Was Race a Strong Factor in Clear Clinton Win in Pennsylvania?
I blogged on this issue yesterday -- and a GOP leader's claim that John McCain will have a big edge on Obama because of the rae-based vote in November. It drew a wide and varied response from readers. Some claimed that Clinton suffered from gender bias, or pointed out that Obama was getting 85% of the black vote. Others objected to bringing up this issue at all, or praised me for doing so.
Long before that, I had suggested that many understate the number of older Democrats who are (still) racist and who would tip many contests to Clinton. But I closed yesterday's post by saying that if Obama won or came close in Pennsylvania that might put the issue to rest.
Didn't happen. And the exit polls show, again, that one in four Clinton voters claim they would not vote for Obama in November -- for whatever reason. And she got 70% of the white, blue-collar vote in most regions, including the area of central Pennsylvania where I spent a lot of time growing up and heard many a racist remark.
Here's the money quote from a New York Times analysis of the exit polls: "Sixteen percent of white voters said race mattered in deciding who they voted for, and just 54 percent of those voters said they would support Mr. Obama in a general election; 27 percent of them said they would vote for Mr. McCain if Mr. Obama was the Democratic nominee, and 16 percent said they would not vote at all."
And once again, the old phenomenon of exit polls proven wrong, because people with racist views do not tell pollsters the truth on election day, again reared its head. The final exit polls today indicated only a 4% Clinton win. Now it looks like 10%. That difference is largely the racial vote, I'd guess. I call them the true "late deciders" -- they decide to show their bigotry in the privacy of the voting booth.
Tim Russert reported tonight that the GOP in North Carolina is now going to play the race card against Obama in primary ads there, which can only help Clinton.
Anyway, I will leave it at that -- you guys and gals go at it, and thank you for that. As I've said before, I am just putting this all out there, not to suggest, at all, that Obama should not or can not be the nominee. Let's just say that I am very sensitive to the continuing problems of race and racial prejudice in society.
*
Greg Mitchell's new book is So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits -- and the President -- Failed on Iraq. It is the first five-year history of the war, has been hailed by Bill Moyers, Glenn Greenwald, and Arianna Huffington, and features a preface by Bruce Springsteen.
Read more reactions from Huffington Post bloggers to the Pennsylvania Primary
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The race issue is of course in play, but to what degree? At what point it comes into play among older Democrats and/or blue collar Democrats? Certainly southern Illinois is fertile ground for racism, and Obama knows the landscape there very well. In the election that sent Obama to the Senate, those voters were faced with black Democrat and black Republican (albeit not one with Illinois roots). Bet there was some serious bitterness among the ranks then. But in 2008, those voters know Obama very well. Clinton did eke out victories in many of those areas, but Obama did quite well. I offer no meaningful analysis, just food for thought.
Well Said~the only time you really see white people support black folks is when they are on the sports field helping them to win.
RACE (black) and CHANGE. Two of the scariest words for a huge number of Americans.
Take all the NASCAR fans, at home and in the stands.
Take all the fundamentalist WHITE believers in the pews and at home soaking up the hate-spewing, fear-mongering TV evangalistas.
Take all the wrestling fans, in the arena and at home.
Take all the so-called "silent majority", scratch the surface of their (white) skins and you have red-blooded, scared to death of anyone darker than they, racist flank.
Obama embodies all that just simply goes against everything they hold dear. He scares them. He galls them. The tragedy is that they will not listen to him and get to know him as the best person to come along in the worst of times. Because of his skin, for God's sake!
So your a mind-reader or something? Sounds like you have some of your own prejudices.
It absolutely is about race.....i
I am a white woman over 50 and we will all vote for Obama in the General Election in my family. I am a proud voter of Obama. The dirty Republicans here in Kingwood,TX don't like my signs in my yard, or on my car , (infact they steal them off my car) but you know what if Hillary can say it , I can too. SCREW EM!!
