'Nevada Phenomenon' Bigger Peril to Obama than the Bradley Effect

A confident Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama shrugged off the buzz that he'd crash and burn with Latino voters, "Not in Illinois, they all voted for me." But not so fast; there was this retort from a reader, yeah, but you ran against Alan Keyes. Keyes, being the luckless and hapless eleventh hour Republican political sacrificial lamb who Obama annihilated in his smash victory for the U.S. Senate in 2004. But this time around, Obama faces a far bigger opponent than Keyes could ever hope to be, or even for that matter archrival Hillary Clinton. It's the 'Nevada phenomenon'. It poses a far bigger danger to Obama's White House drive than even the much debated 'Bradley effect'.

The Bradley effect is named after former Los Angeles. mayor Tom Bradley who lost his bid for California governor to a white opponent in 1986, though Bradley had big leads in polls. Many white voters told pollsters and interviewers that they had no problem voting for an African-American, but once in the privacy of the voting booth voted for his white opponent.

The 'Nevada phenomenon' by contrast has nothing to do with the supposed penchant for white voters to deceive pollsters and interviewers on race. In the South Carolina primary white voters went in reverse. The polls had Obama winning only ten percent of the white vote but in his smash win he more than doubled that percent. The 'Nevada Phenomenon' instead is the mix of wariness, fear, indifference and even hostility of the majority of Latino voters toward a black candidate.

It is more troublesome and intractable than potential white voter resistance to Obama. Even though in South Carolina and other Deep South primary states Obama lags behind Clinton among white voters, he's still likely to get a respectable percent of white votes. That's not true with Latino voters. Obama's poll popularity with Latinos hasn't budged very much despite his heightened name identification, media boost, energizing change pitch and personal charisma.. And if the history of black candidates, even popular well known and victorious candidates that ran for office and bombed with Latino voters is any indication, Obama won't do much better than they did.

Start with the politician that gave the 'Bradley effect' its dubious tag. During his 20 year reign as Los Angeles mayor, Bradley won election five times, and built a solid coalition of black, Jewish, and suburban Anglo white voters. However, Latino voters played only the barest of bare roles in Bradley's coalition and elections. Even though Latinos then made up nearly one-third of the city's population and were a rising percent of the voters, Bradley made few direct appeals to Latino voters for support.

Since then the political polarization between Latino voters and black candidates has been a virtual trademark in every other race where a black candidate has squared off against a white or Latino candidate. In 1993, Rudolph Giuliani, a tough law and order, conservative Republican running in heavily Democratic New York city against liberal African-American Democrat David Dinkins got nearly forty percent of the Latino vote. Nearly a decade later, Lee Brown, the former New York City police commissioner, got less than 30 percent of the Latino vote in his run-off race against Orlando Sanchez for Houston mayor. The even more popular, veteran former Congressman Ron Dellums received barely thirty percent of the Latino vote in his race for mayor in Oakland against a Latino challenger in 2005.

In each case the black candidates won their races with overwhelming support from black and substantial support from white voters. Their challengers were conservative Republicans or centrist Democrats They actively courted the Latino voters, and even won the important endorsements of prominent Latino elected officials and business leaders. That did little to dent the vote barrier between the majority of Latinos and the black candidates.

In Nevada, the pattern was the same. Obama got the endorsement of the leaders of the heavily Hispanic Culinary Workers Union. But getting the vote of the rank and file union workers was a far different matter, as the subsequent vote showed. Latino voters, many of them almost certainly members of the culinary union, defied their leaders and helped propel Clinton to victory.
This was yet another danger sign that the continuing reluctance of Latino voters to back black candidates could have a blowback effect on Obama.

The Super Tuesday primaries on February 5 will be a big test for him with Latino voters. Their numbers have soared in the key primary states of New Jersey, New York, Florida and his home state, Illinois. So much so that the black vote, even assuming that he will grab a far bigger share of that vote than Clinton, and split the white vote, will not insure an Obama victory. The Latino vote looms as the X factor for him. Unlike the subtle, much harder to finger 'Bradley effect', the 'Nevada phenomenon' is an open challenge to any black candidate that needs Latino votes to win. Obama is now the black candidate that faces that challenge, and danger.

Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His forthcoming book is The Ethnic Presidency: How Race Decides the Race to the White House (Middle Passage Press, February 2008).

