Today's Harold Meyerson column articulates the many divides in the Democratic party. As Meyerson points out, the gender gap, which traditionally has divided the Democrats from the GOP, opened among the Democrats in New Hampshire. But that's not all:
[B]eneath the profound novelties of the Democratic race lurk the same rifts that have characterized the party's presidential contests for 40 years. Breaking down Tuesday's vote, the old divisions of class, and the sometime divisions of age, are plain to see. Like Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale and Al Gore before her, Clinton is winning downscale and older voters, and the support of party regulars. Like Eugene McCarthy, Gary Hart and Bill Bradley before him, Obama has the backing of more upscale and younger voters, and independents.
Obama carried the college towns. Clinton swamped him in working-class Manchester. Among voters who told the exit pollsters that they were getting ahead economically, Obama won 48 percent support and Clinton just 31 percent. But among voters who said they were falling behind economically - and there were twice as many of those as the 'getting aheads' - Clinton led 43 percent to 33 percent. She led Obama among voters from union households, and she led among voters who said the economy was the most important issue - which a plurality did.
Karl Rove makes a similar point in today's Wall Street Journal:
Sen. Hillary Clinton won working-class neighborhoods and less-affluent rural areas. Sen. Barack Obama won the college towns and the gentrified neighborhoods of more affluent communities. Put another way, Mrs. Clinton won the beer drinkers, Mr. Obama the white wine crowd. And there are more beer drinkers than wine swillers in the Democratic Party.
I don't know if you can swill wine - actually, of course you can, but it's sure to leave you with a splitting headache - but both Meyerson and Rove are on to something. Leave aside, for a moment, the Democratic gender gap, which simply may be a function of Clinton's candidacy. Status and education divided the Democratic primary electorate in 2004 (Kerry vs. Dean) and in Connecticut in 2006 (Lieberman vs. Lamont). You hear a lot about the divisions in the contemporary Republican party, and how the "Reagan coalition" is breaking down, a thing of the past, dead, yadda, yadda, yadda. What you don't hear a lot about are the divisions among the Democrats. And as the number of upscale, highly educated professionals in the Democratic party increases, those divisions are sure to become more pronounced - just as they are more pronounced in 2008 than they were in 2004. This year might be the start of the Republican Reformation. But the Democratic Destabilization may not be far behind.
