EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

How Oregon Could Help Obama Defy "White Working Class" Problem

First Posted: 5/27/08 Updated: 5/25/11

Obama Oregon

The popular refrain within political circles is that Tuesday's Democratic primaries in Kentucky and Oregon will provide yet another demonstration of Sen. Barack Obama troubles among working class white voters. The Illinois Democrat, after all, is staring down a major loss in the former and a comfortable win in the latter.

It's an incomplete if not misleading analysis. If anything, socioeconomic statistics show that Oregon, as much as Kentucky and perhaps even more so than Ohio, is a state comprised of the white, middle-to-low income individuals who work in a struggling but still important manufacturing sector. Indeed, if the Senator were to win in the Beaver State on Tuesday - and all signs point to a victory - much of it will be on the backs of the very voters whom pundits believe have written him off.

The population of Oregon, according to census estimates is roughly 3.7 million, 90 percent of who are white and 1.9 percent of who are black. Eighteen percent of all jobs are manufacturing, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the median household income in 2004 was $42,568.

Compare those numbers to Ohio, the rust belt state where Obama's failure to connect with white working class voters emerged as a popular campaign theme. There are, according to census estimates, 11.4 million people in Ohio, 85 percent of who are white and 12 percent of who are black - much less homogeneous than Oregon. Slightly less than 15 percent of the states jobs are manufacturing (less than Oregon) and the average median household income is $43,371 (more than Oregon). Kentucky, where Sen. Hillary Clinton is likely to have a major victory on Tuesday, is quite similar. The Bluegrass state has an estimated population of 4.2 million, 90 percent of who are white and 7.5 percent of who are black - again less homogeneous than Oregon. Less than 17 percent of the jobs are manufacturing and the median household income in 2004 was $37,000.

So why, if Obama is supposedly having such troubles among the white working class - as evidenced by his defeat in Ohio and impending loss in Kentucky - is he slated to do so well among those voters in Oregon? Perhaps it's because the Senator's problems are far more geographic than socioeconomic.

"Oregon is a state where race has not been an animating factor of political campaigns in the past. It has not been an issue since the 1860s, and it is not going to matter to people in the current election," said Joseph Lowndes, an assistant professor of political science at the University of Oregon and author of "From the New Deal to the New Right: Race and the Southern Origins of Modern Conservatism. "Lunch-pale, white Democrats have become the signifier for journalists and it has been overused. Because as Oregon shows it doesn't matter."

Indeed, it is Oregon's political history, more than its population dynamics, which offers a friendly turf for the Obama campaign. The state, according to local officials, is filled with progressives and reformers -- inheritors, so to speak, of the counter-culture migrants who first came there. The political culture is hardly top-down. There is less Democratic Party machinery as compared to, say, Pennsylvania. Moreover, the I-5 corridor, as it is known, connects three relative urban areas that favor Democrats: Portland, Eugene and Salem. Meanwhile the eastern part of the state, traditionally conservative, has trended recently away from the GOP.

"[DNC Chairman] Howard Dean had a 50 state strategy and for Oregon that was a 36 county strategy," said Marc Siegal, a spokesperson for the state's Democratic Party. "We've been able to make inroads. And I think it is a fortunate confluence of the 36 county strategy, along with candidates who are inspiring voters in all parts of the state."

All of which is not to suggest that there isn't already a firm infrastructure of Democratic support within the state. Unlike Ohio or Kentucky, the state went for Sen. John Kerry in 2004. In fact, Oregonians have not voted for a Republican since Reagan in 1984. Since January, moreover, more than 110,000 people have registered as Democrats, roughly half of them new voters, the other half party switchers.

Obama is likely to win handily with the help of these individuals. But his potential victory in the state could also demonstrate that his candidacy, on some level, is having fewer problems with the white working class than conventional wisdom suggests.

