The Obama Skeptics

Via Andrew and Jon Chait, a Pew poll that quantifies the sense that some of the people who have a problem with Obama just don't like black people very much:

White Democrats who hold unfavorable views of Obama are much more likely than those who have favorable opinions of him to say that equal rights for minorities have been pushed too far; they also are more likely to disapprove of interracial dating, and are more concerned about the threat that immigrants may pose to American values. In addition, nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim.

Obama's campaign has generally, I think, refrained from chalking up anti-Obama sentiment to racism because they know perfectly well that if he gets the nomination he needs to run in a country where the electorate's only about 10 percent black. Still, conservative views about race don't seem to be nearly as big an influence on anti-Obama sentiments as are conservative views about national security -- it's the "fight for U.S. right or wrong" crowd that's really heavily represented in the anti-Obama coalition. It's also fascinating to see that Democrats who agree that "men make better leaders" have a net negative view of Obama; apparently that kind of retrograde cultural conservatism sufficiently correlates with anti-Obama sentiments that even running against a woman doesn't turn those people into Obama fans.

Comments

What the hell does "fight for U.S. right or wrong" mean exactly?

I'm not sure I would know what answer to give if I was presented with this statement/question.

Someone clue me in.

Posted by AKBY | March 28, 2008 10:20 AM

Matt...really now. a.] where does the block quote come from; and b.] the interpretation of the percentages is wrong...the interpretation should be across the rows...although substantively it doesn't make that much difference.

Posted by trubble | March 28, 2008 10:28 AM

AKBY: "Fight for US Right or Wrong" refers to the notion that "If the US does it, it must be right" and that opposing the current policy of the US is "Anti-American" or "Treason", as Ann Coulter would put it

Posted by Joe | March 28, 2008 10:32 AM

No, you have to read it down the columns, because it doesn't make sense otherwise (proof: try to interpret the right or wrong row).

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 10:32 AM

This is useless without a comparable test for sexism and ageism in Obama's support. Further it should also be testing what degree Obama and Clinton are being supported primarily because of race and gender.

Without some context, this "data" is just an excuse to blanket smear Clinton supporters as racists.

Posted by dry_fish | March 28, 2008 10:32 AM

I'm also confused on these stats. Does this mean that a total of 28% of white democrats think Obama is a muslim? That 64% say equal rights have been pushed too far? I must be misreading this right?

Posted by drjimcooper | March 28, 2008 10:34 AM

Thanks for providing the stats. Unfortunately, I suspected as much...

Posted by Paul Maurice Martin | March 28, 2008 10:35 AM

I consider myself not entirely stupid, but it took me about 10 minutes of staring at that table to figure out what those numbers mean....

Posted by Dagger09 | March 28, 2008 10:36 AM

It's also fascinating to see that Democrats who agree that "men make better leaders" have a net negative view of Obama

I guess they think Obama is a bit of a girly-man.

Posted by right | March 28, 2008 10:41 AM

A lot of his supporters think he should fight for the US, right or wrong, too. It's not that big of an influence on their views of him despite what seems to be your interpretation.

Posted by Anonymous | March 28, 2008 10:41 AM

"Without some context, this "data" is just an excuse to blanket smear Clinton supporters as racists."

If the shoe fits ....

What "context" are you after? The context is given -- they're white, they're Democrats, and they don't like Obama. Turn out they also don't like black people generally.

Now just what other context were you after?

There's no attempt to "blanket" smear Clinton supporters, by the way, because there's no claim that all Clinton supporters share those views, and they pretty clearly don't. What is important, however, is that the Clinton supporters who really, really don't like Obama, and who thus are likely to defect to McCain, share these views. And probably won't be voting for a woman either, when it comes down to it.

Posted by David in NY | March 28, 2008 10:41 AM

The interesting thing, and the one that probably invalidates the whole survey is that those with unfavorable views of Obama and say men make better leaders.

Posted by Rob | March 28, 2008 10:42 AM

Actually looking at it again, the table is laid out in a criminally stupid way, so I'll be more helpful.

It's looking at the views of the two non-overlapping groups: Obama supporters (column 1) and Obama non-supporters (column 2).

Because people can have multiple views, the percentages in the columns add up to more than 100%.

So -- 12% of Obama supporters think men make better leaders, while 24% of Obama non-supporters think so.

Note that while most Obama non-supporters believe in America right or wrong (61%!), almost half of Obama supporters believe the same thing (48%)! In other words, the right or wrong question gets a lot of positive responses in general.

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 10:46 AM

The interesting thing, and the one that probably invalidates the whole survey is that those with unfavorable views of Obama and say men make better leaders.

C'mon Rob. They just want a real man. A "Bomb, Bomb, Iran," kinda guy. In short, they're the Democrats who vote for Democrats locally (in the South, I bet), but not nationally.

Doesn't invalidate the poll at all. It just shows that those Democrats who say, "I'm for Clinton in the Democratic Primary, and I won't vote for Obama under any circumstances," are the folks who are going to vote for McCain in November, no matter who's the candidate. Because men make better Presidents, you know, and you gotta stand up for Amurica.

