Race, Gender And Bias In The Electorate

CBS' Kathy Frankovic: Some Americans Admit To Not Voting For Certain Types Of People

(CBS)  This column was written by CBS News director of surveys Kathy Frankovic

---

Will Americans admit to bias? For years, survey researchers have tried to figure out how to measure bias in voting behavior- whether or not people will say they would not vote for certain types of people.

Before the 1970s plenty of people were willing to admit bias. In 1937, The Gallup Poll asked: “Would you vote for a woman for President if she were qualified in every other respect?” The emphasis on “qualified” is mine, but today we are shocked that only 33 percent of Americans then said they’d vote for such a person. In a different poll taken three years later, the question was posed without the “qualified” qualifier, and only 20 percent said they would vote for a woman. So being described as “qualified in every other respect” netted a hypothetical female candidate only 13 points of support.

More shocking, perhaps, was that findings like this -- even among women -- were consistent negative until sometime after 1970. In 1962, Gallup found only 28 percent of women saying they approved of having a woman as president. Sixty eight percent (again, this is among women) disapproved. In a 1970 poll by the Harris Organization (conducted for Virginia Slims, a cigarette targeted at women), 67 percent of women agreed with this statement: “There won’t be a woman President of the U.S. for a long time and that’s probably just as well.”

By the end of the 1970s -- the decade of Vietnam, Watergate, and the women’s movement (and only 15 years after Congress passed major civil rights legislation) -- attitudes appeared to have changed. By a margin of three to one in a Time Magazine Poll, Americans said it would be good for the country to have a woman president. And by nearly the same margin, they said it would be good for the country to have a black president.

The unanswered question, of course, is whether that change represented real opinion change, or simply a change in what it was socially acceptable to say. Today, few Americans want to admit that they might be prejudiced about a candidate’s race or gender. And when people are asked directly about the Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton contest, they can find plenty of reasons to vote for one or the other that don’t involve gender or race.

Still, there are differences once we move from asking about you personally to asking about other people. In January, 81 percent of registered voters told CBS News and The New York Times that they would vote for a woman, but just 56 percent said most people they knew would do so. Fifty four percent said America was ready for a woman candidate. As for an African-American, the differences were even starker. Ninety percent said they would vote for a black candidate, 65 percent said most people they knew would, but just 54 percent said America was ready for a black president. That was a 36-point gap between the number saying they would vote for a black candidate and the number saying America was ready; there was, a 27-point gap in the responses when people were asked about a female candidate.

Some of the gap is due to skepticism about other people’s behavior, rather than to people concealing their own personal feelings. But there are differences: for example, slightly more voters say they personally couldn’t vote for a woman than say they couldn’t vote for an African-American; and Democratic voters are less likely than others to admit to a bias.

Polls in recent Democratic primaries suggest that something might be going on under the radar. We conduct exit polls on paper, so there is no interaction between an interviewer and a respondent, and therefore less opportunity for socially desirable answers. And in fact, in Ohio, one in five white men -- and nearly as many white women -- said the race of the candidate mattered to them. Those voters voted nearly four-to-one for Hillary Clinton, a much higher ratio than white voters who did not say race mattered. But even more black voters -- about one in four -- said race mattered to them, and nearly all of them voted for Obama: even more than black voters who said race didn’t matter. Fewer voters admitted gender was a factor, but men who did were more likely to vote for Obama than those who did not; women who said gender mattered strongly supported Clinton.

But this experiment in asking about race and gender had a different impact in last week’s Mississippi primary. There was almost no gender gap in Mississippi, but the racial divide was enormous. Ninety two percent of African-American voters supported Obama, while just 26 percent of white voters did. Even though nearly four in ten black voters said that race mattered to them, it would have been almost impossible for them to be more pro-Obama than blacks as a whole. However, when whites admitted that race mattered to them (and 24 percent of them did) their votes were more anti-Obama than white voters overall. Only 10 percent of them voted for Obama.

Race and gender continues to be a particularly American concern - and an issue that pollsters will continue to track, probably through November.

[jbgallo2]

endpcnow: Why is he considered African American? Does he look white to you?? Quarar

[jbgallo2]

What happened to my entry? Was the subject too old?
I''m tired of Obama and Clinton, I don''t care for either. Quarar

[gothpapa]

Please STOP handling Obama with kid gloves. If it was okay to take pot shots at Ferarro then why not at the pastor that Obama has placed so much of his faith in? And the pastors comments to ******* america might speak volumes for what was supposeldy Obama''s wife''s misspoken words about the ''first time she felt pride in being an american''. Think about it and dig deeper instead of subliminally supporting Obama. Obama needs to address this and completely denounce the man wh married him and baptized his children because he can do no less.

