Racism Gives McCain A 15% Advantage Over Obama
Politico's Roger Simon reports that a "prominent" GOP strategist told him that McCain will have a 15% advantage against Obama in November because of racism.
The strategist says that a significant number of Whites will not vote for a Black man. The GOP feels that race is a more important factor than taxes, the economy, and the War.
Pennsylvania Gov Ed Rendell admitted that some Whites would not vote for Obama because of race. Reading Pa mayor Tom McMahon tells of getting angry calls after he announced his support for Obama. McMahon says that there is a bit of racism below the surface in Pennsylvania.
About 10-15% of Pennsylvania voters are "undecided" in most polls. Are the undecideds Clinton or Obama voters? Are the undecideds too ashamed to admit that racial bias is playing a role in their vote? Or, is the "prominent" GOP strategist just blowing smoke. See my post November analysis for the answer.
The strategist says that a significant number of Whites will not vote for a Black man. The GOP feels that race is a more important factor than taxes, the economy, and the War.
Pennsylvania Gov Ed Rendell admitted that some Whites would not vote for Obama because of race. Reading Pa mayor Tom McMahon tells of getting angry calls after he announced his support for Obama. McMahon says that there is a bit of racism below the surface in Pennsylvania.
About 10-15% of Pennsylvania voters are "undecided" in most polls. Are the undecideds Clinton or Obama voters? Are the undecideds too ashamed to admit that racial bias is playing a role in their vote? Or, is the "prominent" GOP strategist just blowing smoke. See my post November analysis for the answer.
Advertisement
That's why it's going to be so sweet when Obama wins.
Chronic racism? You's about to get pwned.
April 22, 2008 8:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
To be honest, at the beginning of the primary, I thought Obama had a snowballs chance in hell of winning the nomination. I don't think I was the only one. What Obama has accomplished thus far is amazing and groundbreaking. He changing the game and the old lines governed by race and class lines are being blurred and erased.
April 22, 2008 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's all fine and dandy, but that 15% of people who won't vote for Obama because he's black also won't vote for him because he's a Democrat.
April 22, 2008 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are still quite a few racist Democrats. I'm sure the Republicans have the vast majority of these, but don't underestimate the number of racists (and sexists) within our midst.
The funny thing about Rendell's statement is that it's a bad argument for why Clinton is a better candidate, since more people have admitted to being biased against a female candidate than against a black candidate. Funny as in "odd" and not as in "ha ha", of course.
April 22, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
WRONG WRONG WRONG.
Those 15% are _already_ GOP voters. They are already accounted for in McCain's 40%. The GOP have used the racist Southern Strategy for decades.
I hate lazy thinking. Politico is a classic example of truly remedial intellectual ability among the chattering classes.
April 22, 2008 9:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the nonsense in posts like this (and the MSM, and the idiot Republicans): how many of that "15%' were ever going to vote for a Democrat anyway? And how much of that "15%' would ever vote for Hillary Clinton?
In fact, there's a good 40% of Americans who would not vote for Hillary, ever. Then we factor in the squandered AA vote, and people like me who will have a very difficult time voting for her (I'm in a safe state and will probably be able to not vote for her with a clear conscience).
That "15%' is a subset of people who were never going to vote for the Democrat anyway. It's a false, ridiculous argument.
April 22, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly as others have said-those 15% weren't voting Democratic anyway. The GOP already has a lock on the racist vote. There may be some racists that consistently vote Democratic, but their numbers are not great. Especially lately, with both the Southern strategy and the immigrant bashing that the GOP engages in, there really is no reason to believe that Republicans haven't had a lock on the people who vote based on skin color for at least a couple of decades.
April 22, 2008 9:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
So 15% of voters won't vote for Obama because he's black. Maybe one third (5%) are nominally Democrats.
How many Republicans won't vote for McCain because he's old and has suffered a couple of melanomas?
Racism vs ageism -- polls say more people disqualify a candidate because of age than race. Those "senior moments" may be as harmful as Reverend Wright.
April 22, 2008 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
For those looking for a source, here is such a poll. Short summary: atheist is worse than homosexual is worse than 72+ years old is worse than married for the 3rd time is worse than Mormon is worse than Hispanic is worse than female is worse than Jewish is worse than black is worse than Catholic.
That said, I think the "married for the 3rd time" and "72+ years old" are quite obviously targeted at McCain, whereas a pollee might imagine other black or female candidates with respect to those categories.
Here's another poll from 1999 for comparison. And yet another poll. (Note: these two polls don't ask about age.)
April 22, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have been saying this all along and I wouldn't be surprised if the number is even larger. The trend is ALREADY there in the Democratic primary exit polling data. It's not just white vs black racialism but also Hispanic vs black. Obama is going to lose this election to John McCain. It's as simple as that.
April 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, if Obama is going to lose this election to McCain because he's black, than Clinton would've lost the election because she's female. Polls have consistently shown that to be a bigger hurdle to being elected—not that it should be, of course.
So, we can either resign ourselves to the racist and sexist attitudes in this country, or we can hope that it can change, and work to make it do so.
April 22, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another scare tactic. I always look at each fear card, whose playing it, and add a "therefore_____________".
There are so many advantages that Democrats have over Republicans in this election it's ridiculous.
The Republicans no longer have a stronghold on the country.
April 22, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that taking anything Politico and a GOP strategist says at face value is unwise. How many people would honestly answer the question?
I posted this to see what opinions were out there regarding the impact of race in the General Election. McCain is running closer to Obama than one would predict given feelings about the War and the economy. I do realize McCain has gotten a free ride from the Democcratic candidates and MSM and should be less popular when directly challenged.
Do McCain's numbers already include the 15%?
April 22, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is consistent with a Rasmussen poll from February found that found 15% of voters said they would be unwilling to vote for an African-American for president.
The same poll also found that 17% said they would be unwilling to vote for a woman. So either Senator Clinton and Senator Obama would face significant prejudice should they become the nominee. I tend to agree, though, that people for whom that would be a significant consideration would be far more likely to vote for McCain even if, say, John Edwards were the nominee. But there are also voters who would be willing to vote for a woman or African-American in generic terms, but who would be unwilling to vote for the particular woman (or, less likely IMO, African-American).
April 22, 2008 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink