Class gap in support bases for HRC and Obama

[draft_mario_cuomo]

This is ironic since many Obama supporters charge HRC with being a corporate tool (without ever pointing to any actual differences on the issues between the two).

==WASHINGTON - Barack Obama is running well among high-earning, well-educated Democrats in the race for his party's 2008 presidential nomination. But unless he can broaden his appeal, he risks mimicking past flameouts by Gary Hart, Paul Tsongas and Bill Bradley.==

==But Clinton also held big advantages over Obama among lower-income, less educated Democrats. That included a 4-to-1 edge among people earning less than $25,000 a year and a nearly 3-to-1 margin with people who have not attended college. With the two roughly splitting support from the best-educated, highest-earning Democrats, that spells potential trouble for Obama.==

==n addition, Obama's message of optimism and new approaches tends to be attractive to better-off Democrats, political professionals say. Clinton also has a bank of good will with lower-income voters because of their strong bond with her husband, former President Clinton.==

==Another strong point for Clinton is older voters, a group that tends to vote heavily. While she and Obama roughly split the vote of people less than age 50, she has about a 3-to-1 edge among voters older than that.==

Read the rest at http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/ap/news/nation/elections/presidential/8127917.html

[wyldwolf]

1. this trend can be traced back decades

[Herman Munster]

2. this probably explains why the netroots doesn't support Clinton

Clinton's supporters don't have the time to post on message boards and they may not even have internet access. They are busy working, raising a family, and just trying to get by day to day.

[jefferson_dem]

5. So the less informed and less attentive voters are supporting Hillary?

I would agree with that assumption. She is the "easy" choice ... for now.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

10. Obama was in the 20's in the polls before he said a single word about what he would do as prez

;)

[jefferson_dem]

11. I haven't checked your numbers but he does have natural charm and charisma. Good for him.

;)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

17. Here are the numbers

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html#polls

Three polls had him in the low 20's in November. Several polls over the next three months had him in the 20's--before he even was running for president. A week after he announced his candidacy he moved into the mid-25's, before he even had anything resembling a platform. He has essentially remained there ever since, despite months of campaigning. The exceptions are that he got into the high 20's and even the 30-32% in some polls at various points, meaning that the amount of support he added due to campaigning was 6-7%. The last two polls, done after memogate and the Tony Rezko story, have him returning to the low 20's (20% and 21%). ;)

You are right. He does have a special charm and charisma (the flip side is he is more reliant on that and his image for support, hence he is more vulnerable to anything that tarnishes his brand, like memogate). Still, your point was that HRC supporters are more uninformed than Obama supporters. That seems odd in light of Bo's strength before people had a chance to become informed about what he intended to do. ;)

[MGKrebs]

14. WTF? Where did you get that?

"less informed and less attentive voters are supporting Hillary". Lower income, yes, but not paying attention? Apparently just the opposite...

"Obama's weaker showing among lesser-educated and lower-earning people is partly because many people are not yet following a race in which voting doesn't start for seven months. That gives Clinton an early edge because virtually everyone has heard of her."

WTF does that mean? Higher educated and higher income people haven't heard of Hillary Clinton but lower income people have?

[jefferson_dem]

21. No. The article and the poster referred to the fact that those with less education

disproportionately support Obama. I'm merely expressing that finding.

My understanding is this -

Everyone has heard of Hillary, including those who are not as educated. Obama is less familiar to voters, especially among those who are less educated (and who also happen to be those out there "working for a living", as the poster above suggested). Couldn't we also assume those who are not as educated, and who are "working for a living," are less attentive to the campaign at this point at least?

That's all... No big deal...

[wyldwolf]

6. a little bit to that. But the candidates in question tend to talk above the common man...

... they come across as having an "I'm smarter than you" attitude when, in fact, they can't really identify with lower and middle classes. Voters pick up on this which is why, much more often than not, these types are turned away at the polls.

[jefferson_dem]

23. More than anything else, voters want authenticity. Whoever can project that the best will win.

n/t

[eridani]

8. Yep--way back to the assault on labor that accelerated after 1980

It just makes you cream your jeans that people are working more hours for less pay and have less time to pay attention to the public sphere, and what you and Hillary and Obama want is more of the same.

[wyldwolf]

25. actually way before that

You know, you really have an attitude in regards to me. Like a crush.

[eridani]

26. Rah, rah for the race to the bottom

Not.

[wyldwolf]

28. did you put one of those anonymous valentines day cards in my mailbox last Feb?

[eridani]

31. I think you'd find Scooter or Tweety more compatible n/t

[wyldwolf]

32. but they don't have a thing for me like you do.

[illinoisprogressive]

3. Concidering that Hillary will not release her earmarks for the public, your smear is a big yawner

and couple that with the fact that she has yet to release her tax returns. So does Edwards. and looking at what he used his poverty center for, well, your trash up is just making you look like trash.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

9. Smear? Is anything that doesn't fit with Obama HQ's story deemed a "smear"?

:rofl:

This is not surprising. As Herman Munster noted, this helps explain why she struggles on the netroots but has a healthy lead among the general Democratic population.

I believed Edwards did release it. I think that is how the amount he gave in charity became public. Edwards gave $600,000-700,000 in charity last year. Some Ivy League millionaire candidates who talk about being "our brother's keepers, out sister's keepers", our responsibility to others, unity, etc. are known to very, very stingy when it comes to shelling out their money (as opposed to other people's money via government) for helping others...Thankfully, John Edwards is not like that.

==So does Edwards. and looking at what he used his poverty center for==

Yeah, how dare he try to help find solutions to a terrible problem that afflicts 37 million Americans. :eyes: After all, he could have spent that time writing a book hyping himself and made millions doing so...