[skyk-2009]

there is no way anybody can cover Obama''''s A$$ on
The good Rev. Wingnut and Obama used race in
campaign now it has come back and bit him Well
TOO BAD if you think it that bad hear leave He''''s
done this will not go away and like tony rezko I
Did not know will not work not after 20 years Bye Bye
Obama


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by popstom1 at 12:20 AM : Mar 18, 2008
+ report abuse

You sound like you are getting very panicked there pal. I''ve looked at the poll numbers for Obama since this broke and I do not see any indication of what you speak. Do you think that maybe the American People are onto this hate by association thing used by Southern Fascist. I mean, after all, they were BURNED very badly in the last election and were stuck with the worst in our history. Maybe this nation is ready to rise above this type of thing? Just some food for thought as you go about you smear and slime drive to distroy!

[popstom1]

there is no way anybody can cover Obama''s A$$ on
The good Rev. Wingnut and Obama used race in
campaign now it has come back and bit him Well
TOO BAD if you think it that bad hear leave He''s
done this will not go away and like tony rezko I
Did not know will not work not after 20 years Bye Bye
Obama

[tbweb]

Will Americans admit to bias?

Americans are not usually bias when alone, bias kicks in when around friends and peers, the proverbial peer-pressure!

[eagles_truth]

It''s amazing how Barack Obama has been labeled time and time again by what others have said while speaking completely on their own behalf. Meanwhile, both Hillary and McCain have had racist and extremist views expressed from their campaigns or at their rallies, and we don''t attribute those attitudes to the candidate.

Hillary publicly praised NAFTA over and over again, and then bashed NAFTA before the Ohio primary. Barack had been consistent in his views about NAFTA since before he began his campaign. Then, a person who was not a part of his campaign at the time makes a comment in Canada, and that somehow trumps Hillary''s incontinency and hurts Barack.

John McCain spoke out against the Bush tax cuts, not just because there wasn''t a way to pay for them, but because they were skewed toward the rich. He said it himself. Now he supports making them permanent because that is the stance of the republican party. Still, he is considered the "straight shooter". Barack Obama has been consistent in his plan to roll back the tax cuts for the rich and cut taxes for the working class. He''s also been consistent with his views on the war. But somehow, he is the liar who has been fooling America.

It seems that people are looking for a reason not to support Obama. Clinton and McCain have wide margins of error. Obama has to run a perfect campaign, and even then he can be hurt by any rumor, any half-truth, and any mis-spoken word by anyone even associated with him.

[nearl4511]

People should really be smart enough not to be trapped in this argument. Their automatic listenings and fear cannot be calmed. It is their human nature that makes them gullible and suspicious of difference.

Wright is a scared old man the same as Falwell was, same as RObertson, and that other charleton recently supporting McCain.

I am a white man who will be voting for Obama, providing I get the chance.

I think that is he goes down "K" Street gives out another shout of victory in money over "one person, one vote" representation.

[kansas1946]

Lord. Could these journalists shut up about this. They whine about it, and then bring it up every chance they get. I, so far, have never heard one Democrat say they wouldn''t vote for Obama because he is black. I is usually because they are a Hillary supporter, or were and Edwards supporter and are mad that their candidate is either behind, or dropped out. Now in the general election and the Republicans get involved, that may be another matter, especially in the south, but I imagine those Republicans would vote for a Republican, no matter what. I am a white woman and I am supporting Obama. I would love to see a woman in the Whitehouse, just not Hillary.

[heartlight3]

Well, it looks like the haters and dividers will win again. We had an opportunity to change the tone and premise of politics, but the haters can''t let that happen. I am very disappointed, because in case you haven''t noticed things are going to hell in a handbasket. It looks like we as a people are choosing to hasten it along. It''s really too bad because it seemed like a representative democracy was a pretty good idea. I guess we just couldn''t pull it off. I thought we were better than that, but I guess I was wrong. To watch us as a people take a fine person who wanted to shift the focus of our government and twist him into something that fits into our hateful, divisive paradigm is a real shame. This is so depressing. It makes me very sad.

[candide777]

His supporters recognize that 90% of the politicians who pin that flag on are nothing but con artists. - - Posted by Candide777

As I said, an experience political candidate would, especially since the issue has been brought up so many times. Politics is perception.

Posted by trapbreak at 08:04 PM : Mar 17, 2008

As I said, Obama is not going for the idiot vote this year. Anyone who thinks voters this year are asleep at the wheel again, is in store for a rude awakening!

[candide777]

How tiring and boring all you hate and rumor mongers. Thanks to you I cannot vote for any hopeful scenario.
Posted by Nearl4511 at 10:18 PM : Mar 17, 2008

Don''t lose hope, on one thing we can all agree, nobody wants more of the McSame! After the nomination, there will some time to heal, and half of us will hold our nose and vote against more of the McSame.

