Romney's Suburban Opportunity

That's an ominous trend for Democrats because those upscale whites have become an increasingly central piece of their party's electoral coalition. From the 1950s through the 1970s, polls found that Democratic presidential nominees invariably ran significantly better among white voters without a college education than those with advanced degrees. But in a process I've called the class inversion, those lines converged under Bill Clinton (who ran as well among whites with a degree as those without one) and then crossed in 2000: according to exit polls, Al Gore ran four percentage points better among college-educated than non-college whites. In 2004, John Kerry ran six points better.

From National Journal:

ANALYSIS Make Way for Newt!

SPACEAnniversary of Apollo 12 Launch

ENERGY
Will Chu Stay or Will He Go?

In 2008, the exit poll found, Barack Obama won only 40 percent of the vote among non-college whites, but 47 percent among college educated whites. In Pennsylvania, according to the 2008 exit polls, college-educated whites gave Obama a five percentage point margin over John McCain; in Ohio, they split almost exactly evenly between the two men; and in Florida, they preferred McCain by 12 percentage points. In each case, Obama's showing with college whites, combined with his overwhelming majorities among minorities, helped him overcome big deficits with working-class whites to carry the state.

Against that backdrop, Romney's performance among better-educated whites in the Quinnipiac polls should raise some eyebrows among Democrats. Obviously, neither side has truly framed the general election choice yet. But privately most Democrats acknowledge that Romney could be a stronger competitor than any other Republican for the votes of those upscale whites, because he conveys competence on the economy and does not appear as ideologically rigid (especially on social issues) as his rivals. The very suspicion that hurts Romney in the primaries-the fear among social conservatives that his conversion to their causes is skin-deep-could help him with suburban swing voters in the general election.

The results of the Quinnipiac surveys, conducted from October 31 to November 7 in all three states, should reinforce those Democratic concerns. The poll surveyed 1,185 voters in Florida, with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percentage points; 1,312 voters in Ohio with a 2.7 percentage point margin of error; and 1,436 voters in Pennsylvania with a 2.6 percentage point error margin.

In Pennsylvania, according to Quinnipiac, college-educated white voters preferred Obama over Perry by a 16 percentage point margin, over Gingrich by a 13 percentage point margin and over Cain by eight percentage points. In each of those potential match ups, Obama drew at least 50 percent of the vote. But Romney held Obama to a 45 percent to 45 percent draw among Pennsylvania college-educated whites.

Among college-plus whites in Ohio, Obama led Perry by 10 percentage points, Gingrich by nine and Cain by six. In each case, Obama drew at least 49 percent of the vote. But the poll showed those same college-plus whites preferred Romney over Obama by a 47 percent to 44 percent margin.

In Florida, which is a tougher environment for Obama even among college-whites, those better-educated voters preferred Perry over the president by two percentage points, and Gingrich and Cain by eight percentage points. But those voters stampede toward Romney: he leads Obama among Florida college-educated whites by a resounding 18 percentage points, 56 percent to 38 percent. None of the other Republicans attracted more than 51 percent among Florida college-educated whites in the survey.

In all three states, Romney also runs more strongly against Obama than any of his three principal rivals among non-college whites as well. But Romney's relative advantage over Perry and Gingrich in match-ups against Obama is consistently greater with the well-educated whites.

For instance, in the Pennsylvania poll, Romney draws 50 percent among non-college whites against Obama while Perry attracts 46 percent. That's a four percentage point advantage for Romney. In the same hypothetical match up, Romney's advantage over Perry among college whites doubles to eight percentage points (meaning that against Obama, Romney draws 45 percent of them compared to just 37 percent for Perry). In the Florida test against Obama, Romney outpolls Perry among non-college whites again by just four points (54 percent to 50 percent), but by fully 10 percentage points among the college-whites (56 percent for Romney compared to 46 percent for Perry).

With Gingrich the pattern is similar. In the Florida test against Obama, Romney outpolls Gingrich by five percentage points among college whites and just two among non-college whites. In Pennsylvania the differences are six and four points respectively. With Cain the patterns are not as clear: in the tests against Obama, Romney's advantage relative to Cain is about the same among non-college and college whites.

Another question in the Quinnipiac survey helps explain why Romney performs better against Obama among college whites than the other Republicans. When Quinnipiac asked respondents who they believed could better handle the economy, regardless of who they intended to vote for, each Republican led Obama among non-college whites in all three states, except in one case: Gingrich and the president tied among those voters in Ohio.

But among college whites, the story was very different. On that economic question, Obama led Cain, Perry and Gingrich among those better-educated whites in both Ohio and Pennsylvania (albeit sometimes within the survey's margin of error). By sharp contrast, Romney held a double digit advantage over the president on the economy among those college-plus voters in both Ohio and Pennsylvania.  In Florida, college educated whites preferred all four of the Republicans to Obama on the economy, but Romney's advantage over the president was nearly double that of any of his rivals.

In a race against Romney senior Democrats believe that even if the former Massachusetts governor can cut into Obama's strength in upscale suburbs, the president can make up any lost votes by running better than expected among blue-collar voters; those voters, the Obama team hopes, will blanch at Romney's boardroom background. It remains to be seen whether Obama can really win back more of such working-class whites voters, who have hardened in their support for Republicans in presidential elections since 1980. If Obama can't recapture more blue-collar voters, it will increase the pressure on him to find arguments that can dent what these polls show is a very strong initial impression by Romney in the comfortable suburbs at the foundation of the modern Democratic coalition.--Scott Bland contributed.

WATCH Brownstein discusses recent polling on Obama's struggle among blue-collar voters: