battling for jobs with White Women and they won’t stand for a Woman being elected to the highest position in America – The President of the United States. As a White Woman in Corporate America, I see this theme daily!

Posted by: Juli An | February 13, 2008, 10:07 am 10:07 am

Its truly amazing and yet, still heart
breaking to read the comments of whom I would suspect to be the comments of those with simply an opinion, but not any real experience with the “bottom” of this society. As an over 50, black male born and raised in the “inner city”
and having retired from the US Military,
its crazy to read how a white woman thinks that sexism is greater than racism in this country! Tell me ma’am,
how many white women are shot in the back by police for simply being a woman?
And why is it okay for females to vote for Clinton and be proud of their vote,
but somehow its “racist” for blacks to
vote for Obama? Actually, I don’t really blame those with that mentality because I know we all are the products of a racist, sexist, homophobic society.
And the ruling class understands full well that in order for them to remain in
power, they must continue to promote fear to separate us whom have much more
in common with each other than with them
Specifically, I’m talking about white middle class whites in this country who
amazingly seem to identify with a class of people who they could NEVER aspire to be…the ruling class! Get with it people and get over your shortsighted, racist tendencies. You ain’t gotta like
me as I don’t have to like you…however
whether you choose to accept it or not,
you (middle class whites) have much more
in common with working and middle class
blacks and latinos in this country than
you ever will have with the 2% of people
who rule this country. Its NOT about
race or gender, its about class.

Posted by: INCREDULOUS1 | February 13, 2008, 11:01 am 11:01 am

Ok I’m sick to death of hearing OB supporters crying racism constantly when primary after primary, demographic break downs are showing that its not whites who are unwilling to support a Black candidate, they’re votes are being close to split quite consistently, where you do see a huge trend to refuse to support a white candidate is in the 85 and 90% support from Black voters. They have flamed the fires of racial anger more than anyone and their supporters, like former gov. of VA, , are still doing it mis-representing Clintons comments about Barack’s war vote being a fairytale to a blanket BO’s candidancy is a fairy tale which it absolutely was not.
WAKE UP democrats, Republicans want to run against Obama. Why do you think so many have been talking about how they hoped Hillary will get knocked out in the primaries….hmm wonder why that is??? Or why in some of those early debates their focus was on Hillary so the pundits (who are already giving OB 83% positive coverage to 53 for Clinton) can say oh see their focusing on HIllary their just itching to run against Hillary. OR it could be a little Brae Rabbit, “Please don’t toss me in that briar patch” going on. Why would republicans want to run against the only Democratic brand name to beat them, not only once but twice, making Clinton the only dem to win two consecutive terms since FDR? Hmmm? I wonder….
Obama’s a nice guy but he’s not ready yet and his messianic movement message that only he can save the country concerns me a bit. If you want to hear the right griping about the affirmative action nominee who somehow got the nomination over the better qualified white candidate, elect Barack Obama. If you think white republican men are going to vote for him in November your nuts. The republicans are playing you and manipulating our primaries (8% of VA voters in the dem primary were Rep-I’ve read enough Coulter bitching articles about supposedly Dem’s mucking up Republicans primaries by voting in them, to know the GOP is no stranger to this practice….don’t let them do it to us again. McCain is even scarier than Bushco.

Posted by: demchick925 | February 13, 2008, 1:17 pm 1:17 pm

What is CLEAR from many of the post on here is…..”There are still many really SICK PEOPLE in this country”.
I thought we were having primaries for 2008, while from the looks of things some of you are rejects from the 1800′s or 1900′s! Move on people or try READING book for once and explore life outside of the tired realm of black and white.
By the way, why can’t African Americans be voting for who they think is the best candidate? Were they being racist every time since Reconstruction when casting a ballot for a “white candidate”
?
I think what those that make such clearly stupid statements are doing is describing their voting habits.
Get a life and stop race/gender baiting…..It’s OLD!

Posted by: david | February 13, 2008, 3:19 pm 3:19 pm

War hero veteran MCCain will crush Obama!! Obama has never even been to Iraq and Obama never served on a national security committee…at least Hillary can say she has been to Iraq multiple times and serves on the security committee. Seriously- What chance does Obama have against McCain when it comes to national security?!!??? The Republicans will win AGAIN if Obama is the nominee.

