The Clinton-Obama gender divide

Posted: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:00 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Clinton, Obama, New Hampshire

From NBC’s Domenico Montanaro
There is a real gender divide in this race. Obama leads among men, 42%-30%, and by a similar margin, Clinton leads among women, 47%-34%. This is a real difference from Iowa, where Obama actually BEAT Clinton among women.

He also defeated her in Iowa by wide margins among independents and young voters. Tonight, Obama leads among Independents (43%-31%) again, but not by the whopping margin he led by in Iowa. And he’s trailing among Democrats significantly (45%-34%). In Iowa, he actually beat Clinton by a point among Democrats. Among youth voters, he is way ahead among 18-24 year olds (61%-22%), but he is actually trailing among 25-29 year olds (37%-34%). The under-30 vote is about 18% of the vote, slightly lower than the 22% that came out in Iowa. The combined under-30 vote is 51%-28% Obama -- not as large a margin for Obama as it was in Iowa.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

If the numbers hold up and Obama loses or wins only slightly, then I must put into writing what I’ve told friends ever since Hillary teared up.

This was orchestrated, and I have no doubt Bill was behind it.

Not only did the media attack Hillary for her eyes welling, but in households around NH, husbands were telling their wives “this is why a woman can’t be President,” or “see, women can’t help but cry all the time.”

And that is why Hillary is up by 12-points with women in NH as opposed to five down in Iowa.

Michael, Buffalo, New York (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:22 PM)

I have not seen the internal numbers but I venture to say that Chuck Todd was correct of 1 thing, the "independents" were oversampled but it looks like it was in the Dems polls not in the Rep ones. If "independents" broke for McCain and not Obama that is not a good things for Dems in Nov.

Domingo M. (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:31 PM)

Hillary is the least electible of the Democratic candidates.

Sam, Northern VA (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:33 PM)

let's hope chris matthew keeps "clinton bashing" HILLARY all the way to the white house. i know he gets paid to do what he does but his "candidate of choice" {barack} is becoming a little too obvious, even for chris. so keep up the bad mouthing, chris! IT'S WORKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

gk greek (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:33 PM)

Perhaps the women of New Hampshire enjoy being told how they'll vote as much as Iowans do. Hillary was crowned too soon, declared dead too soon, so yes, now resurrection is the next act. The writers may be on strike but the pundits are doing their best to make an essentially tedious process high drama.

Jodi Lustig, New York, NY (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:34 PM)

Fake tears...so-called savvy female voters of NH fell for it!!! If she is the nominee, I'm voting republican...if you're gagging for "experience" then McCain is miles ahead.

Natasha B, New Haven, CT (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:35 PM)

IT WAS THE "FAIRY TALE" SPEECH - Is This How We Want Our Former Presidents Behaving?

As I write, Hillary’s been projected by you guys to win the New Hampshire Primary. What was the difference? Her weeping? Nope. The fact that she's popular with women? Let's get real. It was the former president. Specifically, it was the “Fairy Tale” speech given by Bill, a monstrosity which may go down in history as having worsted both the “Checkers” and “You Won’t Have Nixon to Kick Around Anymore” speeches by Tricky Dick. A new low in American politics. A series of lies and distortions - which he knew, by the way - followed by the tag line (for those of you familiar with advertising), “A Fairy Tale.” So, I hope you’ll forgive a former Bill Clinton fan for saying that the aspiring First Husband has committed the gravest of sins, and sunk far below any former president in history. For, as a former president, he must’ve known that his first priority was the dignity of the office he once held; his second, his own legacy; and his last, any personal, post-presidential goals. Some of us - even those of us (like me) who would’ve voted for a nominated Hillary in November - will remember this. And we will cast our ballot for anyone other than the Senator from New York.

Scott Campbell, St. Petersburg, FL (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:39 PM)

Suck it up, Chris Matthews. We're not going to let the press do to Hillary what it did to Al Gore.

Karen (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:41 PM)

What are the gender break downs for the Republican candidates? Why is the gender being discussed at all? I always knew our society was sexist but I'm continually amazed at how blatantly negative our media is about
"the woman" running for President.

Laurie B. (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:43 PM)

Well, Gooooo Hillary!!! We love you and will work as hard as we can. We believe in you and know that you're the right person for this job!! NO QUESTION ABOUT IT!!!!!

Gayle Niemeyer (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:43 PM)

I think yesterday's 3 events were clearly orchestrated targetting the woman vote
1. Bill Clinton getting a phone call in the middle of the speech from Hillary, ending with a "love you"
2. Hillary tearing up on 'How do you do it ?'
3. 2 guys coming up with placards that said 'Iron my shirt'.

