Race and the general election

[agcatter]

Looking at some head to head polling (Survey USA last two months)  McCain vs Hillary as opposed to McCain vs Obama i"ve noticed the following trends -

race plays no role in the Pacific NW  - Obama runs far better than Hillary

Ohio - Clinton has consistantly run better than Obama by 3 - 4 pts.  I assume due to white union workers in industrial areas - Wallace got a significant chunk of that demographic in 68,
may be a race factor among southern Ohio white Dems as well

Massachusetts - definite 5 to 8 pt lag by Obama in two consecutive polls.  Doesn't matter of course, safe Democratic state but definitely there

border states - race hurts Obama quite a bit in Kentucky - two consecutive polls - last one he was running 19 pts behind Clinton who herself was 10 down.  Big difference.

Deep South - Very big difference in Alabama - 11 -15 pts (shock shock)

Farmbelt - mixed, Obama runs 2 or 3 pts behind Clinto in Kansas and yet far ahead of her in Iowa - function of Obama's wks in Iowa campaigning?  I see race as a very minimal difference here.

New Mexico - McCain runs better against Obama than Hillary 4 or 5 pts - I assume it's the same pattern of some Hispanics reluctant to go for a black candidate.

Virginia - the one exception to the southern rule - Obama runs an average of 3 pts better than Hillary - I assume because of the better educated and more upscale liberals in NOVA

It definitely will be a factor to various extents in different areas.  Worth watching as the campaign unfolds.  Right now, the only state I see POSSIBLY being a determining factor is Ohio - mainly because the state is so closely divided.

[Sam Spade]

Watch out for PA too.  Especially that state.

Hillary would run negatively to Kerry's average in states like WA, OR and CO, but I would have told you that months ago.

Anyway, some of your observations are sound, others aren't. 

Also, it's hard to tell what exactly the numbers in November will be looking at the numbers right now.  A lot of it has to do with media coverage, etc...

I have my gut suspicions, especially about areas of this country I know well, but that's it.

[Aizen]

OH and PA look like trouble areas for Obama. NV, CO, IA look like excellent Obama pickups. I suspect NM could be a good Obama pickup too. I'm not sold on VA going Dem YET (although many here would disagree). Obama is going to have to focus on OH and PA. If he can't get OH, he can make it up with CO, IA and NV. If he loses PA he can't make that up.

[Sam Spade]

NV, CO, IA look like excellent Obama pickups.

IA, yes.  NV, eh, I don't know.  CO, possible for sure (remember I'm considering 50-50 contest)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Neither you, nor I, nor the *man in the sky* knows what NM will do, ever.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's possible, like CO is possible.  Maybe slight less possible, but I really don't know.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I tend to agree. Pennsylvania will be a state McCain could pickup, as well as Wisconsin. Obama should have a great chance at Nevada, Colorado, Iowa, and maybe New Mexico, though I tend to think McCain will run well there.

[Tender Branson]

Note that in the latest Rasmussen poll, Obama is closer to McCain than Clinton. Once the campaign kicks in and Obama pulls out a slight win against Clinton on March 4, expect McCain to fall slightly behind. Currently, OH polls show the same pattern as in Bush vs. Kerry.

[Stranger in a strange land]

remember also that evangelicals and movement conservatives will be poorly motivated to vote for McCain. For example, Joe Republican will vote for McCain at the end of the day, but without the Hildabeast to fear, he won't be motivated to work a GOTV operation. Also, I just can't see evangelical megachurches pulling for McCain to the same extent that they pulled for Dubya. They know he's not one of them and they won't have the same sway in his white house that they had in Bush's. I think a lot of people underestimate how big a factor this was in Bush's reelection.

[Torie]

Obama isn't black enough in style or substance or appearance, for race to matter much in the General election. Sure the symbolism has a certain attraction, but in the end, for POTUS, that won't matter much either. That is my gut reaction.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Once people hear about Obama's policies, they will vote for McCain. You all are underestimating McCain and ignoring the fact that Obama's policies are more liberal than Kerry ever talked about.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's far too early to say for sure; quite how prominant racist voting is will depend, to a large extent, on how prepared the McCain campaign is to dog-whistle (and how much in shows up in some areas depends on how good McCain is at turning out those extra Bush voters from 2004. We could see some sharp falls in turnout in places). And if they do that then racist voting may be apparent in areas that many here won't expect. Right under their noses, perhaps.

[opebo]

Once people hear about Obama's policies, they will vote for McCain. You all are underestimating McCain and ignoring the fact that Obama's policies are more liberal than Kerry ever talked about.

