Jan. 11, 2008
Gender And Race In The Democratic Primary
CBS' Kathy Frankovic: In The Wake Of The New Hampshire Primary, Questions About Voters' Gender And Race Considerations
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Voters Now Colorblind?
Sen. Barack Obama is the first African American to have a real chance at the presidency. Does this mean voters have gotten beyond race? Harry Smith speaks Joe Watson and Jon Meacham of Newsweek.
-
Video
First Look: Baffled Pollsters
"Only On The Web": Senior political correspondent Jeff Greenfield previews his analysis of the New Hampshire primary in which he questions why pollsters were baffled by Hillary Clinton's win.
-
Video
Hillary Clinton 'Unplugged'
Fresh off her triumphant New Hampshire comeback, Hillary Clinton talks to Katie Couric about the race everyone thought she was poised to lose.
-
Photo Essay
Hillary Clinton
A look at a life and career full of firsts.
-
Photo Essay
Barack Obama
A look at the life and meteoric rise of the president-elect.
Before the New Hampshire primary results were known, this seemed like the week to write about questions of race and sex, and Americans’ willingness to express negative feelings about the potential breakthrough of women and African-American candidates for president.
Even after New Hampshire, those topics still are relevant. In fact, they have become part of the discussion of the discrepancy between the final pre-election polls and the actual primary results. You can find a good review of the arguments at Pollster.com -- New Hampshire: So What Happened?
One important part of that discussion: there was a lot of potential for movement in the days before the primary. In the CBS News Poll conducted last weekend, which consisted of re-interviews of New Hampshire registered voters first interviewed in November, 28 percent of those who had a choice said their minds could still change. And additional 9 percent of all likely Democratic primary voters were undecided.
So, it was a fluid race. About one in four of the people we re-interviewed had already changed their minds once, moving from supporting one candidate in November to supporting another. Hillary Clinton has lost the largest number - of course, as the [November] frontrunner, she had the most to lose.
But those who were with her in last weekend’s poll - especially the women - were more committed to her than were the women who supported Barack Obama or John Edwards. 95 percent of women supporting Clinton said their minds were made up. Less than two thirds of women supporting her opponents said the same thing.
What people say they might do in a purely hypothetical situation doesn’t necessary match what they say when confronted with the real case, or when asked who or what they prefer. Some data suggest it is easier for people to say they really don’t want to vote for a woman than it is for them to say that race forms part of their thinking when they decide how to vote. Of course, the language people tend to use when talking about politics is the masculine language of sports. We hear that Hillary Clinton was “on the ropes” before the New Hampshire primary, and that on election night Clinton and Barack Obama were “battling it out” for first place. And, after all, we measure a “horserace.”
The historical trend on willingness to vote for a woman - or for a black candidate - is quite dramatic. Now, about nine in ten Americans say they would be willing to vote for a woman candidate for president “if she were qualified for the job” and similar numbers say they would be willing to vote for a qualified black person.
But even if you are (at least hypothetically) willing, you may not think other people are. Barely half of all voters last year thought the country was ready to elect a black president (54 percent) or a woman president (55 percent). Black voters were especially skeptical: only 45 percent of them thought America was ready for an African-American president (That was BEFORE Obama’s victory in Iowa; we’ll be able to see if that has changed soon.).
And the hypothetical might not translate to the specific. Recent evidence for this comes from last month’s CBS News Poll in South Carolina. We asked voters in South Carolina a different pair of questions -- whether “all things being equal” they would rather vote for a man or a woman for president, and whether or not they would rather vote for someone of their own race.
Nearly nine in ten said a candidate’s race didn’t matter - much like the answers of voters nationally when asked if they would be willing to vote for a black candidate for president. But the responses are different when it comes to women. One in four voters in South Carolina said they would rather vote for a man - and on that question it didn’t matter whether or not the respondents themselves were men or women. 27 percent of men would rather vote for another man, but so would 23 percent of women. Hardly any women - or men, for that matter - said they would prefer to vote for a woman.
That was the preference among all voters. But since all the Republican candidates are white men, the question was really irrelevant for Republican primary voters. What about those who do actually have the opportunity this year to choose a woman or a black man?
It turns out that a lot of the stated bias against women candidates for president occurred among Republican voters. And black voters overall were less likely than white voters to say either race or gender mattered. But 11 percent of white Democratic primary voters said all things being equal, they would rather vote for a candidate of their own race, much like the answers from all voters. Thirteen percent of those same voters said they would rather vote for a man. But among those South Carolina Democrats, it was white women - 17 percent of them - who admitted they preferred to vote for a man; only 6 percent said they would prefer voting for a woman.
And when it came to the specific, race took precedence over gender. When we asked who South Carolina Democrats intended to vote for, white voters (male and female) supported Hillary Clinton; while black voters (male and female) supported Barack Obama. So before South Carolina’s January 26 Democratic primary, pollsters will have to grapple with questions of race and sex once again.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
- Latest in Opinion: Poll Positions
- Poll: Sotomayor Still An Unknown
- Will Americans Embrace Obama's "Change"?
