This is quite a logical fallacy.Obama, Barack $335,536 859 McCain, John $280,513 558This is the numbers for all military personnel, and it’s pretty close considering the people in the military of course would naturally NOT like going to war.

So in other words. It’s actually GOOD NEWS for McCain because so many US Military Personnel wants to give McCain money even though he is FOR the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They would be expected to have a landslide in donations to Obama who is anti-war and wants to bring the troops home. I mean if you were in war, wouldn’t you want to go home to your family?

So of course, a more logical "donation table" would be if Military generals gave more donations to one politician than another. Why? Because Military generals and Military historians would know better about who is a better commander-in-chief than the average person. Not military personnel doing the fighting.

Jonathan, what soldiers are really thinking is hard to ascertain, for obvious reasons.  Any time a politicians from one party or another visits, they spin the visit to suit their own agenda.  Same with the pundits.

There was a Zogby poll a couple years ago, but its reliability has been questioned.

I’m not sure these figures are a reliable factor on who soldiers think are a better option for CiC, either since McCain has always typically gotten lower donation amounts, even from non-soldiers.

The figures I’ve seen in the past, anyway, show a heavy more money/less money balance that’s starkly different between the two candidates.  For the Dems, it’s Obama/DNC, and the Republicans, it’s RNC/McCain.

If you look at those statistics I think its something like 335 donations.

335 donations out of 2 million military personnel is laughable to even try and predict given the fact that the sample is beyond statistically irrelevant to say the least.

There is probably less to this story than it appears.  Research has documented that the military is overwhelmingly Republican and, while those studies are methodologically flawed insofar as they oversample the Air Force (the most culturally conservative service) and officers (which tend to be more white, middle-class, and suburban than the enlisted force), it is likely that military voters will still tend to favor McCain overall.

It is interesting to note the contorted sample in this story’s snapshot: deployed soldiers overseas, not "the military".  Even with over 150,000 deployed in Iraq and more in Afghanistan, that is still a relatively small slice of the military.  Also, it is very early in the campaign and contribution patterns at this point are rarely indicative of an overall trend. 

The most likely explanation is probably quite simple — the military includes a slightly disproportional number of blacks and I am sure the prospect of a black President is exciting enough to provoke some donations which otherwise would not exist at all.  Thus, like almost all fundraising numbers (especially Ron Paul’s, for example), the "lead" here is an indication of enthusiasm of a minority, not support by a majority.

Like Jason says, the military is generally Republican, so take dollar numbers for donations with a grain of salt.

There’s a reason why in 2000 Gore’s campaign made moves to prevent the counting of overseas absentee ballots, which they, also, presumed would be Republican.

I saw a table on Fox which was reporting this numbers and it noted the number of contributors that are serving overseas in Iraq, with respect to John McCain it was about 25, while with respect to Obama it was around 125. It also showed numbers for other service members, and the total doesn’t necessarily reflect the whole of the military population.

Let me respond to Claudia:
If the numbers were reversed and I happen to come across these statistics, then perhaps you’re right, like many I may do something like this to support the candidate I like.

However, right after though, I would be embarrassed by a commenter who reveals that although many armed service people are most likely Republican, that doesn’t mean they are all pro-War.

But you did get me there Claudia, I agree, I probably would be a hypocrite and show the same statistics if it had supported my candidate. But again, someone would have made me look bad easily.

Especially soldiers who are out in combat, will do anything in their power to get back home to their families–while at the same time supporting the whole general idea for the war. See what I mean?

In other words:
  Soldiers abroad want to go home, but know that it is a good cause they fight in, but they will vote/pay the politician who will bring them home, while at the same time support the war’s general purpose: the war on terror. No soldier, POW, ex-soldier likes war, if you believe this, you are naive.

Hence, it is statistically probable for Barack Obama to be more popular among soldiers serving in the war. However, soldiers in the Air Force, Navy, and perhaps other services, would be more likely to lean Republican.

Jason is mostly right on this issue.

Also time is an issue that isn’t covered in this article. Just when were all these donations given? Perhaps some soldiers wanted Obama over Hillary Clinton even if they would rather have a Republican president.

Jason is mostly right on this issue.

