McCain's Problem with White Voters

Much has been said and written in the past six months about Barack Obama's need to attract white voters in sufficient numbers to be elected, first in the primary (done) and now in the general election. It is a truism that somehow got twisted into Obama having a "problem with white voters" by the Clinton campaign and a compliant and mathematically illiterate traditional media. More to the point now, it is McCain who needs to score exceptionally well among white voters, better in fact than any other Republican presidential candidate in the past 20 years, including George H. W. Bush in his rout of Michael Dukakis in 1988.

A combination of changing demographics and heightened interest among groups favorable to Obama means that McCain will likely need over two-thirds of the vote of white voters 30 and older, and over 60% of all white voters, to even have a shot at winning. By comparison, the GOP's best presidential scores among whites in the last five elections belong to the elder Bush (60% against Dukakis) and George W. Bush (58% against John Kerry). The task is not impossible, but increasingly unlikely.

It is no surprise, then, that the McCain campaign has suddenly started focusing on race. The meaningless "race card" play is as desperate now as it was when Bill Clinton used it late in the primary. It is a frantic plea to the sliver (or is it more?) of white voters who somehow think that African-Americans can pull out a trump card that magically cowers all white people around them into submitting to their will. The "race card" covers a wide, polymorphous range of presumed white grievances, not least of which is affirmative action, which 53% of white voters say is "no longer necessary" in one recent survey; perhaps not coincidentally, the same percentage of white voters thought Obama's comment saying he didn't look like past presidents was "racist."

With that in mind, the Clintons' raw recourse to race in some of the late primary states did appear to have some effect: in Pennsylvania, for instance, half of Clinton's winning margin was provided by white voters who openly said that the candidate's race mattered "a lot" in their choice. It appears that McCain too sees race-baiting as his only way to the presidency and is turning to it early in the hope of stemming an unfriendly tide.

The prospects for McCain nonetheless remain daunting, even if one believes that openly bringing race to the table will attract more voters than alienate others (this is not a given.)

How did this happen?

At the risk of making Karl Rove and Mark Penn turn in their political graves, forget about micro-trends and let's look at the old-school, but frankly still meaningful broad racial, ethnic and age demographics at play.

African-Americans, Democrats' most loyal group, will continue to support the party's nominee with the same margin or better as in the past. What will change here is that black turnout can be expected to rise, conservatively to 12% of the electorate (from 11% in 2004.)

Among Latinos, McCain had high hopes, with his Arizona roots and moderate stance on immigration. That was until he cut and ran on that issue in the GOP primary, bringing him more or less in line with a party whose approval among Latinos is sinking even faster than among the general population (obviously not only because of its stance on immigration.) By doing this, McCain abandoned all hope of duplicating Bush's inroads in 2004. Recent polls have been remarkably consistent in pegging the race among Latino voters at about 70% of decided voters in favor of Obama. As the McCain campaign likes to say, he needs no introduction to this group: we take that to mean that there is little for him to add, that the majority of Latino voters' mind is made up and that these numbers will not change. Adding to McCain's problems is that the number of Hispanic voters has grown in every one of the past four years, conservatively to 9% of the voting age population.

Another problem for McCain: young white voters, who have tilted solidly towards Democratic candidates in recent elections (10% margin for Kerry in 2004.) The difficulty for the Republican this year is that the Democrat is especially attractive to young voters (Obama surely has more youth appeal than, say, Kerry); and that as echo boomers (children of baby boomers) have come of age, the number of voting-age young people has swollen. Even if 18-29 year-olds don't vote in a higher proportion than usually (and most observers assume they will), there are far more of them than there were four or eight years ago.

With white voters thirty or older representing a shrinking share of the electorate, and Republicans' already low popularity with the rest of the voting population dwindling, the challenge grows exponentially for McCain. Not coincidentally, he has rarely been able to exceed a 45% share against Obama in the RealClear and Pollster general election poll composites. It may be that the actual ceiling when undecided voters are accounted for is 47 or 48%, but it is unlikely to be higher.

Of course, the presidential election is based on the electoral college and individual states' outcomes, not on national polling as was sadly demonstrated in 2000. Here too, though, the picture is bleak for McCain. Outside of a dozen dazzlingly red states, mostly small and mostly in the Deep South, Appalachia and the Plains, McCain cannot count on any strong traditional GOP support. Again, demographic composition and recent shifts are working against him in a number of key states without which he cannot even begin to hope to be elected.

