More on Clinton and Obama's Jacksonian, Academic Divide
Reader Comments
Suburban Precinct Numbers
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/primaries/conn_primary_dem_results_by_town/
Above is a link to the Connecticut numbers to add to your Massachusetts analysis--check out New Canaan and Darien--both big Obama wins.
http://www.co.henrico.va.us/registrar/2008FebruaryElection-unOfficialResult.htm
Also above is a link to the the Henrico Co VA website. Obama does well in affluent, strongly GOP slice of Henrico--the Tuckahoe District--which Obama carried 5,100-2,800. Allen won every precinct there in 2006. (see also VA statewide site --http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/).
Similar pattern in affluent, now swing McLean/Great Falls portion of Fairfax Co--where Obama ran particularly well -- see riverfront precincts 301, 304, 306, 311.
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/eb/result/DEM_RESU08_final.pdf
Thanks
Pretty much a landslide
Looking at your map, It is pretty much a landslide in Clinton's favor. With the exception of ultra rich Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Island, and a small enclave around Amherst, Clinton swept the state. So much for the value of Kennedy and Kerry endorsements.
BTW, Obama has certainly not been courting the gay vote. In fact, he is reported to have refused to be photographed with San Francisco mayor Gaven Newsom out of fear that it might tarnish his otherwise blank canvas.
Aaahhh, it all makes sense now . . .
. . . kind of an oxymoron - Jacksonian Democrat . . .
But if one falls for the race bate, then one would have to wonder how it came to be that an African America became (first democratic) governer of the state (in a really long time). As much as race is an issue in American history, so is gender, and to give more weight to one issue is to view this phenomena through narrow lens. I guess what the MA primary results show is that it's mult-dimensional.
At any rate, I still stand by my previous statements. Boston and surrounding areas (areas heavily populated with minorities) swung for Obama. If one thinks there is nothing wrong with minorities supporting minorities, then they're much a part of the race issue that still plagues America as Jacksonian democrats. There are some minority groups who went decisively for Clinton, like, I would imagine, the Asian vote. One might say at a visceral level that race was the motivating factor, but in all honesty, this is too superficial and we need to look deeper than just race and gender. There's also other factors that come into play and many reasons to be FOR Clinton, than AGAINST Obama. Many of which are in line with Asian values. And at the end of the primary day, those reasons won the day.
My greatest fear is that this primary race really does divide the democratic party, and a segment of that population will actually end of voting for the white guy (out of spite, mind you, not hate for another's race or gender).
Northampton
Have you considered how large the student and faculty population of Northampton is compared to the non-college-affiliated lesbian community? I would wager that the number of same-sex marriages performed in Northampton is much smaller than the total undergraduate population of Smith College. Northampton seems like a clear example of an "academic" community if there ever was one.
Yes, the gay men I know in Massachusetts predominantly supported Clinton, certainly out of proportion to our age and education cohorts.
The Massachusetts Vote
This was very enlightening, and I'm surprised Clinton has done well in Massachusetts, given its history in demonizing female candidates (Jane Swift and Kerry Healy). I think many MA residents have "voter's remorse" after voting for Deval Patrick into the governer's office. He has fallen flat on his campaign promises, and if history serves us right, Obama, if president, would fall flat on his promises as well.
I wouldn't interpret the Boston and surrounding areas (including Cambridge) as leaning Obama as a result of the college vote. Afterall, these areas also have a heavy population of African Americans and minorities who tend to vote Obama no matter what. Isolated collegetowns like Wellesley and Amherst are more telling of the "Jacksonian academics" divide. Affluent areas like Lexington and Concord represent the white upper income brackets. The western parts who carried Obama tend to be Republican and anti-Clinton. I don't think the media discusses this segment of the Obama support enough.
After all this, it's surprising that Clinton carried the majority of the youth as well as white males in this state. I would have liked to see a breakdown of the age in the Boston and surrounding areas. This state boasts one of the highest post secondary education rate in the country, and has an above average mean family income. It would help shed light on if Obama really does carry the college educated vote, because, as a young college-educated individual, I have yet to encounter a young college-educated individual who voted for Obama.
Jacksonians
The "Jacksonians" you describe in your recent piece could better be described as rednecks who would never vote for a black person. It has nothing to do with their relationship to their Jacksonian ancestors.
The Democratic primary is overwhelmingly about race. The Hispanics, Asians and lower-class whites who compete with African-Americans are voting for Hillary. Their support is not so much because they particularly like her or they want a woman President. It's an anti vote. My guess is that they would vote overhwhelmingly for a white man if they had the choice--which they will have in November.
The academics and upscale Dems who are voting for Obama just don't feel as threatened by his race.
Race is the central issue in this county and it has been since we started buying slaves from West Africa.
Please don't give me academic B.S. about Jacksonians.
Sean Hannity
That was a good appearance on Hannity's show yesterday. I got the feeling it was WAY over Hannity's head however. He does better with short little sound bites that he can compress into his 5 second attention span. I'm a conservative, but Hannity is hard for me to take. Also, I doubt he could name more than about 50 members of the House and maybe 40 senators. He couldn't understand the description of the Scots-Irish in America. He's just not very smart.
