Outside of Old Privileged White Guys Obama's Approval Rating is 72%

I should hat tip bobjb72 on Twitter for this point.

https://twitter.com/bobj72/status/735091227847069700

This has no little relevance as we hear Rush Limbaugh and friends claim that the rise of Trump is a reaction to President Obama.

In light of this, Obamas numbers may bode very well for Hillary Clinton.

For more on this see Mark Murray's tweet.

https://twitter.com/mmurraypolitics/status/735087349747601408

In many ways you can say that the GOP is the white men's party and the Dems are for everyone else. But let's be more precise. You can make the case that in the 2016 election there are two kinds of relevant white voters:

1. College educated white women.

2. Non college educated white men.

To win Trump needs to maximize number 2, while number 1 is an important swing voter she may do very well with. Basically the Jennifer Rubins of the world.

A very interesting Atlantic article argues that regarding white voters, the Dems and the GOP are inverting. Historically-from FDR to the 1960-the Dems were the party of non college educated white men-call them blue collar men. The GOP was the party of college educated white men-call them white collar.

"White working-class voters defect from the Democrats, as white college-educated voters abandon the Republicans—a reversal a Clinton-Trump race could cement."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/an-election-in-negative/483905/

In the history of polling-going back to 1952-the Democrats have never won a majority of college educated whites. But Hillary seems set to do very well among college educated white women.

"The class inversion has gained strength election after election almost regardless of the nominees. But Clinton and Trump—in their bookended strengths and weaknesses—are unusually well-positioned to intensify it. Trump has demonstrated a visceral appeal among many blue-collar voters, especially men, and raised deep alarms among many of those with advanced degrees, especially women. In both the voting during the primaries and in general-election polling, Clinton, in turn has shown extreme weakness among blue-collar men and generated the most support among college-educated white women. The national CBS / New York Times poll released last week captured a nearly perfect parallel: 68 percent of white women with a college degree said they viewed Trump unfavorably, while 67 percent of white men without a degree were unfavorable toward Clinton."

"Trump faces big hurdles trying to dislodge the traditional Democratic advantage among non-white voters. So college-educated white men and non-college-educated white women are likely to become important swing groups."

"In the history of modern polling dating back to 1952, no Democratic presidential candidate has ever carried most college-educated whites; even Lyndon Johnson fell slightly short during his 1964 landslide. (This analysis uses the American National Election Studies, a poll conducted immediately after the vote, for the elections from 1952 to 1976, and the exit polls conducted by a consortium of media organizations for the elections since.)"

"From 1952 through 1980, in fact, no Democratic nominee reached even 40 percent with college-educated whites, except Johnson. During that same period, no Democratic nominee failed to reach 40 percent of the vote with non-college whites, except George McGovern in 1972 and Jimmy Carter in 1980. Over these eight elections, every Democratic nominee except McGovern ran better, usually significantly better, among non-college-educated whites than among their college-educated peers. This was a world in which Democrats were the party of people who worked with their hands, and Republicans represented those who wore suits and worked behind desks."

"But the period since 1984 has seen an accelerating reversal of that historic pattern. During his landslide defeat to Ronald Reagan in 1984, Walter Mondale ran slightly better among college-educated than non-college-educated whites. In the next three elections, Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton ran almost exactly as well with both groups."

"Since then, every Democratic presidential nominee has run better with college-educated than working-class whites. From Al Gore in 2000 through Barack Obama in 2012, the share of the vote won by the past four Democratic nominees among college-educated whites has exceeded their performance among non-college-educated whites by four to seven percentage points."

"That shift is rooted largely in the growing prominence of non-economic issues in national politics. On questions from abortion and gay marriage, to gun control, to whether immigrants benefit or burden American society, or Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban Muslim entry into the U.S., non-college-educated whites (especially men) consistently take more conservative positions than white-collar whites (especially women). Polls by the Public Religion Research Institute, for instance, have found that whites without a college education are significantly more likely than those with advanced degrees to believe the values of Islam are incompatible with American values. And while nearly three-fourths of college-educated whites say in Pew Research Center polling that the growing number of immigrants strengthens the U.S., nearly half of non-college-educated whites say they threaten traditional American values."

This would suggest that in the future there is an inverse relationship between the voters of Latinos and blue collar white men. Sure, immigration isn't the only thing Latinos care about but to be as against it as the Trumpists are will keep them Democrats for many years to come.