[tibu987]

Clinton''''s Image Damaged, CBS News O/L, 03/17/08
And well it should be.
That this scandal ridden, sleazy, shyster lawyer from Arkansas, the second most backward State in the U.S.
has gotten as far as he(and she) has, says loads about the unaware voting public.
Lets stop the Clintons from going any further.
The Clinton twins and McCain only offer businesss as usual. Is that what you want.
I don''t.
I''ll be voting for Obama.

[tibu987]

I am a white male and I will be voting for Obama.
I cannot imagine 4 more years of the corrupt Clinton twins in Washington.
Clinton and McCain represent more of the same in Washington.
Obama is the only candidate who represents change.

[rrow1]

I got an email today about Hillary supporters boycotting msnbc. Besides their biased coverage (people are calling it the Obama network)they now had a spot on their home page where obama was registering voters. Over the line! I am participating in the boycott, please join us! Send them an email stating you are joining the boycott and spread the word!

[nearl4511]

Thanks to all the divisionists who have fomented this round of hatred.

There is no hope anymore in the Democratic party. There was as the begining of the election cycle, but the desire to win at any cost has re-ignited a hatred that has not been this hot since just after the civil war.

No woman President. No black President. Just a war monger will win. Well perhaps he has some sense and morals about some things. Goodness knows the devil''s seed has prospered again.....and England is following suit with a big Conservative party win in the wings.

How tiring and boring all you hate and rumor mongers. Thanks to you I cannot vote for any hopeful scenario.

[omega39-2009]

Blazercoach, I believe we both know that politicians make empty promises, it is as old as politics itself. The Nation, a very liberal newspaper had an article today saying that things like health care for everyone just won''t happen because the obligations and deficits simply means we can''t afford to do this stuff (I have included the link below). I too have enjoyed the back and forth and wish more of us could talk to instead of past each other. It would go a long way to heal the divisions that have become so prevalent within our democracy. I am off to drink some green beer, happy St. Patrick''s day - Omega

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20080331&s=howl

[pepperwood2]

Good News for Hillary from Penna. we''re not playing the Gender Card Here.

As a voting Democrate from the old school, I''m happy to learn that Governor Rendell has come out for Hillary in our great State of Pa.

The old guard is alive & well here. They''ve expressed the belief the shepherd boy Obama is a Democrat out of line, not sure what that means, but it is clear that the Governor has connections, and assured us that Hillary will win Pa.???

Each day his constituents gather together at the summit to find new ways to distain, mock, belittle, ridicule, and start rumors circulating concerning Obama. His camp is encircled & he is outnumbered. He has to go it alone! Somehow, we''ve been told that Pa,Ny,Oh,Nj, are superdelegate states and since Rendell was president of the DNC, I''m sure he knows the ropes. We don''t understand this but it sounds like a pretty slick trick.

We''ve been told that Our Great W...e Hope Hillary is entitled to the nomination and nothing is going to stand in HER way. I trust this will be good news for most Pa & the Mainstream News. We are not Gender biased.

This is fun & we''re just warming up here in Pa. It''s Polka time so lets roll out the barrel & start the count down for Hillary. Go Hillary!

[blazercoach1]

CBS Oliver.....do you have data to support what you said?

I have seen on several occasions that Hillary is carrying the Catholic vote....but shouldn''t that you read that as a vote FOR Hillary, and not a vote against a "black" candidate??

If that''s how you read it, you could say that any vote for Hillary is a vote against a black candidate. Would you say that most California, New York, etc... democrats are voting AGAINST a black candidate? I doubt it.

Please don''t try to paint Catholics as voting AGAINST anyone..... They''re tending to vote FOR Hillary, as disgusting as that is for me, a Catholic :)

[blazercoach1]

Omega,

You''re point about McCain is well taken. However, the reason he did not advocate the tax cuts at first was because they did NOT contain any provisions to cut spending. Ultimately, I believe he played politics and didn''t want to go into primary season having NOT voted for them. For that......he should be called out. However, I do believe that he will fight FOR those spending cuts as President.

You''re point is also well taken that a Democrat congress will not capitulate. However, there is a body of government that has a lower approval rating than Bush: Congress. Also, SEVERAL Republican lawmakers are not seeking re-election.

I believe this gives Republicans an opportunity to "clean house" from the Bush administration. McCain himself has said that the Republicans have stopped acting like Republicans, in terms of economics. I think he''s doing the right thing (as he''s always done) in not supporting people in his party due to their title.

IF he wins the White House, he will be able to use the "bully pulpit" of the President to change the Congress as well. That''s my take on it, anyways. Ultimately, I believe that THAT''S what the American people expect out of their government.....less of it.

In case we don''t get to continue.....I''ve enjoyed writing back and forth! An unusually calm and respectful discussion, given the normal tone on these boards! :)