So Much For That Theory...

Remember when it was popular to say that Obama's best states were those with either a high percentage of black voters or state's with none at all?

As some bloggers have shrewdly pointed out, Obama does best in areas that have either a large concentration of African-American voters or hardly any at all, but he struggles in places where the population is decidedly mixed.

What this suggests, perhaps, is that living in close proximity to other races — sharing industries and schools and sports arenas — actually makes Americans less sanguine about racial harmony rather than more so.

Except that West Virginia--with a menancing 3 percent black population--is about to had Hillary a whopping victory. And what about Kentucky with its 7 percent black population? The idea that places without black folks will somehow be more receptive to a black president is too simplistic. Not that I have any better theories. Geography maybe? Obama seems to have a particular problem with whites voting in Democratic primaries in Appalachia and in the Deep South. Someone out there, with a better knowledge of history than the kid, should offers us theory. Any thoughts guys?

Comments

[Don Weightman]

Yeah. I have a theory. The Scotch-Irish in Appalachia -- southern tier NY, Western PA, eastern & southern Ohio, western VA, on down -- love her, hate him.

Those guys are clannish, anti-cosmopolitan, hate "outsiders". Too bad Obama.

They love fighters, fighting dirty is fine, Yay Hillary.

Look at the immigration and cultural-political statistics for those guys. The patterns are all laid out in David Hackett Fischer's wonderful book Albion's Seed, It details the effect of the various strands of British emigration on the way we live now.

As to West Virginia, read it and weep.

[zak]

The Clintons are particularly popular among Southern & Appalachian whites; since the latter tend to be poor, this seems to correlate w/economics, but I think it's as much cultural as anything. Bill is seen as one of them, and some of this rubs off on Hillary.

Factor in the traditional competition for jobs between poor whites and (mostly poor) blacks in the South, and you've got Obama's "Appalachian Problem," as Slate called it a couple weeks back.

[Roger Bigod]

Yes, folks from the Borderlands. The ones who stopped off in Ulster for 100 years or so are known as Scots-Irish. Fisher is good. Also, James Webb's "Born Fighting". Briefly, the central governments of England and Scotland didn't control the area for 500 years. The result was a people who're clannish, resist authority and value physical prowess.

They're not racist so much as distrustful of difference. The governor of Louisiana, Jindal, is Indian. He lost on his first try, mainly on the redneck vote from north central LA. He went back frequently for 4 years to speak at meetings of men's civic clubs, no doubt to assure them that he like to hunt and fish and was an all round good ole boy. It helped that he went by "Bobby", not "Piyush". He didn't go out of his way to mention his Rhodes Scholarship either.

Obama doesn't set off the same reflexes that Sharpton or Jackson would. OTOH, he's articulate in a way that can come across as elitist or preachy. Rednecks don't mind rich people or people of high educational levels or intelligence. They fiercely mind it if someone thinks he's "better then everybody else".

His best chance is to get coaching lessons from Webb.

[Alex Whalen]

I would guess that it has something to do with average age of the population. Obama's problem has never been race, or at least never just race. He's only really struggled in states where the population is particularly old. WV, OH, and PA are all examples of this phenomenon. Once the state's manufacturing base disappeared, there wasn't much to keep the next generation from leaving, and over time the state's population turned a much deeper shade of gray.

[ed]

Also education. Obama does better with the better educated demographic.