Chart of the Day

Via Ezra Klein, the Alexa rankings of our presidential candidates. Obama beating Clinton this badly is pretty much expected -- it falls out from the differing demographics of their bases with Obama doing better among younger people, better educated people, and wealthier people, all webbier groups. John McCain's pathetic performance seems noteworthy -- is he just exclusively the candidate of the elderly?

Comments

There's that and the fact that McCain's website sucks.

Posted by Ben | February 7, 2008 1:45 PM

Where is Ron Paul? :-)

Posted by Anonymous | February 7, 2008 1:46 PM

John McCain's pathetic performance seems noteworthy -- is he just exclusively the candidate of the elderly?

The one worry I have about Obama is that he isn't getting much support from the elderly. If its Obama vs. McCain, will McCain win the elderly vote?

The conventional wisdom is that Obama is more electable than Clinton. Its probably true, but I'm not completely convinced.

Posted by Jim W | February 7, 2008 2:00 PM

@Jim W: Well, isn't the question: Does Clinton stand a substantially better chance of winning the seniors' votes against McCain?

Posted by moff | February 7, 2008 2:11 PM

There's that and the fact that McCain's website sucks.

So does Hillary's, for that matter. Their "blog" is a really lame array of boring articles and there's really not much to look at or do.

Posted by gustav | February 7, 2008 2:16 PM

Did McCain rape your dog?

Posted by ostap | February 7, 2008 2:23 PM

is he just exclusively the candidate of the elderly?

Not the elderly, per se, but definitely the lawn-botherers. Old people not too busy shooing kids of their lawns to get on the Internet are going for Clinton.

Also, check it out if you include ronpaul2008.com for some extra fun.

Posted by Aaron S. Veenstra | February 7, 2008 2:30 PM

Alexa is pretty useless for traffic comparisons, and *really* useless for drawing demographic conclusions -- I wouldn't put too much stock in their charts.

Posted by Tom | February 7, 2008 2:36 PM

Careful, Matthew. You're wondering into Charlie Cook Territory -- you're turning into a "Real Washington Pundit".

From the Cook Political Report , July 14, 2007:
----------
"For all intents and purposes, McCain's campaign is over. The physicians have pulled up the sheet; the executors of the estate are taking over. Paying bills and winding down -- not strategizing, organizing, and getting a message out -- will be the order of the day.

So what ruined McCain's campaign? The senator didn't have one problem; he had several"

Ref: http://www.cookpolitical.com/column/2007/071407.php
-----------
ha ha ha ha. Why bother watching Jay Leno?

Posted by Don Williams | February 7, 2008 2:39 PM

IT'S A SERIES OF TUBES!!!!

Posted by Senator Ted Stevens | February 7, 2008 2:39 PM

Okay, so Charlie Cook got that one wrong.

And yet. It's not as if McCain resuscitated himself -- Giuliani, Huckabee, Thompson and Romney did it for him.

And that probably explains his pathetic Alexa performance. Republicans who drifted back into his column probably figured that they already knew enough about him, and in any case couldn't get very excited about voting for "none of the above".

Posted by Dave L | February 7, 2008 2:53 PM

John McCain's pathetic performance seems noteworthy -- is he just exclusively the candidate of the elderly?

Maybe after his nap is over, you can ask him.
.

Posted by Grand Moff Texan | February 7, 2008 3:13 PM

I'd love to see Ron Paul's site's stats on this chart, just for comparison.

Posted by John | February 7, 2008 3:15 PM

Choice of a Nude Generation ...Stirling Newberry at The Agonist

Posted by bob mcmanus | February 7, 2008 3:41 PM

Hey! Enough about "the elderly." I'm 65 and was on the internet when it was the Arpanet. I built a home computer in the mid-70s, before you snot-nosed kids were even born. And I'm sure as hell not voting for McCain.

Nor are my 65-plus friends. We're supporting Obama.

Posted by Jim Wilson | February 7, 2008 4:11 PM

What Jim Wilson right above me said.

Matt, watch your tone with the elderly. My dad, who is older than McCain by a few, reads your blog and similar ones. (I have to give him the link to Ezra's; keep forgetting damnit.)

In fact, when I checked my email on Saturday I had this from him, the email's entirety: "Read Matthew Yglesias today on “Honor Bites Back”." So not all white males above the age of 70 are confused by the Internet (ok, he's often confused by the Internet; dad, it's a hyperlink, use them in your emails) and support McCain.

In fact, he might be reading this comment. Hi Dad! Yes, I'm looking for a job.

Posted by Mitch Schindler | February 7, 2008 5:30 PM

Yeah, given that Dems tend to have a considerable advantage with older voters, and that older voters actually, you know, *vote*, I'm not sure that making rude comments about McCain's age every time you get a chance is really a winning strategy.

Posted by Derannimer | February 7, 2008 9:26 PM

"Did McCain rape your dog?"

He's militaristic enough that he probably would given the opportunity.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | February 7, 2008 11:35 PM

"I'd love to see Ron Paul's site's stats on this chart, just for comparison."

I tried it. He was far above the others until the beginning of January, then Obama caught him, now he's just above Clinton.

Posted by Lothar Matthäus | February 8, 2008 10:55 AM