Uncomfortable Questions

Who are these low income, under educated, white voters turning out for Hillary Clinton in rural areas? Why are so many claiming they will vote for McCain if Hillary is not the Democratic nominee? On what basis could one think Clinton best suited for the job, but that Obama is somehow so ill suited that it is better to cross party lines and vote for John McCain?

The first problem with these voters is that they are making their decision with the least reliable criteria available to them; the character and characteristics of the candidates themselves. In other words, these folks are not voting their policy preferences or their economic interests. They are voting for who they think is the "best person" for a job they must not understand. This is a fairly uncomfortable truth because it exposes these voters as fundamentally ignorant of the workings of our political system. However, there is an even more uncomfortable truth lurking here.

Senator Clinton has claimed to be more experienced than Obama, but has not been able to put much distance between she and Obama on policy. She has exploited Obama's association with his pastor and his former neighbor Mr. Aires. She has repeatedly talked about her ability to attract working class white voters. These repeated assertions are troubling because it is standard operating procedure in campaigns to repeat these types of claims not just to brag, but also to subtly send cues to others in the particular category mentioned (poor, uneducated, rural, whites, in this case). The uncomfortable question here is; how many of these lower income, under educated, rural, white voters are supporting Clinton because Obama is black?

Clinton supporters have dodged this question a bit by asking how many black voters are voting for Obama because he is black, in an effort to create moral equivalence and thus neutralize the potential damage to Clinton. Of course the dodge is not reasonable. If blacks are voting for Obama because he is black, they are not therefore voting against Clinton or anyone else because they are white. Indeed, blacks have never crossed party lines in great numbers to support black Republicans. On the other hand, if poor, white, rural Democrats are voting for Hillary now, but will cross party lines to vote for McCain in November, the most obvious reasoning is not nearly so benign. Clearly some significant portion of Hillary's new found supporters are voters who realize that a Democrat should win, but who are not willing to go so far as to vote for black man.

It ain't pretty, and it means that the legacy of Clinton's late surge may be profoundly negative.