‘Burbs may be Obama base; Latino-rich communities, not so much
Dante Chinni
Posted: 06.23.2008 / 10:57 AM PDT
WASHINGTON Sen. Barack Obama’s protracted nomination fight with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton not only seasoned the Democrats’ young standard-bearer for the general election, it also showed the kinds of places where he’s strong and those where he needs to focus his fire if he’s to prevail in November.
For a while, in the Ohio and Pennsylvania primaries, his weakness was portrayed as working-class white voters. As the primaries moved to the more rural states of West Virginia and Kentucky, the name of the group of concern morphed into the related “Appalachian voters.
”But a look at the primary and caucus results through the prism of Patchwork Nation’s 11 different community types reveals a couple of trends: First, Senator Obama did well among what is traditionally the biggest swing type in elections, the wealthy suburbs (“Monied ‘Burbs”). Second, while Obama may have problems with white voters who are less well off, particularly in areas with many service workers (“Service Worker Centers”), his bigger problem may lie with Hispanic voters, like those in “Immigration Nation” communities.
Primary results are not necessarily indicative of how things will shake out in November. For instance, Senator Clinton did better overall in America’s big cities (“Industrial Metropolis”), thanks largely to New York City, in her home state, and to the fact that Obama was absent on the ballot in Detroit. But those big cities will almost certainly fall his way in November.
Still, the primary numbers reveal where a candidate’s base is. And for the Obama campaign, there is a lot to like in the Monied ‘Burbs.
The Illinois senator captured more than half the vote in these places, which of late have proved to be crucial in presidential elections. These areas are generally well heeled and their residents well educated, and they are by far the largest community type Patchwork Nation tracks, with more than 84 million people packed into 304 counties. These are the places the media often end up focusing on the metro areas around Philadelphia, Detroit, and Cleveland that can swing key states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Ohio.
Furthermore, voters in the Monied ‘Burbs are closely split between Democrats and Republicans and can tilt either way.
The benefit of this for Obama is that he starts with good support in places he will need to win in the fall. If there is a downside in those figures, it may be that they help to stick on him the label of intellectual “latte liberal.” After all, the Monied ‘Burbs might also be called “Starbucks Central.” These are not generally struggling, gritty places.
Obama’s other big base of support came from communities with large African-American populations, “Minority Central.” He took 59 percent of the vote from these places, found predominantly in the South, and they could help him in November in places like North Carolina and Louisiana.
The primary numbers also have some less-happy news for Obama. He lost big to Clinton in two potentially key community types, places with high concentrations of service workers (Service Worker Centers) and high concentrations of Hispanics (Immigration Nation).
For all the talk of working-class whites, that is an enormous group of people, taking in several Patchwork Nation community types. A more specific group that might be crucial are the people who live in Service Worker Centers.
These are places where voters should feel an affinity for the Democratic Party. People there earn less than average, often don’t have health insurance, and are the ones facing the biggest crunch in the nation’s economic downturn. But Obama took only 34 percent of their votes in the Democratic primaries.
They are a group he will probably want to focus on in the coming months.
Obama may have his hardest sell, however, with Hispanic voters like those who make up much of Immigration Nation. The Illinois senator won only 37 percent of voters in those places; more tellingly, he lost them not only in the primary states but in caucus states, too.
Through the nomination season, the Obama campaign proved to be a master at organizing in caucus states. He beat Clinton among all 11 community types in the caucuses except for Immigration Nation counties, where Clinton beat him handily.
Obama’s trouble in those counties could prove significant in the West, in places like New Mexico and Nevada that figure to be battleground states. It may suggest a hole he will want to try to fill in coming months, possibly even in the selection of his running mate.
Next Monday, a breakdown of the primary vote for Sen. John McCain.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:49 pm PDT
Um, did you happen to notice that Obama polls at least 20 point ahead of McCain in Latino communities. This is lazy reporting on your part.
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:04 pm PDT
Thank you for your thoughts, but your observation misses a key point. Obama may poll better, but ultimately, as it often does, it may come down to turnout.
For instance, McCain is crushing Obama in Evangelical communities and he almost certainly will in the fall. BUT the question is how will those voters turnout. The difference between a 20- and 30-point gap can be very significant, particularly in a close state. Think about the Evangelical vote in a place like Missouri.
That same rule may apply to Obama in a Hispanic communities in a place like New Mexico.
Still, thanks for reading … and posting.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:10 pm PDT
Good article. We are still four months out out from the election. The primary season did show us our weakness. The polls are starting to bounce for Barack. We are not taking anything for granted. The campaign here in Tampa FL plan to aggressively get new voters involved in the process. Florida is turning blue. We are fired up and ready to go!!!
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:46 pm PDT
[…] http://patchworknation.csmonitor.com/csmstaff/2008/0623/burbs-may-be-obama-bastion-latino-rich-c… […]
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:19 pm PDT
Sorry Dante . . . don’t mean to step on any nerves, but I have to agree w/ “monitor” on this one. You’ve stated a hypothetical in your blog response, but we’d appreciate you backing that up with some hard numbers. There are always some people who will stay home, but I think if you researched this some more you’d find that most primary democratic voters will still vote democratic in the fall (even if they voted for “the other democrat” during the primaries). Come November, there will be millions of general election voters who didn’t vote in the primary; however, you’d be hard pressed find any past data that shows large numbers of primary voters who decide not to vote in the general election. And again we know that most (not all, but most) registered democrats will fall in line behind the democratic nominee. Let’s not fool ourselves with any false drama . . . millions of Latinos will come out and vote, and most of them will vote for Obama.
