How Big Is Appalachia Anyway?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:14:54 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This:

This DKos post argues that Barack Obama's inability to connect with white working class voters is limited to Appalachia. That is incorrect in my view and I will discuss why I think so below.

But the question is begged - is that not a problem in and of itself? The Appalachia Phenomenon is used to explain Obama's problem with white working class voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, North Carolina and improbably, Maryland. That is 7 states. One is comfortably Democratic, Maryland. Four are solidly Republican, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee and Kentucky (though Bill Clinton won it). But the last two? Ah, Ohio and Pennsylvania. They decide Presidential elections. Even the Appalachian Phenomenon gives serious cause for worry. But the Appalachian Theory does not explain everything. More . . .

The expanded Appalachian Theory holds that:

In the 19th century, migrants from Appalachia moved west. People from Appalachia settled and put their stamp on the Ozark region of Missouri and Arkansas, on Oklahoma and the southern Plains, on North Texas, and eventually they were a big part of the initial growth of Southern California.

(Emphasis supplied.) The Appalachian Theory now explains Obama's problems with white working class voters in Missouri, Arkansas and Oklahoma as well. Of those, Oklahoma has long been a solid Republican state. But Missouri and Arkansas have been battlegrounds. So now we have Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri and Arkansas explained by the Appalachian Theory. This is a problem we must overcome if the Dems are going to have a good chance to win the White House in November.

But I do not accept that the Appalachian theory addresses the full spectrum of this phenomenon. Of course we have the Southern Problem which effects Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Mississippi.

But that still does not explain all of Obama's white working class problem. Let's look at three other states: Arizona, Florida and Indiana. In Arizona, Clinton won the white vote by 53-38 (she won Latinos 55-41.) In Florida, Clinton won whites by 53-23 (she won Latinos by 59-30). In Indiana, Clinton won whites 60-40. Are these three states in Appalachia too? Need to hear more? Ok.

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.

Unless the entire country East of the Mississippi is now referred to as Appalachia, I think this proposed theory explains very little and indeed is part of the entire Ostrich approach we now see from Obama blogs. It is just plain silly now.

I believe Obama can do better. I believe his problem goes beyond race issues. Obama is indeed the wine track candidate, the candidate of the Creative Class (and of course African Americans.) But he must do better - with white women, with the white working class, with seniors and with Latinos. I wrote about this in February, March and April and Obama is not doing any better now. Indeed he seems to be doing worse. This is a problem that MUST be addressed for November. Pretending that saying "Appalachia" will solve it is no answer.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Obama Disses Boomers Who Opposed Vietnam War | Obama to Head to Missouri Seeking Rural Support >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

How Big Is Appalachia Anyway? | 195 comments (195 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

He's a wine track candidate, (5.00 / 3) (#2)
by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:19:29 PM EST

if you exclude all of the wine-trackers who aren't WASPs. . . For example, he lost Jews 2:1 in PA. I think you would be hard pressed to describe Jews as "Appalachian migrants."

The Hillbilly's ... (5.00 / 2) (#10)
by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:23:53 PM EST

...of Egypt?

[ Parent ]

That's Southern IL. (none / 0) (#17)
by oculus on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:25:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]

stop it... (5.00 / 5) (#27)
by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:29:21 PM EST

you're making me laugh and cry at the same time! :-)

Seriously...I am so glad people are finally realizing that terminology doesn't really matter when it comes to his problem. Just admit he has a problem connecting with a certain demographic and go from there.

Of course, the time to do this was before he started his run for office IMHO.

But what do I know, I'm just a 40-year-old liberal Jewish female opera singer web designer Bubba with a Master's Degree who's speaking from under the Obama bus.

[ Parent ]

You qualify as "Creative Class" (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by oculus on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:31:19 PM EST

pursuant to Wiki article---got to make money being creative; so, I doubt the opera singer part would suffice.

[ Parent ]

: dont worry madam (5.00 / 1) (#57)
by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:37:45 PM EST

as a former art major who has made my living in some from of art or design my whole life . .
welcome to bubba hood.
we like opera singers.

[ Parent ]
: Heh. (none / 0) (#67)
by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:43:41 PM EST

I get paid for singing, although not always in an operatic setting.
So there. ;-)

[ Parent ]

Well when we need entertainment.... (5.00 / 3) (#44)
by Maria Garcia on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:32:12 PM EST

...in our cramped quarters under the bus, you can sing for us. ;-)

[ Parent ]

Only if she's not fat ! (none / 0) (#63)
by tree on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:40:45 PM EST

.....Sorry, tasteless "fat lady sings" joke. I couldn't help myself. I will now go sit facing the corner for a 5 minute time-out.

[ Parent ]

: D'oh! (none / 0) (#68)
by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:44:48 PM EST

(no, I'm not fat. that stereotype is not as applicable now in the days of the TeeVee.)

[ Parent ]

Although Your Voice Is Muffled By The Bus (5.00 / 1) (#151)
by PssttCmere08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:53:04 PM EST

we hear you loud and clear Madamab. Seriously, if the Dem leaders are the least bit aware, they need to toss obama under the bus and run with Hillary in the GE. It will take a miracle for obama to make up this much ground. It won't happen as he continues to insert his foot in his mouth at every turn.

[ Parent ]

The Moses Gap. (none / 0) (#100)
by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:03:12 PM EST

My demographic: (5.00 / 4) (#96)
by magnetics on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:01:48 PM EST

Mixed race family (Ashkenaz, Aframerican); two Ph. D's, one professorship; 12 patents in medical imaging (creative?); multiple publications in peer reviewed academic/technical journals.

Both solidly for Hillary.

The Aframerican member was raised by a grandmother, who herself had grown up in a milieu in which slavery was a living memory.

Barack Obama may wish to claim the AA banner, and he certainly has the votes for it, but he is not (despite his many virtues) a true product of the black American experience. This is not a cut on him, but it's a fact worth remembering, and should (IMHO) be categorized a chicken in search of a roost.

[ Parent ]

You are the arbiter? Jeez (none / 0) (#179)
by contrarian1964 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:41:21 PM EST

You are the arbiter of the AA experience? My god, what is up with this blog that this comment is celebrated and not challenged?

[ Parent ]

: How is this not correct? It is. (none / 0) (#189)
by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:42:46 AM EST

Obama is from the black American heritage of slavery only in that he is descended from slaveholders.
He wrote books about trying to fit into that heritage, because he did not come from it. You may have heard of his books?
This was held against Obama, commented upon by many AAs -- until after he won Iowa and became the media darling. I don't think the media would have been comfortable at all with a descendant of slaves.

[ Parent ]

'Twould make an interesting (none / 0) (#4)
by oculus on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:21:39 PM EST

documentary.

[ Parent ]

You mean work of fiction (none / 0) (#6)
by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:22:26 PM EST

Gullah (none / 0) (#7)
by Kathy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:22:39 PM EST

Interestingly, Atlanta is on the piedmont of the foothills of the Appalachian mountains, and went solidly O.

[ Parent ]

not a suprise if you know the city (none / 0) (#61)
by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:40:20 PM EST

it is to the rest of Georgia as an air lock is to open space.

[ Parent ]

I am there and this is true. (none / 0) (#105)
by Burned on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:05:08 PM EST

But the CDC employees that I know went solidly for Clinton. :)

[ Parent ]

The CDC rocks! (5.00 / 1) (#111)
by Fabian on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:10:13 PM EST

You can tell them I said that.

I was never all that interested in public health until I worked in a hospital. Then it became obvious to me that Bad Things happen to Real People, not Other People.

[ Parent ]

: The CDC knows that bad things can happen (5.00 / 3) (#126)
by Burned on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:19:23 PM EST

to EVERYONE unless someone who is ready comes in and fixes it fast.
They are somewhat depressed. I'll tell them you said they rock.

[ Parent ]

Urban Demographics (none / 0) (#185)
by itsadryheat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:26:28 PM EST

Check these demographics

Being factual is different than being racist(for anyone tempted to waste a comment.)

Atlanta Population

White 33%
African American 61%
etc.

[ Parent ]

Excuse me (none / 0) (#192)
by cal1942 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:55:26 AM EST

I hope you're not implying that all WASPs are wine trackers. That's a ridiculous myth.

No offense intended at all but we practice far too much ethnic stereotyping.

Many, if not all, of the stereotypes are grossly inaccurate.

[ Parent ]

How about May 20? (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by lambert on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:20:22 PM EST

"Before November?"

Obama's self-coronation would seem like an excellent time.

Why wait? Though I won't be holding my breath.

: Lambert! Fancy meeting you here. (1.00 / 2) (#132)
by Joe Beese on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:23:15 PM EST

Then again, I suppose not. After all, this is one of the increasingly few places left that hasn't succumbed to this strange voodoo madness afflicting so many previously sensible blogs. The terrible things Josh Marshall says about Hillary... you know he can't be in his right mind.
If enough people aren't hearing your message of sanity over at Corrente, don't overlook the No Quarter site - a Blog Jeralyn Likes.
Consider their recent thread "Yes, We Go To Fox News Again":

At least -- unlike Timmuh Russert -- they give Hillary and her supporters the time of day, and they actually ACKNOWLEDGE that there are VOTERS who should still have a fucking opportunity to VOTE and to be HEARD!
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/12/yes-we-go-to-fox-news-again/
I'm sure the commenters there will be right on your wavelength.

