"White Voters Deliver Nevada to Clinton"...

...is not a headline from either of America's political newspapers of record.  The New York Times trumpets "Vote of Women Propels Clinton in Nevada Caucus" while the Washington Post's "The Trail" says "Gender Gap Benefits Clinton".   But in the consortium entrance poll data upon which these claims are based, one sees that Clinton held only a 13-point edge among females, who comprised 59% of caucusgoers, but an 18-point edge among whites, who made up 65% of those voting.  Furthermore, Obama outpolled Clinton among nonwhite women, and Clinton outpolled Obama among white men!

So why the emphasis on gender, rather than race, in the press?  Seems like subtle sexism (and racism) to me, i.e., the implication being that it's women (and not whites) who are falling in behind identity-politic strictures.  It also seems to imply that Obama's problem was a lack of support from women, when an honest first glance at the data says his problem was a lack of support from whites.