Posted by David in NY | March 28, 2008 10:48 AM

Rob (and Matt):

About the "Men make better leaders" point - just because a Democrat or Democrat-leaning independent has an unfavorable view of Obama does not mean they support Clinton. We have no measurement of Clinton's support from these numbers, and some of the people listed as unfavorable to Obama may also be unfavorable to Clinton.

Posted by Mercutio42 | March 28, 2008 10:56 AM

Another thing to remember is that this needs to be taken in the context of a highly contested primary race. Just like in the figures about Clinton or Obama supporters voting for McCain if the other person wins the nomination, this needs to be considered in that context.

If (when) Obama wins the nominatiion, retake the poll and you will see a difference in the results.

Posted by john m | March 28, 2008 10:57 AM

Merutio,
Exactly. People suggesting this is trying to smear Hillary supporters are being ridiculous. These same people could have unfavorable views of Clinton as well. We can't gather this information from the poll. However, the information that we can gather falls under the "duh" category. Wait, you mean a larger number of people that disapprove of interacial dating don't like Obama? What a shocker!

Posted by Stacy | March 28, 2008 11:01 AM

Right -- I imagine there are a lot of Democrats with favorable views of both Obama and Clinton. We don't even know what % of Democrats are in each of the two columns.

Lame, Yglesias, lame.

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 11:04 AM

David in NY,

Context like this (also from the same Pew study):

In general, opinions of Clinton vary considerably by gender. About two-thirds of Democratic and Democratic-leaning women (68%) say Clinton has made them feel proud. By contrast, just 42% of Democratic and Democratic-leaning men say the same. Women are also much more likely than men to say Clinton is inspiring (72% vs. 57%), honest (69% vs. 59%), and down-to-earth (69% vs. 51%), and to say that Clinton has made them feel hopeful (70% vs. 52%).

More context:

What Makes Democrats Uneasy about Obama?

Democratic voters who said that Obama makes them uneasy (25% of all Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters) were asked to explain what it is about him that makes them feel this way. The most common response pertained to his relative lack of experience: a quarter those who say Obama has made them feel uneasy point to his inexperience, either in general or in a particular policy arena, or to what some perceive as his naivety about the political process. Closely following mentions of his inexperience are concerns about Obama's affiliation with Rev. Wright and other associates, mentioned by 21%; 16% refer specifically to Wright.

Further, the Andrew Sullivan post Yglesias linked to quite plainly made the case that racist Democrats are Clinton's "base." More importantly, the fact that Yglesias titled this post, "The Obama Skeptics," yet he completely ignored the core reason for skepticism about Obama make it fairly clear that Matt was simply distorting the Pew study to use it as a phony vehicle to hack away at Clinton.

Posted by dry_fish | March 28, 2008 11:07 AM

I think you're interpreting it incorrectly Barbar.
It is meant to be read one row at a time.

For example, of those who believe men make better leaders, 12% have a favorable impression of Obama and 24% have an unfavorable impression. The rest are apparently neutral towards him.

The table doesn't say anything about the relative size of these groups within his total support base.

Posted by Mark | March 28, 2008 11:09 AM

Stacy,
I think you have it backwards. The table indicates that a surprisingly large number of Democrats that do not like Obama also do not approve of interracial dating.

I also want to echo David from NYC's comment: the table does not refer to Hillary. Every election there are a number of Dems who cross over to vote Republican. I'm curious as to the overlap between Dems who dislike Obama and those who voted for Bush over Kerry.

John M, I'm not sure I agree with you. I think people who don't like interracial dating or who think equal rights have gone too far have held these views since long before this primary season. I think Hillary's campaign has exploited white resentment, but I don't think she created it.

Posted by Matt | March 28, 2008 11:11 AM

I suspect that a lot of these racially challenged "Democrats" will vote McCain over either Obama or Hillary.

Posted by Anderson | March 28, 2008 11:13 AM

Mark, look at the "fight for US right or wrong" line.

48% of those people favor Obama ... and 61% don't favor him? Nope.

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 11:14 AM

dry_fish,
I agree with you for the most part, but I think its missing something. Many people who are uneasy about Obama would NEVER explicitly state that it is due to his race or heritage. These same people might not even know it themselves. But, we have to assume this a large reason when you see that 28%(!) of people that disapprove of Obama also disapprove of interacial dating, right? That's what this poll is getting at.

Posted by Stacy | March 28, 2008 11:14 AM

Hm. So ignorant crackers don't like Obama. Who knew?

Posted by Jen | March 28, 2008 11:14 AM

Barbar,
What Mark said.
There's nothing stupid about the data table. Why you looked at it and expected columns or rows to add up to 100% is your problem, not the table's. The presentation of the data is clear and the results are compelling. White Dem or Dem-leaning registered voters who have an unfavorable opinion of Obama are more likely than the other group to also have unfavorable opinions of immigrants, minorities in general, and female leaders.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 11:16 AM

Hm. So ignorant crackers don't like Obama. Who knew?

Posted by Jen | March 28, 2008 11:17 AM

Matt,
No, you're correct. I was just typing it in a really lazy way. I guess I meant that it is no surprise that democrats that disapprove of Obama also disapprove of interacial dating at a much higher clip than those that approve of Obama. Either way, not a shocker, but you're right...

Posted by Stacy | March 28, 2008 11:20 AM

The interesting thing, and the one that probably invalidates the whole survey is that those with unfavorable views of Obama and say men make better leaders.

Hillary and Bill seem to understand this much better than you. Why do you think they keep babbling on about commander-in-chief thresholds, patriotism, and sniper fire in Bosnia.

Posted by Mike | March 28, 2008 11:20 AM

Mark, look at the "fight for US right or wrong" line.

48% of those people favor Obama ... and 61% don't favor him? Nope.

No no no. You are reading this table all wrong.

Of the white Dem or Dem-leaning voters who like Obama, 48% believe in fighting for U.S. right or wrong.

Of the voters who DO NOT LIKE Obama, 61% believe in fighting for U.S. right or wrong.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 11:22 AM

Stacy, maybe I'm misreading the table in the original post, but I don't think it's saying that 28% of people who don't like Obama also don't like interracial dating. Actually, it's saying the opposite. It's saying that of people who disapprove of interracial dating, 28% of them have an unfavorable view of Obama. Also, only 13% (of course this is still too high) of white Democrats overall hold an anti-racial dating view. My point being that it's a very small group, not at all representative of "The Obama Skeptics." Matt could easily have titled this post "Conservative Democrats hold conservative views" and it would have been much more accurate and appropriate.

Posted by dry_fish | March 28, 2008 11:23 AM

So, the primary reasons for not liking Obama are apparently:

1) He's a Muslim.
2) His church pastor is a racist.

You've sure got some sophistimicated political discourse going on down there.

Posted by BruceR | March 28, 2008 11:23 AM

Tinisoli is reading it correctly, I believe.

Mark, you have it backwards. Of those who have a favorable opinion of Obama, 12% believe men make better leaders. Of those who have an unfavorable opinion of Obama, 24% believe men make better leaders.

PS -- The Matt up above in the thread is me, not Yglesias.

Posted by Matt B. | March 28, 2008 11:26 AM

Stacy, actually, you're right, I'm wrong. I misread the table. Gah.

Posted by dry_fish | March 28, 2008 11:30 AM

This quote from the Pew poll shows how to read the table: "In addition, nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim." It's not saying that 23% of Democrats who think Obama is a Muslim don't like him. tinisoli and Barbar are right, Mark and dry_fish are reading it wrong. Not that I blame them, it's a terrible table.

Posted by fp | March 28, 2008 11:33 AM

This is BS. How many people are we talking about? What are their attitudes toward Clinton? Are these people who are participating in the primaries? Can we get a regional break down? Plus, there are a million other questions that must be answered before the posted info has any meaning.

I am not an Obama supporter. But I have been supporting African American candidates politically, locally and nationally -- with my vote, my time, money and energy -- since I cast my very first vote for Shirley Chilsom in 1972.

Obama has not implied that his opponent's supporters are racist. But his online supporters have done so repeatedly -- as Mr. Yglesias does in this post. It's not only obnoxious, it is a revelation of their own prejudices.

I won't be upset if Obama gets the nomination. But I do regret the money and support that I've given to publications like The Atlantic and many lefty blogs over the years.

Posted by esmense | March 28, 2008 11:39 AM

Just because some people here are reading it wrong doesn't mean the table is flawed.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 11:41 AM

Dry_fish,
Yeah, I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Tinisoli is explaining it correctly. Those that dissaprove of Obama also disapprove of interacial dating at a rate of 28%. Those that approve of Obama disapprove of interacial dating at a rate of 9%.

Posted by Stacy | March 28, 2008 11:43 AM

This is BS. How many people are we talking about? What are their attitudes toward Clinton? Are these people who are participating in the primaries? Can we get a regional break down? Plus, there are a million other questions that must be answered before the posted info has any meaning. Polls early on showed that about the same number of people had misgivings about supporting a black candidate as a woman candidate -- with, in both cases, about 15% of potential voters saying they definitely would not support such a candidate, and another 15% saying they were "unsure" if they could support such a candidate. That there are people who will not vote for either of the leading Democrats because of prejudice has always been a given -- not surprising with such historic and unprecedented candidacies.

I am not an Obama supporter. But I have been supporting African American candidates politically, locally and nationally -- with my vote, my time, money and energy -- since I cast my very first vote for Shirley Chilsom in 1972.

Obama has not implied that his opponent's supporters are racist. But his online supporters have done so repeatedly -- as Mr. Yglesias is doing in this post. It's not only obnoxious, it is a revelation of their own prejudices.

I won't be upset if Obama gets the nomination. But the reporting and commentary on the Democratic race does make me regret the money and support that I've given to publications like The Atlantic and many lefty blogs over the years.