The moment I heard the 3 events I knew it was all orchestrated. I didnt hear one news channel highlighting the 3 events. It was downright cheesy. New Hampshirt is supposed to have a highly educated electorate.

Ron Kristen, Raleigh, NC (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:43 PM)

I hate the idea that Clinton would snag women voters on behalf of being a woman, or that Obama would do the same with black voters.

In either case, it's an insult to the demographic being cited - that they can't make their own decisions based on anything but their race or ethnicity.

That being said, however you analyze the numbers, Hillary won. And if she continues to, so will the Republicans this November.

John, Fort Collins, CO (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:43 PM)

Hey Main Stream Media, how about some humilty here? YOU GOT IT WRONG - BIG TIME!!! You guys/gals are no better than the local weather forecasters who regardless of how often they screw up the forecast, they simply brush it off or find another excuse for why the got it wrong - and still have a job the next day. Stop hijacking this important debate that we democratic voters need to have and start reporting more objectively. Chris Matthews - stop calling yourself a journalist. While you might have the intelligence and the right credentials - your blatant lack of objectivity barely qualifies you to work for OK Magazine but not quite good enough for TMZ.com

OG, San Francisco, CA (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:44 PM)

Chris/Chuck,
Need a tissue to cry into?

rosie, grand rapids, MI (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:44 PM)

I'm sorry, but as a woman under forty, I will pick Obama or Edwards anyday over Clinton. It is not a matter of gender, it's a matter of vision over politics as usual. Ilike to think that we are a society above gender politics.

Danielle, Rockville MD (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:44 PM)

More than over the "tearing up" fiasco, I am more disappointed in my sisters in NH not voting down Politics-as-usual in Hillaries Rove-like attacks on Obama. We just keep rewarding bad behavior! Come back, Obama!

June, Boise ID (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:46 PM)

Thank you women of New Hampshire and on to the women of Nevada and SC! Senator Clinton I am proud of you! Lean on us ladies, we know what it's like to live in a man's world and will never let you fall from grace. Believe in us like we believe in you!

Much love from the Show Me state!

Johnalee~

Thank you NH Women! Women everywhere unite! (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:46 PM)

I think this thread proves we are not a society above gender politics.

Lisa, Oklahoma City OK (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:47 PM)

Any Democrat saying they will vote Republican if Hillary is the Nominee is a fake!

Laura G. (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:47 PM)

Well, obviously, Edwards will win the next one, because he's from the Carolinas, and probably Obama wins Michigan - he's from that region.. we have to wait until super Tuesday to get a real clue about the probable nominee for the Democrats, if then!

Douglas Stouffer (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:49 PM)

Chris Matthews looked gleeful after Iowa and couldn't wait to sink his teeth into Hilary. How, he just looks angry--his personal preferences are obvious both by his appearance and his statements about the Clintons, both of whom he clearly despises. Keith O. is similarly transparent.

Guys, just report the results and get ahold of yourselves, or you will become as bad as Fox news has become in the pro-Bush camp.

Julie Glade, Valparaiso, Indiana (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:49 PM)

HRC won in NH because the women flocked to her in droves because she CRIED. lol. unbelievable but true

jim el cajon (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:50 PM)

We're going to lose this Whitehouse if Hillary wins the primaries :(

Upset Dem (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:51 PM)

Look. It is this simple. This has nothing to do with gender.I have been a Democrat for the last 16 years. But we need a change in direction, we need someone with out bagage. We need someone who can unite the country. We don't need fake tears, polarazation and continuation of a dynasty. We have tried that in 2000 and 2004. If Senator Clinton is the nominee of the Democratic Party. I will be voting Republican (if it is McCain) or 3rd Party.

Paul Hennerich Saint Louis MO (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:51 PM)

Sen. Obama WILL be this party's nominee. Clinton's fake crocodile tears will fool nobody.

When did being the First Lady qualify you for the Presidency? "35 years of change?" If she brought 35 years of change, then why have the last 20 years been so divisive and done absolutely nothing for America? And why does America STILL want change?

Hillary and Bill Clinton are the exact same side of the Bush-Cheney-Rove coin of deceit, division, dishonesty and Machiavellianism. In the end, Americans will reject that formula. We are sick and tired of being told that "the other side" is evil, when the REAL evil we face is Bin Laden & Company.

If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, it guarantees a Republican victory and another 4 to 8 years of "Remember 9/11!" being shoved down our throats. It guarantees another 4 to 8 years of division and hyper-partisanship.

New Hampshire betrayed its storied tradition of wise judgment tonight; the rest of America will prove them wrong.