Posted by: Super White Guy | February 13, 2008, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm

I applaud you, and agree wholeheartedly with you, Jim from KC.

Posted by: JC | February 13, 2008, 4:16 pm 4:16 pm

Someone here states that Obama’s “messianic movement message that only he can save the country concerns” her a bit.
See, now this would be an example of voting based on one’s emotions – namely, the emotion of concern.
First of all, emotions are not all bad things. Ignorance is a bad thing. And arguments from ignorance are flying a-plenty around this thread. Ignorance like this assertion that Republican white men (all of them? every last one?) are voting strategically for Obama now and would reject him based on his race later. Ignorance like this assertion that McCain would crush Obama in a general but would have a real tough time with Hillary. Those of us who went to college understand what is lacking in these assertions. It’s called evidence, people. And as the bunch that tends to be better-educated here, it is plain that the research shows that this is simply not the case.
(BTW, intelligence is not solely relegated to college-educated folks – I appreciate those who’ve written in and stated plainly that although they haven’t been to college, they can still make intelligent arguments about this matter and why they support Obama, regardless – KUDOS).
Now, having addressed this melarchy about emotion being all bad, and the implied canard associated with that – that Hillary’s voters allow for no “emotional” variables into their political calculus, let’s get to the real core of the matter that this has become. Obama is much stronger against McCain because he can make contrasts against his opponent, particularly contrasts that are and were supported by large percentages of the electorate. He doesn’t have to just veer off of meaningless, nuanced distinctions – seeing how much Hillary’s tried to pretend she’s a Republican when it comes to foreign policy over the last six years – and actually offer an alternative. This is a strength, folks.
Hillary might actually come across as stronger when it comes to how she is perceived on foreign policy, but what you have to keep in mind is that accumulating “experiences”, while all well and good, tells us nothing about something infinitely more important – and that is one’s sense of JUDGMENT. Hillary has a history of having made HORRENDOUS BLUNDERS OF JUDGMENT over the course of her political career, and if ruining the cause of health care reform for the last decade, or voting to authorize what is seen as the biggest foreign policy disaster is not an error of judgment – and BTW, these are errors THAT SHE STILL REFUSES TO ADMIT TO (ANOTHER SEVERE ERROR OF JUDGMENT IN ITSELF) – then nothing is.
Obama can get, as a VP nominee, someone who is seen as offering balance with strong foreign policy credentials. That will be the easy part. It could even be Hillary – seeing as how stubbornly both she and her Gender Warrior “Sisters” refuse to see the light on what a poor and not very electable candidate she can be in many ways. It’s no big deal. She’ll take that corner office she tried to boot Al Gore out of back in 1993 – where she’ll play out her obsessively wonkish and “managerial” conceptions of the administration and leave Obama to do what he cleans the floor up with her on – leading a country that he can unite and bring to a stronger sense of consensus. It will be less problematic with her there the next time she opens up her mouth to insult the intelligence of the electorate, as she predictably does.

Posted by: Zarathustra | February 13, 2008, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm

It is unbelievable that so many people can jump on the banwagan especially the media who want to make Obama look as the untouchable and the daily cried we have found a saviour The messiah Obama.But what is his nessage .Change chamge change to what?

Posted by: Damazing Grace | February 13, 2008, 10:40 pm 10:40 pm

Election is not a kid game – “Yes, we can” or “No, you can’t”. It involves our futures and many lives of our soldiers in Iraq, so use yours votes and vote smartly. Senator Obama just like a new grad, don’t expect him to lead this country out of poverty and end the Iraq war overnight. White men and GOP will terminate his political life in this November if he wins the nomination. Mark my word.

Posted by: stock_craft | February 14, 2008, 12:22 am 12:22 am

Now, this article bears watching. We are quite a cynical people. We dearly love to fight and white men voting for a black man over a white man in America? What have we come to? I love this NEW AMERICAN MAJORITY. The hopes and dreams of the people who founded this country are about to be realized. What we have promoted in a Democracy is now coming to pass. Our Best Days are in front of us. Take a deep breath. It’s going to be interesting. Mrs. Clinton will not win the nomination. I wish for her, a graceful exit. Abraham Lincoln said it well, “with the people, you can do anything, without them, you can do nothing”. The people, (in the Democratic Party) are not with her.
Now on to the General Election. Where we will determine principally whether we live in a Republic or a Democracy.
Senator Obama got a little specific today. He’s going to spend a little money here at home. The Republicans say it’s going to cost but it’s money spent at home not across the waters and our men and women can look forward to coming home to jobs and a future. That’s what we all want, for real. Now if we can just get past a few things, and we will, we have no choice.

