elcid89's blog

sober reality ...

 abuse

Let me say first of all that my intention in writing this is neither to inflame tensions nor to turn Dems against one another. It's simply, and solely, to take an objective look at the electoral situation going into November, nothing more. I ask that you approach it from that vantage point. 

During an interview last week, Hillary Clinton pretty much said the unspeakable thing that's been looming in the corner for much of this primary cycle. In explaining why she continues to campaign for the Democratic nomination in the face of what seems an insurmountable lead by Barack Obama, Clinton opined that his support among white voters is weak.

This would be troubling, and a seeming cheap shot on the basis of race, if the numbers didn't quietly substantiate her allegation. Recent polls found that 53% of whites who have not completed college viewed Obama unfavorably.

I examined the numbers for myself, and they are troubling. Of the 29 Democratic primaries since New Hampshire on Jan 8th, Obama has won 15. Sounds good. Of those 29, he pulled a majority white vote in just 5 out of 29.

In Indiana, a state in his own backyard that he narrowly lost to Clinton, he managed just 40% of the white vote. In North Carolina, the numbers are even more troubling at just 37%. His victories in every state where he's failed to carry a white majority, in every one of them, have been solely attributable to overwhelming support among black voters. 

While that's great news for him in the micro, it exposes a fundamental weakness in his campaign that should have Dems thinking hard about how to play this hand.  Obama supporters believe that he will garner much more support among white voters in the general election. I'm inclined to believe that will be tougher to achieve that they think it is. For the diversity minded me, that's a sad realization to come to. For the cold hard reality minded me, it's a serious & damning weakness going into an important election. 

Consider history: Tom Bradley ran against George Deukmejian for governor of California in 1982, and a month before the election was polling 10% to 13% ahead of Deukmejian. Deukmejian's campaign manager suggested that the margin wasn't what it appeared to be, as whites who were inclined to ile to a pollster, so as not to appear racist, wouldn't have the same problem in the privacy of a voting booth. He was correct. Going into the election with a 7% polling advantage, Bradley lost the election. One of the primary reasons was the white voters, 17% of them, who admitted to exit pollsters after voting that they simply hadn't been able to bring themselves to vote for a black man. 

Douglas Wilder, going into the 1989 Virginia gubernatorial election with a commanding 13% lead, saw that lead evaporate to less than a 1% margin of victory on election day. The reason? You can guess.  

Likewise for David Dinkins running for mayor of NYC. A comfortable lead over Guiliani disintegrated to a less than 2% margin of victory, and this for a Democrat running in a historically Democratic stronghold. The reason why isn't difficult to find. It's written all over the exit polling. 

So, while she might have said something distasteful, I fear that she's accurate as well, and the numbers aren't pretty. We'll have to see if they're enough to swing the election to McCain in November.

And I'm pretty sure, unfortunately, that they will ...