(Update) If I Were Obama…
(posted by Mona)
I’d be doing all in my power to convince Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) to switch parties and accept the Veep slot. On many issues Hagel holds impeccable conservative creds — but is quite good on war/foreign policy — and being a pale dude from the heartland he could assuage those voters who think Obama is unpatriotic, extreme, and “hates whitey.” And, as the first linked article shows, Hagel can and does say things about McSame that Obama would have some PR problems proclaiming. Among other things, Hagel is a well-decorated Vietnam combat vet. That would make him the perfect harbinger for replying to any insinuations that McCain’s suffering in the Hanoi Hilton renders sensible his contemporary, horrific foreign policy.
******
Update: This is the unpleasant problem Hagel might help solve: Obama Faces Uphill Climb vs. McCain Among White Voters
May 21st, 2008 at 6:12 pm
During the 1992 Presidential campaign, a reporter asked Bill Clinton why he picked Al Gore as his running mate, probably expecting to hear something about geography or gaining voters in thus-and-such demographic. Clinton shot back instantly, “Because I might die, that’s why!”
That *is* the question: Who does Obama want to be president, if he wins the election and then gets shot by some lunatic on Inauguration Day? I don’t think “Chuck Hagel” is the answer.
May 21st, 2008 at 6:21 pm
mjfgates, I’m pretty sure that you’re confusing President Bill Clinton and reality with President Jeb Bartlett and the West Wing on TV.
May 21st, 2008 at 6:38 pm
mjfgates
1. Obama has to win before it would be of any concern who would succeed him if he died; and
2. Hagel is good on the most important issue of our time, foreign policy.
May 21st, 2008 at 9:19 pm
I like Chuck Hagel, at least when it comes to the Iraq War, but there are more politically appropriate white dudes (veterans even) who can help him demographically.
Jim Webb, for instance. Although he can be a bit rough around the edges (which I personally like).
And I do believe Obama’s “white problem” is overstated. As many have pointed out, he actually does quite well with non-Appalachian white folks. At least well enough to win.
The game - even moreso this election - is turnout. Obama has turnout like McCain has the phrase “my friends.”
May 21st, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Jim Webb, for instance.
Yup. Another good choice. But I still think a Hagel switch to the D Party and as Obama’s Veep would be an Ace of Spades, where Webb may only be the Ace of Hearts, Diamond or Clubs. For sheer discombobulation and disarray among the Rs that would be so, and would buy many conservative populist votes.
But I have zero opposition to an Obama/Webb ticket, and like the idea quite well enough.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:10 pm
The other possibility is for Obama to seek a white conservative female Democrat as a running mate. That might win back some of the many female voters (some of whom are white) who said they’d vote for McCain if Clinton did not get the nomination.
May 21st, 2008 at 10:15 pm
jackson writes: The other possibility is for Obama to seek a white conservative female Democrat as a running mate.
Possibly, but who is this “white conservative female Democrat?” And would she bring the same political capital as a gun-loving, white Vietnam vet?
McCain is going to play the Vietnam POW card, long and loud. Maybe not him directly, but his allies will.
May 21st, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Chris in DC,
I don’t know if you read Joe Bageant, but it’s likely that in all those Appalachian counties where Obama does badly, the whites are disproportionately Ulster Scots (or Scots-Irish, or “Borderers,” or whatever).
May 21st, 2008 at 11:49 pm
How good is Hagel when it actually comes time to vote? I know that he says a lot of good stuff, but then when it comes time to vote on key bills I’ve heard he isn’t always so great. Then again, I haven’t followed him closely. I’m willing to stand corrected on this.
Regarding whether he’s an asset on the ticket: First, the blue-collar/working-class/middle-class/insert-preferred-term-here whites that Obama is doing worst with are in the Midwest and Appalachia. They may not be as impressed as you’d hope by an affluent Republican from the Great Plains. The social, economic, and geographical differences are substantial.
Second, one observation I’ve heard is that Obama does best among whites when the whites live in areas with few blacks. Can’t remember where I read this, or I’d link to it, but the idea is that where there are a lot of blacks the white population is less likely to support a black politician because there are a lot of racial tensions mixed in with local politics. OTOH, where there are few blacks, racial politics is more abstract, so Obama has more of a chance. I grew up in a midwestern city with a large black population and significant racial tensions, and this analysis makes a certain amount of sense.
So, bringing in a white guy from a 99% white state like Nebraska might not be the best way to deal with the racial politics. A white politician more accustomed to black-white politics might be a better running mate if the goal is to win white votes in the Midwest.
May 22nd, 2008 at 1:21 am
Mona, ahem,
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Chuck_Hagel.htm
Ix-nay from me for the idea of a Obama/Hagel ticket.
Anyhow, I don’t think either Obama or Hagel would go for it. So far at least, I think Obama have shown too much bravery and confidence to cynically offer the veep slot to Hagel as a kind of boost amongst the whites. I don’t think Hagel will relish that role either.
Fundamentally, Obama and Hagel are on different teams.
May 22nd, 2008 at 6:08 am
This would make sense, as this ethnicity predominates in those regions (has pretty much since the colonial days, when Scots-Irish mostly settled further inland). I think, however, it has much less to do with ethnic origin, and more to do with economic problems, combined with racial insularity.
As to the comment about resistance to black candidates being at least partly a product of being near black communities - I think plenty of evidence disproves this. We see this resistance in overwhelmingly white areas of appalachian regions as well, where you’d be lucky to see a single minority. Inversely, I believe that states like Maryland, for instance, have less reluctant white populations despite the larger black communities there.
Much more than exposure to black communities, what matters is what kind of exposure. If you live in an all-white community, and all you ever see of black culture is the stuff on the nightly news or in rap music, you could very easily validate racist tendencies. On the other hand, if you work with black folks, or know them on a better level, you realize how much prejudice truly is pre-judging people.
But some people never change their attitudes, no matter what.
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:20 am
Chris in DC, those arguing that there’s a relationship between the percent black in an area and Obama’s performance note that he does tend to do very well in the most black states and in the most white states. The situation with Appalachia, which does tend to be very white, may be explained by their location and media markets. Appalachia sees the big cities of New York, Philadelphia, DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Memphis, Columbus, Cleveland, etc. nearby. And in many situations Appalachia is forced into states with those metropolitan regions, only Kentucky and West Virginia stand alone. Appalachian voters, more so than rural whites in the Plain States, are constantly feeling a political battle with the big cities in their states.
May 22nd, 2008 at 8:46 am
Nominating a pro-life Republican will not exactly unify the Dems behind Obama. This choice has more pitfalls than benefits, and would be extremely disappointing.
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Chris and FreeDem,
I think Thoreau’s observations about racial tensions may still apply, even in the nearly all-white counties of Appalachia. They’ve seen themselves in a tension with the areas of the South with a large black population, going back to the Civil War (e.g., the negative attitude of eastern Tennessee toward both blacks and the plantation owners, and ditto for the West Virginia secessionist movement). Their racial attitudes are shaped by a completely different history than whites in the Midwest and West.
May 22nd, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Kevin -
To riff further on that point, I saw this interesting video on DKos:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/5/22/142132/498/133/520573
May 22nd, 2008 at 5:41 pm
It may be that the observation I cited regarding racial politics is inaccurate. Be that as it may, my understanding is that Nebraska today does not have the same situation with racial politics as, say, urban industrial areas of the Midwest (i.e. where this election will probably be decided). A white running mate from Nebraska may not be the best choice to handle the racial politics of urban Milwaukee.