Democrat Buyers’ Remorse: Already Here?

A couple of weeks ago on OTB Radio, I suggested that there’s a very real chance that, come October or so, the Democrats will have a bad bout of buyers’ remorse. Paul Lukasiak, guest posting on left-wing talk radio host Taylor Marsh’s blog, says that the real lesson of Hillary!’s primary performances the last several weeks is that they already do:

Ever since the media declared that Barack Obama was “inevitable” after February 19th, based on a two week period when the an unprepared Hillary Clinton campaign suffered “10 straight losses”, rank and file Democratic voters have been sending a message. Rather than rally ’round the “inevitable nominee” that message has been a consistent, loud, and clear message to the Democratic Party — DO NOT WANT.

In nearly every demographic category since February 19, Clinton percentage of the vote has risen, while Obama’s has fallen. This includes Obama’s supposed “strong” demographic categories such as voters with college degrees post-graduate degrees and voters whose income is above the national median. And Clinton beat Obama in the primaries in March, April and May in most of the major categories.


McCain may not have been the choice of the majority of Republicans, but once he was declared the “inevitable nominee”, rank and file Republicans closed ranks behind McCain. … But Democratic voters refused to accept the pronouncements of the pundits and “analysts”, and have voted in overwhelming numbers in support of Hillary Clinton.

Lukasiak then cites some trends that should give even the most ardent Obama supporter pause:

Once voters realized that Obama would be the nominee, his support within most demographic categories declined, and declined significantly in most cases. Obama’s support declined overall by 2.3%

* Obama’s support among men declined by 2%,
* Obama’s support declined among women by 1.2%,
* Obama’s support declined among White voters by 4.8%,
* Obama’s support declined among Hispanic/Latino voters by 3.2%,
* Obama’s support declined among White males by 6.7%, and
* Obama’s support declined among White females by 3.6%.

Clinton’s overall support, on the other hand, increased by 4.7%

* Clinton’s support increased among Males by 6.0%,
* Clinton’s support increased among Females by 3.1%,
* Clinton’s support increased among White voters by 6.2%,
* Clinton’s support increased among Hispanic/Latino voters by 2.6%,
* Clinton’s support increased among White males by 10.8%, and
* Clinton’s support increased among White females by 6.0%.

He concludes by noting that, while “Obama did manage to increase his support among African Americans overall by 5.4%… the impact of those changes is small.” cochange1b.png

Thus, Obama’s net increase in support among African American voters represents only 1.8% of the Democratic electorate, while Clinton’s net increase in support from White voters represents 8.4% of the Democratic primary electorate. Clinton’s overall net increase of 6.7% of the primary electorate is a clear sign that ‘buyers remorse’ has set in.

Of course, most of the primary voters now telling the party that they don’t want Obama will rally to him once he’s officially nominated. But this is most certainly among the arguments Hillary!’s campaign is making to the superdelegates.

FILED UNDER: 2008 Election, , , , , ,
Dodd Harris
About Dodd Harris
Dodd, who used to run a blog named ipse dixit, is an attorney, a veteran of the United States Navy, and a fairly good poker player. He contributed over 650 pieces to OTB between May 2007 and September 2013. Follow him on Twitter @Amuk3.


  1. Deward Bowles says:

    Obama’s grass roots movement is sweeping the nation. 100s of thousands of people are sending him donations of less than 100 dollars. Change never ask a crumb from me but change takes effort. We all must change and we all must help to turn the page and heal the wounds inflicted on this country by the politics and policy of the last 20 years. God bless America.

    My vote is for Obama

  2. Dodd says:

    Have Obama’s supporters always sounded that much like Paulbots and I just didn’t notice, or is that new?

  3. yetanotherjohn says:

    Look at the groups that are turning away from Obama. While many of these people will come back to Obama in November in true yellow dog fashion (aka they would rather vote for a yellow dog than a republican), think about the impact on the independent voters who will really decide the election.

    The largest decline for Obama was among white male voters (6.7%). Do you really think McCain is going to have a hard time connecting with the dissatisfaction expressed by such a crowd?

    The really telling numbers is when you move these numbers out of the skewed democratic primaries (which don’t look like America) and to the general election demographics. The Obama totals decline from 44.8% to 41.2%. while the non-Obama numbers increase from 49.6% to 53.3%.

