Should Dems try to whistle Dixie?

The WSJ had an interesting item yesterday on the Obama campaign’s registration efforts, and the number of voters Obama’s team can and will bring into the process this year, most notably in the South, where Democrats haven’t carried a single state since 1996.

On a hot afternoon in this southern U.S. town, Tom Wolf, a field organizer for Barack Obama, delivered the fruits of hundreds of hours of staff effort — 130 voter-registration applications — to the Wake County Board of Elections office. They had been filled out by a handful of Republican-leaners, a few dozen young adults and scores of older African-Americans who stopped voting years ago.

Those older blacks were the focus for Mr. Wolf, a foot soldier in one of the most unconventional aspects of the Illinois senator’s presidential campaign. Sen. Obama reckons that a surge in black voters will put in play long-solid Republican regions across the country, lifting Democratic candidates for all offices, from the White House to Congress to state legislatures. “I guarantee you African-American turnout, if I’m the nominee, goes up 30% around the country, minimum,” Mr. Obama said at a campaign event this past winter.

This focus on new voters is unusual. Most presidential campaigns concentrate on firing up their base or wooing independents. Voter-registration drives are treated as an afterthought, overshadowed by fund raisers and door-to-door canvassing. […]

For Sen. Obama, the registration initiative is at the fore, especially since the main reason for low black turnout is low registration. The U.S. Census Bureau says that while registered black voters turn out at a rate generally even with white counterparts, qualified African-Americans register at a lower rate nationally — 68% to 75% for whites. The gap is particularly stark in the battleground state of Florida, where only 53% of eligible blacks were registered in 2004, compared with 71% of whites. In Virginia, it was 58% to 72%.

So, to borrow a cliche, Obama intends to “grow the pie,” instead of just slicing the old one differently. And looking at the landscape, there appears to be a real opportunity for Obama to get hundreds of thousand of voters, especially in the South, into the process.

Will it work?

First, the numbers matter. There are about a half-million qualified African Americans who didn’t vote in 2004. In North Carolina, the number is 343,000. Similar results are found throughout the region, and the Obama campaign is making a concerted effort to reach those would-be voters and get them registered.

On the other hand, there’s my friend Tom Schaller, who argues today that the drive to boost turnout among black voters won’t produce Southern victories.

Two pervasive and persistent myths about racial voting in the modern South are behind the notion that Mr. Obama might win in places like Georgia, North Carolina and Mississippi.

The first myth is that African-American turnout in the South is low. Black voters are actually well represented in the Southern electorate: In the 11 states of the former Confederacy, African-Americans were 17.9 percent of the age-eligible population and 17.9 percent of actual voters in 2004, analysis of Census Bureau data shows.

And when socioeconomic status is held constant, black voters go to the polls at higher rates than white voters in the South. In other words, a 40-year-old African-American plumber making $60,000 a year is, on average, more likely to vote than a white man of similar background.

The second myth is that Democratic presidential candidates fare better in Southern states that have large numbers of African-Americans. In fact, the reverse is true, because the more blacks there are in a Southern state, the more likely the white voters are to vote Republican.

Given the data, Schaller argues Obama has a real shot at winning Florida and Virginia, but might as well give up hope for the rest of the region where, Schaller insists, Obama “cannot overcome reality.”

I’ve learned not to argue with Schaller’s math, even when I want to. That said, there are competing analyses of the Southern question, and I found Nate Silver’s take pretty compelling.

I’d just add, though, whether he should or not, Obama is eyeing the South, and will be investing time, energy, and resources in picking up some electoral votes in the Republicans’ dominant region. Unless the McCain campaign is prepared to gamble that Schaller’s thesis is iron-clad, McCain won’t have a choice but to invest resources of his own in the South, which in turn, will limit his ability to spend elsewhere.

Something to keep an eye on.

Republican’ts will be screaming about fraudulant registrations in
three
two
one…

  • Obama’s team is focusing on recruiting older African American voters who had stopped voting — as the article above says — but his isn’t a race-based campaign?

