Is Obama's Election the Final Atonement of the Democratic Party?

Following its inception in the late 1790s, the Democratic Party, originally called the Democratic-Republican Party, worked for the political aims of the slaveowners of the South. The founder, Thomas Jefferson, owned slaves. As the sin of slavery became more and more apparent to Americans, the Democratic Party began to suffer internal strains. Indeed, in the pivotal 1860 election, the Democratic Party split into two factions and each faction had its own candidate. The reason why was because the Democratic Party couldn't remain loyal to both its allies in the Southern ruling class and get the votes of Americans who wanted to abolish slavery.

From 1860 to 1876, the Democratic Party was out of power in Washington. The Southern ruling class, which had lost the Civil War, wasn't able to control the Reconstruction governments of the states of the Old Confederacy. That all began to change, however, following the disputed election of 1876.

In that election, Democratic candidate Samuel Tilling, governor of New York, almost defeated the Republican candidate, Rutherford Hayes. The election was thrown into the House of Representatives. Hayes managed to pull out a win, but the price was that he agreed to withdraw United States troops from the South. He ended Reconstruction.

The ending of Reconstruction meant that the white majority of the Southern states could grab control of the state governments, which they did, and it also meant that they could establish segregation, which they did. The refusal of the United States Supreme Court to rule segregation unconstitutional in the Plessy case meant that black Americans had no way to force the state governments of the South to recognize their civil rights.

From 1876 to 1948, the Democratic Party did not challenge this state of affairs. That ended in 1948 when the young Mayor of Minneapolis challenged the status quo and forced the Democratic Party to adopt a civil rights plank. Strom Thurmond and the so-called Dixiecrats walked out, formed their own party, appeared on five Southern ballots in 1948, and the so-called "Solid South" began to crack.

The cracking was patched over in the 1960 election, with electoral slates loyal to John F. Kennedy carrying most southern states. The passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, followed by the Voting Rights Act, drove Southern whites out of the Democratic Party. By 1972, Nixon was following the Southern Strategy and Democrats lost every state in the South. (Of course, McGovern lost all states but one, but the writing was on the wall for Democrats in the South.)

Jimmy Carter managed to get back some of those southern states in 1976, cut lost them to Reagan in 1980. Mondale lost them in 1984 and Dukasis lost them in 1988. Clinton, though, was competitive in the South in both 1992 and 1996. Gore, however, in 2000, was not, and neither was Kerry in 2004.

In politics, though, as in life in general, nothing lasts forever. Obama actually took three southern states, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida, on his way to winning the presidency. Not only did he take three southern states, but he proved that a candidate who was not a white southerner could win the presidency.

In a way, the election of the first African-American President as a Democrat represents an atonement of sorts for the Democratic Party's racist past. It doesn't excuse it, it doesn't make it disappear, and it doesn't repay all those African-Americans whose rights were denied for decades in the South, and indeed, in the United States. But, it is an atonement of sorts. As a Democrat, I am proud and glad that my party was the first major party to nominate an African-American for president. As an American, I am even prouder of my country for electing him.

States Ranking by Percentage in Poverty & the 2008 Election

Below is the ranking of the 50 states plus the District of Columbia by the percentage of their population living in poverty. The ranking was done by the United States Census Bureau. If you look at the top ten states, two of them went for Obama and the other eight went for McCain. Conversely if you look at the bottom ten, you will find that nine of those states went for Obama, while only one went for McCain. Ohio, by the way, ranks 21, with 13.3% of its population living in poverty.