Obama has 'policies'?  Its hard to imagine a modern Democrat having 'liberal' policies, but anyway people won't pay any attention to that.  They'll be annoyed that McCain's policies are exactly the same as Bush's, and also that he is a ridiculous.

[Reaganfan]

Ohio seems to be a much better bet for Hillary then for Obama. Maybe race is a factor, but I also hear that "experience" is important, especially from the older voters. If Obama loses Ohio and Florida, he will have to run the table in the Southwest...where McCain will be strong with homestate advantage (just as Obama will be strong with his in Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois) as well as McCain's appeal to Hispanics.

McCain's true strength is how much of a maverick he has been, how well he appeals to Hispanics and Independents, and his national security credentials. I've been hearing McCain talking as the "candidate of change". Luckily we aren't facing off against a Governor like Richardson who would pull the "you are of Washington" argument, and both Obama and McCain are part of a record unpopular congress. Obama goes on about change, while McCain notes that while he may not be as young and articulate, he has experience to bring change. That is an important argument.

Hillary's experience argument hasn't hurt Obama among the Democratic Primary because Democrats don't care about experience and leadership as much as electablity and style. In a general election though, regardless of debate performances (2004 Bush-Kerry), the main argument will be the determining factor.

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

A crazy electoral map where Obama loses both Ohio and Florida...but wins the election by picking up Colorado.    Crazy.

He won't win Virginia, though.   The downstaters will see to that.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Obama's leading McCain in all real PA polls (aka not crappy uni ones).

and LOL@Duke's hackery.

[ukchris82]

woah! congrats on 30000 posts!!

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

Watch Obama screw everything up by picking Hillary as VP.  Wouldn't put it past him.   Can you say "McCain Landslide"?

[Wakie]

Or ... to summarize ... America is ready for a black President.

One interesting biproduct of the Clinton-Obama race has been a discussion about whether America is more racist or more misoginistic.  I think it is both.  But I think that it is more socially acceptable to be a misoginist than a racist.  I'm not saying that is why I think Obama will win, but I do believe it contributed.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Once people hear about Obama's policies, they will vote for McCain. You all are underestimating McCain and ignoring the fact that Obama's policies are more liberal than Kerry ever talked about.

Kerry was a liberal who tried to run as a DLC democrat. In my experience, a DLCer will almost always lose an argument with a conservative, while a progressive will win at least 50% of the time. The reason is clear: the progressive and the conservative both have the courage of their convictions, while the DLCer is wishy-washy. Worse, DLCers allow Republicans to trap them into arguing about divisive social issues like god, guns, gays, and abortion, while a Progressive won't be ashamed to go for the jugular of economic issues, the true weak point of post-Reagan and (especially) post-Bush conservatism.

[opebo]

Watch Obama screw everything up by picking Hillary as VP.  Wouldn't put it past him.   Can you say "McCain Landslide"?

He won't - he'll be afraid enough for his life given being the first black president and knowing the proclivities of the Secret Service.. he doesn't need a VP trying to off him as well.

[TheGlobalizer]

One thing is clear: Obama's tough demographics are latino voters and "Joe Lunchpail" white voters.

Every other demographic is falling over themselves to fellate him.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

he'll almost have to offer Hillary the VP spot first. This has been such a close race that he can't just ignore her and her supporters like that.

That being said, I doubt she accepts second fiddle to Obama.

[opebo]

he'll almost have to offer Hillary the VP spot first. This has been such a close race that he can't just ignore her and her supporters like that.

That being said, I doubt she accepts second fiddle to Obama.

Given the likelihood of Obama surviving his term, this would be an un-Clintonlike error.

[TheGlobalizer]

he'll almost have to offer Hillary the VP spot first. This has been such a close race that he can't just ignore her and her supporters like that.

That being said, I doubt she accepts second fiddle to Obama.

I don't think he needs to go anywhere near Hillary.  She's kryptonite.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

he'll almost have to offer Hillary the VP spot first. This has been such a close race that he can't just ignore her and her supporters like that.

That being said, I doubt she accepts second fiddle to Obama.

I don't think he needs to go anywhere near Hillary.  She's kryptonite.

He really has no choice. That's why Kerry chose Edwards in 2004. You can't just ignore her. Obama wouldve been offered the VP spot first if Hillary won the nomination as well.

[agcatter]

Why in the world would he put a polarizing, negatives in the low 50s figure on the ticket?

No way.  Besides, his first appointment as President would need to be a food taster.