The Numbers
A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer
Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer has won two Emmy awards for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq, and The Numbers blog was honored this year as winner of the 2008 Iowa Gallup Award for Excellent Journalism Using Polls.
ARCHIVES
SUBJECT INDEX
RECENT POSTS
- In Afghanistan Decision, Risks Abound
- Views on the Terror Trials
- Sarah Palin: Rogue for President?
- Chasing Feathers
- Tomorrow's Elections: An Obama Referendum?
- Schwarzenegger's Nastygram: One in 10 Billion?
- Executive Pay? Cut Away
- Pols, Polls and Pushback
- On Nuclear Iran, Diplomacy and Sanctions are Preferred to Hostilities
- Polling, Politics and Nobels
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
The Role of Race
February 15, 2008 9:35 AM
Race has been a riveting factor in the Democratic presidential primaries; even beyond sex, age and socioeconomics, it looks to be the single most powerful demographic in vote choices – at least for nonwhites.
Witness New Mexico, which Hillary Clinton last night was announced to have won by a razor-thin 1,709 votes – despite losing white voters there by a 12-point margin. The reason: her 26-point victory among Hispanics.
I wrote last week about white men as a swing group; it proved out in Virginia and Maryland. But differing vote preferences between African-Americans and Hispanics are essential as well, and especially worth evaluating with an eye toward the Texas primary ahead.
There is some tension here. In aggregate exit poll data from the Super Tuesday states, just 3 percent of whites called the race of the candidate “the single most important factor” in their vote; that rose to 12 percent among Hispanics. Voters in both those groups favored Clinton by roughly 3-1 margins, 73-22 percent among whites, 72-27 percent among Hispanics – in both cases, better for Clinton than she did among whites and Hispanics who gave less importance to the candidates’ race.
Among black voters, 6 percent called race the single top factor and 83 percent of them went for Obama, but so did 82 percent of all other blacks.
Obama surprised Clinton among Hispanics in Virginia this week, seemingly beating her by 54-46 percent; that only happened previously in Connecticut, 53-43 percent. In fact, though, the sample size in both states was too small for reliable analysis, and the difference between the candidates was within sampling tolerances.
More reliable is the overall result among Hispanics: Across all primaries to date, Clinton’s won them by 61-34 percent. Her 67 percent support from Hispanics in California (where Obama won white men by 20 points) and by 55 percent in Arizona (where white men split evenly) were crucial to her winning those states. New Mexico’s the latest example.
As with whites, socioeconomic status plays into the Hispanic vote. Clinton has done 10 points better among Hispanics who don’t have a college degree (65-32 percent, vs. 55-42 percent among Hispanic college graduates) and among those with less than $50,000 in family incomes (67-30, vs. 57-40 percent among better-off Hispanics). She’s helped in this population by the fact that Hispanic voters are less likely to be college graduates (32 percent vs. 39 percent of blacks and 54 percent of whites) and more apt than whites to have incomes under $50,000 (49 percent of Hispanics vs. 33 percent of whites.)
Clinton’s done 11 points better with Hispanic women (66-31 percent over Obama) than with Hispanic men (55-39 percent). Among whites, she's won women overall by 59-34 percent, but managed only a dead heat among men, 45-44 percent.
Among blacks, meanwhile, the surge to Obama since December has been remarkable. In the last pre-primary ABC News/Washington Post poll last year, Clinton led Obama among blacks by 52-39 percent. That changed after Obama established his credentials by winning Iowa; across all primaries to date he’s won African-Americans by 79-17 percent.
Whites have accounted for 61 percent of Democratic primary voters; 20 percent have been blacks, ranging from a low of 1 percent in New Hampshire to a high of 55 percent in South Carolina. Hispanics have accounted for 14 percent overall, peaking at 35 percent in New Mexico and 30 percent in California, where their turnout was up sharply from 16 percent in 2004. The Texas primary is March 4; in 2004 Hispanics accounted for 24 percent of Democratic primary voters there, blacks, 21 percent.
All these number stand in sharp contrast to the Republican primaries, in which voters have been divided much more by religious belief (evangelical vs. non-evangelical) and ideology. There’s good reason race hasn’t been a factor: Whites have accounted for 88 percent of Republican primary voters, compared with 61 percent of Democrats. Hispanics, at 6 percent of GOP voters, are less than half as prevalent in the Republican ranks as in the Democratic. And blacks, two in 10 Democratic voters, account for just 3 percent of Republicans in this year's primaries.
