Here's an article from the Washington Post on the white vote in the 2010 election. It's notable for the straight-forward, non-apologetic way it talks about the importance of the white vote. Long ago, there was no more point for political reporters to talk about the national white vote than for fish to talk about water. Then, it became in bad taste. But as the country becomes less white, it becomes paradoxically inevitable that the white vote will have to be talked about.
Democrats hope Obama 2008 model will help stem midterm losses
By Chris Cillizza
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 5, 2010; A02
To become the nation's first black president, Barack Obama not only won heavy percentages of the black and Hispanic vote but also managed to trim the Democratic Party's traditional deficit among white voters.
Four years after Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) lost the white vote by 17 percentage points, Obama lost it by 12, according to exit polls. While the 2008 gains were generally attributed to Obama's strength with young voters -- he won by 10 points among whites 18 to 29 years old -- he managed to improve on Kerry's showing with white voters across every age demographic.
Fast-forward to today. With the November midterm elections less than four months away, Obama's standing among white voters has sunk -- leading some party strategists to fret that the president's erosion -- and the party's -- could adversely affect Democrats' chances of holding on to their House and Senate majorities.
"Since in the past House elections white voters tended to represent the independent vote, [the midterms] will surely be devastating for Democrats running in an election that will be a referendum on the Obama agenda," predicted one senior Democratic operative who closely tracks House races.
In Washington Post-ABC polling, Obama's approval rating among white voters has dropped from better than 60 percent to just above 40 percent. In a June poll, 46 percent of white voters under age 40 approved of how Obama was doing, compared with just 39 percent of whites 65 and older.
The latest NBC-Wall Street Journal poll reveals that Obama's standing among white voters is remarkably similar to that of President George W. Bush at this same time two years ago.
In the June 2008 NBC-WSJ survey, 37 percent of white men and 26 percent of white women approved of the job Bush was doing. In the June 2010 poll, an identical 37 percent of white men approved of Obama's handling of his job, as did 35 percent of white women. ...
One senior strategist, speaking candidly about his concerns on the condition of anonymity, noted that white voters made up 79 percent of the 2006 midterm electorate, while they made up 74 percent of the 2008 vote. If the white percentage returns to its 2006 level, that means there will be 3 million more white voters than if it stayed at its 2008 levels. That scenario, said the source, "would generate massive losses" for House and Senate Democrats in November because of Obama's standing with that demographic.
To avoid such losses, the Democratic National Committee has committed to spending tens of millions of dollars to re-create (or come somewhere near re-creating) the 2008 election model, in which Democrats relied heavily on higher-than-normal turnout from young people and strong support from African American and Hispanic voters.
The DNC's plan is ambitious, to say the least: In the space of a few months, the strategists hope to change the composition of a midterm electorate that, if history is any guide, tends to be older and whiter than in a presidential-election year. Put that way, it sounds crazy -- and it has drawn considerable skepticism from independent observers.
But given the reality that white voters -- again -- almost certainly hold the key to Obama's and the Democrats' chances in the fall, they would be even crazier not to try.
McCain didn't do all that that badly among those whites who bothered to vote in 2008 -- 55% relative to Bush's 54% in 2000 -- but he didn't get all that many whites to bother, whereas Obama got lots of nonwhites, including young ones, all worked up. Since 2008, however, the Youth of the Future have gotten bored with politics (as is natural -- politics becomes more relatively interesting as sports, music, romance, etc. become less interesting, so politics is Last Man Standing among your interests). Obama is trying to whip them into a frenzy again, but without alienating whites.
In other words, expect more Will.I.Am.
ReplyDeleteIF the Republicans really want to win the white vote they can stop being such obvious shills for Big Business and support tough immigration enforcement, end H1B visas, and stop the hemorrhaging of US jobs overseas. I'm not holding my breath. And don't even get me started on Sarah Palin.
ReplyDelete...whereas Obama got lots of nonwhites, including young ones, all worked up. Since 2008, however, the Youth of the Future have gotten bored with politics...
