More specifically, Moore's ability to survive the accusations of badually persecuting girls, which have shaken up her campaign, will probably become if she can maintain her advantage before the scandal among white women with no college education, even when her College its educated counterparts have moved toward Democrat Doug Jones in much larger numbers than usual for deeply conservative Alabama, according to public and private polls in the race.
With that contrast, the Alabama race is illuminating one of the least understood political trends of the Donald Trump era. Many commentators have warned that Republicans face a systemic problem with female voters under Trump, and could see that difficulty deepen if Moore wins and is sitting in the Senate. But that conclusion is too broad. Instead of a monolithic response, the Trump era is instead widening the gap between the political preferences of white collar workers and white women with blue necks.
The gender gap so promoted has not disappeared. Whether they see whites, blacks or Hispanics, Democrats perform better among women than men (or from the other angle, Republicans do better between men than women).
But in Trump's era, clbad division seems more powerful than the division of gender, especially among whites. In the 2016 presidential race, Trump worked much better among white women with no college education than those with an advanced degree. In fact, the gap between the two groups was by far the widest recorded in exit polls since at least the 1980 presidential race.
Similarly, in the Virginia governor's race last month, when the white women joined the Democrat Ralph Northam, the winner and the blue-collar white women occupied by the Republican Ed Gillespie, the two groups diverged even more than they did during the Trump-Hillary Clinton race in the state one year before. And both parties are preparing for another strong divergence between white women and working women in Alabama next week.
"The clbad division is much larger [than the gender divide] and certainly the results in Virginia show that," says Gene Ulm, who surveyed Gillespie. "Gender simplifies things to a degree that does not explain much."
Waiting for the 2018 Congress races, all signs point to a strong reaction against the Republican Party among well-educated white women, who express extreme dislike for Trump in the polls and are being energized by the increase in badual harbadment high profile cases. That change, combined with Trump's more modest but still measurable setback among white men with a college education, illuminates a clear path of opportunity for Democrats in wealthy suburban districts of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania through Virginia, Illinois, Minnesota. , Colorado. , Texas and California.
But with the blue collar men staying firmly behind Trump and the Republican Party, the Democrats will not reject many workers and non-urban districts unless they can convert more white working-clbad women. Without at least some progress in such working-clbad districts, Democrats will face a very narrow road to the recovery of the House, which has been under Republican control since 2011. "You have to get to those non-Democratic women," says Margie Omero. , a Democratic pollster who has extensively investigated the largely "blue collar" Walmart "mothers.
Despite broad generalizations about the gender gap, Republicans have consistently been stronger among white women without titles than their counterparts with advanced education. Historically, fewer blue-collar women than white-collar women have been moved by Democratic arguments on social issues, either because they take more conservative positions on issues such as abortion or because they do not prioritize those concerns. By contrast, white-collar, white women, who are generally among the most economically powerful groups in the electorate, have also been more receptive than their white-collar counterparts to Republican arguments to reduce taxes and federal spending. President Barack Obama led only about two-fifths of non-university white women in each of his two victories, and those women gave the Republican Party great margins during its mid-term landslides in 2010 and 2014.
But while The disparity between blue and white-collar women is long-standing, Trump-Clinton's struggle raised him to a new height. According to exit polls, Trump only carried 44% of white women with a college education. That tied George W. Bush in 2000 for the weakest performance with the women of any Republican candidate for president since 1980, except for the 1992 and 1996 races, when a significant number of them broke for the candidate of third party Ross Perot.
And yet, Trump, running against the first female candidate of the wholesale party , surprised the observers by solidly defeating Clinton white women in general. He did it by winning 61% of white women without a title, more than any candidate in any of the parties since 1980, except President Ronald Reagan during his collapse in 1984, according to exit polls.
The result was that Trump had 17 better points among white women without a title than those who had one. Since 1980, the largest previous gap had been in 2008, when John McCain ran 11 points better among white women who did not have college degrees.
The increasing clbad gap between white women traced a parallel divergence among white men. Trump ran 18 points better among white men without a college degree than with those who have advanced education. Before Trump, no Republican since 1980 had exceeded by more than six points the white men who did not have university studies.
Put another way, in the 2016 race, the clbad gap between whites of the same gender was much larger than the gender gap between whites of the same clbad.
The same pattern shaped the career of the high profile Virginia governor. Northam was raised by an increase among white women with college degrees: it carried 58% of them, a significant 50% increase of Clinton in Virginia. Northam also posted a six-point gain compared to Clinton among white men with a college education.
But in relation to Clinton, the exit polls showed that Northam got only three percentage points between white men and women with blue necks. In contrast to the abrupt and exclusive shift toward the Democrat, Gillespie had two-thirds of white women without a title. That was an astonishing 25 points better than his sample (42%) among the white women of the university.
Since taking office, Trump has clearly lost some ground with white women with blue necks, who became highly resistant to their efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Its approval rating among white women not enrolled in the most recent national ABC / Washington Post survey was just 46%, and in a recent national Quinnipiac survey, only 54% said they believe Trump is able to serve as President.
But Northam's weakness in Virginia showed how many cultural and economic barriers still prevent that concern from translating into Democratic votes. Alabama's race next week could reinforce that message. The Washington Post / Schar School poll released on Saturday showed that Jones was far ahead, with likely voters finding the Democrat had a 15-point advantage among white women with a college education. But despite the accusations that hit Moore, the poll found him still leading by about 35 points among white women without a title. That leaves Jones with very little margin for error, because Moore in the poll has a 20-point lead among white men with a college education and an advantage of almost 50 points among white men without a title. Private surveys in the state have found the same pattern, although generally with Moore a little later depending on the participation projections.
A Clbad Division on Sexual Harbadment
The Alabama race suggests that the increased emphasis on badual misconduct could widen the partisan divide between white-and-white-collar blue women. In general, surveys, such as the recent ABC / Washington Post survey, show that approximately the same percentage (a little more than a third) of white women with and without a degree report unwanted badual advances at work. (For non-white women the number was lower, about a quarter)
The intensified attention to the problem seems to be greater energy for high-level women who are already deeply alienated from Trump. (In the Quinnipiac survey, more than three-fifths of white women with college education said they were not fit to be president and two-thirds said they did not respect both women and men). But it may not be as mobilizing as a theme for blue-collar women, especially because the more high-profile cases have focused mainly on media and entertainment figures.
"It will be mandatory for everyone to talk about this to make sure that we are not only talking about harbadment of privileged women and famous works," says Omero. "And we're not just talking about the period of harbadment, but all the ways in which women need more equal opportunities."
Similarly, a Democrat who closely watches the Alabama race says that the accusations against Moore have not evicted more blue-collar women because many of them consider that various forms of harbadment are an inescapable part of their working life. "Quite frankly, the power structure is so different from what suburban housewives have to face," said the Democrat. "It's not a question that some of these white women not educated in college do not think Moore did this, but there's a lot of them that do not think it's a big problem compared to what they're about."  With Trump in the White House and Moore potentially in the Senate, Republicans could face a stampede against Democrats among well-educated white women next year. That alone would drive measurable profits. But if the Democrats can not convince more blue-collar white women to join the accusation, the party can still fail in its attempt to win back the House or the Senate.