Which hurt the candidate more?

[Bo]

Obama's race (though not by much).

[Psychic Octopus]

Probably Obama's Race, however I do not feel either quality really mattered a great deal in the long run.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

McCain's age b/c VP selection became a higher risk decision.

[DariusNJ]

McCain's age, but only because a lot of people were attracted to Obama's candidacy because of his race, which somewhat cancelled (though not totally) the negative effects that his race had.

[Badger]

McCain's age, but only because a lot of people were attracted to Obama's candidacy because of his race, which somewhat cancelled (though not totally) the negative effects that his race had.

Obama's race, I sez. Other than a (by definition) handful of black Republicans and conservatives, African-Americans would've voted overwhelmingly (90+%) anyway for a white Democrat just as they did for Kerry, Gore, Clinton, et al. A-A turnout improved, sure, but turnout improved markedly among all races across the board.

Overall Obama's race probably cost him Missouri with a number of older Dixiecratish Dems jumping ship to make up for any increased AA turnout in St. Louis and KC, though probably not Montana as well. GA? A bit of a stretch as most older Dixiecrat Dems have already long voted GOP in federal elections and wouldn't have liked Obama's liberalism even if he was white. Obama's race cost him votes here for sure, but highly unlikely enough to make up a 200+k deficit.

[Sasquatch]

McCain's age b/c VP selection became a higher risk decision.

+1

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

I'd rather say it was an advantage.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

I'd rather say it was an advantage.

Exactly.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The only reason Obama was even given a second thought as a candidate was his race.

So McCain's age by default.

[Badger]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

I'd rather say it was an advantage.

Exactly.

In what world does increasing his share of the black vote from 90+% to 95+% in exchange for scads of white voters, particularly seniors, become an "advantage"?

[fezzyfestoon]

In terms of actual electoral damage, McCain's age.  His image was nothing compared to the one Obama was able to create and age had a lot to do with that.  That affected his entire campaign.  In real terms, Obama's race was a much more damaging aspect.  But it didn't translate into electoral loss as he was most damaged locally in places he wasn't going to win, and didn't need to win, anyway.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

I'd rather say it was an advantage.

Exactly.

In what world does increasing his share of the black vote from 90+% to 95+% in exchange for scads of white voters, particularly seniors, become an "advantage"?

in a world where turnout matters, and plenty of people not just black get excited by the idea of a first black president

[KuntaKinte]

In terms of actual electoral damage, McCain's age.  His image was nothing compared to the one Obama was able to create and age had a lot to do with that.  That affected his entire campaign.  In real terms, Obama's race was a much more damaging aspect.  But it didn't translate into electoral loss as he was most damaged locally in places he wasn't going to win, and didn't need to win, anyway.

From abroad, I'd say this is quiet accurate. Though I think if McCain was 20 years younger, he still would have been blown away by Obamania.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

I'd rather say it was an advantage.

Exactly.

In what world does increasing his share of the black vote from 90+% to 95+% in exchange for scads of white voters, particularly seniors, become an "advantage"?

in a world where turnout matters, and plenty of people not just black get excited by the idea of a first black president

This.

And badger, I don't think Obama lost "scads of white voters, particularly seniors". The Deep South could be an exception, but Obama was not going to win there anyway. Elsewhere, as shua notes, there were a great amount of people, not just black people, who were excited by the idea of Obama being the first black president or whatever. So, if anything, I'd say that overall, Obama gained, not lost, votes because of his race.

[Badger]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

I'd rather say it was an advantage.

Exactly.

In what world does increasing his share of the black vote from 90+% to 95+% in exchange for scads of white voters, particularly seniors, become an "advantage"?

in a world where turnout matters, and plenty of people not just black get excited by the idea of a first black president

Again, turnout among all races increased substantially. The African-American share of the overall electorate increased only a smidge from 2004. (From approx. 12% to 13% IIRC).

As far as the first black presidential nominee jazzing up non-white voters, I submit from personal experience these were a) damned few and far between, and b) the kind of socially liberal kumbaya singing youths who weren't about to vote GOP (especially for McCain) under almost any circumstance.

[Badger]

Option 2. I don't think Obama's race hurt him.

I'd rather say it was an advantage.

Exactly.

In what world does increasing his share of the black vote from 90+% to 95+% in exchange for scads of white voters, particularly seniors, become an "advantage"?

in a world where turnout matters, and plenty of people not just black get excited by the idea of a first black president

This.

