GAIL COLLINS: EVERYBODY'S UPPER MIDDLE CLASS!

Gail Collins, writing about Hillary Clinton's New Hampshire victory in today's New York Times:

... My own favorite theory is that this week, Hillary was a stand-in for every woman who's overdosed on multitasking. They grabbed at the opportunity to have kids/go back to school/start a business/become a lawyer.

... for one moment, women knew just how Hillary felt, and they gave her a sympathy vote. It wasn't a long-term commitment, just a brief strike by the sisters against their overscheduled world.

Yeah, that's right -- the whole thing can be seen as a reaction by women who know what it's like to try to quiet a crying baby while reading urgent e-mails from clients on their BlackBerrys.

Here's the reality, from John Judis on election night (emphasis mine):

I've looked at the current Democratic exit polls....

Here are the groups in which Obama enjoyed a significant margin over Clinton: men, young voters (18-24), voters making more than $50,000, voters with post-graduate education (a good indication of professionals), independents, first time voters, voters without religious affiliation, men without children and single men, voters who said they were getting ahead financially, voters who thought the war in Iraq was the most important issue, who wanted change, and who wanted someone who could unite the country.

Here are Clinton's groups: women, particularly married women, voters over 40, voters making less than $50,000, voters without a college degree, union voters, Democrats, Catholics (an important constituency for the Democrats), people very worried about the economy, voters who thought the economy was most important, voters who valued experience, and voters who evaluated candidates on whether they "care about people like me." ...

I'm not trying to disparage upscale women who multitask, nor am I suggesting that less affluent women don't have to multitask. What I'm saying is that less affluent women are invisible to Collins. When you say "women," Collins thinks, "women of my sociocultural status." It looks as if Hillary Clinton won New Hampshire because of support from women who aren't of Collins's sociocultural status, women whose existence Collins doesn't even acknowledge.

****

UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal also crunches the numbers:

In New Hampshire, Mrs. Clinton scored best with women who had lower incomes and less education as opposed to highly-paid, educated women. Half of women who earn between $15,000 and $30,000 voted for her, compared to 29% for Mr. Obama. Just 31% of women with post-graduate degrees voted for Mrs. Clinton, however, compared to 43% for Mr. Obama.

(But note the supporting quotes in the Journal story: they're from four professional women, a college student, two politicos ... and one waitress. What was I saying about less affluent women not being acknowledged?)