I should hope so, because it was almost my dissertation project.

I am quite convinced from the research I did do that the reported preponderance of Republicanism among military members is exaggerated in existing studies.   There are very serious methodological errors in the studies I have seen.  But I think some preponderance does exist in excess of rates expected from the demographic groups in the broader society.   

Both self-selection and socialization tend to push the military towards general conservatism.  People should avoid reading too much into that, however.  There are some strange deviations from conservative orthodoxy in the military version.  In particular, the military tends to be less bellicose in foreign policy than conservative civilians (soldiers are the ones who pay the price for armchair generals) and much more tolerant on racial issues than some civilian conservative (and some liberal) demographics.

The biggest problem with the report that prompted this post, however, remains that fundraising (especially at this early date) is an expression of narrow enthusiasm, not broad support. Otherwise, Ron Paul types would have WAY more support than they actually do.

Yeah I must completely agree, that’s why I said, people who go to war, tend to be less of a war-monger, because they pay the price.

John McCain paid the price, so don’t think that he is going to be the most war-monger guy in the planet. He’s more likely to be extremely anti-war, especially since his son has been to the Iraq War.

So the statistics that Obama gets more donations, should be completely natural. In fact, it should be a surprise that John McCain gets so many votes, but maybe because of his military service.

Regardless of how much Soldiers don’t want to go to war, sometimes wars are a necessary evil, and fighting terrorism does indeed help. Backing off, will not automatically make terrorists your friends.

Regardless of how much Soldiers don’t want to go to war, sometimes wars are a necessary evil, and fighting terrorism does indeed help. Backing off, will not automatically make terrorists your friends.

I don’t think anyone (certainly not anyone here) was claiming it would.

I am certain Obama does not hold any such position, so don’t even try it.

Why? Obama said he wants to withdraw from Iraq within 16 months of his first term as president. Sounds to me like he has no Middle Eastern historical knowledge, no foreign policy experience, and no military history experience.

I have quite a lot of Middle Eastern historical knowledge, I teach foreign policy and the national security policymaking process, and I have extensive military history knowledge.  And I find nothing blatantly irresponsible about Obama’s ACTUAL proposal (which you clearly have an inaccurate and shallow interpretation of).

So maybe, just maybe it is not as obvious and clear-cut as your sweeping and dismissive proclamations cast it to be. Or perhaps you have some qualifications and credentials to share that exceed mine?

I don’t have to exceed your qualifications. I don’t care about his proposal now, he obviously changed it AFTER he was criticized for it, like the many other things he’s changed.

The reality is, he did say 16 months, his website said it as well. 16 month withdrawal to END the war in Iraq, is what Obama kept saying in speeches. Now his aides might say different, as the incompetent Samantha Powers did. The reality is, it was a foreign policy blunder, regardless of whether he fixed it later or not.

The shallow interpretation is the accurate interpretation of his original proposal.

Jonathan,

I think that if Obama were president he would be forced to listen to generals and the situation on the ground no matter what he said in the election. But, I think a more striking point is that if Obama had his wishes years ago, we would have already been on our way out and never had the surge which proved to help the situation and prepare for a safer withdrawl. His pandering to liberal elements in his party outweighed good judgment

Interesting discussion of little consequence … however, I would note that redfish’s reliance on "fox" as a source for anything substantive makes his opinion on anything virtually worthless !

For what it’s worth, here’s my two cents:  Although it’s true that the military have always voted predominantly republican, I honestly think you may see a slight shift at this election… Though admittedly not a huge one.  I have to disagree when it was said that the armed forces support is likely coming from the blacks in the military who wish to see a black president.  My husband is a white, middle class, highly educated Air Force Captain and pilot.  He is not only voting for Obama, but also donated to the campaign before he was deployed.  Several other members of his squadron are leaning towards Obama as well… although they do not speak about it openly in fear of being ostracized.  They dont support Obama because they want to turn around and come home necessarily; they support him because they want someone they can believe in.  With the issues surrounding McCain not showing up to vote on the new GI bill, and the overall lack of enthusiasm he generates among the younger generation, I’m not at all surprised that some military members are shifting to Obama.   That being said, I know that my husband’s  views are not echoed by most of the military.