Posted by: Hurley Jones | February 14, 2008, 2:43 am 2:43 am

This type of thinking stems back to slave days where one drop of Black blood made a person Black.
Don’t think so; think I’m wacky? think about Tiger Woods…
One Black grandparent, one White grandparent, two Oriental grandparents. What is he? According to every source that writes about him, he is Black! His children, regardless of the race of their mother, will be considered Black; and they might only have one Black great grandparent!
I think he’s an American with Oriental characteristics and dark skin; but the press, et al, says he’s Black. (Look at his eyes.)
Who is obsessed with race? Liberals and democrats primarily – who did this story?
There are more important things at stake but race dominates this issue.
Why isn’t ABC covering his Senate Bill 2433, the Global Poverty Act of 2007? That’s where our sovereignty is being transfered to the UN; but is that important? Not according to ABC, what’s important are racial issues.
This is disgusting.

Posted by: Aime Watts, Jr. | February 15, 2008, 9:05 pm 9:05 pm

I’m a white man and am voting for Clinton. At first, Obama had me in tears when listening to his speeches. After hearing the same rhetoric over and over, I’ve come to realise it is only that – rhetoric without substance. I’m also a college graduate, so that’s now 2 strikes against the polls supposedly favoring Obama. Bill Clinton hit it on the head but nobody really wants to talk about it. It is all about race and it always has been. These African American politicians that are jumping from the Titanic in favor of Obama had this planned from the beginning. They were never “pro” Hillary. They wanted to appear they were “pro” Hillary so that it wouldn’t look like it was tied to racism. But, it’s obvious their timing is impeccable. They have turned out to be racial hypocrites planning this from the beginning. It’s so disappointing. If Hillary doesn’t get the nomination, I will vote for Obama over McCain, but it will be with much trepidation!

Posted by: W Rodgers | February 16, 2008, 11:31 am 11:31 am

to Demchick925 -
I agree with everything you’ve said. Of course the Republicans want Obama to get the nomination and not Hillary. They know he’s the easiest of the two to beat. Why do you think that in Republican states they allow open caucuses or open primaries? It’s because the Republicans can “hand pick” the Democratic nominee. For example, Nebraska, a red state, had open causes. It turns out, 80% of REGISTERED Republicans came out to vote in the Democratic caucuses. Who won? Obama by more than 60/30 over Clinton. The Republicans want Obama! The same thing may happen in Texas. Another red state that has an open primary, according to Dick Morris, who laughs at the possibility of Clinton getting knocked out because of the same scenario. They are masters at winning their game, but their dishonesty confirms to me why I will NEVER vote for a Republican again!

Posted by: W Rodgers | February 16, 2008, 11:46 am 11:46 am

Anyone who thinks that sexism isn’t a big part of this race is just kidding themselves. I don’t think all men are sexist but there is enough to keep Hillary from getting elected. When women fought for the right to vote the white men in power decided to give it to the black man leaving white and black women out in the cold. This is just history repeating itself.

Posted by: Firefigher | February 21, 2008, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm

I’m a white male that’s never been to college and after reading some of the posts by the college educated I don’t think I’ll ever bother. There isn’t a real difference in the three Candidates althouth
the empty rhetoric has some variations in it. None of them haved addressed the real issues that are destroying this country.

Posted by: dave charlotte USSA | May 3, 2008, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm

I predict that the next aggressive superpower will grow too tired digging through the blowed up and ash ridden politically correct and very dead military industrial complex that exists today (or the one coming to fruition) before they can get to the real America which will be too busy tinkering in the backyard and educating their own kids to even notice the enemy digging or the destruction that came before.

Posted by: dave charlotte USSA | May 3, 2008, 11:53 pm 11:53 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.