White Male Voters needed to win the GE

[GoldieAZ49]

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/03/03/clinton-obama-make-push-for-the-neglected-white-male-voter.html

Clinton, Obama Make Push for the Neglected White Male Voter

Hillary Clinton gets the votes of the Latinos and the ladies. Barack Obama gets the black vote. Who does that leave out? The white guys. And the battle for this demographic is heating up between the two Democratic candidates. When John Edwards left the race, white males may have lost their logical choice. Since then, Clinton and Obama have begun to incorporate more of Edwards's populist rhetoric into their campaigns.

The populist themes are meant to appeal to a demographic that political analysts rarely spend much time talking about and that both candidates need in the tight race to clinch the Democratic nomination—white men, who make up 36 to 39 percent of the electorate.

"They are both going after the Edwards vote—white, male, blue collar—and there are a lot of them in Ohio," says Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics. "If Obama wants to come close or win Ohio, he's going to have to be successful with white men."

And recently, the Illinois senator has been. While Clinton held the white male vote in many of the earlier Democratic primaries, Obama carried it in Virginia, the one Potomac primary state that Clinton had the best shot at winning. Obama received an even higher percentage of white male voters in Wisconsin, where 63 percent selected the Illinois senator to 34 percent who chose Clinton. And he won both states.

Despite the current focus on the primaries, there's a larger elephant in the room, so to speak: The Democratic Party struggles with attracting white male voters.

snip

This time around, John McCain poses a formidable challenge for Democrats trying to woo white male voters away from the Republican Party. "The almost certain Republican nominee, Senator McCain, is someone whose life story is intrinsically appealing to a significant swath of white men who can identify with his narrative and also with the virtues and ideals that he embodies," William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, says. "At the same time, it is now certain that the Democratic Party will nominate someone who is not a white male for the first time in its history, and that raises the obvious questions."

This will be the case Hillary will make to the SD's. Her ad campaign is attacking him directly, a change from the pro Hillary to anti Obama.
This is COMMON in politics, once that change happens it doesn't go back to the feel good ads.

It may be of interest to look at the info again in light of Obama's comments alienating middle American white male voters.

How this will affect his support in the remaining states is yet to be seen, but will have an impact.


Citizen Left posted this info a week ago, before Obama's comments hit the MSM.

It showed the history of losses Dems have had because they lost the majority of the white male voters.


Democratic candidates received the following percentage of the white male vote:

1980 Presidential Election:
Carter: 38%

1984 Presidential Election:
Mondale: 32%

1988 Presidential Election:
Dukakis: 36%

1992 Presidential Election:
Clinton: 37%

1996 Presidential Election:
Clinton: 38%

2000 Presidential Election:
Gore: 35.2%

2004 Presidential Election:
Kerry: 38%


More info and links at the original post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5424487

[blogslut]

1. If statistically/historically the majority don't vote for us

Why would that change now?

We don't need this demographic and we're not going to get this demographic and we sure as hell aren't going to get it with Senator Clinton as our nominee.

[cali]

4. it might. a catastrophic economy

might change the equation. If you can't heat your home or feed your family, if you're a white male who is availing yourself of the local food pantry, you might have a change in priorities.

[blogslut]

7. That is always a possibility

Especially with President Smash-and-Grab at the helm.

However, at the moment, this "Democrats need white male voters" line is a media-created myth.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

2. Yes, that huge black vote in WY, KS, VT, ME, WI, IA, etc.

:eyes:

[MercutioATC]

3. Ahh...the ever-changing goalposts!

We started with the rules...delegate count...until Clinton lost.

Then we moved them to popular vote...until Clinton lost.

Now we move to who more white males will vote for in the general...


Why don't we just argue that Chelsea is representative of the entire under-50 vote and nominate whomever she'd vote for?


:eyes:

[GoldieAZ49]

6. Did you even glance at the title of the article?

Clinton, Obama Make Push for the Neglected White Male Voter


Obama WANTS that vote, let alone needs it in greater numbers than past candidates to win

[MercutioATC]

8. I didn't deny the fact that white male voters are needed in the GE.

Voters of EVERY race and both genders are needed in the GE.

I'm speaking of Clinton suggesting that the SDs should back her, even though she's lost the delegate and popular vote counts, because she can appeal to white males.

This is the third or fourth different measure by which she's arguing she should be considered...and I have no doubt that if Obama started polling higher among white males, she'd find a new reason she's the best candidate (even though she's failed at every measure she herself has argued for in the past).

[YOY]

5. OK I'm in. So's my little brother.

I did my part.

[shraby]

9. What makes this statement true?

"When John Edwards left the race, white males may have lost their logical choice."

What logic says that white males would necessarily be looking for a white male to vote for? It's a straw argument and doesn't belong in public discourse.