The bigger questions in this election revolves around the Republican candidate. Republicans didn’t have the huge primary turnouts and increased democratic voter registrations that the democrats have benefited from this election cycle. Historically, republicans are sure voters, but will millions of republicans who blew off the primaries find the energy to vote in the GE? Especially when their candidate is a little over-aged and not particularly exciting??
As of May, the number of registered democrats is 10.1% higher than the number of registered republicans. (see rasmussen for the numbers). Assuming 125,000,000 voters in the upcoming GE (the 2004 GE had 121,500,000) with 26.6% registered as independent or ‘other’, that gives democrats a 12,625,000 vote advantage going into the 2008 GE. That’s going to be a problem for republicans, especially considering republicans and democrats ran about even (37% each party) during the 2004 election. Right now, McCain needs an EXTREMELY high republican turnout (not going to happen), or he needs to find a way to attract about 75% of independent and ‘other’ voters–without scaring off his base.
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:25 pm PDT
Dante:
Your Latino point is simply wrong and your response about turnout above seems out of place since your article is not about turnout.
Further, Latino turnout does not need to be high for Obama to win, he just needs similar turnout to the last cycle but to not have McCain get the 40% that Bush did. All polls of Latinos since the close of the primary have Obama crushing McCain.
And, there is good reason to believe that not only will Obama win solidy but that Latino turnout will go up because of immigration issues and concerns down ballot, especially in purple states where anti-immigrant candidates are going to be a real threat. And of course, almost all of them will have an R next to their name.
On the other hand, suburban white voters may not be so strong for Obama, depending on the state (probably good in Connecticut, not so good in Georgia). Extrapolating from the primary is on the whole pretty ridiculous.
This was pretty lazy.
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:28 pm PDT
I do believe that you are wrong. Obama appeals to a greater mix of cultures than McCain does. His multicultural appeal has infact swayed the world and most of the people around the world favor Obama to McCain. Check out WhyObama08.org, help elect him president.
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:58 pm PDT
Hispanics must vote for all Democrat representatives for the US Congress and for John McCain as president. McCain will be a lame-duck president with no veto power that will have to compromise with a Democratic Congress, but his stance on immigration will par with that of a Democrat congress hence benefiting the Latino community in all.
Pass among Hispanics-Latinos & immigrants this option.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:01 pm PDT
To all, sorry some of you disagree with this post. But that is, of course, why this comment area is here and I’m glad you have used it to share your thoughts.
There are no numbers on future Hispanic turnout, of course. Thats why it is in the future. One point of this piece (and it wasn’t the only one) was that the primary numbers using our community types do seem to indicate that Obama was not the first choice among Hispanic voters. Those figures are in the piece. And they are definitely proof that voters in those communities were not as enthusiastic about Obama as they were about Clinton.
Some of your responses seem say, “Yes, but they were still enthusiastic.” Maybe they were. Maybe they weren’t, but there certainly is no proof of that. And there certainly isn’t proof that people in those places are enthusiastic enough to come out and vote in big numbers for Obama in the fall. And that could have an impact in states that will likely be close and contain many of these types of community, like New Mexico.
The data from the primaries indicates this these communities are not strongholds for him. As I note in the piece, it doesn’t mean he won’t win them. But even the strongest Obama supporter would have to acknowledge his numbers were low — less than 40 percent. And the fact that he even lost those communities in caucuses, which were his strong suit, is clearly a sign of something. They were the only community type that Obama lost to Clinton overall in total caucus votes.
As to the point about the Burbs. In this case I am talking about the “Monied Burbs” as defined by this project (see the community type tabs in the bar above) and I am talking about the the vote of that group overall, not in any one particular state — Georgia or any other. In fact, there are not many “Monied Burb” counties in Georgia.
Again, if your point is we don’t know about these communities in the fall yet, you are right. We don’t. But if your saying we shouldn’t discuss them and what the primary vote in those places might mean for the fall, I guess I respectfully disagree.
And that brings us to one last point. Many of you seem to feel this piece is “lazy.” If you don’t want to look at what the primary vote might tell us about the fall, then clearly this piece is NOT for you. I don’t really know how else to respond.
Next week we will do the same thing for John McCain. You may think that is “lazy” as well.
But on this site we try and use these community types to create a new ay of analyzing the vote and what moves different types of communities. This is simply a new and different way of looking at the primary results an what they may mean.
Regardless, it’s nice to have so many comments addressing me directly and to have a real dialogue online.
Thanks
-Dante
June 24th, 2008 at 10:31 am PDT
Actually, there is some research suggesting considerable antipathy between blacks and Latinos. Professor Paula McClain at Duke has addressed this subject in at least one article. Several others have also identified “cracks-in-the-rainbow.” This friction may not exist at the level of officeholders and politicians, where the illusion of coalition is fiercely maintained; but at the grassroots, where Latinos and blacks are competing for housing, jobs, local offices, and other scarce resources, the suspicion and hostility is real.
And ultimately the question is about margins. It is easy to imagine Latinos voting for Obama — after all they are 2 to 1 Democratic in party identification. But the question is by what margin.
McCain doesn’t need to peel off very many Latino voters to win battleground states such as New Mexico and Nevada. And in Florida, where Latinos are evenly divided between the parties, McCain needs only a few percentage points to seal a win.
Obama’s weakness with Latino voters is not imaginary. You’re kidding yourselves if you think it is.