Poll points to ‘racial challenge’ for Obama

Newsweek published the results of a new poll, which shows John McCain doing quite well among white voters, leading Barack Obama by 12 (52% to 40%), and leading Hillary Clinton by four (48% to 40%). This isn’t especially surprising — white voters overall preferred Bush to Kerry in 2004, Bush to Gore in 2000, Dole to Bill Clinton in 1996, and H.W. Bush to Clinton in 1992.

But Newsweek went further in analyzing the results, and found that Obama’s race “may well explain his difficulty in winning over white voters.”

In the NEWSWEEK Poll, participants were asked to answer questions on a variety of race-related topics including racial preferences, interracial marriage, attitudes toward social welfare and general attitudes toward African-Americans. Respondents were grouped according to their answers on a “Racial Resentment Index.” Among white Democrats with a low Racial Resentment Index rating, Obama beat McCain in a hypothetical match-up 78 percent to 17 percent. That is virtually identical to Clinton’s margin in the category, 79 percent to 13 percent. But among white Democrats with high scores on the Racial Resentment Index, the picture was very different: Obama led McCain by only 18 points (51 to 33) while Clinton maintained a much larger 59-point lead (78 to 18).

Who exactly are these high Racial Resentment Index voters? A majority, 61 percent, have less than a four-year college education, many are older (44 percent were over the age of 60 compared to just 18 percent under the age of 40) and nearly half (46 percent) live in the South.

I’m not entirely sure why this is newsworthy. Older, less-educated white people who harbor racial “resentment” are far less inclined to vote for the African-American presidential candidate? I’m pretty sure we could have guessed that without the benefit of a poll.

The same poll, meanwhile, not that white people are also thrown by Obama’s name and confusion over his faith tradition. Only 58% of white voters correctly identified Obama’s Christian faith, while 11% still believe he’s a Muslim. Just as ridiculous, “18 percent of white Democratic voters say they judge the Illinois senator less favorably because of his name.”

We’ll have a lousy economy, more wars, and a right-wing Supreme Court, but at least our president won’t have a funny sounding name.

As for the rest of the Newsweek poll, the results with the country at large were far less discouraging.

Among voters overall, however, Obama fares better, tying McCain 46 percent to 46 percent in a hypothetical match-up. (That’s down slightly, within the margin of error, from the last NEWSWEEK Poll, conducted in late April, in which Obama led McCain 47 percent to 44 percent). In that contest, he is boosted by a strong showing among nonwhites, leading McCain 68 percent to 25 percent (Clinton leads McCain 65 percent to 25 percent among nonwhites). But even this result shows some of the electoral challenges facing Obama in a year when Democrats generally appear to hold an electoral advantage — boasting a 15 point advantage in generic party identification over Republicans, 53 percent to 38 percent.

Clinton fares slightly better against McCain: 48 percent to 44 percent (within the margin of error). She enjoys this slight edge even though Obama leads Clinton 50 percent to 42 percent as the choice of registered Democrats for the party’s nomination. Clinton’s white support is unusually high: at a comparable point in the 2004 election, Democratic nominee John Kerry received the support of 36 percent of white voters, compared to George W. Bush’s 48 percent, and in June of 2000, Bush led Al Gore 48 percent to 39 percent.

And because of his “white voter problem,” GOP strategists think McCain can win the general election. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10585.html

  • The white working class has voted against their own interests for at least 150 years, happily sending their sons (and now their daughters) off to be sacrificed as “proof of their patriotism.” All it comes down to is the fact that most white people are morons, a “fact” you don’t need a survey to proove – merely go get on the road, survive that, and stroll through any mall in the country.

  • Sa, doesn’t that mean that white people are just block voters, too?

    Fortunately, there is 5+ months to go. It would be foolish to assume that Obama will win over many of those folks with their heads up their ass. He should try and if he can peel off 10-20% of them, McCain is done.

    A friend of mine wrote an op-ed piece in the WaPo about the real nature of Lobbyists and if you read the comments, you would think lobbyists eat babies while wiping their asses with 100 dollar bills.

    Linking in McCain forever and a day to lobbyists will ruin him among the very constituencies he’s supposed to be strong in.

  • That’s precisely why this is a historic opportunity – dur chimpfurher is wildly unpopular. The repugs have lost 3 consecutive SPECIAL elections where they should have been shoo-ins.

    Now is the time to take back the party – we don’t need the racists crowd. It is time stop the most ignorant, bigoted, and un-progressiveness voters from determining who’s the POTUS.

    Obama can win an honest election. We need to get voters out in force, watch the polls, raise hell about all the shenanigans from 2000 & 2004, and hold a few feet to the fire.

  • Tom – a more detailed look that the undeducated white voter thing actually shows it to be an APPALACIAN phenomenon – Obama has plenty of support among working class whites.

