TNR BLOGS

July 05, 2009 | 4:05 PM
July 05, 2009 | 12:13 PM
July 04, 2009 | 11:18 PM

March 09, 2009 | 5:19 PM
March 09, 2009 | 5:16 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM

July 05, 2009 | 12:02 PM
July 01, 2009 | 10:33 PM
June 30, 2009 | 8:42 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

July 03, 2009 | 10:13 PM
July 02, 2009 | 12:57 PM
July 01, 2009 | 7:02 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
14.02.2008
The Valentine Vote

One of the major stories out of the Potomac primaries was the big margins Obama enjoyed among white men, 56-43 over Hillary Clinton in Virginia, for one example. And of course, Mark Penn famously declared that 25 percent of Republican women would flip over to Hillary in a general election. But as long as we're slicing and dicing the electorate into manageable, Valentine's-Day-chocolate-sized pieces, I'll launch a small theory of my own: single, heterosexual men are more likely Obama supporters than ones in a relationship.

Keep in mind this evidence is purely anecdotal. But I've personally observed a steady stream of Hill-raising women putting the proverbial moves on their significant others, bringing them into Clinton's fold, under pain of...well, you know.

One Hillary supporter--who has, since his conversion, done high-level work on the campaign itself--even told me this: "I was on the fence between Clinton and Obama for a long time and there are a couple things that swayed me. One was my girlfriend, who is a big Hillary supporter. When you have dinner with someone every night they can work you over."

Now this osmotic, gender-based, under-the-bedsheets suasion probably only works part of the time (cf. this NYT piece about vegan-omnivore love), and even close families don't necessarily vote the same way. But if Penn is right (!) could this shadow campaign mean coupled Republican men are not far behind?

--Dayo Olopade

Posted: Thursday, February 14, 2008 1:40 PM with 6 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

virginiacentrist said:

If social pressure influences voting in this way, then you'd think Hillary would do better in Caucuses, where men often attend with their wives and openly back Obama in front of their wives.

February 14, 2008 2:01 PM

ramboorider said:

My God, talk about a Bradley effect. A lot of guys will say ANYthing to get laid. But when they're behind the curtain, they're not gonna VOTE for Hillary unless they really want her. I just don't see it.

February 14, 2008 2:52 PM

ryanmacd said:

Key difference btwn your anecdote and the vegan-omnivore dilemma...your guy's support for Obama seemed, well, pretty limp. When ever you have a fence-sitter and a passionate advocate in a relationship, the fence-sitter is more likely to be pulled over than to go the other way, That is where the fear of withholding can do it's dirty work so well. Just ask my boyfriend.

No such luck with the vegetarianism. Food choices tend to be more important to people than politics.

February 14, 2008 3:13 PM

arsonplus said:

Maybe that's  why Obama does better in states that bleed their most eligible singles to the big cities. O' and virginiacentrist,  it's notably easier to disagree with your wife than your girlfriend.

February 14, 2008 3:13 PM

esmense said:

I have noticed that young and unattached men, and the angrily divorced, tend to have the most animosity toward Clinton.  For some, I think, feeling rejected by women contributes to their over-the-top anger at "that woman."

February 14, 2008 7:59 PM

ironyroad said:

ramboorider:  exactly -- who knows what guys are going to do in that polling booth!  Saying "yes dear" is a way of getting out of a boring argument that she won't drop while giving the impression that you see her side of it.

February 15, 2008 11:41 AM