Posted by esmense | March 28, 2008 11:44 AM

Mark and tinisoli,
The block quote indicates that BarBar has the right interpretation of the table. Pew looks to have started with favorable/unfavorable and then asked about equal rights, dating, etc.

So, no, Mark, it's not: "of those who believe men make better leaders, 12% have a favorable impression of Obama and 24% have an unfavorable impression." It's 12% of those who favor Obama, and 24% of those who don't, who think men make better leaders.

You can't draw any conclusion at all about how many are "neutral" about Obama from these figures.

Posted by SqueakyRat | March 28, 2008 11:46 AM

Okay, I think we're all on the same page. Now, is anybody surprised by these results? I'm not. It doesn't mean that all Hillary supporters are racist as someone said earlier, though. Not even close.

Posted by Stacy | March 28, 2008 11:48 AM

Tinisoli, your interpretation is correct, but I think you are actually in agreement with Barbar, not Mark. By Mark's reading, among people who say fight for U.S. right or wrong, 48% have a favorable view Obama and 61% unfavorable. Barbar was pointing out that this is impossible.

Posted by ibid | March 28, 2008 11:48 AM

Just because some people here are reading it wrong doesn't mean the table is flawed

Upside-down stop signs aren't necessarily flawed either, but if your goal is to have a maximal number of people obey them, it helps to have the signs oriented in a maximally-understood way.

Posted by dry_fish | March 28, 2008 11:50 AM

It's standard to put the samples in the columns, the data in the stub. Of those unfavorable to Obama, 23% think he's a Muslim. Not, of those who think he's a Muslim, 23% are unfavorable...72% would have no opinion?

What are the base sizes, though? What % of Clinton supporters are unfavorable to Obama? Would that be the bulk of Clinton's supporters, or a subgroup of them?

Posted by Ronnie Pudding | March 28, 2008 11:52 AM

And tinisoli, you're agreeing with Barbar, not disagreeing.

Posted by SqueakyRat | March 28, 2008 11:54 AM

By the time the utter clusterf#ck now emerging in Iraq has really penetrated public consciousness, that plus the tanking economy will guarantee that the most hopeless element of the racist jingo "get off my lawn" vote is ALL Gramps McCain will have left. Not exactly a winning majority.

Posted by Steve LaBonne | March 28, 2008 11:57 AM

esmense,
I guess it doesn't take much for you to get upset. There is nothing in Yglesias' post that refers to Clinton at all. The fact that he never mentions Clinton or her supporters suggests that he "gets" what you do not: the table is about Dems who _disfavor_ Obama, not about Dems who support Hillary. These are two different subsets. I'm not sure why you take such offense. Even if you fall within both groups, the numbers still show that you are more likely than not to have no problems supporting African-American candidates or civil rights. So chill out, and don't be so quick to accuse others of accusing you or your candidate of racism. It's sad that we're this far into the thread and there's been so little talk about what the poll really reveals to us.

Posted by Matt B. | March 28, 2008 12:01 PM

Clinton supporters are 53% favorable, 41% unfavorable toward Obama:

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=1278

So most like Obama but prefer Clinton. Of that 41%, we have a racist minority.

Posted by fp | March 28, 2008 12:02 PM

Yeah well, BruceR...WE'RE NUMBER 1!!!

Posted by We're number 1! | March 28, 2008 12:02 PM

Simply put
RACIST, RELIGIOUS BIGOTS, UNEDUCATED, ANTI-IMMIGRANT XENOPHOBES WON’T VOTE FOR OBAMA!!

Who knew.

Posted by Ann | March 28, 2008 12:02 PM

As has been noted, this doesn't tell us anything about how many Clinton supporters actually hold these views. The important column is the Unfavorable column, which tells us which factors drive white Democrats' negative views of Obama. Obviously people who have a negative view of Obama are more likely to have a negative view of interracial dating and equal rights. What the table tells us is other factors such as immigration and "US right or wrong", whatever that is supposed to mean, are more responsible for negative views of Obama. Anyone who thinks this is a post trashing Clinton supporters as racists is ignoring the fact that MY is discussing this in terms of negative views of Obama, which does not precisely correlate to Clinton voters.

Posted by ibid | March 28, 2008 12:03 PM

"This is BS. How many people are we talking about? What are their attitudes toward Clinton? Are these people who are participating in the primaries? Can we get a regional break down? Plus, there are a million other questions that must be answered before the posted info has any meaning."

You're right in the narrow sense that this set of data tells us nothing about "People Who Support Clinton." That's not what being surveyed.

The way this survey works is that people were asked first "Do you like Obama?" and then a series of other question about their racial/social/political view. The answers of the people who like Obama are then contrasted with the answers of the people that don't like him.

So this data cannot, specifically, answer the question: "What do supporters of Clinton think?" What it's trying to get at instead is "Why don't some people like Obama?"