    Elsewhere, Huffington Post is running an article introducing Obama’s sister, who has apparently just joined his campaign — for the second time (but played up as if it were the first time). There was a bit of publicity back in October when she was announced as a surrogate, then she entirely disappeared. I wondered why. Now we find out. To quote:

    “Discussion of those ties [to the Asian American community] has taken a back seat to the Obama campaign’s efforts to win the Hispanic vote and his ability to rouse young and black voters. In spite of the drawn-out primary season, many voters have heard little about Obama’s years in Jakarta _ he lived there between 1967 and 1971, while his mother was married to Soetoro-Ng’s father, an Indonesian businessman _ or about his years in Hawaii, where Asian-Americans are a majority.”

    His sister goes on to say that there was a campaign decision to downplay the diversity of his background. Now, they are approaching Asian Americans for funds, so his sister is front-and-center again. This may be a different “race” but it is still playing a race-card.

    Is she his sister, or is she his sister only when they need money from the Asian American community?

    There are areas of the country where family is strongly valued. This includes not just Asian and Hispanic communities, but also places like Appalachia and the south (where who you are is defined by who you are related to). When Obama treats his relatives as if they were disposable, he comes across as creepy to those constituencies. You can portray the South as a bunch of bigots for avoiding Obama, but he contributes to the disdain for him in ways that are not being acknowledged in this election. It is understandable that he wouldn’t kinow what family means given his personal history, but you can’t blame this entirely on white bigotry. Obama played a role in alienating the people he is now trying to attract and I have no doubt he doesn’t understand how he did it.

  • Will it work? Who knows? But it won’t be any worse than the moronic strategies of the Gore and Kerry campaigns.

  • Obama’s team is focusing on recruiting older African American voters who had stopped voting — as the article above says — but his isn’t a race-based campaign? -Mary

    They are registered at a lower rate than other races, as the article indicates, so no, it’s not race based, unless you count striving for equal representation to be race based, which you probably do.

    Honestly, I’ve never heard anyone disparage the drive to register more Americans to vote, but I don’t hang around racists.

    Anyway, it won’t matter, they can’t all wait in line for 12 hours to vote on one broken voting machine.

  • Mary’s right, we should get rid of Obama and get behind Hillary, who never alienated anyone.

    heh.

    Anyway, I think the observation that “Black voters are actually well represented in the Southern electorate” may be accurate and Obama will “grow the pie”. You can’t tell me that the black voters are not going to be fired up this time. They are, and they will be, and anyone they know who refuses to go vote will be hounded to death, because this is the first time they’ve had one of their own at the top of the ticket.

    What we need to do is be prepared for the Republican disenfranchisement campaigns, which will surely come this fall. We’ll probably be waiting in line for a long time on November 4th, but we’ll be having a good time in that line.

  • I think this is a good idea. The more money you spend on ads/exposure in an individual state, the more diminishing returns there are (people start to get sick of them!) Therefore if Obama’s fundraising is as good as we hope it will be, he’ll almost have to spread out into the southern states to avoid wasting money.

  • Mary – to quote Dick Cheney (oh, the temptation, no… must resist…must remain civil)
    So?

    Here’s your stark choice – 4 more years of Bush (or worse) along with the worst Supreme Court choices imaginable (especially for women)
    Or Obama.

    If you can’t make the correct choice, then go with the other Cheney quote and stop blithering away at us here.

  • I don’t think the answer is really clear cut one way or the other. At the very least, I’m wondering what sort of conflicting information is out there that would lead Obama’s campaign to believe it has a shot while Schaller and others would conclude that Obama has no chance.

    Perhaps at this point in 2004 there were similar trends, but if not, there’s no reason not to try for certain states. Right now, he’s polling about four or five points behind McCain in North Carolina, which has 15 Electoral votes. Kerry lost the state to Bush by about 13 percent. The same can be said for Indiana, which has 10 Electoral votes. Kerry lost that state by 21 points. How is that not encouraging?