Rich, NYC, NY (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:52 PM)

I completely agree with Michael from Buffalo, New York. I am certain that it was orchestrated and that is why she is up in points with women in NH. However, as one woman who had a very different reaction to her crocodile tears, I sure hope other strong, smart women will also be offended no matter what the ploy behind them. Ms. Clinton, "there's no crying in baseball!!!" PPPLLLEEEAAASSSEEE

Denise, Houston, Texas (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:52 PM)

I read so many people pointing out that Hilary Clinton is a woman and husbands around the country debating whether women can be President.

How many are questioning if a black man can be President? How ignorant would someone look if they reasoned that because Obama isn't white, he's playing a race card. And because Hilary is female, she's playing the gender card.

Once again something idiotic gets reinforced:

Only rich white men can be President. We debate whether a woman can be President, whether a black man can be President, but after seeing the last rich white man President, I wonder why we're not asking if it's not time to let some other gender or race give it a go. Can we do worse?

Kristy (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:52 PM)

I think the outcome and MSNBC's comment on the "gender divide" underscores a more important and neglected reality. That is, the media establishment is unprepared to interprete an election process pitting a female against a male. The inaccuracy of media pundits over the past 48 hours reflects more than a few limitations of media coverage during this "change" era in politics. That is, (1) the ongoing democartic race (Hillary's "fall") has been interpreted with respect to past races- which do not provide a precedence for a male/female standoff and (2) major networks and cable channels use more males than females for a greater proprtion of televised time when reporting and interpreting the ongoing polls/results. This affects, I believe the accuracy and levity of interpretations. why did we hear so much about Hillary's aggression when every candidate, over the course of the primary challenge so far, has shown more?

M. Little (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:52 PM)

Go Hillary! Jen & Aunt Ter are rooting for you in FL...

Jennifer F. (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:52 PM)

Ain't that America!? At least the press doesn't have a clue. I'm glad to see some contention. Trial by fire is good practice for a future Prez.

Shane, Apex, NC (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:54 PM)

'Suck it up, Chris Matthews. We're not going to let the press do to Hillary what it did to Al Gore.'
Karen is right...the best campaign tool Hillary has in her pocket is Chris Mathews big, dumb mouth...keep it up, it must be time for you retire! I'm even disappoint in Keith Olberman, who I love, for MSNBC's jaded coverage of this race. But go ahead, keep it up...we'll be laughing about your crappy coverage from the Oval office in 380 days!

Marcia, Gold Canyon, AZ (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:59 PM)

I am thrilled for Mrs. Clinton. I do not know if she is electable, however, I have similar doubts about the electability of Mr. Obama. John Edwards has the best polling numbers against the Republican candidates.

Jacque, Boise, Idaho (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:01 PM)

Isn't it amazing that the national press/media and the pundits they let spout their biased opinions has had it put back in their face. MSNBC should be ashamed to let their main anchors be so biased. For a while there I thought I was watching FOX. And Keithe Oberman reminded me of his arch rival Bill O'Reilly. Good for the voters in New Hampshire for going to the polls and voting their mind not what the press was telling them to vote!!!

Randall Price Chattanooga, Tennessee (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:02 PM)

I could never understand the voters in our country, some complained that Hillary was Cold and Steely and now they complain that Hillary cried to get votes and show a softer side. When Obama and Edwards attacked her in the debates, they said she was playing the gender card but when Clinton attacked back, she was being Nasty and Demeaning. Obama won in Iowa, good, Hillary appears to be winning in NH, wonderful, maybe Edwards will win in South Carolina. Stop Moaning, listen, and then vote

Sam, Boston, MA. (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:04 PM)

How did Obama's double didget lead disapear over night? I didn't think there were that many undecideds.

Brian, St. Louis, MO (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:05 PM)

Get real, media. You were writing Hillary off after the Iowa caucuses - as if such a tiny percentage of the country were going to determine who the nominee will be. I'm so sick of seeing interviewers ask the guys about their foreign policy experience and Hillary about her hairstyle in 1976. We're not playing Entertainment Tonight here, we're electing the next leader of America and delegating all the power that goes along with that post. Yes, Obama is a rock star and is running an impressive campaign. I just think he doesn't yet have the credentials to be President. Maybe a Clinton/Obama ticket?

Julie, OR (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:06 PM)

Hillary Clinton has the capability to lead our nation & the people of New Hampshire has spoken. Only the zealous Clinton's Haters would tried to come up with all sorts of reasons for her winning the state of New Hampshire.

If you truly hate the Clintons, then have the guts to admit it for posting negative comments about her w/ no basis. Don't hide behind the "Pundits" shroud & make stupid comments that are totally uncalled for. The least you can do is to point out her weaknesses as a leader. Please don't resort to comments that would make you any less of a person than you already are.

John Doe (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:08 PM)

Dude, since the Republicans have been in office our wages don't go as far and our children go to war. They prefer Obama to win the democratic election because they feel they can defeat him when it really counts. This election is not about being patriotic but who controls our countries wealth by giving huge government contracts to their buds. So believe what you want this is about money!!! Every card (i.e., race, gender, economic) is being played and we are falling for it. Vote for Hilary.