The fact that 28% of the people that don't like Obama also don't like interracial dating and that 45% of the people who don't like Obama think equal right have been pushed too far suggests that maybe the fact that he's black has something to do with why they don't like him. This is further supported by the fact that fewer of the people that like Obama share these attitudes.

As far as who the people who don't like Obama support in the primaries, this data can't answer that. They might be supporting Hilary, they might be supporting McCain, they might be supporting Ron Paul or Mike Gravel for all we know. But since all of the people included in the data were whites Democrats or Democrat-leaners, it seems likely that the vast majority of them would be voting in the Democratic primary. It is entirely possible to have a favorable view of Obama and still support Clinton. But it seems all but certain that those Democrats with an unfavorable view of Obama would fall to her camp in the primary.

Posted by diablevert | March 28, 2008 12:06 PM

Yes, fp, you are correct. Out of the 41%, a minority are racist. The majority support Clinton because they're just not paying attention.

Posted by Stacy | March 28, 2008 12:08 PM

My bad. You're right, the table is somewhat counterintuitively structured.

Posted by Mark | March 28, 2008 12:15 PM

I am especially alarmed by the initial numbers in this table: are there really this many Dems who feel that "equal rights pushed too far"? Really? Too far? I disagree strongly with those who view that equal rights have come far enough. I can only conclude that those who believe that equal rights have gone "too far" are just too blinded by their own racism to see the world as it really is. And even 19% of those who support Obama think equal rights have pushed too far. That just seems strange to me -- not necessarily that they support Obama, but that they add to an already very large number of Democrats who feel this way. If a person truly believes this, then why are they even in the Democratic party? What is it about this party's supposed ideals that appeals to them? I would think that a very large amount of traditional Democrat Party policy positions run contrary to such a person's beliefs.

The only consolation I take, I guess, is that only a minority of Dems view Obama unfavorably, and considering that Obama wins or ties every demographic against Clinton except for white women and senior citizens, perhaps the vast majority of Dems who believe equal rights have gone too far are pre-Baby-Boomers, the ones who have stubbornly clung to racist beliefs since the beginning of the civil rights movement and are bound to die off relatively soon.

Posted by Matt B. | March 28, 2008 12:16 PM

What the table tells us is other factors such as immigration and "US right or wrong", whatever that is supposed to mean, are more responsible for negative views of Obama.-ibid

It says no such thing. We can't determine from the data which hot-button issue is more responsible for the unfavorable views of Obama in that group. All we know is that of that group, a lot of them have bad feelings about interracial dating and a lot of them still think Barack is a Muslim. They could, in theory, actually dislike Obama because he's too skinny. We can't know for sure from this poll.

Given that the respondents were Dem or Dem-leaning voters, I don't think it is an irresponsible leap to think that many of the ones who don't like Obama are probably voting for Hillary, at least in the primaries. But yeah, they could all be planning to vote for McCain in November... which may help explain why Hillary's supporters are more like than Obama's to switch parties in November if their girl isn't the nominee.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 12:17 PM

Hey Stacy,
Hilarious. As Homer liked to say, "It's funny cuz it's true."

Posted by Matt B. | March 28, 2008 12:23 PM

tinisoli: Given that the respondents were Dem or Dem-leaning voters, I don't think it is an irresponsible leap to think that many of the ones who don't like Obama are probably voting for Hillary, at least in the primaries.

But the table provides no information about what % of Hillary supporters fall into this category. If, for example, 1% of Hillary supporters fell into this category, I think it would be completely irrelevant.

Also, for someone very proud of being able to read the table correctly, you have done a terrible job reading my comments in this thread.

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 12:27 PM

My point is that these are registered Democrats and leaning Democrats. No one knows who is weighted how. The point about the man question is that just because someone is registered Democrat doesn't mean they truly are a Democrat. Or that they'll vote in the Pennsylvania primary doesn't mean they are a Democrat. The other thing is the confidence intervals on such parsing is going to be so wide as to make much o this meaningless anyway, but that woudl say that most polling of this type is meaningless and no one would then pay for it.

Posted by Rob | March 28, 2008 12:28 PM

tinisoli: Given that the respondents were Dem or Dem-leaning voters, I don't think it is an irresponsible leap to think that many of the ones who don't like Obama are probably voting for Hillary, at least in the primaries.

But the table provides no information about what % of Hillary supporters fall into this category. If, for example, 1% of Hillary supporters fell into this category, I think it would be completely irrelevant.

Also, for someone very proud of being able to read the table correctly, you have done a terrible job reading my comments in this thread.

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 12:29 PM

Barbar,
First off, sorry if I cited you as one of the innumerate commenters.
Secondly, if the respondents in the Pew poll are Dems or Dem-leaning voters, don't you think it's reasonable to think that those who have unfavorable views of Obama are probably among Hillary's supporters? And if so, that some percentage of Hillary's supporters have those racist or racially-tinged views?
Like I said, they could all be planning to vote for McCain, but given that they are registered Dems or leaning toward voting Democratic, it seems obvious that a lot of them are propping up the white girl in the race.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 12:38 PM

This is all correlated with age. The fundamental difference between Clinton and Obama voters is that the former are more likely to be older than the latter. It's not surprising that the former are more likely to be prejudiced as well.