    There will always be the cut and paste partisans (like Deward above) who will blindly support Obama (BTW Deward, you may want to reconsider the use of 20 years as a benchmark when discussing Obama). But the more America sees of Obama the less support he garners.

  4. Anderson says:

    I have never seen such nickel-and-diming on meaningless stats. Too much data, not enough analysis.

    I think the big picture remains a good one. McCain has lots of negatives that are going to become evident in the general election. The media’s crush on McCain will grow stale to them, and they will take a novel interest in “The Unknown McCain” (i.e., “The McCain *We* Knew All About, But Didn’t Care to Tell You”).

    Obama will have more appeal to independents than Clinton, and will at least split the indy vote with McCain — in fact, I think McCain’s intransigence on the war will give Obama a majority of the independents. (Not to be confused with the Indy vote — he turns out to be an Eisenhower man, I hear.)

    McCain will be the Bob Dole of 2008.

  5. jessica says:

    This is so true. Listen to the people. I live in Chicago and I’m a Hillary supporter who will be voting for McCain in the Fall. And I know many others who feel the same way. Obama is a divisive candidate. HE has divided us. And if he and his supporters think that Hillary’s supporters will just fall in line. Think again. We will be throwing our support to John McCain.

  6. anjin-san says:

    When you look at McCains piss-poor performance in recent GOP primaries, I suspect the buyers remorse factor is a push.

  7. hank says:

    here’s what my daughter’s young friends are saying:

    never never ever Hussein, if not Hillary vote McCain.

    Whites with European ancestry, i.e., Polish, German, English, Lithuanian, French, Spanis, Italian (Catholics) are rejecting Barack Hussein Obama in large numbers. A vote for McCain will be a protest vote against Obama whom we feel has been foisted upon us by the DNC. Africa is simply not the homeland for America Europe is and we will reject Obama for voting for McCain who really isn’t so bad. That the fear for Democrats the more you learn about McCain you realize he’s no George Bush.

    So the DNC would rather foist Obama in the GE knowing he cannot win. How many democrats really want that?

  8. Jessica says:

    The Democrats are playing a dangerous game. They ignore the sentiments of two crucial demographics they need desperately if they want to beat John McCain in November — women and rural voters.

    When Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by more than 40 points in the crucial swing state of West Virginia. Not since 1916 have the Democrats won the White House without winning in West Virginia. Obama’s poor showing demonstrated once more his weakness among rural voters, and among women. Both groups have been deciding American elections for decades.

    We will vote for McCain as a protest that we are indeed rejecting Barack Hussein Obama. And yes, names do matter in president elections.

  9. Anderson says:

    Jessica, if you’re really the kind of person who would vote for 4 more years of Republican rule in the Executive Branch, just because Hillary’s not the candidate …

    … well, I’d say don’t let the door hit your ass on the way out of the Democratic Party, but it’s pretty obvious you’re no Democrat to start with.

    Btw, how much is the McCain campaign paying its trollbot commenters?

  10. anjin-san says:

    Jessica can’t talk right now Anderson, her lips are welded to Rush’s butt…

  11. Len says:

    Taylor Marsh? Really? She hasn’t had a radio show in a long, long time, by the way.

    Hey, if you like Taylor Marsh, here’s a website you’ll absolutely adore: Blue Spot.

    Knock yourself out. (No, really, I mean it. Knock yourself out.)

  12. od says:

    The democrats can’t win. If they give it to Obama they’ll lose a lot of Hillary’s supporters, who will go to McCain. If they give it to Hillary despite her being behind in delegates they’ll lose a lot of Obama’s African American supporters, youth, and much of the college educated Obama supporters.

    However, its unlikely that Obama’s supporters will vote McCain, most will just stay home. The college educated supporters, in particular, would actually benefit personally from McCain, so the democrats would be giving them a guilt free excuse to leave the democratic party. It’s hard to see how either Obama or Hillary can win, since both would need 90% of the other’s supporters, and neither is going to get anywhere close to that.

  13. Jessica says:

    I’ve been a lifelong registered Democrat my whole life. I live in Chicago. Barack Obama has been the worst Senator here and has done absolutely nothing for the State of Illinois even when we needed him for critcal votes we got nothing more than “present.” I am tired of people calling me a racist because I do not support him. All he has done in this 3 years in the Senate is write a book, travel to Africa and run for president. he has ill-served Illinois and I can only believe this is how he will run his presidency.