    Let’s look at Georgia. Kerry lost that state by about 550,000 votes. If Obama’s volunteers can register about 60 percent of the unregistered 500,000 black voters, it’ll have 300,000 additional Democrats in the state. If the campaign can turn out 85 percent of those Democrats, it’ll have 255,000 new voters. He’s almost cut McCain’s hypothetical lead in half with this one group of voters alone. And while there are some voters in every state who wouldn’t register for the Democratic party if you held a gun to their heads, I’ve heard anecdotal evidence that there are a lot of younger, white people open to the party in fast-growing areas of the state, just as there are in certain areas of North Carolina and Virginia. There may not be enough of them to make a difference in the end, but we won’t know until we try.

    Sure, we may waste resources trying in these states, but why not take the opportunity when it is presented? At the very least, we’re softening the ground for next time. Even if we find out our efforts have been wasted in September, we can always pull out. That’s what every campaign does. Do you think McCain will be still be advertising as much in Michigan at the end of September if he finds it’s not working? Of course not. Obama is no different.

    Simply put, let these people do their thing. They’ve run a very impressive campaign so far and earned the right to try to win this in their own way.

  • As a Canadian, I am curious why voter registration is so cumbersome in the US? In Canada if you file taxes you can vote and you can even register on election day. We don’t have a history of turning away voters. Our system is far from pefect, we have low turnouts too, but registration is not a problem.

  • At the very least, I’m wondering what sort of conflicting information is out there that would lead Obama’s campaign to believe it has a shot while Schaller and others would conclude that Obama has no chance. -Brian

    While his goal is to win every state, it is likely he will compete in states he doesn’t feel he will ultimately win if he can help down ballot candidates and increase his popular vote total substantially.

    This helps him hit the trifecta of a people’s mandate, more Democrats in state and federal positions, and gets McCain to waste money in areas once thought safe.

  • “And when socioeconomic status is held constant”

    This is not very helpful without the breakdown of how many whites and blacks there are in the different socioeconomic groups. For example, if there are many more poor blacks and poor people in general are less likely to vote then there are a lot of votes to be picked up through registration. Too, this line of reasoning ignores that Senator Obama has vowed to help the downstream races as well. Greater democratic turnout will help elect democratic congressmen and force the republicans to spend more money to defend red turf.

  • Gee, Mary the Gooper troll, when did Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, Black Americans, or Purple Americans stop being AMERICAN? Apparently, to you, women are the only voting public which matters to you (if that really matters to you which I highly doubt).

    Matt, we have issues with voting because people like Karl Rove only wants white affluent people to vote; those would would normally vote Republican.

    And good on Obama for working those downstream voters. We need Dems at every level from local to state to senate and congress. That’s one approach I wholeheartedly agree with.

  • Keep in mind that this present republican obstructionist disaster has gotten dems elected in red states for the first time in years. This election will be like no other and just because southern states voted republican last time I wouldn’t count those chickens till they’re hatched. The republican tide has turned all over the country and southern republicans are beginning to see how they have actually been voting against their own interests and believe a big change is necessary. McCain is no change at all.

  • Mary, you have an amazing ability to read a novel’s worth of discussion, insinuations and interpretations into what most would call a tiny, if not microscopic, piece of the picture. You make it sound like Obama is on a different campaign every day when he’s just doing what any politician running for office does: calling his connections and rallying his support. So his sister has an Asian father and happens to know people who are also of Asian descent–holy all out conspiracies! But what does it mean, Batman?

  • I’m all for increasing voter registration and turn out, but I hope the BO campaign isn’t making the mistake of clinging to the stategy that won the last war for them. In other words, focusing on getting every last favorable voter to turn out was key in the primaries, where delegates were largely allocated on percentage of popular vote. Whether you won or lost the state was not as important (ask Hillary about that).

