Today on Hardball, there was more fawning over how great John Edwards and Barack Obama looked on the stage together yesterday, the point, of course, being that they're a ticket made in heaven. I have to agree they did look great but so did John Kerry and John Edwards four years ago and we all know how well that worked out. The truth is, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton looked perfect together too once upon a time, but the quintessential Dream Ticket image of them standing on the stage together after the Los Angeles debate has been overshadowed by the tension of the race between them that's ensued since then, not to mention the most recent debate, which was anything but a showcase of unity.
But in the minds of these talking heads who seem to have written off an Obama/Clinton ticket but now see Obama/Edwards as the key to Democratic victory in the fall, the perfection of Edwards extends beyond aesthetics. On Hardball today it was suggested by one guest that Edwards was a perfect match for Obama because he could be the bridge between Obama and those elusive white working class voters. It's ironic, of course, that Edwards's endorsement would prompt this discussion since Edwards had cited his concern over the white working class narrative that had emerged post-West Virginia as one of the reasons he chose yesterday to endorse. But my real point here is that in fact, as great a guy and a candidate John Edwards is and was, he has in no way demonstrated that he would somehow be the key to the white working class vote.
Poblano has the goods. He begins:
It seems to be taken for granted that John Edwards had some stranglehold on the working class white vote. But this was not really the case. The working class vote was not a particular strength of John Edwards in either relative or absolute terms.
As evidence, he breaks down how all three candidates performed in the first 5 contests -- through Florida after which Edwards dropped out -- on several measures in an attempt to gauge white working class support. Poblano concludes:
Firstly, John Edwards actually performed slightly better among voters making more than $50,000 per year than among those making less.Secondly, while we only have this data available in three states, there was no real difference in the education levels of Edwards supporters.
Thirdly, in every state where we have data available, Barack Obama performed significantly better than Edwards among voters making less than $50,000 per year, and among voters who did not attend college. This held true in racially mixed states like Florida, as well as extremely white states like Iowa and New Hampshire.
Fourthly, in every state where we have data available, Hillary Clinton performed significantly better than Edwards among voters making less than $50,000 per year, and among voters who did not attend college.
Now, as Poblano correctly states, this is not to in any way disparage John Edwards but rather just to point out that if it's white working class voters you want, there's just no evidence that John Edwards would deliver them. In fact, Hillary Clinton didn't exactly blow Obama away on this measure either that early in the game but as we've seen in the most recent contests, the game has changed.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 130 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