Posted by matt | March 28, 2008 12:46 PM

It's funny to read all the handwringing and claims of unfairness and claims that this does not reveal the true reasons why people don't support Obama. As MacNamee said at the Clemens hearing on the hill, "it is what it is". Why can you not just accept what this says? There is nothing inherently biased and there is no need for further context about these numbers. They are what they are. Live with it.

Posted by Bubba | March 28, 2008 12:48 PM

Matt,
Yeah, I agree that its not surprising. But that doesn't mean I have to like it. Also, all these Dems who think "equal rights have been pushed too far," I would be interested to see what they want to do to stop that. What equal rights do they have a problem with? Those percentages are troubling.

Posted by Stacy | March 28, 2008 12:49 PM

tinisoli -- obviously some percentage of Clinton's supporters have racially-tinged views, but whether or not they are significantly propping up her campaign depends on WHAT percentage. As I said, the table doesn't tell you.

Contrary to what you claim, this is an awful table, designed to suggest all sorts of incorrect conclusions. For example, it is *entirely possible* given the data shown that *most* people who oppose interracial dating etc. also favor Obama!

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 12:56 PM

I'm guessing "equal rights pushed too far" refers to affirmative action. Did you guys know that Obama didn't check the "Which race are you?" box on his Harvard application?

Posted by Monster | March 28, 2008 1:43 PM

AND WHO THE FUCK STILL HAS PROBLEMS WITH INTERRACIAL DATING???

Reminds that it was until the (I think) late 90's that a high school in Alabama didn't allow interracial couples to go to prom.

Posted by Monster | March 28, 2008 1:45 PM

For example, it is *entirely possible* given the data shown that *most* people who oppose interracial dating etc. also favor Obama!

You *could* say that, Barbar, but you wouldn't be saying so based on the data in that table. You seem to expect data tables to have some magical ability to prevent misinterpretation. How would you have drawn that data table in a better way? Aren't people responsible for achieving some degree of data literacy? If I and others had no problem understanding the table (no "pride" about that, BTW), what makes you think that the table is to blame for the misinterpretations that others made?

The Pew study did not set out to determine which candidate is preferred by racist white Democrats, nor did it set out to determine if racist white Democrats have favorable views of Obama. It set out to determine if there are differences between Dems who like Obama and Dems who don't like Obama on specific cultural/social issues. And there obviously IS a difference. That's what the data table shows.

Now, whether or not this difference accounts for (a statistically significant portion of) the other candidate's support is not something that can be concluded from this data. But it is a reasonable and correct inference that that other Democratic candidate (Hillary Clinton) is probably getting votes from people who don't like Obama, and that some of those people are the same ones who DISAPPROVE OF THE INTERRACIAL DATING THAT PRODUCED BARACK OBAMA.

This is not a CONCLUSION, per se, but it is a reasonable and logical inference to make, and that's why Yglesias and others are reporting or echoing it. And that's why Pew, thanks to this and other sets of data, writes things like this: ...Certain social beliefs and attitudes among older, white, working-class Democratic voters are associated with his lower levels of support among this group.

"Associated with" does not mean 'this explains everything!' or anything as definitive as you seem to require.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 1:46 PM

This is not a CONCLUSION, per se, but it is a reasonable and logical inference to make, and that's why Yglesias and others are reporting or echoing it. And that's why Pew, thanks to this and other sets of data, writes things like this: ...Certain social beliefs and attitudes among older, white, working-class Democratic voters are associated with his lower levels of support among this group.

Tinisoli, with all due respect, it's still an irrelevancy. Fine: white Democrats who dislike Obama are also more likely to oppose interracial dating. I'm 100% convinced that had Pew opted to poll the depths of those who find Hillary Clinton unfavorable you would find some association with believing women aren't as smart as men, believing that wives should submit to the will of their husbands, or believing that a majority of white Americans are racist. Clearly, such would not be representative of the vast majority of Obama supporters, or even of the majority of people who dislike Hillary. But had I written an entire blog post about that minor population of people and titled it "The Hillary Skeptics" it might be reasonable to conclude that I was at least hinting at the idea that anti-Hillary sentiment had roots in larger sexist and anti-white racist pathologies. It's very difficult to see this blog post as just innocently stating an innocent conclusion.

Posted by dry_fish | March 28, 2008 2:37 PM

I'm 100% convinced that had Pew opted to poll the depths of those who find Hillary Clinton unfavorable you would find some association with believing women aren't as smart as men, believing that wives should submit to the will of their husbands, or believing that a majority of white Americans are racist.

Got data?

Look, the absence of a similar study about Hillary——offering a breakdown between her detractors and her supporters along cultural hot-button issues or, say, class lines——doesn't mean that this Obama-related poll is an "irrelevancy" or insignificant. I'd be as eager to see that poll done as you are. But that doesn't mean we should ignore this one about Obama.

