Race is still the big story in Mississippi elections. From the Associated Press:
The surveys in 35 randomly selected precincts in each state included 1,861 interviews in Kentucky and 1,859 in Mississippi. Results are subject to sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, higher for individual groups such as black voters.
In Mississippi, 33 percent of voters were black - 3 to 6 points higher than in VNS exit polls in the past three presidential elections - and 94 percent of them voted to re-elect Democratic Gov. Ronnie Musgrove.
But 77 percent of whites backed Barbour, propelling the Washington lobbyist and former national Republican chairman to victory with 53 percent of the overall vote.
Black turnout may have gotten a boost in Mississippi because Democratic nominees in two down-ballot races were black. Both lost, however, as just 8 percent of whites voted for Barbara Blackmon for lieutenant governor and only 22 percent of whites backed Gary Anderson for treasurer.
-- snip --
Looking ahead to 2004, pluralities of around 45 percent in both states said they definitely would vote for Bush if the presidential election were today while about 35 percent definitely would vote for someone else. Those who haven't firmly made up their minds comprised 20 percent of the gubernatorial electorate in Kentucky and 17 percent in Mississippi.
The Democratic party right now is the party of everyone who is either not white or not Christian, plus a surprisingly small minority of the white, mainline Christian vote. (I assure you that the religious beliefs and participation of whites in Mississippi who voted for Musgrove differs dramatically from Barbour supporters). Unfortunately, this isn't a big enough coalition to carry the day in Mississippi despite the near fanantical suppport of the base. In much of the country, more than 6% of African American voters are registered Republican, and more are independents who are somewhat mixed in their vote, resulting in something like 80-90% Democratic party support.
Mississippi is in many ways a microcosm, or at least a caricature, of the South as a whole. Round up everyone likeminded or even close, and the numbers still aren't there.
One choice is to compromise the party's values to compete better in the South. But, I'd like to think that the better course is to engage in the fundamental effort it takes to change hearts and minds. It can be done. As recently as 1986, according to a recent Pew Study, interracial marriage was highly controversial. Now, it is a non-issue even for evangelical Christians, despite an absence of big money behind efforts to change attitudes on the subject. The Democratic party's resources would be better spent engaging in some evangalism of its own in the South, in an effort to change people, than in working on get out the vote campaigns or figuring out how to make the party more conservative so it would appeal to a wider base.