J Garcia, San Diego, California (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:09 PM)

Sam, Boston, MA. (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:09 PM)

TRY ASYOU PUCKERS MIGHT you are going to lose to whatever democrat you suckers go up against5 .Republican equals haters people who are greedy people who rather lose money in Iraq and I mean lose as in someone stole it thangive it to another american you are hard of haeart ,mind and soul good luck in your new endevours.

kenn (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:09 PM)

I haven't heard any of the pundits remarking that it is Edward's percentage points that Clinton gained in the change from the Iowa results. If Edwards had done as well she would not have and the predictions by pollsters would have been closer to reality. Perhaps New Hampshire doesn't like populists, or maybe they thought he was unfairly attacking Hillary in his pointed remarks about the systemic powers that be. But I also think the Clinton's have been playing the voters in a very manipulative way.

Susan Erickson (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:10 PM)

I agree with you, Mr. Hennerich. There just seems something profoundly upsetting about two families ruling us for so long: Bush I, Clinton I, Bush II, Clinton's Wife I . . . that seems so strange and upsetting to me. We need someone new.

JG (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:11 PM)

Has anyone noticed the placement of the podium and the background of Ms. Clinton's acceptance speech?? Kudos to her media adivser who finally took notice and took some timely advice.

Mark Golembiowski, Chicago, IL (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:12 PM)

The media themselves have become the "pillory Hillary" crowd. At the slightest hint of a show of tiredness (read: weakness) on her part, supposedly "objective" journalists roll out the negativity smear machine in a way that they never do for any of the male candidates. There IS a gender divide here, folks, but it's not just among the voters. It's among the overwhelmingly male members of the media who don't know how to report on a woman presidential candidate. Here's a hint, guys: do it just like you report on the male candidates.

What gave the victory to Mrs. Clinton in New Hampshire was all the gratuitous negative spew being dumped on her by Messrs. Obama and Edwards, and by the media with their puffed-up pundits. Criticism of Mrs. Clinton has gone far beyond the reasonable and borders on a witch hunt. That is why as long as women see one of their own being mocked, flogged and crucified in the public square, they will flock to her side to defend her -- with their votes.

Karla Johnson, Ventura County, CA (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:13 PM)

Are there nothing but old, white women in NH?

WTF?

RobK, Seattle, Wash. (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:14 PM)

Gender absolutely is a factor. Check out the three guys on the left side of your screen who are responsible for this content (Political Director, Deputy Political Director, and Political Researcher who wrote this piece). All WHITE MEN. The Republican candidates? All WHITE MEN. Wake up, America, it's time to get rid of the -isms that plague our society. We need to elect a non-white non-man to the Presidency.

Jen, Columbus, Ohio (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:14 PM)

As we look at New Hampshire and scratch our heads at the polls versus the election results, people should recall the Doug Wilder rule with polling. Is it possible that twenty years later, people still poll one way and then vote another? Did Obama's race play a factor in an area that has a strong Boston immigrant population? Not to suggest that the people of New Hampshire are bigots, however these questions should be asked.

cbob (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:16 PM)

Hey Republicans, I'm an independent who would vote for McCain before I'd ever vote for Clinton.

Jim, Santa Cruz, cA (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:18 PM)

I sooo saw this happening the minute she teared up. The discourse erupted. ALL the women in my house BUT me started considering a vote for Hilary after that, and the way it was all over the papers today. How many feminism-related posts did the NYTimes have? Sheesh. I am SOOOO disappointed that this was decided by a woman acting like a crybaby on television.

Katie (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:19 PM)

I'm glad Hillary won tonight, if only to wipe that smirk off Chris Matthews' face. His blatant hatred of the Clintons, seizing on any and every opportunity to belittle them, is an ugly thing to see. His behavior makes the Fox Noise team look like impartial journalists. Honestly, I think the man's brain is unhinged, for instance, he keeps confusing the results of the Suffolk poll. I'm not sure what kind of ratings he's getting for his show, but if I were MSNBC, I would look more carefully at his contract next time it's up for renewal.

Well, actually, the real reason I'm glad Hillary won is that Iowa and NH now don't get to decide for us, the people who live in other states (CA in my case), who our Democratic nominee should be. Now, the rest of us will have a chance to cast our votes that actually mean something later on. Finally, I'm gratified that a black man and a woman each won a presidential primary for the first time ever in our country. History has been made and a new chapter has been turned, and the current bankrupt administration will be swept away into the dustbin of history a year from now. Halleluja!

Don Wynn, San Leandro, CA (Sent Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:19 PM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=561713