If a poll showed that 28% of Hillary haters believe that women shouldn't work in government whereas only 9% of her fans feel that way, then yeah, I'd infer that because those people are probably supporting Obama then some of Obama's support is from sexist people.

But so what? Even if true, what relevance does that have vis a vis the disparities in the Obama poll? One could have "The Obama Skeptics" and "The Hillary Skeptics" as back-to-back posts, and neither would cancel the other one out or make the other one more legimate.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 3:07 PM

tinsioli, since you seem to be in love with this amazing table and want to have its babies, I'll simply restrict my comments to how *you yourself* have misinterpreted it.

But it is a reasonable and correct inference that that other Democratic candidate (Hillary Clinton) is probably getting votes from people who don't like Obama, and that some of those people are the same ones who DISAPPROVE OF THE INTERRACIAL DATING THAT PRODUCED BARACK OBAMA.

It is also a reasonable and correct inference (maybe even more so) that BARACK OBAMA is getting votes from people who DISAPPROVE OF THE INTERRACIAL DATING THAT PRODUCED BARACK OBAMA.

Listen -- 80% of Democrats have a favorable rating of Barack Obama (click my name for URL). I'm not sure what his unfavorable rating is, but it may be considerably lower than 20%. That would mean that column 1 contains at least 4 times as many people as column 2, and maybe much more than that.

That in turn would mean MOST Democrats who disapprove of interracial rating actually favor Obama (because 8% of a sufficiently big number will be bigger than 28% of a smaller number).

Face it, this table is a piece of shit, and the inferences YOU are drawing from it are also shit.

I say this as a strong Obama supporter who is eagerly awaiting Clinton's departure from the race.

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 3:51 PM

Barbar, you are embarrassing yourself.

The Pew poll and its results were of WHITE Democrats and WHITE Dem-leaning registered voters— NOT the entire Democratic electorate or the national electorate as a whole (which is what your Gallup page is about). So you can't simply pull the "80%" figure from another poll of the Democratic or national electorate and then slap it onto Column 1 of the Pew data table and conclude that more racists are actually voting for Obama than not voting for him.

And even if the vast majority of white Democrats DO have a favorable view Obama, and the Pew study's data bore that out for that sample, it wouldn't make it irrelevant or "shit" that 28% of those who don't have a favorable view of him are opposed to interracial dating——the very thing that brought Obama into existence——or that that percentage is much higher than the percentage in the 'favorable' column. The point of the survey is to figure out why voters may like or dislike the candidate, not simply to quantify how many racists like Obama and how many don't, or to

Again, here's Pew:
In particular, white Democrats who hold unfavorable views of Obama are much more likely than those who have favorable opinions of him to say that equal rights for minorities have been pushed too far; they also are more likely to disapprove of interracial dating, and are more concerned about the threat that immigrants may pose to American values. In addition, nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim.

Notice that Pew does not claim that MORE people who have unfavorable views of Obama harbor racist sentiments than those who favor Obama. It says that people in that group are MORE LIKELY to feel that way, because the PERCENTAGE is higher, not the f'ing tally of voters.

Do you see the difference between "more likely" and "more of"?

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 4:49 PM

"nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim."

This is really pathetic.

A quarter of Democrats are so stupid they don't comprehend that he's not a Muslim, despite it being common knowledge in the media.

This must be the Democratic equivalent of the same morons on the Republican side who still support Bush.

I guess for these nitwits the blatant lies from Clinton about Bosnis just don't matter.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 28, 2008 7:19 PM

A quarter of Democrats are so stupid they don't comprehend that he's not a Muslim, despite it being common knowledge in the media.

It's not a quarter of all Democrats. It's a quarter of those WHITE Democrats who don't like Obama.

Only 5% of white Dems think Obama is a Muslim.

But yeah, it's still pathetic.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 7:38 PM

I meant, only 5% of white Dems WHO LIKE OBAMA think he's a Muslim.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 7:43 PM

So they think he's a Muslim who went to Reverend Wright's church for kicks?

Posted by Monster | March 28, 2008 7:47 PM

Maybe they think Reverend Wright is a secret Muslim, too.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 7:51 PM

tinisoli, are you really pleased with the discovery that *some* of Clinton's support is from racist people? Why did you even need your precious table to tell you that?

It is only important to know why white Democrats don't like Obama if there are a lot of white Democrats who don't like Obama. Since you don't even know how many there are, it's bizarre to insist that this table indicates something important.

You also misunderstand my point about how it is entirely possible that more racists support Obama than oppose him. Of course I understand that a random person who dislikes Obama is more likely to be racist than a random person who likes him. This is not only entirely intuitive but easy to read off the graph. My problem, once again, is with the *relevance* of this fact. You yourself have no problem drawing inferences about the Clinton-Obama race from the table. And yet the majority of Clinton supporters fall into column 1.

Perhaps an example with a different topic will make this more clear.

Assume we have a population of 500 Democrats and 500 Republicans. This same population also consists of X Communists and 1000-X non-Communists. All the Communists are Democrats.