[ Parent ]

If you cross reference... (5.00 / 6) (#8)
by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:22:52 PM EST

...the caucus states with the Obama map you get a fair idea of why he got such lopsided supertuesday results. You have to remember that Clinton won the popular vote that day but came in second with the delegate count. with florida and michigan out of commission it was easy enough to see that obama and the media would spin it into a string of wins for Obama. Lopsided wins in caucus staes wiped out her vote count and successful statewide performances in massively populous states.

That's as good as the terrain maps showing Clinton winnning the Appalachian mountains.

She also won the back country in California fo rwhat it's worth--The Sierras.

He played the Bush map (5.00 / 2) (#13)
by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:24:44 PM EST

Yes. (5.00 / 7) (#30)
by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:29:49 PM EST

very much so. I'm still steaming over the way the delegate system/coupled with activist caucuses was such a force multiplier for Obama.

His team is so sharp it'll cut every one. he's trying to distance himself from the antiwar activist/fans he's been dependent on. Ordinary People will notice this contradiction eventually.

[ Parent ]

Ordinary people have. (5.00 / 4) (#48)
by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:33:28 PM EST

The media, the blogosphere, and the narrow Obama coalition are too busy congratulating themselves how awesomely superior they are to those eeeeevil Clintons to notice.

Which will the SD's listen to?

We'll see.

[ Parent ]

It took me until October (5.00 / 2) (#50)
by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:34:48 PM EST

when he threw me under the bus. Does he think people won't notice?

[ Parent ]

: I think women were left at the (5.00 / 8) (#91)
by Fabian on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:57:58 PM EST

bus stop.
At least, I've never felt any reason to climb on board. About the time that OH finally got to vote was when Edwards dropped out and the Hillary Hatin' went from fringe to mainstream. It helped to push me off the fence. Clinton's health insurance plan was the real decider, though. I'm no knee jerk voter. Obama just didn't offer me anything to vote FOR. I do Issues, not shiny rhetoric.
The shiny rhetoric might have worked, if only the Obama supporters had stuck to the happy, shiny rhetoric instead of spending their time coming up with more reasons why Hillary was Teh Evil. Authoritarians can do the cognitive dissonance shuffle, but I can't.

[ Parent ]

that early string (none / 0) (#157)
by christinep on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:12:34 PM EST

By negating Fla. & Mich. early on, Clinton's victories were not only minimized, but any opportunity for something like momentum was stagnated for 6 weeks. Thats a big "turning point." Even in mid to late April, a Florida-Michigan resolution would have psychologically and otherwise propelled Clinton. People have said so often that it is all about the math. I keep saying that it is all about the map. The electoral map. (Just keep looking at those states and playing with the electoral numbers...and, add some probability--not possibility--theory.)

[ Parent ]

Heh (5.00 / 11) (#11)
by Steve M on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:23:58 PM EST

This reminds me of all the comments I've seen from Obama supporters saying that Hillary always wins the late deciders because people who wait until Election Day to make up their minds are "low-information voters."

Even if that's true, does that somehow make it not a problem? Are we going to send all these people to the University of Phoenix before the general election? We all know what Adlai Stevenson said about being the thinking man's candidate.

later voters (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:30:42 PM EST

have MORE knowledge of Obama than Iowa voters had.

[ Parent ]

But, according to polls, the (none / 0) (#46)
by oculus on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:32:51 PM EST

Iowa voters are still supporting Obama. This will be the definitive well-researched book on this election system. You read it here first.

[ Parent ]

The well researched book will be VA and WI (none / 0) (#65)
by thomphool on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:42:09 PM EST

I'm kinda stunned that no one (to my knowledge) has done an in depth look/ study of voters in WI and VA and what happened there compared to other states. There are many theories for what happened (momentum, religiosity, ethnic origins), but none of them fully explain how Obama connected with voters in those states, and whether the changes in the dynamics of the race since then have led to some of those who voted for him in those states to change their views looking towards November.

If Democrats and the Obama campaign can fully understand what happened in those 2 states, it will go a long way towards helping in November. To this point though, I haven't seen a plausible, rigorous analysis or explanation for those states.

[ Parent ]

the answer is simple.. (none / 0) (#94)
by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:00:05 PM EST

complete lack of any real campaign by Clinton until after Super Tuesday, while Obama had organized those states.

I mean, lets get real... Clinton does go from a double digit win in New Jersey one week to a double digit loss in Maryland a week later because of Obama's ability to connect with white voters in MD.

Obama didn't do anything but have his campaign show up in VA and WI in the absence of the Clinton campaign.

[ Parent ]

Clinton won Whites in MD (5.00 / 2) (#109)
by thomphool on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:07:15 PM EST

by 10, lost them in VA the same day, with similar levels of attention payed to both states. Lack of attention had something to do with it, but does not explain the entire phenomenon. Not by a long shot. In order to really understand what happened. Maryland's primary being 37% AA probably had a little bit to do with Clinton losing by double digits there.

