In 2008, John McCain carried Mississippi with 56% of the vote to Obama’s 43%. This was a significant improvement over 2004, when Kerry was beaten 59%-40%. You can examine where Obama did better or worse than Kerry by comparing the 2004 and 2008 exit polls. One obvious area is among women. In 2004, there was no gender gap in Mississippi. Both women and men gave Bush 59% of the vote. In 2008, McCain won the support of 62% of men but only 53% of women. In 2004, Kerry won 14% of the white vote. In 2008, Obama only carried 11% of the white vote. Obviously, black turnout was much higher in 2008. Kerry also did better with the 18-29 voter, carrying 63% compared to Obama’s 56%..
Now, one thing that kind of leaps off the page is that it is remarkable for a candidate to win only 11% of the white vote but to still carry 43% of the electorate. There are a lot of black folks in Mississippi. The white folks didn’t much like Obama, but then they didn’t much like John Kerry, either. It appears that Obama outperformed Kerry mainly by appealing better to women and by inspiring an historic turnout from the black community. And, while he underperformed with the youth vote, he still did quite well. Those kids are older now, and many of them are in the crucial 30-39 age category this time around.
One last thing to consider is that John McCain received 94% of the white born again/evangelical vote, which constituted 46% of the electorate. If there is even a single point of erosion in that number because, say, Mitt Romney is a Mormon, that’s a lot of votes.
Now, these numbers show that Mississippi is probably the most racially polarized state in the country. White folks vote Republican and black folks vote Democratic, and there just isn’t much cross-over at all. That makes it very difficult for a Democrat to overcome the white-majority demographics of the state. Yet, younger whites cross-over more than older whites. In 2008, white women crossed over more than white men. And white evangelical voters, who are a strong plurality of the electorate, are the most reliable Republicans.
In order to win in Mississippi, the president must sustain high turnout among blacks, do better in the under-40 vote, and improve on his progress with white women. If there is any erosion in the Republicans’ support among white evangelicals, it will have a bigger impact in Mississippi than anywhere else in the country. Can he do that?
It’s a tall order, but both Santorum and Romney offer a path. Romney’s most obvious vulnerability is his faith. Can a Mormon win 94% of the white evangelical vote in Mississippi? I kind of doubt it. At a minimum, I would expect less enthusiasm and lower turnout. It’s also worth noting how badly John Kerry did in the state. Branded as a flip-flopper, the moderate Massachusetts senator simply couldn’t connect with the white voters of the state. It’s hard to exaggerate how much better John McCain’s biography and style fit Mississippi than Mitt Romney’s are likely to do.
Rick Santorum’s weakness is among young voters who support gay rights and among women who don’t want politicians telling them that they can’t have their health care cover prenatal screening or birth control. If you make a frontal assault on white women’s health care plans, you’re going to see an erosion in your support, even among white evangelical voters in Mississippi.
I chose to look at Mississippi because it is iconic as a conservative state with racially polarized politics. It should be one of the most unlikely places in the country for a black, liberal president to win an election. This is, again, a state where Obama only won 11% of the white vote in 2008.
Obama won’t dedicate many, if any, resources to winning the state because he doesn’t need its Electoral Votes. Of course, the reverse is probably true, too. The Republicans will not be investing in Mississippi because if it is not safe, they have no hope of winning the general election. Yet, it is not crazy to speculate that Obama might have a chance in Mississippi this time around. The main reason is the severe weakness of his likely opponents. The Republicans cannot afford any significant erosion of their advantage with white evangelicals or women, and the younger voters are voting Democratic while the older, most conservative, voters are dying off.
Maybe some mathematicians can look at the 2008 exit polls and election results and figure out what Obama needs to do to hit 50%.
