Democrats face a strategic decision that has bedeviled their party for 40 years: How hard should they fight in the South?
From The New York Times:
[S]ince the South began to shift away from the Democrats in the 1960s, it has become one of the biggest and reddest of the Republican strongholds. In the last two presidential elections, the Democrats failed to carry any of the Southern states. Although recent Democratic nominees have typically gotten about 9 out of 10 of the votes of Southern blacks, they still need a substantial chunk of the white vote to prevail. Political scientists put that figure at close to 40 percent, though it depends on the state, and the Democrats have rarely gotten it.
Even after selecting a Southerner, John Edwards of North Carolina, as his running mate in 2004, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts drew 29 percent of the white vote in the region (17 percent in the Deep South). In 2000, Al Gore got 31 percent, even losing his home state, Tennessee.
The only times since 1972 that the Democrats have carried more than a third of the Southern white vote, according to exit polls, were when Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton, both Southerners, were atop the ticket. In 1996, for example, Mr. Clinton got the votes of 36 percent of Southern whites and 87 percent of Southern blacks, and carried 5 of the 13 Southern states.
Mr. Obama’s Southern strategy relies on significantly increasing black registration and turnout, as he did in the primary season.
Democratic candidates have typically written off many Southern states early in the process. But when Democrats give up the South, they need to win 70 percent of the rest of the electoral votes, said Merle Black, an expert on Southern politics at Emory University. And they often subject candidates running for lower offices in the region to fierce political headwinds: it is hard for a statewide candidate to prevail when his party’s presidential nominee loses by double digits.
Southern Democrats have often felt left out of their party’s presidential calculations. From Reconstruction to the 1960s, the South was essentially a one-party region: Democratic. But voters’ allegiance was rocked in the 1960s by the Democrats’ leadership in passing civil rights legislation, and whites began to move to what Republicans asserted was their more natural ideological home.
This was exacerbated, many Southern Democrats believe, by the national party’s habit of nominating Northern liberals who campaigned little in the region. But the Democrats who ran those campaigns said they had to devote their resources to the states where polls showed they had the best chance of prevailing.
Some Democrats say the Obama registration drive could have unintended consequences, spurring a higher turnout among whites planning to vote Republican. But Charles Bullock, a political scientist at the University of Georgia, said he considered that unlikely.
“Older whites who are most likely to have traditional racial attitudes are probably already registered and may have records of consistent participation,” Dr. Bullock said.
As [Ray Mabus, the former governor of Mississippi and a senior adviser to Mr. Obama,] put it, “I’m sure some won’t vote for him because he’s African-American, but I’m pretty sure those people wouldn’t vote for any Democrat.”
Mr. Obama’s race aside, his ideology is a significant hurdle in the South, if history is any guide. Mr. Clinton broke the Republicans’ hold in 1992 in part by running as a decidedly centrist Democrat — pro-death penalty, pro-welfare reform, for the “forgotten middle class.” He was also helped by Ross Perot’s third-party candidacy, which drained votes from the Republicans.
In the Republican camp, strategists say that for all the difficulties the party is facing, the South remains deeply conservative.
_______________
See also an article in The New York Times entitled "The South Will Fall Again" in which the case is made that:
In the rest of the South [other than Virginia], Mr. Obama cannot overcome reality. Even if unprecedented numbers of black voters turn out to vote for him, the white vote will serve as a formidable counterbalance. Mr. Obama should not hope to capture states in the country’s most racially polarized region.
[S]ince the South began to shift away from the Democrats in the 1960s, it has become one of the biggest and reddest of the Republican strongholds. In the last two presidential elections, the Democrats failed to carry any of the Southern states. Although recent Democratic nominees have typically gotten about 9 out of 10 of the votes of Southern blacks, they still need a substantial chunk of the white vote to prevail. Political scientists put that figure at close to 40 percent, though it depends on the state, and the Democrats have rarely gotten it.
Even after selecting a Southerner, John Edwards of North Carolina, as his running mate in 2004, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts drew 29 percent of the white vote in the region (17 percent in the Deep South). In 2000, Al Gore got 31 percent, even losing his home state, Tennessee.
The only times since 1972 that the Democrats have carried more than a third of the Southern white vote, according to exit polls, were when Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton, both Southerners, were atop the ticket. In 1996, for example, Mr. Clinton got the votes of 36 percent of Southern whites and 87 percent of Southern blacks, and carried 5 of the 13 Southern states.
Mr. Obama’s Southern strategy relies on significantly increasing black registration and turnout, as he did in the primary season.
Democratic candidates have typically written off many Southern states early in the process. But when Democrats give up the South, they need to win 70 percent of the rest of the electoral votes, said Merle Black, an expert on Southern politics at Emory University. And they often subject candidates running for lower offices in the region to fierce political headwinds: it is hard for a statewide candidate to prevail when his party’s presidential nominee loses by double digits.
Southern Democrats have often felt left out of their party’s presidential calculations. From Reconstruction to the 1960s, the South was essentially a one-party region: Democratic. But voters’ allegiance was rocked in the 1960s by the Democrats’ leadership in passing civil rights legislation, and whites began to move to what Republicans asserted was their more natural ideological home.
This was exacerbated, many Southern Democrats believe, by the national party’s habit of nominating Northern liberals who campaigned little in the region. But the Democrats who ran those campaigns said they had to devote their resources to the states where polls showed they had the best chance of prevailing.
Some Democrats say the Obama registration drive could have unintended consequences, spurring a higher turnout among whites planning to vote Republican. But Charles Bullock, a political scientist at the University of Georgia, said he considered that unlikely.
“Older whites who are most likely to have traditional racial attitudes are probably already registered and may have records of consistent participation,” Dr. Bullock said.
As [Ray Mabus, the former governor of Mississippi and a senior adviser to Mr. Obama,] put it, “I’m sure some won’t vote for him because he’s African-American, but I’m pretty sure those people wouldn’t vote for any Democrat.”
Mr. Obama’s race aside, his ideology is a significant hurdle in the South, if history is any guide. Mr. Clinton broke the Republicans’ hold in 1992 in part by running as a decidedly centrist Democrat — pro-death penalty, pro-welfare reform, for the “forgotten middle class.” He was also helped by Ross Perot’s third-party candidacy, which drained votes from the Republicans.
In the Republican camp, strategists say that for all the difficulties the party is facing, the South remains deeply conservative.
_______________
See also an article in The New York Times entitled "The South Will Fall Again" in which the case is made that:
In the rest of the South [other than Virginia], Mr. Obama cannot overcome reality. Even if unprecedented numbers of black voters turn out to vote for him, the white vote will serve as a formidable counterbalance. Mr. Obama should not hope to capture states in the country’s most racially polarized region.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 6:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home