redblueamerica.com

If you are what you eat -- a dubious proposition -- then does what you eat say something about how you will vote? More important, does your choice of adult beverage have some political significance? Maybe. It's not outside the realm of possibility. Here, courtesy of the New York Times today, are a pair of stories scrutinizing the "intersection of politics and the pantry."

Although precincts and polls are being parsed, the political advisers to the presidential candidates are also looking closely at consumer behavior, including how people eat, as a way to scavenge for votes. The practice is called microtargeting, as much political discipline as buzzword. The idea is that in the brand-driven United States, what we buy and how we spend our free time is a good predictor of our politics. ...

Once they find small groups of like-minded people, campaigns can efficiently send customized phone, e-mail or direct mail messages to potential supporters, avoiding inefficient one-size-fits-all mailings. Pockets of support that might have gone unnoticed can be ferreted out.

I suppose it's not surprising that pollsters and political advisers delve into consumer trends and preferences in search of precious votes. After all, they know where we live, how much money we make, what kind of car we drive, whether or not we have kids and what sports they play, so why wouldn't they know what fast-food joints we frequent and what kind of bottled water (or bottled whatever) we drink?

So the Times helpfully reports that Clintonites favor Fig Newtons and Kashi GoLean cereal, while Obamaphiles like Sugar in the Raw and Bear Naked granola, and McCainiacs go for corn-fed beef and and eat Fiber One (ho ho!) At the table, Republicans drink red wine and Democrats prefer white, lending scientific credence to the pejorative "Chardonnay-swilling liberal" label. And at the bar, Republicans prefer brown liquors -- your bourbons and scotches -- while Democrats like to stay in the clear with gin and vodka. Liberals usually buy their groceries at Whole Foods or the local farmer's market, while conservatives shop at supermarkets like Safeway.

There's a large measure of hooey in all of this, too, given how easy it is to conjure exceptions. Joel, for example, is a notorious scotch fiend. Hillary Clinton clearly has a fondness for Crown Royal. Personally, I'm ombibulous. I like Whole Foods, too. Big whoop.

And, as Jaime Sneider at the Weekly Standard points out, "food preferences don’t often change, yet candidate preferences do. When someone who previously thought he was going to vote for Obama decides ultimately to pull the lever for McCain, he doesn’t switch from Bear Naked Cereal to Fiber One."

The New York Times story also included notes of caution. “Knowing that your base drinks gin doesn’t give you a clear idea on how to communicate with them effectively on issues,” said Jeff Navin, managing director of American Environics, a "progressive research and strategy firm." “But if you take it a level deeper and say, are there psychological drivers that will help understand the values behind the behavior, you can speak to those values and persuade voters.” Thank you sir, may I have another?

There is something to be said for plying voters with booze, like shrewd pols did in the old days. To Democrats and Republicans alike I say: Make mine a double.

(Thanks for the tip, Jim.)