- Bush's Popularity Reaches Historic Lows
"We hold these truths to be self evident that ALL men are created equal"...
It will certainly be interesting to see how factors play out in the coming events.
Posted by Hwy71So
Unless they are running for office, then we have to look at their gender, religion, race and blood type. But let''s not forget the amount they pay for a hair cut, their accent and if they wear boxers or briefs ( or in this election should I include thong or grandma underwear?)
I do think we need to look at their ethics and honesty, but then how do you judge who is telling the truth or not?
In his books Barack Obama has told the story of the family into which he was born, about a father from Kenya and an American mother who met as college students in Hawaii.
At age 6 young Barack was already living in Jakarta with his mother and his Indonesian step father before moving back to Hawaii at age 10 to be raised by his maternal grandparents when his mother and her second husband divorced.
Over the years Barack Obama has had bonding experiences with white and black relatives and with Asian family members amidst an understandable struggle to find his own identity. Through it all he developed a keen ability to understand and to resonate with people of various ethnic backgrounds and to quickly move beyond differences in physical appearance and culture.
Having successfully worked his way through the complexities of the family into which he was born this highly intelligent and very dynamic 46 year old African American man may very well be able to understand, to unite, to lead, and to serve America and Americans in a way that has never been done before.
Unlike those who may live in many other parts of the world, most Americans don%u2019t really want to choose their next president based on who the candidate%u2019s parents happen to have been. Americans for the most part are more interested in the qualities, abilities, and knowledge possessed by a particular candidate and the character revealed through that individual''s life experiences.
Seems everybody wants to jump on the band wagon of change instead. (a strategy initiated by Barrack Obama)
That would indicate to any clear thinking person that those who claim to be leaders are in fact following Obama''s lead. . .like sheep.
Don''t count out Edwards appearing on the campaign trail made up like Al Jolson and singing ''Mammie''.
I can see why the thought of falling backwards again would make her tear up.
Especially when Bill just has to lean backwards in his chair and...
...oh!!!the humanity!!!
This is not our countries beliefs entirely, this is based on the world''s view of our country..To the Whitehouse, the worlds view of us is all that matters...
factcheck.barackobama.com
The Democrats use taxes to pay for the functioning our society.
The Republicans cut taxes so your children and grandchildren will have to pay your taxes and their own taxes%u2026 double taxation?
Cutting taxes only to lay them on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren is DEPLORABLE!!!
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
For the sake of our children America, get involved!!! We have fine Democrats to choose from.
IF THIS IS THE BEST AMERICA CAN OFFER WE ARE FINISHED AS A GREAT NATION. THIS IS PROOF (DIVERSITY WILL DESTROY A COUNTRY IN THE LONG TERM). I GIVE UP IT"S AS IF THE VOTING PROCESS HAS TURNED INTO A JOKE BETWEEN RACE,GENDER AND WHAT"S GOOD FOR AMERIA HAS FELL BY THE WAYSIDE.YOU MAY NOT LIKE WHAT I JUST SAID BUT REMEMBER IT IN 20 years when your grand children are starving like African nations and no medical and medicine like Mexico and the name of America has been changed to AFRICO because America forgot who and what we are and did not take our democratic process serious. WE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF LETTING AMERICA AND GOD(CHRISTIAN) DOWN,NOW WE MUST PAY THE PRICE for LETTING VOTES BECOME MORE IMPORTANT THEN FREEDOM.WE NO LONGER KNOW RIGHT FROM WRONG AND HAVE FORGOT WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN AMERICAN.
JUST KIDDING,FOOD FOR THOUGHT,WITH CRIME ON OUR STREETS,MORE PEOPLE DIE EVERYDAY THEN IN IRAQ,AS YOU CAN SEE WE NEED TO DO SOME SERIOUS THINKING.
Posted by chad55555 at 09:20 PM : Jan 11, 2008
You, sir, are a racist, sexist bigot, who has no idea what he is talking about. You are hereby invited to go live on an uninhabited island somewhere with a few of your white male friends, if they''ll go. You are a large part of what is wrong with this country, pure bigotry.
You didn''t mention Barack Obama''s fake "Kenyan grandmother" who''s appeared in several TV news reports.
She is actually a woman who took BO''s father into foster care for a short period when he was a young child.
Your are no different from those you mock and ridicule..We can''t blame African Americans, Jews, Hispanics and Women for our problem..The "White House" is being run by a group of "nincumpoop''s" If you didn''t make your vote count in 2000 & 2004..You have no reason to complain. "Divison" isn''t the answer, this is when we are tested as a country, Are we able to stand united and face the crisis'' before us? Or do we let people like you set us back to 1950''s...
I''ll be damned to let that happen...!
WILL AMERICANS WAKE UP BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE???????
-
by realpatriot1
January 13, 2008 10:43 AM PST
- Obama isn''t talking about gender or race. The Clinton campaign is fixated on her gender and his race. She''s playing the gender card to attract women, which is legitimate. Her playing of the race card to bring him down shows that she doesn''t have the character to unite the country and that she''ll do and say anything to win.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 22 Comments