But there are so many reasons this argument is awry that my brain is on the fritz trying to assimilate them all. Firstly, Obama voters are a multitudinous crew. Any poll will empirically attest to this, and anyone who has been to an Obama event can anecdotally attest to it. Many kinds of people will be voting for Obama for many different reasons, all of them valid.
Secondly, black support for Obama will be only marginally greater than it was for Kerry. Kerry won 88% in 2004 and Obama will win 95% according to the DailyKos internals, an increase of 7 points. Compare this to his predicted increases among Latinos (10 points) and youth (10 points) and it is clear that an Obama victory cannot be attributed to any one single factor. This is true even when considering not just the increase in black support, but also the increase in black turnout.
And finally, it's worth noting that both of Bush's razor-thin victories relied heavily on the support of Evangelicals. Anyone who tries to diminish an Obama victory by attributing it solely to one subset of voters--while neglecting to acknowledge the fact that Bush's victories were much more convincingly attributable to an even narrower subset--is a hypocrite. We can only hope that on Nov. 5th, the pundits with the megaphones will have some sense. Unfortunately, you usually only get to hold the megaphone because you're loud, obnoxious and/or completely devoid of sense.
Comments are closed on this story.