After viewing the exit polls from the 2004 and 2008 Presidential elections, President Obama made had the support of women at a rate that is about right for a Democrat. Also striking were the gains he made among men. But what I think made the ultimate difference for Obama were his incredible gains among minorities.
Before we look at the popping numbers among minorities, let's look at some of the modest, yet significant, gains Obama made among men and women. In 2004 John Kerry won 51% of the women's vote. This number was quite low for a Democrat in recent elections (Bush made a 5 point jump from 2000). So in 2008, it should not be surprising that Obama won 56% of the women's vote. What is somewhat shocking is the fact that he won 49% (a plurality) of the men's vote. According to Heatherington and Keefe the percentage of men who identified themselves as Democrats has steadily been falling. In 1976, just over 50% of men considered themselves Dems, while by 2004 that number had fallen to nearly 45% (193). Despite the fact that just under 45% of men (also on H & K, 193) called themselves Republicans, Bush received 53% and 55% of their votes in 2000 and 2004 (two very close elections).
Despite these significant differences, what really put Obama over the edge in 2008 (and left Kerry hanging in 2004) were the gains Obama made with minorities. In 2004 Bush received 62% of the vote among white men and 55% among white women. Kerry received 37% and 44% respectively. Obama's numbers were slightly higher than Kerry's (41% and 46%). The difference was among African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, and the ridiculous "Other" category. Together they made up 23% of voters in 2004 and 26% of voters in 2008.
Here is where Obama made gains:
In 2004 Kerry received 88% of the African-American vote. His 2008 counterpart increased that number to 95%, a 7% leap. Among Hispanic-Americans, Kerry received only 53% of the vote, while Obama raked in 67% of the vote, a 14% jump! Asian-Americans, who admittedly made up a very small slice of the electorate in both 2004 and 2008, supported Kerry 56%-44%, while they supported Obama 62%-35% for an 8% increase. Finally "Others," who also are a small fraction of the electorate pulled the lever for Kerry at 54% clip in 2004. That number increased to 66% for Obama in 2008.
Another interesting comparison (and unrelated to my thesis) are the changes among age groups. Obama improved on nearly every age category. 18-29 year olds favor Kerry by 9%, but voted for Obama at a roughly 2-1 rate. 30-44 year olds supported Bush by 7%, but this time Obama won their support. The 44 and older age groups were much closer to 50% in both elections, but Obama improved upon their support (it is hard to compare because the categories are different) except those over 65, where it is clear, he actually dropped 2%.
Obviously the reasons for the shift from a Republican to a Democrat are complicated. The political environment was certainly much friendlier for the Democrats. Obama was a stronger and clearer candidate than Kerry. McCain was a less-disciplined and weaker campaigner than Bush. Just to name a few.
The two elections are fascinating to compare side-by-side (particularly through the gender and racial prisms) because we get to see just how much the country changed its mind between 2004 and 2008. But the results also create several questions: Was the 2008 election simply an anomaly? Or is it the sign of a fundamental shift in our nation's course? Are men going to gravitate back to the Democratic Party, while women continue their push to the left? Are minorities going to continue to make up more and more of the electorate? If so, are they going to vote for Democrats in numbers like 2008, or did they just come out and vote for Obama because he was an electrifying candidate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Per your comment on the increasing percentage of the population that is minority, there is fairly strong evidence, based on trends since the 1990s, that the US will be majority minority by 2050.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/03/pdf/progressive_america.pdf
You’re right, the 2004 and 2008 elections are interesting to compare indeed. There were some shifts, but also many expected trends which we may consider the “status quo.” Like the Gapology info details, race is one of the most important factors impacting politics in America today. For this reason, I agree with you that the gains that Obama made (and Kerry failed to make) with respect to the minority vote ultimately helped him secure the presidency.
ReplyDeleteAs far as your closing questions go, although time will ultimately tell, I don’t think that 2008 will be viewed as an anomaly. Having said that, I think some of the voting figures we saw in the 2008 election did in fact occur as a result of Obama or an electrifying campaign in general, but this may very well hint at a change in the nation’s course as you’ve said. I think the real test will occur after Obama’s term(s?) in office—especially if his approval ratings are low and the voters (including many first-time voters) feel let down or disenfranchised.