We create a similar table as the one shown in the post. We compare people who favor Communism to those who don't favor Communism, and we see the % of each that support capitalism. The results are 0% vs 100%.

Now it's pretty clear that the people who favor Communism are Democrats (analogy: like how people who don't like Obama are probably Hillary supporters). Does that mean that you can conclude that a significant element of Democratic support is from people who oppose capitalism?

That obviously depends on what X is. At least, this should be obvious. If X is 2, then no. If X is 500, then yes.

Look up the base rate fallacy. It's not an uncommon mental stumbling block, but there's no reason to get ridiculous about it.

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 7:55 PM

Barbar,

I'm not having trouble with mental stumbling blocks or being "ridiculous". Simply saying so over and over again will not make it so. You are the one who pulled a figure right out of your bum (though you suggested it was on Gallup) about how 80% of Dems like Obama, and you are the one who then applied that overall Dem or overall electorate figure to a set of data that was about WHITE Dems only. That maneuver was inappropriate, yet you made it without hesitation, all the while talking trash as though I'm the idiot who's monkeying around with numbers. Nice. You've repeatedly accused me of misinterpreting the data, but without citation.

Believe me, I do understand your point about how there may not be very MANY people who got assigned to Pew's Column 2, and therefore there may not be very many white Dem racists who are holding Barack back and/or propping Hillary up. But still, it is significant that nearly a quarter of those white Dems who do not like this African-American candidate hold "values" that are ascribed more often to Republicans. A lot of people have been speculating about these "Reagan Democrats" or "white ethnic working-class Democrats", especially with the PA contest coming up, and the Pew study obviously sought to quantify what that effect may be.

The concern, on my part at least, is that the thing that keeps Obama's favorability ratings among all Democrats at anything less than 95-100% is racism. The Pew study supports that notion, even if most white Dems still like Obama and even if those white Dems do not necessarily vote for Hillary.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 8:36 PM

tinisoli, I will admit that I've inserted some snark into my comments that may not be fully appropriate. I will make one final point:

The concern, on my part at least, is that the thing that keeps Obama's favorability ratings among all Democrats at anything less than 95-100% is racism. The Pew study supports that notion, even if most white Dems still like Obama and even if those white Dems do not necessarily vote for Hillary.

Yet the table indicates that the majority of white Dems who don't like Obama don't have the racist views that you're worried about. For example, the vast majority of them approve of interracial dating (or at least don't disapprove of it).

Posted by Barbar | March 28, 2008 8:47 PM

Yes, the majority of Obama-disliking white Dems are not opposed to interracial dating, but to me it is surprising that that majority is not more vast. Only 72 percent? I'm sure that's better than it was twenty or thirty years ago, but Jesus... More than a quarter of anti-Obama white Dems don't want their kid dating people from other races? That sucks.

And the majority is much more vast——92%——in the pro Obama column. That's a big disparity. Perhaps even a really SIGNIFICANT disparity.

If both columns showed that an equal percentage of white Dems, whether for or against Obama, were opposed to interracial dating, then I wouldn't be making a fuss and neither would Pew. It's not just the raw numbers, or the presence of a majority, that matters. It's the disparity from one group to the next, and it's the issues themselves. Nearly a quarter of white Dems who don't like Obama think he's a Muslim.

THAT'S CRAZY.

Posted by tinisoli | March 28, 2008 9:04 PM

You claim to understand the points I'm making, and then you go and indicate that you don't.

Does Obama go to 95% favorable rating if racists aren't around? You say the Pew study supports that notion, and yet

(a) the Pew study indicates that *most* white Dems who don't like Obama aren't racist (as defined by the table), and
(b) the Pew study indicates that there are a lot of people with racist views who actually have a favorable impression of Obama (possibly even a majority).

This means you cannot use the table to conclude what Obama's support would be if racists weren't around.

Yes, the table shows that an Obama opponent is more likely to be racist than an Obama supporter (and this is the only thing it shows). Your mistake is in thinking that allows you to draw conclusions about how racists limit Obama's favorable rating.

Related is the fact that you also misinterpreted my comment about the interracial dating. My point was that if most Obama opponents approve of interracial dating, it is *not correct* to say that the opponents of interracial dating are the the bulk of the people who don't like Obama. You change the subject to whether or not Obama supporters are more racist than Obama opponents -- which of course is what the table is highlighting.

I tried to blame the table in my earlier comments, but you would have none of that, so I guess we only have your innumeracy to blame.

Posted by Barbar | March 29, 2008 5:54 AM

Barack Hussein Osama: Black, Muslim, Hates America, No AMERICAN flag pin, no pledge of allegiance, no National Anthem, denial of JESUS. Why don't you people wake up before it is too late. He will make Osama Bin Laden our new leader and sell out America to the MUSLIMS. I don't want to speak arabic, please wake up and vote Republican to defeat terror. Dont you remember 9/11???

Posted by Cagemonkey | March 30, 2008 6:53 PM