Overall, President Obama did very poorly with whites on election day, but looks can be deceiving. Over at The New Republic, Nate Cohn has started to crunch some county-level numbers and what he has discovered in pretty depressing. Outside of the South and Appalachia, Romney actually did worse with whites than George W. Bush. But within the South and Appalachia, things got ugly.
Do you have a theory on why John Kerry carried Knott County, Kentucky by 27 points and Barack Obama just lost it by 47 points? Counties in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas showed the same thing. Obama ran 14 points behind Kerry in West Virginia. Obama won in affluent, well-educated suburbs. He did very well in heavily white states like New Hampshire, Iowa, and Wisconsin. He significantly over-performed Gore and Kerry in white states like Vermont, North Dakota, and Montana.
But, for some reason, white voters in the South and Appalachia just can’t stand the president. They dislike him more than they disliked the previous Democratic champions.
Their votes count just the same as anyone else’s, but their hostility to the president created the illusion of a much closer presidential contest than actually existed. Obama didn’t really have a problem with whites in most of the battleground states.
But what should really frighten Republicans is that whomever follows Obama, they should be able to hold the winning coalition he built and add to it a bunch of folks who only voted against the president because of some peculiar and unidentified quirk of Southern and Appalachian people that may not be repeatable. In other words, Missouri may be blue for a white chick.
Pretty depressing for whom?
And BTW, “what should really frighten Republicans is that whomever follows Obama . . .
“whoever” (nominative case).
Their votes count just the same as anyone else’s, but their hostility to the president created the illusion of a much closer presidential contest than actually existed.
This is true where “closer” means “possibility of going the other way,” and doesn’t mean “featuring close vote totals.”
Given the polarization of the electorate the shrinking of the swing vote, having small numerical leads doesn’t necessarily mean your chances of winning are lower. A 2 point lead in the new 4 point lead, a five point lead the new ten point lead.
True. Getting all the white votes in Mississippi goes only so far.
Oh, and my theory why Obama did worse than Kerry with some of our southern friends? — Because he’s not a real progressive!
Obama just doesn’t have that small-town, regular-folks, relatable personality that made John Kerry so popular.
Who amongst us has not put cheese in our grits?
What are grits again?
Sorry Joe, but cheese grits are what I ate for breakfast for 12 years … in the south
Yes, hence the reference to cheese grits.
In 2008 I supported John Edwards because I saw the possibility of a Son of the South doing well in a lot of those places where racism still rules.
Of course, back then we didn’t know of Edwards’ diddling.
I’m not sure what the cure for this ugly disease is. No doubt, much of it was wedded to the Birthers et al, but still ugly underneath.
Ditto on Edwards.
And this disease is a lot deeper than somebody’s heavy handed propaganda campaign. I know people who would break out the white sheets and the ropes today if they thought they could get away with it.
ignorant southron whites don’t like Barack.
TABMITWH.
There’s a black man in the White House.
Obama is half black, half white. So why is he considered to be a black man rather than a white man?
Are the black genes assumed to be dominant?
Race is a social construct that is defined by the individual themselves and the society around them. Your average African-American is about 30% Caucasian. Why isn’t Obama considered a white man? Well, when people look at him, most see a black man. And he identifies himself as a black man. Racist attacks are directed at him because he is seen as a black man. That’s good enough for me.
We should not accept the social constructions of our selves created by our enemies – except to turn their own hatreds back on them. Obama’s racist foes are terrified of their own construction of him. If they could see him as he actually is they would know that the only thing they have to fear is the fear they themselves have created…
We, individually, don’t get a choice. “Socially constructed” does not mean “optional.”
The value of the American dollar is socially constructed, but I assure you, it’s very real.
You might as well advise people to fight pedestrian fatalities by refusing to accept that trucks drive through crosswalks.
It’s all very admirable that you don’t want the social construct of race to exist, but merely pretending that it doesn’t, when it does, isn’t going to make it go away.
Booman Tribune ~ Comments ~ What Could Be Causing This?
Yes we do, and I have chosen to exercise it.
No, Frank, you don’t get a choice over whether it exists.
You get a choice over whether you are going to acknowledge it exists, but that little “color blind” affectation doesn’t mean anything outside of your own mind.