: One difference between (5.00 / 2) (#120)
by tree on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:14:40 PM EST

MD and VA is that VA had an open primary and MD had a closed one. I have no idea if that accounts for the difference in the white vote.

[ Parent ]
: There was a lot of (5.00 / 1) (#131)
by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:23:01 PM EST

misinformation going on at teh time about Bill, and lots of MSNBC led historicity about Obama.

[ Parent ]

Edwards campaigned in IA this year (none / 0) (#122)
by oculus on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:15:10 PM EST

and in 2003.

[ Parent ]

I doubt it (none / 0) (#49)
by Steve M on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:33:47 PM EST

Iowa basically got to live and breathe the candidates for several months. Iowa is a caucus which tends to favor high-information types. The knowledge that Iowans accumulated during their primary doesn't necessarily accrue to the benefit of every voter in the subsequent states.

In fact, it seems to me like the day after the Iowa cacucus is traditionally the day when most of America wakes up and realizes there's some sort of campaign going on.

[ Parent ]

: The early states (5.00 / 2) (#55)
by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:36:10 PM EST

rendered a split decision.

[ Parent ]
: They got no negatives about (5.00 / 1) (#134)
by Salo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:24:03 PM EST

Obama. Whereas Edwards was being ridiculed and marginalized and Clinton was being harranged.

[ Parent ]

Somebody mentioned (5.00 / 1) (#115)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:12:03 PM EST

signing them all up for degrees at Matchbox University.

"A degree in every pot".

[ Parent ]

: that would correctly be: (5.00 / 3) (#158)
by cpinva on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:20:53 PM EST

"match book university". i know this because i am an honors graduate of the "papa doc duvalier school of tact & diplomacy, port au prince campus", advertised exclusively on fold-out match book covers.
the real problem, BTD, is that no, sen. obama can't do better, he hasn't a clue how to. he's had a year to figure it out, yet appears to have little, if any, inclination to do so. a reasonable person, confronted with a similar set of facts, would have to conclude sen. obama just doesn't care.
this "appalachian theory" rests on a foundation of shifting sand. the mountain chain and trail run for approx. 2100 miles, from GA through ME. i believe the sen. won GA, SC, NC, VA and DC, all of which have direct connections to the appalachians. of course, they share another common element: they all have a wildly out of proportion % of the AA community, who pretty much all voted for him. but, they alone couldn't have given him victory, some other groups had to provide him with votes as well.
the last time i checked the map (about 5 minutes ago), OH, IN, NV, FL, CA, TX, etc. are not part of appalachia, and have little connection to it, the obama campaign's unsupported assertions to the contrary.
maybe, just maybe, the people who didn't vote for him just don't like him, or have no faith that he understands their issues, and will work on their behalf.
just a thought.

[ Parent ]

Yep (none / 0) (#14)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:24:56 PM EST

I heard Stevenson's great quote (none / 0) (#19)
by oculus on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:26:31 PM EST

on NPR this morning.

[ Parent ]

What about all the working class white who's... (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Maria Garcia on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:25:01 PM EST

...ancestors never passed through appalachia? Are we going to conveniently forget them? But then I don't really get this way of thinking, is it just a way of trying to reassure people that its only "bubba's" they are trying to "purge" from the Democratic party?

Darn I Thought It Was All The Grannies Fault (5.00 / 6) (#16)
by MO Blue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:25:18 PM EST

I guess all the grannies have moved to Appalachia.

Nope, they apparently (5.00 / 5) (#21)
by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:26:50 PM EST

migrated FROM Appalachia. heh.

[ Parent ]

This week (5.00 / 11) (#54)
by joanneleon on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:36:00 PM EST

they're in West Virginia. A few weeks ago they were in Pennsylvania.

Boy, those Grannies get around.

[ Parent ]

Heh (5.00 / 3) (#56)
by Steve M on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:37:11 PM EST

I read at the blogs that Clinton's win in Pennsylvania was meaningless because PA is supposedly her demographic perfect storm.

Now I'm hearing the exact same thing about WV! Sheesh.

[ Parent ]

Not to worry (5.00 / 2) (#70)
by tree on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:45:45 PM EST

Those 7 (or eight) extra states are all prime Obama territory.

[ Parent ]

ok (none / 0) (#93)
by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:59:30 PM EST

didnt see any teevee or blogs over the weekend.
where did the 57 state thing come from.
its great.

[ Parent ]

See these (none / 0) (#112)
by tree on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:10:20 PM EST

LA Times

Video

[ Parent ]

: Too Damn Funny! (5.00 / 3) (#121)
by flashman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:14:57 PM EST

I was going to make a joke; but I can't make this any funnier. Well, he moved the Great Lakes to OR, so I guess he can create more states. :)

[ Parent ]
: oh dear (none / 0) (#118)
by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:14:04 PM EST

(thanks)

[ Parent ]

Wait for it (5.00 / 5) (#76)
by joanneleon on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:49:23 PM EST

They're on their way to Kentucky! On buses, headed out tomorrow night!