In the South, McCain is leading by single digits in Mississippi, South Carolina and Georgia, all of which have large African-American populations. Obama is unlikely to win these, but he sure will give McCain a fight, especially in Georgia, an unpleasant prospect for McCain whose limited resources should not be depleted in such Republican strongholds. More ominously, both candidates are essentially tied in North Carolina and Virginia, easy wins for Bush in 2004. Both states feature a potentially lethal mix for McCain: a large pool of black voters, young and/or educated whites, and a growing Latino population.

In the Southwest, McCain's problems are best symbolized by Arizona, his home state, in which he is struggling to beat Obama, thanks in no little part to the fact that Hispanics now represent 25% of voters. Texas should not be close either, yet here too Obama is lurking behind McCain by just 6% or so. McCain may not have given up yet on New Mexico and Colorado (both of which Bush won), but he may as well in light of polling and of demographics that favor a general shift towards the Democratic party (open Senate seats in both states are expected to move into the Democrat column this year.) Nevada remains a moderately bright spot for McCain, as it appears to be shifting more slowly towards Democrats than its neighbors; that said, here too Obama is now leading.

Obama's home region, the Midwest, is a nightmare for McCain. States previously known as swing have swung so far towards Obama (and in some cases Democrats generally) that they are considered all but unattainable by McCain: Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa (all decided by less than 3% margins in 2004) will all vote for Obama. Perhaps worse for McCain, Indiana, North and South Dakota, and Missouri are in play, an unthinkable occurrence four years ago. McCain's hopes in the region rest on Ohio and Michigan. It is a measure of the hill he has to climb that in Ohio, an absolute must-win Bush state for him, McCain is currently slightly behind Obama. Michigan is essentially McCain's only hope at this point of gaining a significant formerly Democratic state (thank you DNC for your ineptitude in handling that primary problem, and Hillary Clinton for exacerbating it after all was lost), and even there he is behind Obama. It is no accident that both Ohio and Michigan, bleeding jobs and population, are essentially immobile demographically and are showing the least movement toward the Democrat.

Another state McCain cannot lose under any circumstance is Florida. Thanks to Obama's late start there and Democratic primary stupidity (see Michigan above), the state has only recently slowly started moving towards the Democrat. That said, it IS moving, with Obama slightly ahead. A look at the Congressional races in the state shows what McCain may be up against: Florida's three Cuban-American Representatives, all Republicans, are in the fight of their electoral life, demonstrating the deep demographic and political shifts in the state, especially in South Florida. The most recent survey gives Obama a 20% edge among Latinos in Florida, a sea change from 2004 when the exit poll numbers were the exact reverse.

Aggravating the situation for McCain, smaller GOP states such as Alaska and Montana are threatening to break off, less because of demographics than of local conditions and Republican corruption and ineptitude. The presence of former GOP Congressman Bob Barr at the head of the Libertarian ticket will probably not be material in most states, but in some close contests (such as Montana and Alaska) his role could be remarkably akin to that played by Ralph Nader in 2000.

The Northeast, including Pennsylvania, will vote en bloc for Obama except for West Virginia and, just possibly, New Hampshire, McCain's political home away from home in which he is nonetheless lagging behind Obama.

None of this is to say that the election is foretold, that Democrats should be complacent, or that Obama has a cakewalk ahead of him. However, McCain's campaign to date is so widely off the mark that it is hard to imagine he will be able to get his groove back with white voters, a group whose aspirations he should be deeply familiar with. It also means that unless McCain can convince more white voters to cast their ballot for him than for any Republican in recent memory, and to match Ronald Reagan's performance against Walter Mondale in 1984, he will not win. This too is unlikely: after all, many of these voters knew Reagan. And McCain, to them, is no Reagan.

Comments

[PublicAdvocate]

Before you do a victory lap for Obama before the election, take into account some sobering facts and statistics that will affect the Fall's election:

http://Gallup.com tracks the candidates daily. As of the last few weeks, McCain has made progress and is in a dead heat (44% to 44%) and later only three points away from Obama

According to http://CNN.com Ralph Nader has twice scored 6% of the vote in the last few weeks, and is now receiving matching federal funds qualifying him for debates

Also according to: http://PollingReport.com/politics.htm As of late June of this year, 25% of the electorate does not think that America is ready for a black president. Those aren't all right winger Republicans either. I know plenty of Democrats who wanted Hillary for President and have never warmed up to Barack as well as those who have become frustated with his drift to the right supporting retroactive telecom immunity, accepting private financing, pushing for oil drilling,warming up to NAFTA and the WTO as well as giving Bush/Cheney a free pass on impeachment.