ReplyDelete2008 was literally "An Historic Event," and will be impossible to duplicate.
I've voted at the same polling place in every election since 1980 and I have never, ever seen the likes of 2008. Young people of all races acting like they were in line for a concert. There was a carnival atmosphere, everyone was talking to each other, taking pictures of themselves voting, squealing "I voted! I voted!" Bursting into applause when someone came out of the voting booth.
Now, being able to say you stood in line to vote for THE FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT EVER is one thing. But standing in line to vote for some boring old white guy you've never heard of who's running for the House of Senators or something? Hardly!
I expect lower minority turnout for two reasons:
ReplyDelete1. nothing left for blacks to accomplish. It's hard to get excited about a black congressman when you have a black president.
2. blacks are less worried about civil rights since Obama's election is confirmation civil rights (and Sailer's slavery tax) rest on firm ground.
As for point #2, blacks are generally socially conservative on social issues like gay marriage, so don't be surprised if the GOP makes inroads.
Steve Sailer said..."McCain didn't do all that that badly among those whites who bothered to vote in 2008 -- 55% relative to Bush's 54% in 2000 -- but he didn't get all that many whites to bother, whereas Obama got lots of nonwhites, including young ones, all worked up."
ReplyDeleteNo, McCain didn't get me to bother--but Obama did. He even got my apolitical husband, who'd never voted in his life, all worked up enough to go the polls.
I like to think we are two of the 3999 reasons Obama lost the state of Missouri, which nearly always votes for the winner.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/us/politics/07missouri.html
Well the key in 2008 was for Obama to run on the hallow nostrums of "Hope and Change". It worked well because the incumbent was dangerously incompetent, unpopular and dangerous:
ReplyDelete- massive increase in deficit spending, government waste and promotion of speculative policies that deepen our economic crises and harm our long-term economic health
- ownership of 2 unpopular and unaffordable conflicts, repeatedly shuffling his handpicked generals and pursuing conflicts that have no realistic exit strategy
- a culture of corruption from appointing blatantly unqualified and biased individuals to key positions to giving Wall Street buddies billions and billions
- a bitter fight to expand unaffordable medical benefits (prescriptions, etc)
- a dramatic demonstration of complete incompetence and feigned concern about historic disasters occuring in the Gulf of Mexico
- setting a record for laziness by taking more time off to play golf than any other previous president, even in times of national disasters (Obama played more golf in his first year than Bush in his 8yrs)
- repeatedly trying to force through amnesty for 20-30 illegal aliens against the laws of the country and will of the people in a time of record unemployment
It sounds like the same situation only much worse than in 2008. I'm sure all these carbon-based life-forms are dying for some real "Hope and Change", thinking "Si se puede".
Whenever any one of these corrupt incompetents makes any efforts to campaign, just keep shouting them down with "That's not change, that's more the same."
Obama needs a good old-fashioned disaster to get re-elected. Think Bush and 9-11.
ReplyDeleteUh oh - Uruguay is too white.
ReplyDelete[Hat tip The Derb.]
Black pantherGate is an interesting way to appeal to the white vote.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately for B.O., young Whites aren't that stupid. I personally know a number of young Whites who have abandoned him, because of his betrayal of his promises related to peace, the environment, etc.
ReplyDeleteIt's easy to get bored with politics when politics is boring. So many of the issues are settled questions - it's just not permitted to hold the correct view on those settled questions.
ReplyDeleteIs our immigration policy a failure? Sure, and there's really no debate to be had about it - but, bizarrely, holding the obviously correct view is not polite. This kind of institutionalized intellectual dishonesty makes politics awfully dull.
"Obama is trying to whip them into a frenzy again, but without alienating whites."
ReplyDelete"Without alienating whites?"
He's already failed at that.
I have begun to think the term "The First Black President" is inappropriate. There seems to be more chance now that Obama will be known as "The Last Black President".
ReplyDeleteRobin Hood opposed King John. Was that John I or John VII? No, it was just John. The English hated the stupid SOB so much they never had another king of that name.