    You make some good points – no disagreeing, just think we need to be more specific here. It is only the RACIST poor white voters in the south that are not going to support Obama.

    We don’t need them and shouldn’t pander to them this year.

    We need to stop using the kkkarl rove lies that lying liar shillary uses to justify her candidacy.

  • Former Dan – “he should try?”

    You mean by running on the white side of his family’s heritage.

    Those people really don’t matter this year if the votes are actually counted. We need to seize the moment.

    It’s a once in a lifetime opportunity.

  • My worry is that some of the non voters, who are half of us, and don’t get polled, might be pulled out of their chairs to vote against Obama.

  • The greater threat, imho, is the disenfranchisement of African-Americans. How many millions will never get to vote because of deliberately inadequate facilities? How many will be falsely labelled felons? How many votes will evaporate in the trackless electronic machines?

    If Obama continues to address the electorate as adults and handle difficulties with aplomb, and yet cannot get enough white votes, then so be it. A quasi-democratic country with a majority of bigots, idiots, and sociopaths is without hope.

  • Michael7843853 – Funny how MSM, kkkarl rove, and shillary proclaim that getting the ignorant, racist white vote (primarily in Appalachia region) is more important than millions and millions of African American votes that are spread throughout the nation.

    Just the fact that kkkarl rove is pushing this big-time should be enough to tell us its a lie.

  • “Tom – a more detailed look that the undeducated white voter thing actually shows it to be an APPALACIAN phenomenon – Obama has plenty of support among working class whites.”

    This is clearly right.

    Look, most of these people have, and will continue to, vote Republican at the presidential level. How many of the 11% who think Obama is a Muslim will vote for ANY Democrat for President? How many who don’t like the name will easily pull the lever for Hillary? Very, very few, that’s how many.

    Obama will make substantial progress around the margins, as he has repeatedly, through the famliarization process; by November, anyone who believes he’s a Muslim, not a Christian, won’t be ill-informed, they’re just creating their own right-wing reality. A certain number will, however, become more comfortable not with a generic black man, but with Obama.

    Combined with the 50 state registration gains (2/3 of which are Obama driven), extraordinary turnout all around, and especially among blacks and the young? And combined with extra support from state level candidates everywhere who see the self interest in being tightly indentified with Obama because of the above?

    Polls now show Obama leading in PA, Ohio and VA. We don’t believe them because a certain % of the voters (ALMOST ALL OF WHOM WILL ALWAYS VOTE R) have nasty racial attitudes? What sense does that make?

    And, btw, Obama will take North Carolina in November, helping sweep the first woman governor into office, and helping to replace the useless Sen Dole with the first female Democratic senator from NC.

  • Tom,
    Could you cut out the racist schtick? Replace “white” with “black” in any one of your posts and you’d do fine and dandy at Powerline. Get a grip.

    PS Prove has one “o.”

  • This has always been the “Obama gamble” for the party: for every racist Democrat who votes McCain due to Obama’s color/name plus every racist non-voter who is motivated to turn out against Obama, the Democrats need to turn out (a) a new young voter, (b) a traditionally non-voting minority voter, or (c) a moderate suburban Republican/Republican-voting Independent. If our new votes and crossovers are more plentiful than their new votes and crossovers, we win easily. If not, the math gets a little tricky (and to be fair, the “Hillary gamble” would be similar, trading sexists/hardcore anti-Clintonists, for racists in the above formula, and putting “traditionally non-voting female voter” in (b) above).

    Making history was never going to be easy, for Obama or Clinton, and I assume everyone was fully aware of that as they cast their votes against the plethora of white male candidates. But given the massive turnout and voter registration in the Dem primaries, I rather like our odds at coming out on the right end of the math.

  • Very foolish to proclaim shedding the most ill-informed, bigotedly white voters is somehow a gamble.

    This isn’t about a “gamble” – the Democratic Party is dead if it panders to the most ignorant, racist, non-progressive voters out there, expecially after the neocons and repugs have screwed up big time.

    The crowd that has supported the criminal cabal in the White House has reaped what they have sowed – dur chimpfurher is the most unpopular president in U.S. history and the vast majority of middle and working class folks that voted for the chimp are far worse off today.

    The idiots that vote in large numbers against their best interests (the south and Appalachia regions) don’t matter this year.

    The REAL gamble is to continue to pander to that crowd in a year when 80+ of the public wants change.

    Please, quit parroting kkkarl rove’s dishonest talking points while proclaiming yourself to be on the other side.

  • I love the sanctimonious liberal doctrine: if you disagree with us you must be an ignorant cretin. Let’s not discuss issues, or, how we’ll pay for all your “free” programs. Instead, let’s throw insults toward anyone who disagrees with our “enlightened positions”.

  • For every person railing against the bigots in the Southern and Appalachia regions, do you realize you are spouting the same bigotry? There ARE racists in those areas, to be sure, however, isn’t painting an entire region as racists simply playing into the very stereotypes you complain about?

