Edwards As Working-Class Hero? The polls don’t support the press’s narrative
Columbia Journalism Review's Zachary Roth does a fantastic job today debunking the group-thinking media's narrative that John Edwards is a "working class hero", who will give Obama a "boost" in the GE among members of that group. Here's an excerpt of this must-read piece:
<Blockquote>In Iowa, entrance polls didn’t ask about educational levels, which is how working class has generally been defined this primary season. But they did ask about income. And Edwards’s best income demographic was those making over $100,000 a year—the richest group. His second- and third-best performances were among those making $50,000-$75,000 a year and $75,000-$100,000 a year. His three worst showings came among the three groups making less than $50,000 a year.
New Hampshire’s results are slightly more mixed, but they still don’t offer support for the idea of Edwards as a working-class hero. Edwards performed just as well with college-educated voters as with non-college-educated voters. Looking again at income, his strongest performances were with voters making $50,000-$75,000 a year or $75,000-$100,000 a year. He did as well with voters making above $100,000 as with voters making below $50,000.
And in South Carolina, his best performance by education level was among those with a post-graduate degree. And he did better among voters with a college degree than those without. In terms of income, by far Edwards’s best result was with voters who made more than $200,000 a year.
The root of the problem here is the press’s obsession with style and image—and simple, clear narratives—at the expense of substance and evidence and complexity. Throughout his campaign, Edwards reminded anyone who would listen that he grew up the son of a mill worker, and his campaign rhetoric was squarely focused on the economic struggles of ordinary working Americans. Apparently, that was enough to make many in the press assume that his supporters were working class—even in the face of empirical data suggesting a much more complicated picture.</blockquote>
And besides Roth's great points, I would add the fact that Edwards could not even manage to help Kerry win his own native state of North Carolina. Indeed, Bush swept the floor with Kerry in the Midwest and South, known as white working class enclaves.
But big journos love a simpe story line they can recite as a group, evidence be damned, as Roth pointed out.
Whole story <a href="http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/edwards_as_workingclass_hero_1.php?page=all">here</a>.
<Blockquote>In Iowa, entrance polls didn’t ask about educational levels, which is how working class has generally been defined this primary season. But they did ask about income. And Edwards’s best income demographic was those making over $100,000 a year—the richest group. His second- and third-best performances were among those making $50,000-$75,000 a year and $75,000-$100,000 a year. His three worst showings came among the three groups making less than $50,000 a year.
New Hampshire’s results are slightly more mixed, but they still don’t offer support for the idea of Edwards as a working-class hero. Edwards performed just as well with college-educated voters as with non-college-educated voters. Looking again at income, his strongest performances were with voters making $50,000-$75,000 a year or $75,000-$100,000 a year. He did as well with voters making above $100,000 as with voters making below $50,000.
And in South Carolina, his best performance by education level was among those with a post-graduate degree. And he did better among voters with a college degree than those without. In terms of income, by far Edwards’s best result was with voters who made more than $200,000 a year.
The root of the problem here is the press’s obsession with style and image—and simple, clear narratives—at the expense of substance and evidence and complexity. Throughout his campaign, Edwards reminded anyone who would listen that he grew up the son of a mill worker, and his campaign rhetoric was squarely focused on the economic struggles of ordinary working Americans. Apparently, that was enough to make many in the press assume that his supporters were working class—even in the face of empirical data suggesting a much more complicated picture.</blockquote>
And besides Roth's great points, I would add the fact that Edwards could not even manage to help Kerry win his own native state of North Carolina. Indeed, Bush swept the floor with Kerry in the Midwest and South, known as white working class enclaves.
But big journos love a simpe story line they can recite as a group, evidence be damned, as Roth pointed out.
Whole story <a href="http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/edwards_as_workingclass_hero_1.php?page=all">here</a>.