Comments

[cynara]

The LA Times had a great opinion column that counters the idea that Latinos have an anti-black bias, and explains why commentators promoting this baseless accusation damage both the Latino and black comunities:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rodriguez28jan28,0,5950176.column

[LionEater]

The sad thing is that, even though Clinton dumped on Latino voters in Nevada with the lawsuit, they still came out in droves for her. That's a bad sign for Obama.

[banjomike]

As an Idahoan, I'm looking forward to which Democrat stands the greatest chance of winning in the general election.

My state will most likely go for Mitt Romney, who I believe will be the Repub candidate, but the only Democratic candidate I think has an honest chance of delivering numbers is Obama. The folks out here widely and irrationally hate the Clintons.

But at the same time, Idaho is as tired of the divisive politics as any state, and they're looking for some hope. Obama has stuck to his message of hope and optimism, and even in the reddest state in the Union, it resounds.

It's an uphill sled out here for Obama, but he's the only Democratic candidate to set up a campaign office here. In fact, his campaign has 2 offices, manned by professionals. If that ain't optimistic and hopeful, I don't know what is, and he has my support in the upcoming caucus largely because of this commitment to us.

Folks here are of the Bush presidency, the Republican state arrogance, our intransigent wide-stance Repub Senator, and the inablilty of the Administration and Congress to come up with a workable solution to the illegal immigration problem. The recession is going to hit hard and deep in the Intermountain West- they always do, and they always linger out here longer than most other parts of the country.

If Obama gives our Latin-Americans a reason to hope, they will vote for him, just as the white folks will. He has the right message at the right time.

[Wattree]

Bradley? I knew Bradley, and he wasn't no Obama. Bradley didn't even get my vote for governor due to his cowardly performance during the Eula Love incident, the bus strike, and his failure to put chief Gates in his place.

Hutch, you've been dealing with the "Bradley effect", the "Nevada Effect", and every effect you can think of that can hurt Obama. Now I want to remind you of one that I brought to you attention the very same week that he threw his hat in the ring--the Obama effect. That's the effect you need to focus on, because that's the effect that's going to transfer fifty dollars from your pocket to mine. If you can't see what's on the horizon, I'm gonna put that money towards buying you a guide dog.

Man, we're not witnessing a campaign here, we're witnessing a phenomenon--and it looks like you're gonna get caught with popcorn in your lap.

Wattree

[LeftLeanWing]

I found an interesting article called

"Will Latinos vote for a Black President"
http://www.diversityinc.com/public/2967.cfm

which gives an interesting and detailed analysis of the apparent black | brown divide. Is exposes that these apparent differences is based more on local competition issues in the large urban centers and some of the racial hierarchies within their native countries.

Please give it a read ...

[Superfelo]

Cynara,
Let me tell you something about being oppressed and cowed into submission. Unfortunately, because of our years of oppression and submission; aside from other cultural deficiencies that we labor under; our self-hatred and defeatism blowback into our own selves and those that look like us.

It may not be a general malaise; but our White Spanish conquerors as our masters taught us to hate ourselves for that is one way to keep the oppressed, oppressed.

It is our dirty little secret.

Although we must give credit to the Clinton for being able to play us, while doing nothing for us; just pretending.

Si, se puede! Yes we can!

Enough said.

[tbone99]

Looks like he's trying to court the lation vote with the drivers license issue but considering that the Repugs are going to play the heck out of immigration this year that may be a dubious move.Its more perception than reality for Lations, he's actually better than Hilary on latino issues .

[NABNYC]

I just hate these posts. They sound like they were written by Bill Clinton. Don't support Obama because he's BLACK. HE'S THE BLACK CANDIDATE.

The Clintons tell us: White people won't vote for him. Mexican Americans won't vote for her. Women won't vote, men won't, young won't, old won't.

Yeah? So then how come he's got the most delegates? How come he's got the momentum? How come he's got the most enthusiastic supporters? How come the Clintons have to buy people to go to their rallies, while the Obama campaign has to turn people away because there's just too many people who want to be there?

What's up with this Clinton mantra: don't expect anything. Go back to work. Do as you're told. Pay your mortage. Pay your taxes. Sign your kids up for war. Forget about college. Forget about social security.

All the Clintons tell most people is negative stuff: don't expect anything good to happen. Work hard then die. That's their mantra. The Clinton's view of politics is that the politicians should spend their time soliciting bribes from the elite and voting for laws to benefit the elite, and working people should just work, do as they're told, then die. Talk about diminished expectations.