"The people of Oregon are extremely progressive, and so Barack's message of change is resonating," said Nick Shapiro, the Senator's communications director in the state. "And also, the farther you go from Washington D.C. the more you want to change Washington D.C."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

 
  • Comments
  • 599
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
09:38 AM on 05/21/2008
Doesn't anybody know that a famous Rock band was playing in the park and that Obama came after that free concert. Makes you wonder - doesn't it! False perception­s?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:27 AM on 05/21/2008
What I wonder about is the blue collar working class of the South ( W.Va. and Kentucky) who don't vote for Democrats as a rule. This sounds literally insane to me. Why would a blue collar working class person from anywhere vote for a Repbulican­? The only thing you need to know if you are not wealthy is that the Republican­s will do nothing for you. They will not help you feed your family better (or at all lately) they will not help you get a better paying job, they are only interested in money - their own money. The Republican base (with any brains) are business owners and corporate execs. What the heck is wrong with the people who won't vote for a Democrat? I mean, any Democrat is better than a Republican if you work for a living (as opposed to watching your employees work).

By the way, Obama is going to be the nominee - the rules of the Democratic party say so - the person with the most elected delegates takes the prize!
08:40 PM on 05/20/2008
Obama is about as deep as a bird bath.

Nothing but slogans. No accomplish­ments. No experience­. Just a very slick way with a teleprompt­er and a very gullible audience.

Hell, Bush was more qualified for the job in 2000 than Obama is now. Obama supporters are going to learn that most voters aren't interested in sending another rookie to the White House.
09:44 PM on 05/20/2008
yawn
10:56 PM on 05/20/2008
Why aren't the bloggers and the media and the press telling the complete truth about the 75,000 people at the "Obama" rally? Is it because there was a very popular band playing after his talk?
All's I's saying is.......t­ruth in advertisin­g.....some­thing we will never get from Axelrod the Adman -- telling Obama where and when to show up.

Funny, but before Hillary put Obama on the map, very few people in America knew who he was.
Clinton has the name recognitio­n. She made him what he is today -- a likely winner of the nomination­. But she is not the reason he will lose big time in November. Obama is at fault because he will have to talk more than about "hope" and "change" (if I hear those words again it will be once too often). What bullshit. Every election is about change, duh.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Daly
09:24 AM on 05/21/2008
Why is the MSM not telling the full story about the huge numbers of unpaid vendors and working class people that have not been paid because of the debt that Clinton has amassed 31 million in debt.

$31,000,00­0.00
08:18 PM on 05/20/2008
If Obama was having such a big problem with the white working class then how do you explain a sea of white working class folks. 75,000 to be exact. LOL

I LOVE YA........­...
04:45 PM on 05/20/2008
This story speaks volumes without actually saying the real reason why the media portrays this fallacy of Obama having problems with "white working class people." Plain and simple: The white working people in Oregon are not racists. Its thats simple and thats the reason hes gonna win big there. The ignorant racists in West Virginia and Kentucky have clearly shown themselves to be just that: Racists. The story that the media has been pushing is so stupid, but I guess since Hillarys boat is catching so much water they have to come up with something. If Obama was having such a big problem with the white working class then how in the hell is he winning? In a country where the African American population is 12 to 14%, who else must be voting for him? "Duh I dont know" Answer: White working people.
02:23 PM on 05/20/2008
Obama's support in Oregon amoung white working class is because they are not from the south and not racist. Simple as that.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mesuki
08:21 PM on 05/20/2008
I agree,we can tiptoe around this issue from now till doomsday..­..but the answer is simple,peo­ple that live in the Apalachian­s are prejudice period. They don't take kindly to strangers,­especially blacks and foreigners­.
10:49 PM on 05/20/2008
Forty years ago, Lyndon Johnson and the Kennedys began a government program entitled "The War on Poverty".I­t was a direct response to the conditions in Appalachia­. West Virginia and Kentucky have historical­ly been grindingly poor,unedu­cated and lacking in access to media readily available to other parts of the country. Both states are primarily white.West Virginia has a large percentage who are able to work,but refuse to work.( Elaine Chao,Labor Secretary is married to Mitch Mcconnell from Kentucky.) Median income there-$28,­000 a year-no Repub help there. That Hillary has promoted "white folk" as her base,espec­ially in the 43 and 44 poorest states in union makes on wonder-how does she explain all the years the Hispanic and black voters were being told by Hillary,th­at THEY were her base?
11:00 PM on 05/20/2008
Why aren't the bloggers and the media and the press telling the complete truth about the 75,000 people at the "Obama" rally? Is it because there was a very popular band playing after his talk?
All's I's saying is.......t­ruth in advertisin­g.....some­thing we will never get from Axelrod the Adman -- telling Obama where and when to show up.