February 15, 2008 in 2008 Primaries, Race | Permalink | User Comments (80)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I am so sad at the thought of some folks so quick to vote for this black man because he is black. Lets don't make this a racial contest. Nor a contest a black man or a white woman. Let your conscious lead you to the right person for the job. I don't see any real experience with Obama and I do see where Hillary has plenty of knowledge because of her exposure to the White House. I believe she is what our country needs at this time. Put away all the sarcasm about the candidates and get to the business at hand. OUR COUNTRY AND WHERE WE GO NOW!!!!! Stop fighting like a bunch of kids and get serious about this election and what or who is good for this country and the inhabitants therein. With God's help maybe we can pull ourselves up out of the mire that our govenmnent has put us in. No man is an island unto himself. Please pray for the one we chose for our next president and don't just vote for the ticket. And pray it is the one God wants to lead this country. Just my opinion. God Bless our Country
Posted by: lizzie | Feb 15, 2008 11:42:27 AM
As an Independent, Obama is an empty suit that doesn`t show a thing to me, other than being another political hack. No way I could vote for him rather than McCain whose eco expertise Obama desparages. This from a guy with little if any eco experience and who can`t put together a sentence with out a bunch of uhs, ums etc. Seems all these JFK wannabes have the same problem talking.
Posted by: luke | Feb 15, 2008 11:58:52 AM
I am so sad, that there are still a few women out there who would vote for Hillary because of gender! My son is Active duty Military and hillary Voted for the War In Iraq! she wasnt even against the War till she decided to run for Office.
Posted by: Mom First | Feb 15, 2008 11:58:56 AM
When voting, the voters always choose their own people first normally. There is nothing to surprise. If today Mr. Obama is Mexican, I think he will win the Hispanic votes and lose the Black votes when competes with Senator Hillary Clinton. It is too bad to say that the DEM is really has a big problem inside itself. Senator Obama should drop out the race and support Senator Hillary Clinton to win back the White House. He is too green to lead the broken country at this time. His politically life could end in this November if he wins the DEM nomination
Posted by: stock_craft | Feb 15, 2008 12:07:04 PM
THIS STORY IS A RUMOR. CONGRESSMAN LEWIS THIS MORNING STATED THAT THIS IS INACCURATE AND HE HAS NOT DECIDED TO ENDORSE OBAMA.
Lewis' office: Report that he's endorsing Obama "is not accurate"
By AARON GOULD SHEININ
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 02/15/08
A story in Friday New York Times that said U.S. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) was going to back Barack Obama for president is inaccurate, a spokeswoman for the former civil rights leader told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution this morning.
Posted by: Justin | Feb 15, 2008 12:10:31 PM
The Clintons are racist. What some people here are refering to as help for the black community is nothing more than the usual paternalistic white dude trying to sort out poor and helpless blacks. Why did Bill Clinton compare Obama's win with Jesse Jackson's win he other day? What was the common denominator? Obama is black and Jackson is black. Race wasn't an issue until Bill Clinton started talking with his ghastly eyes bulging and his ugly fingers pointing all over the place.
The Clintons pretend to help blacks, but as far as I can see, their "help" has been nothin more than calculated ploys to be used for future gain. So because Bill Clinto has an office in Harlem, he's a lover of black people?
Oh, Clinton would "love" to help blacks, as long as blacks remember their 'place' in American society. I can tell you guys that the Clintons are shocked that Obama has done this well.
It is sooo simple. Why did Romney fail and McCain do well? Look into their eyes, the answer is there. Americans aren't fools. We know phoneys when we see them. McCain's eyes speak of sincerity, unlike Romney's. It's the same thing with Clinton and Obama. Clinton's eyes are full of lies and cynicism. Obama's eyes are sincere. Ditto his smile, unlike Hilary Clinton's fake and contrived smile. Everything about her is fake. Deep down, I'm sure she doesn'teven understand why she's running for president. McCain and Obama on the other hand are passionate. There is genuine passion in both of them, and the American public perceives this.
By the way, I'm black, and my vote is for McCain. Better to have some conservative values than have none at all!
Posted by: Gbenga | Feb 15, 2008 12:12:15 PM
There should be at least 2 re-actions from black leaders:
1. pondering why the lopsided vote for BO from the black voters and its ramifications
2. decide on whether to follow their constituents.
Guess what? Action #2 has begun. It will take a long while for them to overcome denial to get to action #1.
I echo a lot of posters' comments here. BO's victory will be Pyrrhic for him by Nov and be so for a long time for the black communities.
Posted by: esvida | Feb 15, 2008 1:12:53 PM
Howcome the race is an issue if half of the Potomac dems whites voted for Obama and vice versa?
Posted by: Foreigner from Finland | Feb 15, 2008 1:31:06 PM
Our roots in the White religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an European people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization.
I just want to know if there was a candidate that attended a church with this mission statement would you support them? Be honest.
Posted by: Chris | Feb 15, 2008 1:40:28 PM
I don’t have anything against Obama, but I think 4 years experience is too little
Obama its time for STOP your words with no actions
Obama its time for STOP your speeches with no solutions
Obama its time for STOP your talk with no actions
Obama its time for STOP your cheap speeches & words as the only thing needed
Obama its time for STOP biased media that’s in your favor
Obama words are not change and anti Clinton media might helped you but not all the way will STOP you. Truth will speak out
Yes - it’s Time to point out weaknesses! and STOP free rides from bised media like ABC & MSNBC.. They can not harm you any more - they already passed the border line on this. Truth wins at some point
Go Hillary!