    I grew up in Atlanta during the 60’s. I lived in an integrated neighborhood during the heighth of the Civil Rights struggle. I’m ashamed to say, I had a distant relative who was a Grand Dragon during the 40’s and 50’s in NC. So, I know what a bigot is. However, I had never seen such unfettered racism until I moved to Florida about 12 years ago. Most of my neighbors were Italians and Hispanics from the New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvannia area. I was shocked at the level of intolerance from these people. Mostly WHITE NORTHERNERS. And I believe that Florida Hispanics who won’t vote for Obama, won’t do so because of some leftover bitterness about Elian Gonzalez, but because of the color of Obama’s skin.

    Period.

    I am sure about this because of what I hear from them everyday.

    One last question. Do you think inroads were made in those regions because the Federal Government passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the bigots just decided to play along, or is it because with all the bigots in those areas, there is also a great number of white progressives, who despite the ignorance of their neighbors, have worked to change things from the inside?

    To consistantly blame a region of people for past history, is to be just as much a player in keeping that disgraceful history alive. You want Southerners to move into the 21st century? Maybe you should as well. Allow for the possibility of people to change.

    To keep repeating the same tired, outdated stereotypes, makes you look like an intellectually lazy, dumbass. Grow up.

  • Points to ponder: Why is it racist for whites to prefer a white candidate and not racist for blacks to prefer a black candidate? Oh I forgot, the only reason Obama gets all the African American vote is because they are so sure he is the best candidate. Silly me.

  • Oh, Amy –
    How many white candidates have the blacks voted for all these years?
    How many white voters WON’T vote for Obama, even if he seem to be the better candidate.

    Yours is the 2nd most stupid comment that I have read today (BDS get’s #1, as he foams at the mouth when typing the word liberal).

  • Speaking as a long-time Democratic Party member:

    Two of the most important constituent groups in the Democratic party are supporting history making nominees and unfortunately, only one will win and the other’s backers will be disappointed. Neither group has the “right” to the nomination, they competed under the same rules.

    Only one way of winning is fair and that’s by obtaining the most delegates since that is the method that the nomination is awarded.

    Once 2,026 delegates are won (and we have to go by that number since the holder of that number of delegates will be in control of the credentials committee and be able to apportion the delegations of the penalized states of MI & FL) it is over. That’s the process that is in place for this year. If you want to change it to Popular Vote or Electoral Vote or All Caucus or All Primaries or All Super Delegates, you can…next election cycle. Anything else is just an attempt to sabotage the existing nomination process and obtain the nomination by coup.

    If you are interested in electing a Democrat, in stopping 4 more years of Bush and interested in preventing more right-wing appointments to the Supreme Court, the loser and their backers must to accept that this was close but they lost.

    This applies equally to both the Clinton and Obama campaigns.

    Let’s get on with it and with winning in November.

  • Older, less-educated white people who harbor racial “resentment” are far less inclined to vote for the African-American presidential candidate? I’m pretty sure we could have guessed that without the benefit of a poll.

    Please, don’t fall into this antiscientific fallacy. Common wisdom is wrong as often as it’s right, and even when a study confirms a popular intuition that doesn’t make it less valid. What if the poll had shown the opposite result (that even though they had racial resentment it didn’t translate into political behavior)? And the further demographic breakdown of the “high racial resentment” voters is also interesting, especially because it shows the problem breaks out of Appalachia and into “the South.”

  • It seems there might be the possibility of a backlash should there be compelling evidence of racist voting, particularly if the Republicans and/or the McCain campaign is seen as flaming the racism, either overtly or through proxies. There must be a nontrivial number of McCain leaners, affluent suburbanites in place like Fairfax County, VA, Bucks County, PA and Shaker Heights, OH who would be deeply ashamed and offended and might, on that basis, decide to vote for Obama. I think the Republicans have to be very concerned about this possibility and if not careful, will pay a price.

  • Recent polls out of Ohio and PA have Obama beating McCain in those states.
    Of course, there are some polls that swing the other way. But let’s face the facts- Obama doesn’t need WV and KY to win. The white voters in that state may have a color-arousal problem or a ‘too much FOX news’ problem, but that’s their problem.

    Obama won many lily-white states against Clinton, like Utah, CO, Washington, Alaska. Who knows? He might even be able to win the Southern States except FL!

    Wait till those bigots get the real story on McCain. They’ll come running off their ‘golf courses (like Dick Morris said)’ but they might be more likely to vote for Obama.

  • Who exactly are these high Racial Resentment Index voters? A majority, 61 percent, have less than a four-year college education, many are older (44 percent were over the age of 60 compared to just 18 percent under the age of 40) and nearly half (46 percent) live in the South.