Tell you what: you go on with your bad self, and willfully insist, a la Stephen Colbert, that you “don’t see race.” I’ll give you a year, and then come back and tell us whether you made the category of race stop mattering in people’s lives.
Well, when people look at him, most see a black man.
We should not accept the social constructions of our selves created by our enemies
But, you see, black people look at him and see a black man, too. Not just racists, not just his enemies. Do you think Michelle is his enemy? Do you think Al Sharpton is his enemy?
In his own words, “When I walk down the street, nobody thinks I’m white.”
Here’s a picture of Barack Obama as a kid:
http://www.offbeatbuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/mother-sister-grandfather.jpg
I hope this answers your question.
I see a handsome, bright kid. You see a black?
I see a handsome, bright black kid.
So do you, if you’re not trying to strike a pose on the internet.
If I held a gun to your head and asked you that kid’s race, you’d get the question right 100/100 times.
Drop the phony pretense.
Why do you think “handsome, bright” and “black” are distinct categories, anyway?
See, anyone can play this stupid game. I could probably play it a great deal better than you, when it comes right down to it, but it would probably be best to be honest and forthright, instead of striking stupid little poses.
demi-meamelouc — 1/32 black -> a slave if born to a slave.
In essence, yes. Black genes, being closer to the animal, ARE dominant.
They’re Against Black Man In The White House?
a white grandpa. A square guy.
A regular Joe.
A regular Joe Biden?
You betcha.
Biden-Hickenlooper 2016
You could map those county results against % of the population that is white, % evangelical, fundamentalist, or pentecostal Christians, and diversity of news and political talk shows available from local outlets.
Rush Limbaugh and others don’t make those millions of dollars for nothing.
Alternatively, you could visit some of these counties and ask folks.
Or one could map it against certain search terms used in Google:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9407EED61330F933A25755C0A9649D8B63
Fascinating link, JeffL. Thanks.
Yes. Why, yes, I do have a theory.
I would also note that many of these same people also wouldn’t vote for a woman. Well, you know, unless she was hot.
So you’re saying run Kirsten Gillibrand?
The cause? NRA
The National Recovery Act? (pulling tongue from cheek)
He did better among whites in the battlegrounds, even where there is strong racial resentment, because his advertising was very good and treated the viewer like they were an intelligent adult.
He probably could have done better among whites in the very racist south and Appalachia if it were battleground country and worth spending the $$$ on all the ads. If you were to check counties in these states that get their TV from an Ohio (or other) market where the ads were running all the time, you will probably see some evidence for this.
Where he did the heavy advertising, he was able to counter most of the bullshit being flung at him and, as a result, the polls didn’t swing so much and he was viewed more favorably there.
“What could be causing this?”
You’re kidding, right?
Uhhhhh…racial prejudice, maybe? Crackers and other peckerwoods voting the straight white ticket?
Please.
AG
P.S. By the way…why do you think the next Dem presidential nominee will be white?
I’n on the Deval Patrick bandwagon, myself.
i got yer “balanced ticket.” Right here!!!
A real “balanced ticket.” Deval Patrick and a yet-to-be-discovered Hispanic. Preferably female.
VAYA!!!
AG
Is there a worse epithet in our political discourse than telling someone you hope their party picks a nominee from Massachusetts?
Racial Prejudice? No way! It’s just that Obama is a Socialist Muslim. Yeah. Yeah. That has to be it. And he won’t show Trump his transcript. For sure.
I’m guessing they just don’t like blah people.
I’ve been looking for an appropriate post like this one to ask if anyone was gonna be able to put a number on how many voters Obama lost as a result of racism.
As a voter living inside a narrow blue streak thru the center of my very red state, the state-wide vote count shows that Obama got fewer votes than 4 years ago. Part of that is because he didn’t have a campaign here as he did 4 years ago. And since the state Democratic party was decimated 2 years ago, it has become almost wholly an African American party and is having to be rebuilt from the ground up. There is not a single state wide Democratic office holder.
Less than 15% of the white vote in this state went to Obama and apparently some of the 2008 white Obama voters got sucked into the Obama “kenyan muslim socialist” meme. I’ve decided it is impossible to underestimate exactly how much damage conservative media has done to the minds and emotions of my fellow conservative citizens.