Posted by: david | Feb 15, 2008 1:46:59 PM
I believe race becomes an issue if ANY black superdelegate breaks their commitment to Clinton just because their predominantly black constituents vote for Obama. The superdelegates were given their vote to be based on the tenets of the platform not the majority of the masses. They should do what 80% of the blacks are not - vote on the issues.
Posted by: Sam | Feb 15, 2008 1:50:22 PM
I just read some of the interview of Michelle Obama by Katie Couric and Michelle must be confused by saying "We’ve spent eight years gearing ourselves up for a fight, and we haven’t been educating our kids. We don’t have universal health care." Doesn't she remember that only Hillary supports universal health care. I guess Barack stole so much of Hillary's platform that Michelle forgot about the universal part of the health plan.
Posted by: Tina | Feb 15, 2008 2:03:46 PM
The black voters don't owe the Clintons or anyone, including BO, any vote. They owe themselves and the society they live an obligation to be impartial to skin colors. Our society has expended great efforts to fight against racism. No politician is worth going backward in racial relations.
Posted by: esvida | Feb 15, 2008 2:26:59 PM
esvida....here is what you should be pondering:
1. why the lopsided vote for HC from whites, hispanics and women voters and its ramifications
2. decide on whether to follow their constituents.
Guess what? Action #2 has begun. It will take a long while for them to overcome denial to get to action #1.
I echo a lot of posters' comments here. HC's victory will be Pyrrhic for her by Nov and be so for a long time for the white, women and hispanic communities.
Dekonti
Posted by: Dekonti | Feb 15, 2008 2:28:36 PM
Hillary 35 year of Experience, We Dont Need!
Posted by: Listen Up | Feb 15, 2008 2:52:55 PM
Excuses me to say that because the Clinton have done so much for the black community that the black community owes her something is innocrrect and insult the intelligence of the black community as a whole. I think people play the race card too quickly and should look at the facts. The fact is that based on some of the latest exit polls its not only blacks that are voting for Obama but majority of whites as well. If anything it was Clinton job to improve on the black community its not the black communites job to elect his wife.
Posted by: Nechia C | Feb 15, 2008 2:54:13 PM
Betsy and others. I am "White" and I live in a state "Pennsylvania", where our "Democratic" govenor said, that because "obama" is black, those of us who are "White" in the state would not support him. This man received 80% of the "black vote in the last election, so you may wonder why he decided to call the voters racist. Suprise he is a "Clinton" backer and he was playing the hatred card. Let me assure you that today I changed my registration from Republicain to Democratic in order to support Senator Obama in the primary. Also President Clinton was the first to interject race into this election cycle and I am sure that is why his Surrogate "Wife" has lost the so called "Black" vote. The Clintons' and others like them is the reason we need to transition to a younger more enlighten group of leaders. I only wish my "Republicain" party had done the same. At my age (66), I look forward to supporting the future leaders of this great country.
Posted by: murl41 | Feb 15, 2008 3:55:17 PM
Speech is very important for good leadership. If you cant do it you dont have the vocabulary for inpiration articulation,negotiation and persuation and therefore all that is necessary for good leadership.
In history evidence abound for one examination.
There is quite a lot of people here that dont really put their opinions what they read and what actually exist into proper critical analysis.and inspite of others here attempting to educate somewhat educate them still are incapable of well informed thoughts and statements.
Its also important to know that in individual lives in our daily situations those who are vocabulary challenged are more likely to resort to physical violence in sorting out arguments or attempts at resolving problems and I see this very much in Hillary's new tactics.............ITS enough evidence that much cannot be expected of her.
Also note that nothing comes from her except worked from Obama output.......
Please how can one expect Hillary to accomplish something she has been working for yrs and yet no success? Again the vocabulary issue comes in for she had tried a few times during Bill's reign to get through this so called wonderful health plan .........it was not possible, for the fight to get it through legislation had not the vocabulary to mobilise law-makers around it.........Give me a leader good at speeches!! Winston Churchhill used it to inspire and motivate ....in getting things done.
Posted by: humanity | Feb 15, 2008 4:01:57 PM
No We Can't
No group can discriminate racially without ramification. If 85% of white voted against a qualified black, some in the media would use the L word the next day.
Posted by: esvida | Feb 15, 2008 5:39:52 PM
I am a German and I find some comments about Obama stupid.A spade should be called a spade......Obama is doing great
He has the brains and atouch of politics.I was a big fun of Bill Clinton, he was a good politician.Hillary is good but with the sama old politics. Obama is something else and although he doesn´t win,he has inspired so many people not only in America all over the world.Americans don´t forget he is an American and you should be so proud of him.You forget one thing Obama is half white and half black.He is opening doors for the young generation.
Posted by: Monica Ebert | Feb 15, 2008 6:45:08 PM
Post a comment