    I guess Obama’s “post-racial” politics is just so much B.S., then, eh? Because to read this, one would think that Obama is AFRICAN-AMERICAN, not half-black, half white. Of course, since he refuses to talk about his white mother, one has to wonder what is the problem with this man. He can’t even bother himself to go to WV and KY to meet with and talk to the white “racists”. Why is that? Aloof? Arrogant? Writing an entire swath of voters off?

    And then we get idiotic comments like YOURS – probably because you’ve never been within 50 miles of urbia in your life, have no idea what “rural” is, and especially don’t understand the lives and economic concerns of “less educated”, “low information” voters.

    Obama is heading for a huge loss in November. He can’t win a GE with AAs, young, wealthy white urbanites. And if he were to squeak by, he will never accomplish anything productive, because the divisions will be back to what they have been post-1996 – and possibly expanded – because of a gamble that he can win a GE with the above constituency and all those new states.

    I have some news for you, Clinton does far better among ALL demographics except AA and the young. So much so that she beats John McCain in a GE matchup, whereas Obama is statistically tied with McCain.

    Now, if you really want to win the WH, you need to give up this blind leftist devotion and come to the reality of what and who the Democratic Party stands for.
    Clinton does better among ALL demographics across the board, with the exception of two – neither of which are enough to win a GE.

    And if you paid any attention to the analyses of the races, you would see that the “white” working class (I prefer to call them blue-collar working class – and I don’t give a rat’s ass about their skin color) isn’t concerned about some pie-in-the-sky rhetoric about “change” and whether or if lobbyists have some influence in political life. These folks want decent jobs (and opportunities for those) that pay and provide something extra at the end of the month – like the “rich white liberals”; they want decent health care; they want education opportunities; they want to be secure in their homes. They want a president who listens and sees them, understanding the daily problems they face. Obama doesn’t seem to want anything to do with “those” people. Too bad, because “those” people will indeed vote in November.

    If you and other leftists like you would remove your faces from computer screens and “creative” work and numbers crunching and the lunacy of analyzing everything until you’re constipated, you might actually see and be able to empathize with REAL people, instead of the ones who are just like you.

  • While we are picnicking away this Memorial Day, the man who is going to be most responsible for the woman in our future (unfortunately it won’t be Hillary) has gone to ground.

    The only thing worse than Karl Rove in the spotlight is what he’s up to when he’s not in it.

    Thanks to the stupidity of the Democratic Party devoted to creating yet more rancorous division in a country suffering every consequence of self -interest, it’s now probable that McCain will become president.

    .I write from my rural, small-town perspective where the goings on have been viewed with pretty much universal distaste, resentment and revulsion.

    Out here in the country Obama has as much chance of winning this election as Larry the Cable Guy has of winning the Nobel Prize.

    Here there’s no way to relate to Obama the UberBup and no experience other than self-advancement he can show them to make them want him.

    And he’ll be running his yada yada rhetorician’s dreams against a scarred man who triumphed over nightmares. And will get every single vote the military and its Deer Hunter mind-set can offer.

    Too bad Mccain’s a war-monger and the usual corporate shill.

    It’s too likely Hillary Clinton will become Obama’s running mate.
    Although I still don’t think she’ll be the woman in our future

    I’m a Hillary supporter and when she does this, it will be the first time I’ll be disappointed in her.

    But fish gotta swim , birds gotta fly, and the Clintons gotta be in their natural habitat.

    Bill Clinton has seemed amputated since the day he left office.
    If it takes Hillary being VP before being president for 8 years, well, it is what it is.

    We’re going to hear endless country before party this summer.

    So this is why Rove is in slither mode. Picking the woman who will make McCain the winner.

    Because Americans are craving unity. leadership and a single sense of direction that isn’t incomprehensibly delusional and visibly petroleum-based, McCain and his Lady VP will have to be the Fred and Ginger of electioneering.

    No one is ever going to see them sweat. Especially over each other.

    And since McCain is 72, maybe God’s plans for the first woman president will be sooner than later.

    But Karl Rove has enshrined at his covert heart of darkness Big Oil. This might naturally lead one to assume Condi Rice.
    Except that she is universally loathed as an even more incompetent prig than W.

    What Rove/McCain need is cuddly fuzzies.
    Which lets out Martha Stewart.

    This GOP Goddess needs to be black, professionally endearing and know how to play God

    Maybe Karl Rove’s real surprise is Oprah will be running against Hillary as VP.

    But I would so much rather have Whoopi . Then I’d know the country was in good hands and she’d stick it to the Oily Bubbas by Act III.

    As for me, I’ll be writing in Joe Biden. I want my vote to mean something.

    I want Hillary to win. But Obama needs to take her down with him. And she’s ambitious enough to link to him and lose.

    That’s when Hillary really will have lost.

    gala1

    gandolina@hotmail.com

  • Comments are closed.