The media manifestly shape voter behavior, and that couldn’t be clearer than when we examine how their handling of issues of race (and accusations of racism) over the course of the campaign alters voting patterns in ways that leave the gender gap relatively unaffected.
We’ve seen, over the course of the preceding data, the way that sexism and racism are affecting voter behavior in the 2008. And perhaps the most salient finding is a simple one: That when sexism or racism come into play, they each increase the power of the other to influence the outcome of the election. That is, when Democrats indulge sexism, it enhances the influence of racism in the election, and vice versa. And when it comes to sexism, no figure in recent history has elicited as powerful a reaction as Hillary Clinton.
Fourth of six parts: Sexism and racism are also having an impact on the win/loss margins in individual states – and will play a major role in how the November campaign unfolds as certain states wind up “out of play” because of either sexism or racism (depending upon the candidate.)
The previous chapter shows how the gender gap decreases as the Black vote increases. By sorting the same data by the gender gap shift, we can see what happens as the gender gap decreases.
Not just sexism but also racism were major factors in how the 2008 election would play out. And when the interest groups change, the results show an interesting shift.
In choosing a nominee, the Democratic Party will not merely be deciding who deserves to win, or who would make the best candidate. It will also be a decision about which poisoned landscape the Party wishes to compete upon — one in which toxic wildflowers of misogyny and sexism are in full bloom, or one in which the poisonous weed of racism is a constant part of the environment, and needs the merest watering to completely despoil the land. First in a series.
(In response to last night’s post on the Page Six gossip that Bob Woodward may be retiring from the Washington Post, Paul Lukasiak wrote this comment and I thought it deserved much wider exposure — JH) There are excellent reasons why the Post is extremely unhappy with Woodward right now.