Sorry Clintons, no sale. People want hope. People want a leader who calls on them to do their best, to look into the future, to believe in something more than just corruption and graft in government. And that, Hillary, is not you.

[Papageno]

This is very disappointing to read. I'm a South American citizen, who has been a Green Card holder for over 30 years. I have three children who are dual citizens. In my years living in the U.S., I have found that Hispanic voters have very different views based on different factors. One (and only one) of those factors, is national origin. There is some anecdotal evidence which suggests that voters of Mexican and Central American ancestry are prejudiced against Africa-Americans. Conversely, there is also anecdotal evidence which suggests that voters of Puerto Rican, Cuban and Dominican ancestry are not prejudiced against African Americans. This may reflect the historically different experience between Hispanics and Blacks from the Caribbean basin and those from Mexico and Central America. What a shame that a respected blogger like Earl Ofari Hutchinson wrote about a subject where hard evidence is lacking (primarily because not much research has been carried out). Shades of Bill Clinton?

[nellie]

I'm not sure I agree with your analysis here. You point out percentages such as 40% for Giuliani, 30% for Brown, etc. What this says to me is that Latino voters do not vote as a bloc. I think this is well-known. The political views among Latinos range from very conservative to very progressive. It makes sense that there would be no locked in support, even among Democrats, for any particular candidate.

You imply that this is a racial demographic, but I think it's more likely an ideological one. African American voters tend not to be conservative. The same cannot be said of Latino voters. This in itself would explain a difference in voting patterns.

[DennyCrane]

Thanks must go out to the Clintons for not only seeing the divisions, but inflaming them. Just look at the voting patterns. Women vote for Hillary cause she's a woman, blacks vote for Obama cause he's black, Hispanics vote for Clinton cause they don't want to vote for someone black. I'm not saying all the voters are following this pattern, but too many are. Frankly, I think anyone who bases their vote on race or gender are a disgrace. What's so appealing about Obama is that he has crossover appeal. He was the candidate who just happened to be black. I liked this campaign when it was just about change vs. experience. But in true Clinton fashion, when they're losing, they have to resort to dirty tricks. Obama brings out the best in Americans. The Clintons bring out the worst, which is exactly what we'll get with a Hillary Clinton presidency.

[hrayovac]

If the question was, "Would you vote for AN African American," and not, "Would you vote for Tom Bradley," I'm not convinced on the merits of the poll.

I'll say this Hutchinson: you are consistent in your reluctance to recognize change ..even when it is sitting like a Raven on your shoulder squawking, "Wake up!"

Obama needs a prominent Latin American endorsement..that will help. That is not impossible, perhaps not in time for California, but at some point.

Who's afraid of change?

[chi]

If Latinos are given the oppertunity to truly hear what Sen.Obama has to say they will vote for him,his words are the reasons immigrants came here in the first place.
It is the devide and conquer strategy that has worked so effectively to keep the races apart and protect the status quo that the Senator is fighting.Creating fake enemies,taking peoples eyes of the real goal,how else to exlpain poor caucasians voting republican against their own
interest year in and year out.
Yes,he does give a great speech,and speeches have caused men to put their lives in peril if they believe in the truth of the words.

[AnninCA]

Good analysis.

Here's the deal for me.

I'm white.
I'm over 50.
I'm liberal.
I'm Democrat.

Now, I'd love to go to my grave having always voted Democrat.

It's a part of my own personal identity.

But I have to share, this election has stripped me of personal pride.

Watching people tear down Clinton?

Sorry, but you tore me down at the same time.

He and Hillary are used to this.

I'm not.

So.....My vote is up for grabs.

And this time?

Since my better side has been so dismissed?

This time?

I'll vote for my own selfish interests.

So, candidates.

I'm listening to several key issues that affect me directly.

Social Security
Taxes
Social programs
Health care.

The rest? Since I've been dismissed as relevant?

You know what, that doesn't bug me nearly as much as I thought.

You can worry about the other crud.

Dismiss me.

After all, what would a woman over 50 know, anyway?

Nevermind I was one of the first women to become a VP in a Fortune 100 company.

Dismiss me.

And by the way.......do NOT expect my check in the mail.

[BushMustDisarm]

Here are some comments by a hispanic woman in Florida: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/08/americas_hispanic_voters0_views/html/3.stm
She won't vote for a woman or for a black man. There is no doubt in my mind that this kind of thinking is prevalent in the cuban community.