Go Grannies!

Good thing they're relatively slow movers. Walkers and such, ya know. I don't think they can make it all the way to Oregon in time for that primary.

[ Parent ]

And yet NC (5.00 / 1) (#82)
by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:53:10 PM EST

was totally devastating for Clinton!

LOL

[ Parent ]

Yep (5.00 / 1) (#178)
by IzikLA on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:24:55 PM EST

If only the same attention was paid to his win in NC. Instead it became the end for Clinton, and his glaring problems there were all but ignored.

[ Parent ]

It's very possible! (5.00 / 1) (#72)
by nycstray on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:46:49 PM EST

They could be traveling around influencing other Grannies. After all, NY rural farmers are ;)

[ Parent ]

: Maybe they're like (none / 0) (#87)
by tree on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:56:34 PM EST

THESE grannies. (Grannies start 20 seconds in.)

[ Parent ]

The grannies (none / 0) (#159)
by christinep on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:23:22 PM EST

Most important, the "grannies" vote. Now, it will be interesting to see what the granpas do...will they identify with McCain? The other day, when a spokesman for McCain responded to the "loss of bearings" Obama claim with variations on "looky, looky...ageism, ageism," it reminded me of Jesse Jackson Jr claiming racism by the Clintons. So, maybe McCain will turn the tables on baiting?!?

[ Parent ]

This reminds me of (none / 0) (#187)
by janarchy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 09:57:29 PM EST

a Monty Python sketch about the Hell's Grannies. Bands of roving grannies terrorizing the streets in search of a good time (and apparently voting booths!)

[ Parent ]

How can he do better? (5.00 / 11) (#20)
by Edgar08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:26:50 PM EST

By crafting a message that appeals to them.

The idea that his skin color prohibits him from doing that is pure BS. Which is why I keep saying we need to get away from categorizing these people as nothing more or less than "white voters". It not only insults them and the kinds of things they think about when they make such a decision, but it also, more importantly, denies Obama access to the solution!

I can snarkily refer to them as "smart voters interested in solutions" but apparently I should stop doing that because that implies that Obama supporters aren't smart.

But I will still put it like this.

The idea that his inexperience and inspiration/transformation based rhetoric (as opposed to solutions based rhetoric) simply doesn't impress everyone might be something worth looking at.

Gods forbid!

Exactly!! (5.00 / 7) (#25)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:28:27 PM EST

that is why I push back against this Appalachia meme.

"All is well" is not what we need on this. All is NOT well.

[ Parent ]

They still think (5.00 / 2) (#32)
by andgarden on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:30:14 PM EST

he's going to win Idaho, Utah, Georgia, and South Carolina.

[ Parent ]

Don't forget Kansas! (5.00 / 2) (#40)
by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:31:35 PM EST

(and Poland!)

[ Parent ]

Who knows? (none / 0) (#39)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:31:32 PM EST

he needs to hold Ohio and PA to feel good about this.

He can I think. It just needs some work.

[ Parent ]

He's shown absolutely no inclination (5.00 / 12) (#66)
by Kathy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:43:12 PM EST

to do this work.

And, I'd like to point out that, as with Katrina, this is not about race, it's about CLASS. To push this Appalachian theme only alienates them further. You cannot at once win over a demographic while you perceive them as an "other."

It's also classic excuse time: it's not Obama's fault, it's these racist, low information voters who cling to God and guns. I have to say that some of my redneck kin are some of the most progressive, live -and-let-live folk I know. All they care about is government doing its job by keeping them safe and looking out for their pocketbooks.

[ Parent ]

: Keep Us On The Right Track (5.00 / 1) (#125)
by flashman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:18:41 PM EST

with your keen insight. :)

[ Parent ]

I really should just consider it (5.00 / 3) (#81)
by Edgar08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:52:53 PM EST

A small victory in and of itself just to get the whole thing redefined as something other than a function of race or gender. That it's a function of message.

But at that point, while Obama should at the very least TRY to change his message, we still haven't touched the idea that it's also a function of CONFIDENCE. So don't be surprised if he still has the same problem after changing his message.

This is, perhaps, something that an Obama supporter/strategist has thought of, and it's why, if one were to consider that he's doomed either way, that may be why they might try to shame some folks into voting for him, anyway.

Which will backfire of course. Badly.

He has to at least try to change his message. If one cares about the Democratic Party, he has to try.

You know my deal.

The entire primary was conducted as if a baseball team was looking at a player and strictly focussed on how many tickets would be sold with that player on the team, not on how well the player would catch the ball, hit the ball, and throw the ball.