    But in the general, where it’s largely winner take all, increasing your turnout from 35% of the vote to 49% of the vote (in a two candidate race) gets you exactly nothing. And costs money to boot. Not a good system, maybe, but it’s the one we have.

  • Obama’s team is focusing on recruiting older African American voters who had stopped voting — as the article above says — but his isn’t a race-based campaign?

    This may be the single stupidest thing I’ve seen on the internet. And I’ve been to Free Republic before.

  • Mary, you have an amazing ability to read a novel’s worth of discussion, insinuations and interpretations into what most would call a tiny, if not microscopic, piece of the picture.

    Mary can do anything. After all, she comes from an alternate universe, where she lived in 1930s Chicago and it was a million percent black.

  • Unless the McCain campaign is prepared to gamble that Schaller’s thesis is iron-clad, McCain won’t have a choice but to invest resources of his own in the South, which in turn, will limit his ability to spend elsewhere.

    It’s not just about the money and energy spent there, though that’s certainly important.

    If the McCain campaign is forced to focus its attention on white southern Republicans in states like Virginia and Georgia, the campaign is necessarily going to have to amplify arguments that would appeal to that base. Those would be, of course, the most conservative ones in its arsenal — unyielding devotion to the Bush tax cuts and stay-the-course in Iraq, plus fealty to the Religious Right.

    If McCain has to shore up his support in the South, then, it’s not just that he’ll have to divert money and time from the fight for independents and swing states elsewhere in the country. It’s that he’ll be making an argument which will make winning over those same voters even less likely.

  • Matt @ 9, our voter registration system is a patchwork because each state can enact its own laws regarding the registration process, requirements, etc. The governing establishments in some states have a vested interest in ensuring that “the wrong people” don’t vote in sufficient numbers to upset the status quo.

  • also places like Appalachia and the south (where who you are is defined by who you are related to).

    Mary’s right. Specifically, which degree of cousin you married and whether the wife is over or under 14.

  • It really doesn’t matter whether Obama has a good shot at Georgia, Mississippi, or North Carolina. What matters is that he will compete in those states and has the money to do so. He can mount a credible campaign in all three states and force the GOP to defend their position in all three states, using money that they would much rather spend in swing states and swing districts. For once the Democrats have the deep pockets and it appears that Obama, following Dean’s lead in the 2006 mid-terms, is going to use those deep pockets to best effect by making McCain fight in every state. Good for him.

    When the dust clears I expect that Obama will have a better shot at either GA or NC than most people are giving him right now. Black pride is going to drive a lot of African Americans to the polls this time in spite of whatever voter suppression shenanigans the GOP comes up with. On the other hand, GOP antipathy toward McCain might be enough to counter the tendency that whites will have to come out and vote against Obama. It’s a long shot, but worth the monetary risk.

    What I’m wondering is, for all the squawking the right wingers do about limits on campaign spending and campaign contributions being a violation of free speech, will they change their tune when they are on the losing side of massive spending?

  • My point is that Obama ditches his relatives when they become inconvenient to his campaign. Hillary told Bill to shut up a few times but never ditched him. Obama hides the ones who would suggest he isn’t African American (while appealing to blacks) then brings them out again when he wants money from Asian Americans or needs a “broader appeal.” He only talks about his mother in the midwest. Some people love their mothers enough to have them onstage (yes, I know she is not around, but is ALL of his family except Michelle dead?). Tiger Woods is also biracial but never disavowed his mother in order to seem blacker, even given his father’s bitterness toward the sport. But then, he didn’t have to be elected the world’s top golfer — he could accomplish that on his merits.

    Obama’s approach is dishonest because he pretends that the only racists in this election are white. You don’t care, but I do. Those of us who fought racism in the 60s and 70s find it equally reprehensible now when members of minority groups are racist. We missed the era when minorities were defined as exempt from racism because institutional racism and power differentials make all whites racist and all minorities non-racist by definition. Now that members of minority groups have become part of those institutions and power structure and have the opportunity to mistreat others, that definition needs revision because it has become a shield for racism that wouldn’t otherwise be tolerated. If it is wrong for whites to do to blacks, it is wrong for blacks to do to whites (or others). Obama should be ashamed of his behavior.

