A quick perusal of HRC's early endorsements from political figures in CA (e.g. Representatives) show that a majority of women endorsed her, and endorsed her early.

The clue lies in this further breakdown: it is *older* white women that vote for her. In other words, this group is voting for someone who looks like themselves.

Interestingly, the black community didn't come out in mass for Obama until two things happened: (a) Obama looked credible for real and (b) the Clintons started playing perceived racial cards.

While fact (a) doesn't hold with older, white women (Hillary was real from the start given good branding), judging by the posts here (b) does seem plausible (perceived sexist cards strengthen her support).

Hillary has made much of electing a *woman* president. Obama hasn't made nearly so much about electing a *black* president.

So, while Obama has been running as a candidate for all, Hillary has really focused on this core demographic. (Put the breast cancer research comments this week in that bin as well.)

In some sense, Hillary is too clever by half: it is possible to win the POTUS for her by simply playing identity politics. Obama never had a chance down that road (there aren't enough blacks in the US to elect him to anything). He, therefore, took the harder path -- but more substantial one.

It's instructive to see what Sophie Masloff, the former Pittsburgh mayor, said:

It's been very difficult for me to sit on the sidelines and fail to support a woman.

My kid sister, a 64 year old white woman, feels exactly the same way. She supports Clinton (vehemently) because Clinton is a woman and she's tired of seeing women treated as objects, as irrelevant, as inferior in today's America. It's a frustration derived from daily demeaning episodes, over a period of decades. Women may have improved their state in many ways but all it takes is one dumb comment or action a day from one of the many men women know to remind women of their second-class status.

What's ironic to me is that racial minorities have a much better reason to support Obama than women do to support Clinton. It's not clear how Clinton will improve the status of women except by being a woman president. Women's problems are deeply ingrained. It's not as if men don't understand that women are real people. Everybody knows at least one woman quite well.

Obama has already started to open race relations to serious discussion. Minority races are a mystery to many Americans in that they don't know many racial minority people, if any, in a deep way. An open discussion of everyone's concerns may be a revelation. Racism is uppermost in the minds of many racial minorities. Obama offers the best hope to mitigate racism that I've seen in a long time. This appeals to many whites as well.

Not only do I not see an equivalent thing happening with Clinton and women, but Clinton's constant reminders that she is the woman candidate in this race doesn't entice many men.

I know this will fall on the empty ears of those trying to paint Obama or Clinton in a bad light, but isn't THIS news too?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/10/mccain-ill-cut-deficits-l_n_96011.html

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of Clinton and Obama supporters want to see this guy defeated. Can TPM cover his gaffes and mistakes too? You know, fair and balanced? Shouldn't we start to work toward bringing Clinton and Obama supporters back together and focus on this guy that is against everything that we stand for?

Here's another interesting story going un-noticed:

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/amid-economic-woes-house-gop-to-pivot-from-fisa-earmarks-to-taxes-2008-04-09.html

Amid economic woes, House GOP to pivot from FISA, earmarks to taxes

As for women supporting Hillary--I'm a 45 year old woman and I wanted to support her. I love the idea of a woman president. But gender cannot be my main reason (that would make me sexist), and the flaws in her campaign far exceed any benefits of her gender, imho. Perhaps for some women, they do not (which is not to say there aren't a lot of women out there with perfectly sound reasons for supporting her... I'm just not one of them).

Perhaps a lot of men go this way as well. Gender might make them less comfortable with a candidate, but not so much that they couldn't overlook gender if everything else she offered was great.

If, say, 40% of voters (or even 30%) were voting because they want someone like them in the White House, wouldn't that explain Hillary having more female supporters and less male supporters?

Also, apparently no Democratic candidate for decades has gotten strong male support (or so says Rachel Maddow)--another area for discussion!

To add to this discussion, I'd like to point to the generational gap that works into the discrepancy in gender support. Hillary, as part of the Boomer generation, may be one of the last serious presidential contenders we will see from that generation. In many ways, her run is as significant as when B. Clinton ran and won as the first non-WWII generation candidate.

Obama who is technically at the tale end of the Boomer generation is for all intents and purposes, a post-Civil Rights/ Feminist Movement/ Vietnam War child. These two candidates were shaped by completely different sets of historical circumstances and I think that in many ways translates to their appeal to different segments of the population.

As a non-white feminist nearing 40, I have very different identification with the two democratic candidates. And at least amongst women I know who identify themselves as feminists, there is a generational gap that has become very pronounced as this race has progressed.

Among some women I know who are in their 50s and 60s, they see Obama as an upstart, swaggering, sweet talking male who woos the boss without ever having paid his due. The hard working, under appreciated woman is once again over looked in favor of the guy. Some openly draw parallels to their own lives and they support Clinton out of a sense of feminist justice.

For me, I see this race as truly liberating--a black man and a woman as serious contenders for the presidency! This race between Obama and Clinton in many ways is the fulfillment of the promises of the Civil Rights and the Feminist Movement. I also with little hesitation supported and support Obama's candidacy and I see no contradiction between that and my feminist identity. I also recognize that I am the beneficiary of the work and sacrifice of those who came before. However, I pay my respects to those who came before by not identifying solely with my gender.

This difference plays out in discussions everyday. It should not be a surprise that while Clinton has strong support among white women over 50, Obama has strong support among all women under 40. In the Democratic party, women over the age of 50 outnumber women under age 40, so it makes sense that the split is beneficial to Clinton.

You seem to be saying that Hillary is polarizing on gender because more women support her than men. If you want to look at it that way, you could also draw the conclusion that Hillary isn't as polarizing on race as Obama is. He gets almost total support from blacks, and much less from whites. Are you sure you want to look at things that way?

My point was, Obama's being targeted by the media and Hillary's camp as having little support from white women --- I wanted to reverse that question and ask why Hillary only seems to GET white women?