The good news is that while Latinos are growing as a percentage of the electorate, non college educated white men are decreasing.

As for college educated white women, they have voted for the Dems in 4 of the last 6 elections.

They voted 52 percent for Obama in 2008 but just 46 percent for him in 2012. For two obvious reasons they may well be by definition more apt to vote for Hilary as the Democratic party nominee:

1. Some of the their vote against him in 2012 was likely due to racism.

2. With Hillary as the first woman to lead a Presidential ticket, many at least will be inspired with the aspiration of having the first female POTUS.

In a recent poll Hillary received 57 percent of college educated white women which would be a Democratic record.

"Among whites, the Democratic gains with the college-educated haven’t yet been sufficient to allow any of the party’s nominees to capture a majority of them. But Democrats have remained more competitive among the college-educated than with their white working-class counterparts—drawing enough to help the party win its popular-vote majority in five of the six elections since 1992."

"In early polling, the class inversion between Clinton and Trump is scaling unprecedented heights. In the CBS / New York Times national poll released last week, Clinton narrowly led Trump among college-educated whites (drawing 47 percent of their vote) but trailed him by fully 20 points among whites without a degree (only 33 percent of whom supported her.) Similarly, the NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll released Sunday placed the two even among college-educated whites (with each drawing 44 percent) but gave Trump a 27-point advantage among those without degrees (only 31 percent of whom backed her.) Even more dramatically, the ABC / Washington Post survey released Sunday also showed Clinton and Trump running almost exactly even among college-educated whites (with Clinton drawing 45 percent of them), but the Republican leading her by 40 points among those without degrees (only 25 percent of whom supported her). In each case, the gap between her strength among college-educated and non-college-educated whites would be much larger than the widest ever previously recorded for a Democratic nominee (Obama’s seven-point differential in 2008)."

"Several recent state polls show the same widening chasm. In a WBUR/MassINC New Hampshire poll released last week, Clinton trailed Trump by 14 percentage points among non-college whites but led him by 18 among those with degrees—enough to provide her a razor-thin overall lead. In a Vanderbilt University Tennessee poll also released last week, Trump led narrowly overall after crushing Clinton by 38 points among non-college whites, but only edging her by only four points among their college-educated counterparts (and trailing among minorities). The latest Quinnipiac University Pennsylvania poll showed a virtual dead heat overall, with Trump leading Clinton by 21 points among non-college whites there, but trailing her by five among whites with degrees."

"The imposing gender gap in attitudes toward Trump and Clinton sharpen this picture. In the national CBS/NYT poll, Trump led Clinton by 27 percentage points among non-college-educated white men, while she led him by 17 points among college-educated white women, according to figures provided by CBS. The ABC / Washington Post survey recorded an even greater contrast: it gave Trump a staggering 62-point advantage among non-college-educated white men and Clinton a 24-point lead among college-educated white women. State surveys reinforce the pattern. In the Pennsylvania Quinnipiac survey, Trump led among non-college-educated white men by 43 points, but trailed by 23 among college-educated white women. In Quinnipiac’s latest Ohio survey, Clinton’s vote among college-educated white women was 20 points higher than her showing among blue-collar white men."

"Looking at whites by education and gender, those well-educated white women are consistently the best group for Democrats (who have carried them in four of the past six presidential elections and essentially tied among them in a fifth). But the matchup may be especially problematic for the GOP this time: The 55 percent Clinton drew in the CBS/NYT poll (or the 57 percent she attracted in the ABC / Washington Post survey) would represent the Democrats’ best showing among those women at least since 1980, and probably their best performance ever. By comparison, Obama won 52 percent of those women in 2008 and 46 percent in 2012."

The good news for Dems and the bad news for the GOP: Dem voters like Hispanics are increasing while GOP voters like blue collar white men are decreasing as a proportion of the electorate.

It is notable that the Dems used to be much more skeptical about immigration-a la Bernie Sanders.

The GOP was the party of amnesty. Recall this Reagan-Bush Sr. debate from 1980.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixi9_cciy8w

Herbert Walker Bush kind of sounded like his son Jeb: illegal immigration is an act of law. Reagan also came out against a fence and for 'opening the border both ways.'

Scott Sumner shows himself to be a typical college educated white man.

http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=31720