The importance of cross tabs

So many people look at a poll of public opinion and just see the top numbers. Candidate A has 55%, Candidate B has 45%. They never look into the particulars of where that support comes from (otherwise known as cross tabs) for each candidate.

That's why this quote from the March 5 edition of the New York Times is so intriguing:

"Mrs. Clinton maintained an edge over Mr. Obama among women, whites, Hispanics, older voters and those with less education. Mr. Obama continued to edge her out among men, blacks, younger voters and those with more education, according to an exit poll conducted statewide by Edison/Mitofsky for the National Election Pool."

So she has trouble with blacks and younger voters, and he has trouble with older voters. This is significant. If she gets the nomination, all his new support is disenfranchised and doesn’t go to the polls. If he gets the nomination, the old folks look to McCain because "he’s one of them."

Hmmm. While November 2008 is a long ways off, suddenly I’m thinking it might not be so bad to be a Republican.

And we're off...

Obama. Huckabee.

The Republicans:

I admit that in these closing days leading up to Iowa, I thought that Mitt's Millions would close the gap and maybe put him back on top of Gov. Huckabee. McCain must be dancing (or, well, whatever McCain would do if he would dance) in New Hampshire right now. Despite coming in third/fourth at the caucuses, McCain has been pulling back in New Hampshire, and seeing his biggest rival in NH (Romney) fall is only good news for him. As Mort Kondracke mentioned, it's like a baseball pennant race - you always want the guy who is ahead of you in the division to lose, so you can move forward. Huckabee should certainly spend some more time in New Hampshire now, but he also needs to pour a lot of time and money into South Carolina. And let me tell you - Mitt's folks on the ground in SC will not take this lying down. Huckabee for President better be ready for the gloves to come off down there, and be prepared to get their knuckles a little bloody too.

The Democrats:

But Obama. Wow. This is a huge day in American politics - an African-American man won Iowa. You know, Iowa. The 95% Caucasian state in the middle of the country. It's not like Iowa has a huge minority population to put Barack Hussein Obama over the top. HRC and her minions must be shaking in their boots right now. Oh yeah - and the son of the mill worker is done. D.O.A. One silver lining I am hoping that comes out of this Obama win is it hopefully puts the first (final?) nail in the coffin of the divisive politics of race that come from the ilk of Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. I hope they see his win as what it is - a rejection of them, not as black men, but as liberal, fear-and-hate mongering cretins.

Boo Hoo - Clinton can't have it both ways

I've been wanting to write about this for days - ever since it happened really - but real life and work seem to have a funny way of getting in the way.

Let's re-cap:

All the Democrats running for president were in a debate. A question came up about whether they were supportive of Governor Spitzer's (D-NY) plan to give legal, government-issued driver's licenses to illegal aliens. Each candidate got to say what they thought. Except Hillary. She was for it, sort of, against it, maybe, understood why he would propose it, I guess... In other words, she answered this question like all the others - she didn't. But this time was different - she wasn't let off the hook. The moderator (Tim Russert, I think) asked her to clarify her position. Her fellow candidates jumped on her for not having a "yes" or "no" answer. So finally she says she's for it.

Only to say the next day she wasn't. Or was it the other way around?

See, it doesn't matter. Because in typical "I want it all" Hillary-fashion, the next day she came out swinging. Or whining, actually. About how all the "boys" had ganged up on her.

What is appalling to me is not her stance on the issue (OK, it is actually, but it's not the point of this post) but on her immediate retreat to hide behind her own skirts. I got news for ya' lady - you think that the boys here in America are tough? Wait until you get onto the world's playground! You think the "boys" in Iraq, North Korea, Iran and China are going to treat you like a fragile little doll? If you can't handle debating with men who mostly agree with you, how are you going to defend America against the plots of the people who want to overthrow it?

It's completely offensive that the first words out of her mouth were about gender, and how she was essentially being picked on. Hard to imagine a real female leader crying like Hillary was. Bet you wouldn't have seen Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher or Indira Gandhi pull that nonsense. They would put on their big girl panties and realize that they were leaders first, foremost and only.

Hillary can't have it both ways - she can't want to be the most powerful woman in the free world, and cry about how the boys are picking on her.

He gets this one right

I think it's well-documented (OK, well maybe not documented, but certainly well KNOWN) how I feel about Senator John McCain. But being intellectually honest means admitting when someone totally nails an issue on the head, even if you don't necessarily like that person:

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain made the following statement today: Senator Clinton said that believing General Petraeus' testimony requires a 'willing suspension of disbelief.' I think it willingly suspends disbelief to not repudiate an advertisement run by a radical left wing organization that impugns and dishonors the integrity of a man who has served his nation with dedication all of his life. If you're not tough enough to repudiate a scurrilous, outrageous attack such as that, then I don't know how you're tough enough to be President of the United States.

Hat Tip: The Corner