[ Parent ]

: Shame... (5.00 / 1) (#95)
by pie on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:00:32 PM EST

that may be why they might try to shame some folks into voting for him, anyway.
Which will backfire of course. Badly.
will not work, as you said.
Shame for not voting for a democrat, maybe. But it never worked before (Nader, etc.) Many Naderites continue to be unapologetic.
Obama would have to convince people he's the best person for the job when many of us already disagree with that.

[ Parent ]

There is middle ground (none / 0) (#180)
by contrarian1964 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:44:07 PM EST

...between All is well and All is lost.

This blog strikes me as being in "all is lost" territory. I think venting dominates here - in the comment threads.

[ Parent ]

Thank you. (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by pie on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:29:26 PM EST

That's it, exactly.

[ Parent ]

Well (5.00 / 7) (#37)
by Steve M on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:31:26 PM EST

it is a subset of the overall liberal misconception that everyone who doesn't vote Democratic is either a defense contractor or else confused as to their own self-interest.

Instead of wringing our hands trying to figure out why these people don't respond to our awesome message, maybe we should spend more time figuring out what message they would respond to.

[ Parent ]

I call them practical/pragmatic voters ;) (5.00 / 3) (#53)
by nycstray on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:35:43 PM EST

There just may not be a message (5.00 / 8) (#110)
by Cream City on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:07:18 PM EST

from Obama that would reassure my WV relatives -- and these are highly educated professors, both of them. Very high-info voters; not blog types but voracious readers of every form of print media. One is a native of WV, from an immigrant mining family, the other now has been there for decades.

But in talking to them today, they're excited about Clinton's appearance in their college town today. They could tell me exactly when was the last time a candidate came there (decades ago).

And they said that she would get the votes there because everything that is needed to be known about her is known, no surprises -- but that it's clear there is more to come out about Obama.

Great people, great town, gorgeous topography. If you haven't seen WV, it's worth it.

[ Parent ]

: I know (5.00 / 5) (#142)
by Edgar08 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:32:35 PM EST

Which was part of my second comment in this thread.
Obama can't really do anything about who he is. Black or white he's a jr. Senator who has never seen the inside of an executive office. Which is why Camp Obama would rather racialize the issue which makes who he is a function of our prejudice instead of a function of his inexperience.

[ Parent ]
: WV is (5.00 / 1) (#163)
by gyrfalcon on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:33:44 PM EST

a breathtakingly beautiful state (at least the part that hasn't yet been destroyed by mountaintop removal). And I say that as a proud Vermonter who knows from beautiful landscape.

[ Parent ]

Nope. (5.00 / 1) (#156)
by lilburro on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:11:11 PM EST

Obama bloggers would rather condemn the many, many racists hidden away in the demographics of a Clinton victory. It's the ultimate strawman.

[ Parent ]

Very true. (5.00 / 7) (#24)
by pie on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:27:38 PM EST

Pretending that saying "Appalachia" will solve it is no answer.

And it won't solve it in November either. Does he actually know how to appeal to those other groups? I keep waiting for him to say something appealing, but instead he alienates them further. He has to win them over if he really wants to win.

Sadly, I think he thinks everyone will rally to him when he and McCain start attacking each other. But why should anyone do that? There's no loyalty there, no love lost.

Why? (none / 0) (#42)
by lyzurgyk on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:32:02 PM EST

Sadly, I think he thinks everyone will rally to him when he and McCain start attacking each other. But why should anyone do that?

Because four more years of a Republican White House are scarier than a smooth-talking basketball-shooting dude named Obama.

Hey, that's all I got! Works for me.

[ Parent ]

: I hope McCain (5.00 / 3) (#52)
by pie on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:35:10 PM EST

doesn't make "experience" the cornerstone of his campaign.
/rolls eyes

[ Parent ]
: I would have agreed with you (5.00 / 1) (#62)
by madamab on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:40:33 PM EST

just a week or so ago.
Obama has lost all my respect, and I have no confidence that he will be the strong progressive voice we need to truly make a difference in this country.
After four years of his administration, I predict that the country would look very much the same as it does now, if not a bit worse. No universal health care or even reform. No progress on womens' rights, gay rights or any other social issues I care about (not even weeding out institutionalized racism). No progress on Iraq or Afghanistan. Only a small uptick in the economy if at all. On the environment, he's a fan of coal and nuclear power, which I'm not. And the Supreme Court? He thought Roberts was a fine choice originally.
Why should I vote for that?
HRC or nothing for me.

[ Parent ]
: If all Obama has (none / 0) (#143)
by samanthasmom on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:34:51 PM EST

is "I'm not John McCain", he's in trouble.

[ Parent ]

Don't forget the Italian (5.00 / 2) (#26)
by vicsan on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:28:54 PM EST

Garlic-Nosed too. He needs to work on them and the Jewish community. His connection to Hamas isn't going to help him with the Jewish Community. Oh, and the Catholics seem to not be very fond of him either. Yes indeed. BO has to do better with may groups he's insulted. Add baby boomers to the list too.