Obama is piling up an incredible record. Each new challenge provokes a new impossibly unpopular response from him. The last straw may very well be how he responds to the Islamic attack on us that now seems inevitable.
The classic liberals are angry with his support of the War in Afghanistan and/or his socialized health program. The environmentalists are unhappy about the Gulf spill. He still retains minority support but may lose the Mexican vote too leaving him only with a hard core of black supporters.
Obama rose to power as being portrayed as post-racial and competent. The reality now appears to many white voters as a giant deception. Our fathers remember the lessons of Munich and the Great Depression. Our sons are likely to remember the lesson of electing a black man as President.
Albertosaurus
The real key in 2008 was the same as it was in 1992: "It's the economy stupid." And since the current administration hasn't helped, and could reasonably be claimed to have made things worse, this years mid-terms should be interesting.
ReplyDeleteA WAPO staff writer said: "Since in the past House elections white voters tended to represent the independent vote, [the midterms] will surely be devastating for Democrats running in an election that will be a referendum on the Obama agenda," predicted one senior Democratic operative who closely tracks House races.
ReplyDeleteIn Washington Post-ABC polling, Obama's approval rating among white voters has dropped from better than 60 percent to just above 40 percent. In a June poll, 46 percent of white voters under age 40 approved of how Obama was doing, compared with just 39 percent of whites 65 and older."
Well, to paraphrase the science fiction novel, 'Dune', the DNC could send a Third Stage Election Navigator to Obama to say:
"President Obama, remedy this situation, restore job creation, or you will live out your final term in an annoyance amplifier," unfortunately, like Padishah Emperor Shaddam IV, President Obama, the ex-community organizer with no interest in gathering pearls of wisdom from Milton Friedman, will fail miserably.
There are few other insights I could add about President Obama's personal political motives than Randall Parker has already said:
"In the United States we've got a multi-racial president who wants to redistribute (wealth and power) between the races. He does not want to find his agenda under fiscal constraints due to financial bubbles. He wants to add major new accretions to the welfare state to transfer more to his base. He wants the effects of debt bubbles, stagnant economy, lack of wage growth, and the like to be very short term. He wants a quick return to brisk economy expansion that will generate the tax revenues he needs to fund his plans. He wants a new Great Society."
I am not so sure Whites really matter any more.
ReplyDeleteDemographic changes, in California Mexicans are the defacto majority, mean that White vote must be near monolithic, around 85% or more, to have any effect. And that's not possible because of class and loyalty issues.
Women find most of the ordinary White guys icky and disgusting, particularly when they hit on them. As women and hypergamy guarantee only 20% of men at a maximum are attractive. This is why nearly every commercial presents a White guy as an icky, sexless and "creepy" nerd and the Black guy as wise and sexy.
Meanwhile, White union workers, in government unions, live and breathe and eat and sleep diversity, multiculturalism, 'peace' nonsense, environmentalism, and the other SWPL idiocy, which is rampant in crony-esque Wall Street, the legal system, Fortune 500 managers, and so on. That along with younger White Women forms about 40% of Whites.
Obama may suffer some losses, and even lose the House, but probably not the Senate, and will probably get re-elected based on Demography (i.e. not enough White guys and not enough White bloc voting).
"Women find most of the ordinary White guys icky and disgusting"
ReplyDeleteYour experience is not universal, champ.
Whiskey has the correct long-term picture.
ReplyDeleteAs Steve has pointed out, Whites are due to become a minority of all babies born in the USA, either this year [2010], or next year [2011], and when that happens, the USA [in the long term] will be demographically incapable of supporting a limited government or the rule of law.
If Sarah runs a really tight, focused, disciplined campaign, then she might be able to win in 2012, and POSSIBLY again in 2016, but some time thereafter, out towards the 2020 timeframe, it will become mathematically impossible for the GOP [or any other limited-government/rule-of-law party] to win national elections.
Fortunately, though, the USA will have imploded by that point, and we will have the opportunity to construct several different successor nations to replace it.