So, when they complain in my state and my city about blacks always voting Democratic, I want to counter to them, exactly what do you do? Some of you are educated and a great number are female, why would you vote Republican, given their actual legislative agenda of the last few years? BTW, I’m one of the minority white Obama voters.
I’d still like to see someone come up with a number. My guess is he lost a full percentage point or so nationally.
JeffL, above, links to a great story on this topic.
Check out this graphic: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/06/10/sunday-review/racially-charged-web-searches-and-voting
.html
I wonder if that’s true. After all, at some point voters in the south broke with Dems and became Republicans. Some had been voting Dem for decades. Why wouldn’t some of these voters stay with the Republicans, who are probably culturally closer to them?
This county wide mapping (and later municipality precincts) should be collated to voting methods and business interests of big donors to the republican campaign.The coal industry was a big republican donor. It is magical thinking to believe that the electronic voting systems are not being “managed” by the republican interests who designed, manufactured, programed and tabulate our evoting systems. They built it: of course, they are running it. Coal-mining Appalachia may well have been a part of the U.S. where tabulation “correction” would appear more plausible. We know voter suppression by mining managers occurred in the area.
Which is why I think if HRC doesn’t run (and I don’t think she will) we will get someone like Schweitzer or O’Malley or Malloy at the top of the ticket and either Murray or Gillibrand as the VP.
Good ideas, but let’s leave the Senate alone.
Interesting thought experiment. What if Obama were the same in every way except white. How many more votes would he get from certain voting segments? Would his turnout have been lower among other segments? Would the two numbers offset? And how would that change the electoral map?
I’m not sure that you could determine this exactly. But do remember that Obama inspired a lot of people who otherwise might not have voted.
+
Give black voters and white men Kerry’s percentages, which IIRC were about the same as Obama’s in the case of black voters.
If you really want to figure this out, you would have to define what “same in every way except white” means. If Obama were white, he would not have been able to deliver the “A More Perfect Union” speech, for example. It’s not even clear that his 2004 convention speech would have been as effective without his personal history.
But let’s say that he’s a very eloquent, intelligent, and unflappable white man who espouses center-left political positions and opposes the Iraq War. Let’s say he has a community organizing background and that he dares to expand the electoral map to try to flip states like Virginia and North Carolina. Let’s say he can make references to Jay-Z, is comfortable dancing on Ellen, and is the same age as the actual Obama. I think such a person would have won the 2008 general election pretty handily. There was enough anti-Bush sentiment to push any competent Democrat over the top. The financial collapse certainly would have helped. And I think he would have still been able to appeal to younger voters with his youthful image and use of social media. Certainly his margins among African-Americans would have still been sky high.
“What if Obama were the same in every way except white.”
So, let me paraphrase this, What if Obama’s personality and values were formed as if the culture, society and individuals around him every day related to him as if he were black but he was really white all along?
We are the sum of our experience in the world. IMHO, this is one thought experiment that is simply not feasible.
I’ve seen estimates that it helps among minorities a little bit, but hurts him with whites a lot. Thus, a net-negative.
The President is BLACK.
BLACK.
BLACKEDITY
BLACK
BLACK
BLACK
BLACKILICIOUS
BLACK
BLACKERIFFIC
BLACK
Oh yeah, the President is a Negro, didn’t you know?
Come on, BooMan.
they wanna cling to that WHITENESS!
just (yet) another idiotic example of racism-denial, which makes us white folks feel oh-so-much-better-about-ourselves.
as you’ve mentioned previously, you’ve ruled out racism as an explainer of this behavior, and hence you’re in the idiotic position of trying to explain the behavior.
(shrug) maybe you’ll learn one day/stop being such a coward. maybe you won’t. either way, the south won’t change.
It certainly seems that racism is a huge factor among the neanderthals. Hard to believe those percentages, but it’s hard to believe a lot of things about the limbaugh crowd.
Let’s run the white chick and find out!
Or a Latina.
I generally don’t like the idea of choosing based on demographics, but in this case, electing a progressive woman is just soooo overdue.