    Also, I am not married to the DNC and have learned not to blindly vote for who they nominate. Hillary speaks for me and her issues are my issues. While I have never voted Republican before John McCain is at least and honest patriot. And if 99% of the black who turned their back on the first “black President” Bill Clinton who also raised more money than ever through his global initiative can vote for Obama. No one ever call those blacks racist only white who do not support him.

    The DNC lost sight of the big picture, not the math and delagates but who really can win the white house and you can see here it is only Hillary Clinton.

  14. Jessica says:

    Donna Brazile has said the Democrats no longer need a base. So what does that tell you.

    America is not ready to vote for Barack Hussein Obama. With his kenyan roots and who has not proven himself at all. Most of the country are centrist which is why Hillary could have won. Also, the Clintons are proven with results. She is fiscally conservative and I like that.

  15. Dave Schuler says:

    Most Democratic activists seem to believe that after the primaries are over, the convention has been held, and the candidate made official, all will be forgiven and forgotten and Democrats will go to the polls in numbers and vote for the party’s candidates. I think this is largely correct but I also think that there will be a small percentage that’ll hold grudges. In an election that will be decided on the margins that may be enough to cause Obama some trouble in a few states. I think it’s just too early to tell whether that’ll deliver a state or two that normally ends up in the Democratic column to McCain or prevents a state that should be in play from going for Obama.

  16. Deward Bowles says:

    Obama enjoys an 80% approval rating as a Senator by the people in Illinois.

    The “petition” is being circulated by a rich friend of Clintons who formed a PAC two weeks ago to do this for her. It is a scam. Just like many of the fake comments above purporting to be truthful about the facts. I can point out many more lies above but it is not necessary.

    I encourage you to check out the truth on these matters by doing a simply search.

    My vote is for Obama.

  17. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    If you really checkout Obama, you will not vote for him. He is the first presidential candidate to have done Cocaine in any amount, not counting the Clintons. He is the farthest left of any major Presidential candidate in history. A close examination of those closest to him show a man who is comfortable around people who hate America and white people. He gives great honor to his communist father who abandoned him. His mother abandoned him. In later times he would have been aborted. His resume is so thin, in any other place by Illinois he would have never held a senate seat, let alone, and he ran virtually alone, a U.S. Senate seat. IF this is the best the Democrats have, we are in trouble. All the rest from the left is bull shit.

  18. Bithead says:

    What you miss, ZR, is that in the world of the left, what you list are not problems, they’re attractions.

  19. G.A.Phillips says:

    Most of the country are centrist which is why Hillary could have won. Also, the Clintons are proven with results. She is fiscally conservative and I like that.

    lol I just spit coffee all over Rush Limbaugh shrine, lol thats rich.

  20. Roger Veritas says:

    Until the Obama Daley election machine hit Iowa nobody new who Barack was. Even Huckabee carried Iowa.

    Barack and the Obamatrons are pretty much running on the incompetence of the Bush Administration, African American Unity, and their new voters. Their new voters are in the primaries. They are not actually reaching across racial lines.As the survey reveal much to the chagrin of the Obamatrons as people get to know him the less they trust him.

    Oregon is a good example of smart people making ill informed decisions. In the General presidential elections the polls will be swamped in tsunami fashion above and beyond what we have seen in the primaries.

  21. anjin-san says:

    Trolling, trolling, trolling,

    Keep those doggies trolling…

  22. DL says:

    To put it in equestrian terminology – they swapped a tempermental white mare for a smooth looking black stallion and now they are just beginning to realize that it may not run very well after all.

  23. ExcuseMeForPointingandLaughing says:

    Wow with the schedule of primaries the Dems had lined up the string of losses for Hillary were called in advance just by the demographics of those states because of Obama’s limited support groups.

    Elites / Blacks / young voters. The New Dukakis Caucus. It is the same reason Obama carries urban counties and loses rural ones in most states independent of if he wins the state or loses it to Hillary. It is simply where his support is located.

    Many pundits were calling it just for those reasons and it came as a shock to no one that the results turned out just like the well based projections.

    All the rest is just spin.