I wish the media would stop spinning this PA win. It was expected, she had the whole establishment behind her. Obama won the cities and the educated voters. Clinton got the beer drinking, non-educated ,white woman over 45/50 yrs. , elderly voters over 65 (that are racist) Infact, the state did factor his color of his skin into their vote. I don't doubt that at all.
Superdelegates can not take the nomination away from Obama. We nominate by delegates in the primary election. MATH MATTERS! She can't win by delegates, that is over! Superdelegates should pledge that they will support the candidate with the most delegates, not including FL or MI.
Period!!!
RACE is alive and well in America. The democratic party will not beable to withstand the uproar if they over turn the will of the people. Obama has more popular votes, more delegates , more states. PA was not a "game changer" like Clinton camp says. Clinton on the other hand wants to change the GAME. FL and MI broke the rules, Obama and Clinton both agreed not to campaign there and that their votes would not count. Big surprise folks, Clinton is losing and now she wants to count those votes.
She dosen't want to disinfranchise the voters, she says! She also says" I can win the big states", well Clinton you won TX with the help of the Republican ditto heads. I wonder if that didn't happen in PA also. Regardless, Obama can carry the big states against McCain. He won't win TX, but either would Clinton. That is a RED state, and a RACIST state. I know I live here.
I am a white woman over 50 and we will all vote for Obama in the General Election in my family. I am a proud voter of Obama. The dirty Republicans here in Kingwood,TX don't like my signs in my yard, or on my car , (infact they steal them off my car) but you know what if Hillary can say it , I can too.
SCREW EM!!
Why is it that when we see signs of racism we jump to the conclusion that there are insurmountable numbers of irredeemably racist people for things to move forward?
There are racist people in Illinois. There are racist people in Chicago. When Harold Washington ran for mayor racism almost ripped the city apart, but it didn't and he won. The parts of the city that voted overwhelmingly against him the first time voted for him when he ran for reelection because he did a good job. Those same parts of the city went for Carol Mosley Braun when she ran for Senate from Illinois and those same places went overwhelmingly for Obama both for Senate and for President. Chicago is not some bastion of racial harmony, far from it, it is still one of the most segregated cities in the country. But people seem to have become able to look past their prejudices and think about who would do the best job when picking their leaders. There is no reason to believe that Chicago is special in this way and every reason to believe that much of the rest of the country can't do that too.
But assuming it can't happen will make sure that it never does.
Total number of registered Dems in PA versus raw vote totals show that approximately 56% of registered Dems voted. So what happened to the other half? They stayed home or voted only in their local elections -- why is this? And what does it mean for both candidates?
I am from Alabama (the real one, not the one between Pittsburgh and Philadelphia). Obviously, I am used to seeing racism (I am white). However, one of the most revealing things about this election has been the extent to which I have encountered racism in northern parts of the country. I have done telephone calls for Obama in several states and if anyone thinks the South has the market cornered on racism, I've got news for you.
Jackie,
I've had the opportunity to live on both sides of PA (currently in Philly). Pittsburgh and Philadelphia may be a bit more 'cosmopolitan', but they're every bit as racist as the middle of the state, they just 'hide' it better. I never knew a 'northern' state could be so racist!
I have long held the view that the Democrats were more racist than the Republicans. I never thought they'd have the nerve to openly show it.
My advice to Obama is to get out of the race while you can. You owe a lot to America but you owe more to your children.
Your loss will haunt you and your family for the rest of your life. You will lose not because you are an elitist, but because you are the child of a black parent. That will be a psychological pain you will never be able to live down.
Get out now!! America's shame will be your glory. Resign your seat and go back to a private life where you can be a normal parent.
After all, its better to walk away with your life intact than to be scapegoated for another Democratic loss.