If the REPs could rope in a candidate with roughly the same policy views as Ike, a retired general with fair and reasonable views on welfare state, skeptical of the warfare state and strict on lawfare state, then they would be in office forever.
ReplyDeleteSomeone like...Colin Powell! Unfortunately the REP party apparat damn near pushed him into an early grave.
The REP apparat is too beholden to Wall Street in its various aspects - financial-industrial, military-industrial and medical-industrial complexes - to let a populist REP get his program through.
There really is no coherent nationalist party in the US.
Well the key in 2008 was for Obama to run on the hallow nostrums of "Hope and Change". It worked well because the incumbent was dangerously incompetent, unpopular and dangerous
ReplyDeleteThe key was the media, not the campaign. If a white guy had run that kind of campaign, there'd have been a lot of snickering behind hands, even from the media, and a lot less gosh-shucks boosting from the media. Lefties finally got a chance to drop the cynicism and irony and be the roman-saluting goose-stepping hive-minders they really want to be.
And yes, it worked because people were tired of Bush and McCain looked uber-lame.
Women find most of the ordinary White guys icky and disgusting, particularly when they hit on them. As women and hypergamy guarantee only 20% of men at a maximum are attractive. This is why nearly every commercial presents a White guy as an icky, sexless and "creepy" nerd and the Black guy as wise and sexy.
ReplyDeleteYou need to pass the bong.
Commercials need villains and heroes. Non-whites cannot be villains (lawsuits, PC, etc.). Ergo...the math is pretty simple here.
Your "psycho-PC is what the people want" thing is just fucking stupid. No, it's what the authors want. Painters paint what interests them, writers write about what interests them, and yes, producers produce what they want to see. At least, that's the trend. Deal with it already.
"Women find most of the ordinary White guys icky and disgusting, particularly when they hit on them. As women and hypergamy guarantee only 20% of men at a maximum are attractive. This is why nearly every commercial presents a White guy as an icky, sexless and "creepy" nerd and the Black guy as wise and sexy."
ReplyDeleteStill beating the dead horse, huh?
Stop projecting your own experiences onto social dynamics.
"Svigor said...
ReplyDeleteLefties finally got a chance to drop the cynicism and irony and be the roman-saluting goose-stepping hive-minders they really want to be."
That was funny. And True.
"but he didn't get all that many whites to bother"
ReplyDeleteAfter pinching my nose and voting for Bush in 2004, I sure as hell wasn't about to get Neoconned again in 2008. A lot of the old Goldwater conservatives and former John Birch Society members that hang out in VFW halls did the same thing, they either stayed home, voted for Chuck Baldwin, or left the presidential ballot blank in disgust.
The Tea Party folks and GOP faithful must get Sarah Palin off the brain.
Albertosaurus:
ReplyDeleteOur sons are likely to remember the lesson of electing a black man as President.
I have no qualms about a black man as president - but why did he have to be Obama?
Incompetent, insubstantial - what else can I say. And he's not "black enough" to keep the black leaders happy. Obama is going to make it difficult, but not impossible, for the next black president.
It's not even the fault of women if they find ordinary white guys to be disgusting.
ReplyDeleteModern women have been manipulated, and that is part of the problem. The villains here are the usual suspects: liberals, feminists, fashionistas, big business, fifth-generation Reform Jews for Stalin.
Also, the modern "soul mate" type of romance is to blame. Men and women used to be "role mates" instead, and had stable families.
"Stop projecting your own experiences onto social dynamics."
ReplyDeleteReally. Most single women in the US (even the one's populating hip, coastal metro areas), particularly those closer to 30 than 20, will give almost any average looking white guy with his act together a chance. Women have a dynamic range of what they consider attractive qualities, and are drawn to men with confidence, wit, charisma, and intelligence more than looks or money.
Status is always important, but there are many factors beyond what guys measure that they use to assess status. A lot of extremely HOT women prefer rough looking guys over pretty boys that are their match in looks. Tall, good looking guys and outward projecting bad boys will always have an advantage, but it's not as much of one as you choose to believe.