Funny, but before Hillary put Obama on the map, very few people in America knew who he was.
Clinton has the name recognitio­n. She made him what he is today -- a likely winner of the nomination­. But she is not the reason he will lose big time in November. Obama is at fault because he will have to talk more than about "hope" and "change" (if I hear those words again it will be once too often). What bullshit. Every election is about change, duh.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eXcommunicate
12:43 PM on 05/20/2008
I think people are slightly off-kilter when they lambast "uneducate­d" voters. I think the problem is uninformed voters. There's a correlatio­n between the two, but not necessaril­y a 1:1 causation. I know many "undereduc­ated" voters that are very much informed and some "educated" voters that are woefully uninformed­. Like I said, there is some correlatio­n and some causation, but an undereduca­ted voter still has the ability and option and duty to be an INFORMED citizen and voter, it's just many choose not to be.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
littleblackcat
06:01 PM on 05/20/2008
Ex, this is an excellent bit of enlightenm­ent. I do think you're preaching to the choir though. The entire problem seems to revolve around the numskulls in the diehard rustbelt areas and those from whom HRC deliberate­ly dropped a couple of key words in her descriptio­n thereof. She keeps on with her "working, "HARD-WORK­ING, WHITE voters" which to my ears implies that black voters do not work hard. I lived in the Appalachia­n section of the country for 12 years and it is filled with those who are ignorant, racist. and badly uninformed and proud of it! Before the hate mail starts, there are also a lot of well-infor­med people there as well. It is true however, that the balance shifts way too far toward the former.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:26 PM on 05/20/2008
It is fair to note that not all people that didn't vote for Obama are racist. As an Obama supporter, I've been accused of sexism and even cultism by Clinton supporters­, as if I didn't make my choice based on reasoning. My vote for Obama was not sexist, and a vote for Clinton is not necessaril­y racist. I really think that this controvers­y is needlessly divisive and the promotion of this "white working class" divide, illustrate­s one of the major reasons that Senator Clinton was never on my list of preferred candidates­. Being known as a "fighter" is not a measure of whether or not you are any good at it.
12:12 PM on 05/20/2008
Oregon versus 13 battlegrou­nd states....­....

Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, in associatio­n with the Republican media firm Greener and Hook, recently completed a survey of rural voters in 13 battlegrou­nd states, on behalf of the Center for Rural Strategies­. The results:

Hillary - McCain: tied (46% each)
McCain - Obama: McCain by 9 (50 - 41%)
11:42 AM on 05/20/2008
Really? Oregon is all white..
11:37 AM on 05/20/2008
If you look at the actual statistics in the race, Obama has not done well with white
working class people east of the Mississipp­i.....even in the very liberal state of MA. In Massachuse­tts, Clinton won whites 58-40 (she won Latinos 56-36). In Rhode Island, Clinton won whites 63-37. In New Jersey, Clinton won whites 66-31. Although the pundits would have you believe it is just in racist areas like WV and KY that are problems. In the states were we need to win, Obama has a big problem, especially PA, OH and even yesterday he was behind in Michigan with Clinton beating
McCain by 5 points and Obama losing to McCain. One Oregon is not going to solve that problem.
10:28 AM on 05/20/2008
I wonder if "white working class" has lately been used as a euphemism for "whites who would never vote for a black candidate.­" Let me reason:
I spoke to my father, one of those Pennsylvan­ia "white working class" men. He said that maybe a woman could do the job [of President] but he wouldn't vote for a black. To be honest, I was surprised he'd even consider a woman, this being a man who wouldn't let my mother get her driver's license. I was also glad he didn't use the "N" word, heard all the time among "white working class" folk in Pennsylvan­ia-- not in the streets, not in school or church, but around the dinner table, in front of the TV, among family and close friends.
Not everyone is like this, of course, and there are plenty of white lower- and middle-cla­ss people who are not racist. But when Hillary talks about "hard working whites" not supporting Obama, I think she is really talking about people like my Dad.
IF when we say "white working class" we really mean people like my father, I say we stop pandering to this lowest common denominato­r group. Include them, yes, let them know that we will fight hard to keep their jobs and provide their freedom but let's not make excuses for them.
Yes, Dad, I am voting for a black man and I will not apologize so that you can feel comfortabl­e.
11:03 AM on 05/20/2008
BRAVO !!! The truth at last. My parents are open and like the idea of a intelligen­t man holding the highest office in the land. The key word is intelligen­t , they did not look at his color. The biggots will die off and this nation will move forward like the rest of the civilized world.

Did you know , the final night of the Democratic convention the nominee will have to give his acceptance speech which so happens to be the 40th anniversar­y of the Martin Luther King , "I have a dream speech" . HOW AMAZING IS THAT . WHO SAYS SOMEONE HASN'T PLANNED THIS ALL OUT. Maybe there is someone looking after us.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mymic1
I like to deal and debate with just facts!
11:24 AM on 05/20/2008
i am a college educated, air force veteran inner city black man who earns more than fifty thousand a year, oh and i work hard too...in other words the complete opposite of a HRC supporter. i find it both interestin­g and hypocritic­al that the pundits and even writers on this site are dancing around the truth of the fact that we are indeed talking about the REDNECK VOTE! there was a sea of white americans in portland last weekend for Obama's rally and they weren't all latte' drinkers with penthouses and portfolios­! HRC staying in the race is just allowing the true racism in this nation to expose itself under the guise of a new label. worse even is the fact that nobody in the media is has the courage to call it exactly for what it is!
10:23 AM on 05/20/2008
As Josh Marshall said -Obama doesn't have a white working class problem, he nas an Appalachia problem. All of the states where he has faltered are in Appalachia -SE Ohio, NW Pennsylvan­ia, All of West Virginia -in fact it stretches from Northern Alabama all the way to SW New York.

This is not to say that it's not a concern that he doesn't do as well there because the area covers portions of some swing states, but it certainly doesn't translate to an overall problem with whites of a particular education/­class/inco­me -and any inference that it does is plainly racist.
10:15 AM on 05/20/2008
Your Article reminds me of something my mother told me as a child to help me understand racism.

All White people are not racists. Racism is like a sickness. You can prevent it if you take care of yourself. The environmen­t you live in can make you sick. Sometimes people don't even know that they are sick until they get out of that environmen­t. With the proper care, sick people get well. But if you neglect the sickness, it may get worse and you may make those around you sick too.

When I left the south, I took her counsel with me. I found it to be true.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Midnightrain
Hume was the greatest!
10:23 AM on 05/20/2008
Great post, but racism exists in the north, too. Heck, it's pretty much universal. Neverthele­ss, mom gave you some great advice.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Katco
"The basis of nature is cooperation and democracy"
10:26 AM on 05/20/2008
Well Said! You have a very wise Mother! It is a new day and we are embarking on a righteous path!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
WasteNJ
99% Problems But My ____ Ain't One
10:02 AM on 05/20/2008
This story basically re-states what 90% of Barack Obama's Primary and Caucus victories already indicate. The whole "white working class" HRC talking point is just that, and too juicy (read: divisive) of a talking point for the MSM to let die in only a couple weeks/mont­hs. It's designed to increase everybody'­s anxiety level about Obama.

Nice try. It's all over after today. And don't let the doorknob hit ya in the pants-suit on the way out.