Who's left? Is there any one group, other than the AA community, he hasn't insulted/thrown under the bus?

Creative Class? (none / 0) (#31)
by Big Tent Democrat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:30:03 PM EST

Yeah - and he needs them (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by ruffian on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:33:15 PM EST

to help him throw the rest under there. He can't do it alone.

[ Parent ]

Nah (none / 0) (#64)
by joanneleon on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:41:41 PM EST

He threw a good bit of the Creative Class under the bus too when he dissed dkos on Fox News. But they are in denial about it.

[ Parent ]

: I hate to tell the Obama fans (none / 0) (#73)
by ruffian on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:47:30 PM EST

but a good chunk of the Creative Class is Republican. Obama will always be able to find a media outlet. He can use one to dis the other whenever it suits his needs.

[ Parent ]

Creative class-- yet. (none / 0) (#164)
by gyrfalcon on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:35:43 PM EST

Their turn will come, and they'll all agree it's just great under there and the smell of exhaust is just like roses.

[ Parent ]

Politico did say the "cultural left" (none / 0) (#190)
by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:50:47 AM EST

was tossed under the bus today with the comment on our allegedly awful treatment of Vietnam veterans, all us antiwar protesters like me who then married one.

Isn't the "cultural left" the previous term for the "creative class"? Or is the c.l. older than the c.c.?

I think I need a daily update on the new terms, just so's I'll know who's who with me under the bus.

[ Parent ]

And there are lots of Italians (none / 0) (#117)
by Cream City on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:12:45 PM EST

-- and proud of it -- in WV and other mining areas of Appalachia, many of them descendants of immigrants only a couple of generations ago.

I'm related to one, so now I know several hundred of them -- and that took only a day! And it was clear that they still are very sensitive to stereotyping of their ethnicity. I would bet that just that comment of Wright's cost Obama a lot with this group alone.

[ Parent ]

Appalachia (5.00 / 5) (#35)
by txpolitico67 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:30:50 PM EST

is problematic for sure. But I scour the 'net to see where my group, the Latinos, are in the grand scheme of things.

The longer Obama ignores us, the easier it will be for McCain to reel in those votes, esp considering his stance on immigration.

So those rural white voters aren't going to be his only problem come GE if he's the nom.

Hillary, notsomuch.

Indeed. (5.00 / 2) (#77)
by OrangeFur on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:49:56 PM EST

There's all this talk of white and black voters, as if we've all forgotten what the largest minority group in the United States is.

[ Parent ]

Hmmmm (5.00 / 2) (#89)
by Steve M on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:57:13 PM EST

Men? :)

[ Parent ]

: Statistically, true. (5.00 / 4) (#102)
by Fabian on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:04:10 PM EST

I've been trying to figure out if there's some way to get women to vote as a cohesive bloc.
Probably not. It sure would be awesome to see politicians address women's concerns directly. Even stranger, would be seeing men say "Hey, what about us!".

[ Parent ]

Lets not forget... (5.00 / 10) (#38)
by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:31:29 PM EST

all the southern states where Obama tanked with white Democrats

I really think that the "white working class" analysis is missing a key component -- that we are talking about Democratic voters here. Decades of the GOP's Southern Strategy has pretty much gleaned out of the Democratic party the white working class voters who WON'T vote for an African American.

In other words, the vast majority of the people who we are talking about are people that would certainly consider voting for Obama if given a good reason to -- its not as if they feel some affinity with Hillary Clinton, who is after all a woman from upper-middle class suburban background, who graduated from Wellesley and Yale law, Obama isn't giving them a reason, and Clinton has spent the better part of her life learning how to connect with their concerns.

The other thing that kills me is that there is a lot of insularity/xenophobia in "small town America" that is separate and distinct from racism qua racism. Small town people are both hospitable to and wary of "strangers" --- in a twon of 3000, everyone knows the mayor, and the police chief, and people in small towns want to "know" who they are voting for when it comes to President as well. Obama, with his thin resume and amorphous agenda, isn't going to get the support of small town America against a "known" candidate just because he gives good rally.

Appalachia and affinity for Hillary (5.00 / 9) (#104)
by Molly Pitcher on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:04:44 PM EST

I am an Appalachian by birth and heritage tho I spent my much of my childhood in Illinois, Ohio, Georgia, and Florida. And my high school years were in NC. I have tended to think one hallmark of Appalachia is mining. Tennessee used to scour the mining towns for football players; back in segregated times, those boys were about the strongest, we thought. And I when I went to the Int'l Science Fair with my youngest, Pittsburgh felt like home--more so than SC does. (And no one made fun of my accent.)

But answering the remark that "It's not as if they feel some affinity with Hillary": you are incorrect there. Hillary's campaign seems to me to be unique; she makes personal contact with her bloc. I get emails: one was a suggestion to send Hillary an online Mother's Day card. I did, and today I got an email thank you.

Ok, the personal touch is made possible by the internet. (Tho' I have read that in Arkansas, Bill kept up with individual people.) But to send a candidate a Mother's Day card? Now, that's a campaign idea --oh, I don't even have words for it. Would I have sent a Father's Day card to JFK or even to Bill?

Hillary is different. She is special. She's intelligent, hardworking, all those other adjectives. But something beyond--she has learned to connect with individual people. The result is that many women, especially, have an affinity for her that transcends background, social, cultural, economic differences. Turns out, she is the Great Uniter we have been waiting for.

[ Parent ]

you're right (5.00 / 2) (#141)
by p lukasiak on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:32:27 PM EST

But answering the remark that "It's not as if they feel some affinity with Hillary": you are incorrect there. Hillary's campaign seems to me to be unique; she makes personal contact with her bloc

you're right, of course. I meant to write something like "natural affinity" not just affinity, and in rewriting the sentence left out the word.

M point was that Hillary Clinton is not a born "Bubba". When she met Bill Clinton, she was probably about as capable of connecting with white, working class voters as Barack Obama is today. She probably "understood" them then the same way that Obama does today -- from sociology class.

Clinton has been working at this for so long that its no longer "work" -- she's completely relaxed and unselfconscious in every environment.

Hillary Clinton is Meryl Streep. Barack Obama is Steve Gutenberg.

[ Parent ]

: You forget that she comes from (none / 0) (#191)
by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 12:53:37 AM EST

the working class -- her grandparents in Pennsylvania. Her father only got to college on a football scholarship. And his early years, her early years, were not prosperous while he was building his business; they made it into the middle class -- but she grew up with those grandparents every summer, too.
Bill and Arkansas taught her about Southern working class, but she knows Northern working class from her own family.

[ Parent ]

Lukasiak nails it again (5.00 / 1) (#169)
by gyrfalcon on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:41:18 PM EST

O

[ Parent ]

Also include half of Al and GA in Appalachia (5.00 / 3) (#43)
by itsadryheat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:32:03 PM EST

I grew up understanding we were "in the shadow of the last mountain in the Appalachians" hundreds of miles south of North Carolina in East South Central Alabama on the Georgia line.

The people, the culture, the language and even the genetic memory is Appalachian. In a hot Scrabble game we could always come up with odd words from Ancient Early Languages of the now British Isles. They regularly popped out from some deep tribal memory so we had to use large old Oxfords as the official game dictionary!

The young 11 year old boy in West Virginia who sold his bike and video games to raise $440 to hand to Bill to give to Hillary for the campaign would be right at home in any of the Appalachian area! Does Hillary's victory mean as much to us? How much are we willing to act like it?

: What a wonderful story -- that boy (5.00 / 2) (#123)
by Cream City on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:17:15 PM EST

is sending me back to Hillary Clinton's site to contribute, too. A kid who can leave Bill Clinton speechless is one to watch!

[ Parent ]
: Draw a line from Pine Mountain in SWC Georgia (none / 0) (#79)
by itsadryheat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:52:25 PM EST

Include all of the territory north of Montgomery-Selma area over to near the Mississippi border. This line marks the end of the Appalacians.
That area covers the majority of the populations of Alabama and Georgia.
The majority of Obama voters live south of the end of the Appalachians, except for the obvious urban pockets in Atlanta and Birmingham, for example.

[ Parent ]

Lost in the mess... (5.00 / 4) (#80)
by OrangeFur on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:52:46 PM EST

... of Florida in 2000 was the fact that if Gore had carried West Virginia, as almost every Democrat had done recently, and its measly five electoral votes, he would have won.

West Virginia is not irrevocably red. We can't just keep giving up on these states and writing them off as hopelessly low-income, prejudiced voters.

: Right, WV isn't that red (none / 0) (#138)
by flashman on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:27:26 PM EST

and I don't know why ppl here keep saying it is.

[ Parent ]

Interesting Maps (5.00 / 2) (#92)
by Petey on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:59:06 PM EST

Worth checking out Electoral-Vote.com's maps today to see the extent of Obama's problems.

Clinton 280 - McCain 241

Obama 237 - McCain 290

: I was just thinking....uh-oh (5.00 / 2) (#114)
by Josey on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:11:05 PM EST

It's easier for the Washington establishment supporting Obama to make a deal with superdelegates to endorse him than for Obama to actually win the general.

[ Parent ]
: I cant look (none / 0) (#97)
by Capt Howdy on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:02:06 PM EST

I will take your word for it.

[ Parent ]

I don't see any way that Obama can (5.00 / 8) (#1