Some of those seem dubious. Like, surely George Wallace won some votes from Polish-Americans in 1968, and I find it very hard to believe Herbert Hoover won Poles (and by such a large margin) in 1928. And also it's pretty hard to believe that Obama won Poles by 12 points in 2012 while losing whites by 19 along with almost every white subgroup (i.e. he lost white females aged 18-29).
Though it depends on the *kinds* of whites said candidates got their strength from--like, with Wallace in '68 and the more recent GOP, there's a bit of an evangelical "Jesusland" stigma to overcome. Maybe this Wiki-quote is most pertinent: "Ideologically, they were categorized as being in the more conservative wing of the Democratic Party, and demonstrated a much stronger inclination for third party candidates in presidential elections than the American public". Thus, at least Presidentially speaking, it's "Dem out of convenience".
Also remember that there's a difference re those who are qualified or seek to vote in *Polish* elections--my feeling being that a lot of them went to North America for a reason, that is, to escape that which was still too residually "Communistic" (or more properly, too bogged down by a culture of Euro-bureaucracy and red tape, i.e. it isn't just the former Soviet Bloc being scapegoated). And to them, PiS was the most authentically "anti-Communist" option, because it symbolized "freedom".
In that light, I feel that a lot of the Poles who migrated to N America over the past quarter century were those who might have opted for Stan Tyminski over Walesa and Mazowiecki in 1990, and who found the economic-political-societal gist of what they were looking for across the pond (from where, not uncoincidentally, Tyminski came). Thus the PiS lean: a rejection of self-conscious Euro-style "cosmopolitanism".