It is intellectually dishonest for posters to act as though voting for someone because of their race is the same as voting against someone because of their race. Think of the same thing in terms of the overwhelming support of female voters Hillary gets - if a woman votes FOR Hillary because she is a woman (which I personally do not agree with), it does not mean the voter is "anti-men". The same is true with race. If a black person votes for Obama because he's black (through a sense of pride, kinship, etc.) it does not equate to "that person must hate whites". But when a white person votes for Hillary (or anyone else) only because they would NOT vote for a black, then that is "anti-black". The point is voting for someone due to race or gender does not automatically equate to voting against someone due to race or gender. If it does, then there are no shortage of Hillary supporters who are anti-male (I am trying to come up with a word which means the opposite of 'misogyny", but can find none".
You can't find a word for man-hating because it's an issue almost totally disregarded in our culture. It's not PC to acknowledge that there is such a problem. Even sexist acts against men are referred to as "reverse sexism" instead of simply as "sexism", which is what it is.
So 1 in 4 that Voted for Clinton wouldn't vote for Obama. Did you even look at the turnout? If that is true, Obama would win Pennsylvania by a landslide. 1.8 mil to 1.2 mil.
If you want to use racism as a reason to vote for Clinton, you need to do better.
Whites on the other hand who claim that race has something to do with their decision are most likely not doing it out of some feeling of a deep connection with Hillary Clinton. I doubt there's a feeling of shared group identity and experience that they're relating to based on her race. Race had a hand in their decision because they didn't want to vote for a black man period. They weren't going to vote for him a year ago, they most likely wouldn't vote for him a year from now, and the idea that blacks are just as racist as people with that mentality for supporting a black candidate for completely different reasons is beyond idiotic.
As for the matter of race I'm sure it played a part. I'm not sure why people keep comparing the amount of support Barack Obama is getting from blacks compared to the amount of support Clinton is getting from whites (especially white women). Have any of you actually paid any attention to voting patterns before 2008?? Blacks have been voting for white presidents and politicians (male and females) for quite some time now. Even over other black politians. Barack Obama isn't the first African-American to run for president. And Carol Mousley Braun was the first African-American woman to run for President. For some strange reason she didn't get anywhere near as much support from white women as Hillary Clinton did. "Sisterhood" in the feminist movement has never really included "sisters" who aren't white.
This argument that blacks are somehow racist for showing overwhelming support to a black candidate or openly admitting his race plays a factor has a completely different meaning than the whites who say it. Blacks have the opportunity to vote for a serious black candidate who shares many of our values, beliefs, and opinions regarding this country. Let's not forget that one year ago the majority of African-Americans were for Hillary Clinton.
I'm sorry but that "They're more racist than we are" argument fails all across the board. Northerners deflect racism to southerners, the educated deflect racism to the uneducated, the wealthier deflect racism to the poor, liberals deflect racism to conservatives when the fact of the matter is when it comes to racism they're basically all as bad as each other. Let's not forget that the Democratic Party was called "The White Man's Party" for quite some time and that mentality didn't just dissapear from our parties base on the 60s. There are A LOT of very racist Democrats and liberals out there who are just as bad, if not worse, than any conservative Republican. And I say this as an extremely left African-American atheist Democrat.
I get so sick of Democrats and liberals patting themselves on the back while pointing the finger at Republicans and conservatives regarding racism. The hypocrisy of it is so irritating it makes my head first.
And another thing ... I'm not saying that Obama doesn't spin, but he's not in the same league as Hillary. The Clinton machine is out to destroy and they know how much words matter when make subtle criticisms of loose, slight connections with the Weathermen Underground or publicly say that "he would not have been my pastor", when asked. Her negative PA campaign against Obama has made me feel disillusioned and tired. I'm tired of this whole campaign. I want Obama to move forward so we can start on the road to a new type of leadership in Washington. Does it really matter what he looks like, or that he doesn't have a grandfather from "Scranton"? We have a chance to move our country in a new direction, just as when JFK took office. Are we really going to let the Clintons destroy this decent man, this election, this country for the sake of their own ambitions?
The tide has turned, Hillary, but not in your direction. Even with your tainted win yesterday, the tide is turning for Obama. The superdelegates will move his way because most of them and us see the bigger picture and are reaching for something just a little bit better than you can offer.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