[Jezreel]

Your statistical references are faulty in that they are based national polls with limited voter input and therefore not entirely representative of the electorate. More importantly, as Mr. Jenkins' wrote, the general election will not be decided by the popular or national vote totals. If they were, Al Gore would have become president in 2000. Obama is markedly ahead in electoral college votes and that, above all else, is what matters.

[GunnyJ]

If this is comforting for you then please continue to use these numbers. The reality is who the devil do these pollsters talk to anyway? Have they ever called you? Do they talk to enough people? The proper mix of people? Cell phone people? This contest is not even kinda close.........you'll see in November.

[PublicAdvocate]

What polls do you read? Do they call you up? Is it the proper mix of of people? Your comments about the contest being "not even kinda close" and "you'll see in November" begs the question. How can you be so confident without refuting the above polls since you cite no polls to base your enthusiam or refute the polls mentioned in my original post.

Whether you are aware of it or not, the more that Barack courts the right winger Republicans with his faith based comments and desire for an expanded death penalty the more he will shed Democratic voters who will choose Nader or sit out the vote. The mistake some Obama supporters make is thinking that Barack's rhetoric of hope is more important and trustworthy than his stance on issues and that if elected he will suddenly become liberal and embrace their positions.

What motivation will Barack have (if elected) or will Democratic voters possess to compel a change of course if he was rewarded with the presidency for flip flopping? Need I remind you about his changes on: public financing, offshore drilling, iraq war funding, retroactive immunity, going soft on NAFTA. I see no solid backbone of in these change of positions. Do you?

[rhubardpi]

Racism appears to me to be the only reason for McCain to be even with Obama in the polls. More than a few "experts" opine that negative ads work, so I think it's fair to say that McCain knows what he his doing, or more likely his campaign managers know what their doing, .......one might say they know very well they are not just......whistling in the dark.......do ya get it?

[FlyingEagel]

rhubardpi . .I agree with you. I am Native American and my wife is White. We are from Va and we were at her family reunion. They are "Good Ol Boys". One of her relative told me that he didn't want a n###er in the White House. I replied that I could care less about the color of a persons skin. I am more concerned about how the country is. People like him will never vote for Obama. I will be glad when they are all dead. XD

[lovetheworld]

You rock Paul. I am always overjoyed to read your posts.

I will say this about your posts: I truly believe Obama will win both Georgia and Mississippi.

Georgia has the same large bloc of black voters, young and / or educated white voters, and latinos. A tad less than NC and VA, but still significant, especially when you throw in the likelihood that Bob Barr will take votes away from McCain in GA - his home state.

As for Mississippi, the eastern portion of the state has been trending BLUE for sometime because of the Democratic Party's success in organizing and registering African-Americans. Multiply those efforts with the statewide efforts of Obama's vaunted ground game and you have a winning recipe. This state will be close, but Obama will win. African-AMericans will be out in force - voting in eye-popping numbers never seen before.

Thanks for your contribution Paul.

[djelimon]

Regardless of race, people all have the same needs, and those needs are better met when people work together instead of against each other. SImple self-interest shows the way. Race relations don't have to be a zero-sum game. But they can be a game where everyone loses but the fat cats.

[Cameronj]

A heartening assessment. I've never understood why people become so obsessed with daily, national polls when it's individual states that matter. It should be interesting to see i McCain's latest race-baiting/elitist accusing shenanigans help or hurt him. After all, most white people do not like to be reminded of the racial inequalities that exist in our society, and he's likely to turn off a lot of voters if he keeps bringing it up.

[PoliJunkie]

Everyone, everywhere please PLEASE get involved this is going to get uglier before it becomes even more ugly. This will be a very long General Election and we cannot take anything for granted. Please go to your local district offices to see how you can volunteer to do something to help make Barack Obama POTUS. I am doing everything I can in IL and we cannot sit by complacently thinking that the Democratic Party has this one in the bag. Do whatever you can it is not too late.

[Jezreel]

Agreed.