[pampango]

24. Don't you think Hillary will release her earmarks to the public

before long? Has she responded publically on her intentions?

It would seem to be something that all the current senators and representatives who are presidential candidates will be expected to do. If one does it, it becomes fodder for the next round of debates?

[jefferson_dem]

4. This story, which i also posted here earlier, shows some challenges for Obama. That's true.

It's also interesting that Obama gets more support among those who are more educated.

***

Obama's weaker showing among lesser-educated and lower-earning people is partly because many people are not yet following a race in which voting doesn't start for seven months. That gives Clinton an early edge because virtually
everyone has heard of her.

***

I would wager that Obama gets more support among those people who are more informed on the election contest itself, as well as among those who are more formally educated. Furthermore, i haven't seen the numbers but i would also bet that Obama gets more support from those who are most interested and enthusiastic about the election.

[BeyondGeography]

13. There's a definite upside for Obama in this analysis

He is well-positioned to get strong support from lower-income voters, once they learn more about him (he's the only candidate of the top three who has actually lived and worked among the urban poor and the depth of his knowledge of the challenges facing them is unmatched) and his policies. If he can hold onto his established base, he will be in very good shape in the run-up to January.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

19. That is true

I am sure the Obama campaign is aware of this weakness and working hard to increase its support among those groups and cut into part of HRC's base. Of course, all the candidates will be trying to improve among particular groups (for instance, Edwards among Latinos. I saw one poll that had him at 12% but his name ID was I think 40%). I agree, though, that BO is well-positioned to make gains, although as I said in another post, his support is likely the most volatile because of his reliance on his brand rather than his platform (Edwards) or a long record (HRC).

==(he's the only candidate of the top three who has actually lived and worked among the urban poor and the depth of his knowledge of the challenges facing them is unmatched)==

That is true but there is also a large number of low-income people in rural areas. His attempts to appeal to them will be more difficult. They will be easier for Edwards, just as appealing to urban low-income people for JE won't be as easy as it will be for BO.

[eridani]

7. They're both corporate tools

Obams is less well-known among people who don't have time to actively seek out information.

[StudentsMustUniteNow]

33. You said it. n/t

[BeyondGeography]

12. Let's see, Clinton runs well with older voters and the lower-income

segment. Obama does well with younger voters, highly-educated whites and blacks. Clinton also does well with blacks. So where does that leave Edwards? (Could it be, stuck in third place?)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

15. Edwards is closer to Obama than Obama is to HRC

We know he is 3rd (where some guy named Kerry was at this point in 2003 ;) ).Your point?

It is amusing to see Obama supporters tout how great he is doing in the polls vis-a-vis HRC and then pronounce the Edwards candidacy dead when he is closer to Obama than BO is to HRC. The latest national poll (Cook) had Edwards 7 points behind Obama (the last poll by this firm, in mid-May, had Edwards 11 points Obama and Obama 8 behind HRC) while BO was 10 points in arrears of HRC. In other words, Edwards closed the gap by 4 points to Obama while Obama lost 3 points to HRC. How? Obama fell four points. It seems that finally receiving media scrutiny is having an effect on the blank slate. A Gallup poll days before the Cook poll recorded a 9 point decline for Obama.

At this point in 2003 Holy Joe led, Kerry was 3rd, Edwards was tied for 6th with Sharpton. Clark entered the race, amid much media hype, and immediately shot to 1st place and he remaining in the top 2--until Iowa. The lesson? Polls today are not set in stone. ;)

[BeyondGeography]

16. Oh, he's far from dead, but he is scrambling for votes

which is obvious when you hear Elizabeth compare him with Jesse Helms and JRE himself boast of his ability to campaign anywhere (unlike the black guy and the broad). Whites who may not be comfortable with a minority or a woman would seem to be a prime target for Edwards, based on what we have heard in the past two weeks. That's also known as the bottom of the barrel.

I'm not looking at the polls so much as the dynamic.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

18. He seems to be recovering after falling to the single digits in a poll or two

==JRE himself boast of his ability to campaign anywhere (unlike the black guy and the broad).==

That was a "smear". ;) As was proven, he was alluding to his southern roots--like he did in 2004 when there was no serious black or female candidate. Of course, you knew that. ;)

==Whites who may not be comfortable with a minority or a woman would seem to be a prime target for Edwards, based on what we have heard in the past two weeks.==

It is certainly a factor that some people like that will vote for Edwards, just as some women who are not comfortable with another male president will vote for HRC, or some African-Americans will vote for Obama because they are not comfortable with another white president. The bottom line is that I have never seen an Edwards supporter here argue that his color or gender makes him more electable. Some HRC supporters have cited her gender by claiming a HRC nomination will lead to sky-high Democratic female turnout. Obama supporters have made similar claims regarding Democratic black turnout in the South. I saw one post that claimed black turnout would be so astronomical if he is nominated that he would carry Mississppi!

[BeyondGeography]

20. I can safely say I will never live to see a Democrat carry Mississippi

As for Edwards, he may be the most formidable face-to-face campaigner of the top three, so neither Obama nor HRC should minimize his ability to eat into their base and even win this thing. He'll need help to pull it off, including a major stumble by the frontrunner. It's early, and we'll see. In the meantime, I could do without the comparisons to Jesse Helms (which I'm sure will disappear).

[mckeown1128]

22. Obama running better amoung the well educated...

hmmmm....why would the well educated like Obama.....hmmmmm.....I wonder....

[draft_mario_cuomo]

27. More education= more money

;)

[mckeown1128]

29. Not true..not true....

Education does not always lead to money and money is not the only route to education

[LBJDemocrat]

30. Because they're wealthier

so the only issues they really care about are the ones that don't have much to do with putting "food on the family."