And badger, I don't think Obama lost "scads of white voters, particularly seniors". The Deep South could be an exception, but Obama was not going to win there anyway. Elsewhere, as shua notes, there were a great amount of people, not just black people, who were excited by the idea of Obama being the first black president or whatever. So, if anything, I'd say that overall, Obama gained, not lost, votes because of his race.

And as you southerners frequently--and correctly--point out, racism is hardly confined to voters in the south. There's a reason that people often discussed how border states like West Virginia probably would've been in play if Clinton was the nominee, notwithstanding her being every bit as polarizing to the right and liberal as Obama. There's a reason so many counties in Appalachia supported John freakin' Kerry more than Obama, even as the rest of the country shifted several points Democratic.

I'll repeat that it's hard to fathom how blacks making up a marginally higher percentage of the MO electorate plus a handful of black Republicans pulling the lever for Obama made up for god knows how many lost rural Dixiecrats and white blue collar workers in KC and St. Louis.

MO is probably the only state that went for McCain due to race. MT has too low an AA population for much ingrained racism in voting, and McCain's 200+k margin in GA was probably too large to have been changed by white voters willing to consider voting for a northern liberal Democrat as long as they were white. But that doesn't mean that Obama made electoral gains because of his race rather than despite it. Rather, race explains a lot of why many Obama states like NC, IN, and to a lesser degree VA and FL, were even as close as they were.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

[phk]

Obama's name hurt more than his race, especially the Hussein part.

[Derek]

early on- Obama's race
later on- McCain's age

I don't think that either was a big issue for voters and I'm glad. I actually think Obama was and is too young. Only arrogance would allow someone to think that they should be the most powerful person in the world at age 46. McCain didn't appear to be quite 72 either. He seemed more like a man in his 60's.

[justW353]

early on- Obama's race
later on- McCain's age

I don't think that either was a big issue for voters and I'm glad. I actually think Obama was and is too young. Only arrogance would allow someone to think that they should be the most powerful person in the world at age 46. McCain didn't appear to be quite 72 either. He seemed more like a man in his 60's.

Oh yeah, because James Polk, Ulysses S. Grant, Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton were all terribly arrogant and young...Oh wait, no, they were some of the greatest leaders in American history...Mistake on your part.

Seriously, don't say things this bone-headed and arrogant unless you expect to be called out on them.

[Derek]

greatest leaders according to who? you?

[Bo]

early on- Obama's race
later on- McCain's age

I don't think that either was a big issue for voters and I'm glad. I actually think Obama was and is too young. Only arrogance would allow someone to think that they should be the most powerful person in the world at age 46. McCain didn't appear to be quite 72 either. He seemed more like a man in his 60's.

Oh yeah, because James Polk, Ulysses S. Grant, Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton were all terribly arrogant and young...Oh wait, no, they were some of the greatest leaders in American history...Mistake on your part.

Seriously, don't say things this bone-headed and arrogant unless you expect to be called out on them.

Out of all those President you just mentioned, TR would be the only one whom I consider anywhere near great.

[Badger]

early on- Obama's race
later on- McCain's age

I don't think that either was a big issue for voters and I'm glad. I actually think Obama was and is too young. Only arrogance would allow someone to think that they should be the most powerful person in the world at age 46. McCain didn't appear to be quite 72 either. He seemed more like a man in his 60's.

Oh yeah, because James Polk, Ulysses S. Grant, Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton were all terribly arrogant and young...Oh wait, no, they were some of the greatest leaders in American history...Mistake on your part.

Seriously, don't say things this bone-headed and arrogant unless you expect to be called out on them.

Out of all those President you just mentioned, TR would be the only one whom I consider anywhere near great.

His point being 46 is hardly an unusually young age to be elected to the presidency, let alone run for it (e.g. William Jennings Bryan, Richard Nixon).

[Derek]

early on- Obama's race
later on- McCain's age

I don't think that either was a big issue for voters and I'm glad. I actually think Obama was and is too young. Only arrogance would allow someone to think that they should be the most powerful person in the world at age 46. McCain didn't appear to be quite 72 either. He seemed more like a man in his 60's.

Oh yeah, because James Polk, Ulysses S. Grant, Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Bill Clinton were all terribly arrogant and young...Oh wait, no, they were some of the greatest leaders in American history...Mistake on your part.

Seriously, don't say things this bone-headed and arrogant unless you expect to be called out on them.

Out of all those President you just mentioned, TR would be the only one whom I consider anywhere near great.

I agree, my 3 heroes as far as presidents during the 20th century are TR, Eisenhower, and Reagan.