    There’s no point in criticizing McCain here. No one here is going to be tempted to vote for him. Why rehash the wrongness of all of his policies? It is boring and a waste of time. If I were going to criticize McCain, I’d go do it in one of the conservative blogs where I might change someone’s mind — that would truly be trolling and I don’t actually enjoy hostility — it is the price paid for self-expression. I guess I am still criticizing Obama here because the convention hasn’t happened yet, I don’t consider him our candidate (he is only self-declared) and there is a remote chance we might still be able to nominate Hillary. Yes, it is unlikely but so is Obama’s chance of winning in the Fall.

    When this becomes a Dem Party dictatorship in which only Mugabe (oops, I meant Obama) can be voted for, none of us will be posting anyway. In the meantime, progressives and Democrats can vote for whomever they want. Until November, people are still making their choices so it is as relevant to talk about Obama’s strengths — and weaknesses — as it is to criticize other candidates, such as McCain. However, I’m no more interested in this being a McCain hate-fest than an Obama love-fest. There is a mindlessness to both of these approaches that insults our political process. I’d like to see fair and balanced examination of pros and cons of this election. It happens here occasionally. Since no one person achieves fairness and balance individually, it generally emerges by comments incorporating a range of reactions and viewpoints. Those who want to insult, shout down, chase away or silence disagreement don’t seem to understand that diversity of all kinds is a good thing. That saddens me.

  • Tiger Woods is also biracial but never disavowed his mother in order to seem blacker

    We all know how much the golfing community prizes blackness above all else.

    Do you write speeches for the current president? Or are you this laughable on your own dime?

  • I got caught up on the PGA = Black Power angle above, and missed the even dumber point in that sentence.

    Mary Mary Quite Contrary: When has Obama disavowed his white mother? He mentions her in countless speeches, used photos of him and her in the first national ad he ran, etc. etc.

    I hope you’re really a Republican troll as people keep suggesting, because if you’re sincerely a Democrat, then I weep for the party.

  • Matt, AK Liberal: I know that voter intimidation and outright disenfranchisement are distressing realities in America, but unless the rest of the country is very different than where I live, registering to vote is something one does once, and as long as you keep voting, you remain registered. Unless I’m mistaken, polling places are, if they even change at all, designated months in advance. I just can’t see how having to perform such a trivial exercise such as going to the town hall and asking where one’s precinct will be (and whether one is registered) every few years is such a hardship. You can probably find out over the phone, or online (at the library if you’ve no home connection).

    I’ll add that I do oppose the recent voter ID nonsense, and acknowledge that that aspect of ‘registering’ is a cross between a poll tax and plain intimidation; but mostly for those who don’t think about voting till election day is upon them.

  • MARY come join us here in the Real World. Hillary is OUT!! Now the sooner you and the Mafia owned American MEDIA, accept that, the better off we’ll all be.

  • Obama insults the blacks of the South. Obama has spent little time and money in these states campaigning. He just thinks they are so dumb that they can see he is black and will vote for him only for that reason. Insulting!

  • Sorry I’m a little late to the party. I heard someone talk about treating their family as a disposable item. I assume they were talking about McCain ditching his first wife (did death do them part?) for a young, attractive rich heiress in order to gain an inside political track. Right? Right?

    …right?

  • Mary can do anything. After all, she comes from an alternate universe, where she lived in 1930s Chicago and it was a million percent black.

    Note to self—never read posts about Scary Mary while eating a peanut butter sandwich.

    Should Obama try for the Dixie vote? Hell, yes—we’ve got this shiny new roadster in the driveway called “the Dean 50-state strategy.” Let’s take this baby out for a spin, stretch its legs, and see what it’ll do!

  • Comments are closed.