1
Mississippi
21.1
2
District of Columbia
19.6
3
Louisiana
19
4
New Mexico
18.5
5
Arkansas
17.3
5
West Virginia
17.3
7
Kentucky
17
7
Oklahoma
17
9
Texas
16.9
10
Alabama
16.6
11
Tennessee
16.2
12
South Carolina
15.7
13
Georgia
14.7
13
North Carolina
14.7
15
Arizona
14.2
15
New York
14.2
17
Missouri
13.6
17
Montana
13.6
17
South Dakota
13.6
20
Michigan
13.5
United States
13.3
21
Ohio
13.3
21
Oregon
13.3
23
California
13.1
24
Maine
12.9
25
Indiana
12.7
26
Florida
12.6
26
Idaho
12.6
28
Kansas
12.4
29
Illinois
12.3
30
Pennsylvania
12.1
31
Colorado
12
32
Washington
11.8
33
Nebraska
11.5
34
North Dakota
11.4
35
Delaware
11.1
35
Rhode Island
11.1
37
Iowa
11
37
Wisconsin
11
39
Alaska
10.9
40
Utah
10.6
41
Nevada
10.3
41
Vermont
10.3
43
Massachusetts
9.9
44
Minnesota
9.8
45
Virginia
9.6
46
Wyoming
9.4
47
Hawaii
9.3
48
New Jersey
8.7
49
Connecticut
8.3
50
New Hampshire
8
51
Maryland
7.8

Plain Dealer Article on Dem Gains in Ohio

The Cleveland Plain Dealer ran an interesting article last week on November 10, 2008 about Dem gains and GOP gains in the Ohio presidential election. As you can see from the map, McCain only gained on Bush's performance in 11 counties while Obama did better than Kerry in 77 counties. You can read the article here.

Barack Obama's Election and Household Income

Below is a ranking of the fifty states of the United States, plus the District of Columbia, and how they rank in terms of median household income. You will note that of the top 20 states, which includes the District of Columbia, Obama carried all 20 of them. Of the bottom 20, McCain carried 15 and Obama carried 20. The information was obtained from the website of the United States Census Bureau,which can be found at www.census.gov.


Rank Median Income
1
New Jersey
52,487
2
Connecticut
52,372
3
Massachusetts
51,960
4
Maryland
51,316
5
District of Columbia
49,544
6
Alaska
48,703
7
Washington
48,331
8
New Hampshire
48,254
9
Michigan
47,329
10
Virginia
47,063
11
Illinois
46,526
12
Minnesota
46,349
13
Delaware
46,043
14
New York
45,833
15
Rhode Island
45,544
16
Colorado
45,017
17
California
44,905
18
Pennsylvania
43,402
19
Wisconsin
42,380
20
Ohio
42,346
United States
42,210
21
Indiana
41,991
22
Wyoming
41,913
23
Hawaii
41,821
24
Nevada
41,717
25
Oregon
41,536
26
Utah
41,475
27
Louisiana
40,765
28
Georgia
40,646
29
Kansas
40,595
30
Missouri
40,443
31
Vermont
40,119
32
Maine
40,116
33
Arizona
40,056
34
Iowa
39,753
35
Kentucky
39,595
36
Alabama
39,528
37
Texas
38,797
38
Idaho
38,278
39
North Dakota
38,179
40
Florida
38,005
41
Nebraska
37,828
42
West Virginia
37,622
43
Tennessee
37,589
44
North Carolina
37,545
45
South Carolina
37,194
46
New Mexico
37,064
47
Oklahoma
36,655
48
Montana
36,378
49
Mississippi
35,617
50
Arkansas
35,144
51
South Dakota
34,937

College Grads & 2008 Presidential Voting

Below is a ranking of the fifty states by the percentage of four-year college graduates in their populations. The ranking includes the District of Columbia and was prepared by the United States Census Bureau.

A review of the rankings shows that Obama carried all of the top ten states, and carried 17 out of the top 20. Conversely, McCain carried nine of the bottom ten, with only Nevada in that group going for Obama. Of the bottom 20, McCain carried 16 while Obama carried four. (Ohio, by the way, falls into the bottom 20 at 21.9%. Ohio's ranking is highlighted.)

It would be interesting to know if this voting pattern carried down into the county level of the states that Obama carried, including Ohio. If it did, then one way that local Democratic candidates might target voters is by trying to find out which voters have a four-year degree.

Rank State Percent
0 United States 25.9
1 D.C. 42.5
2 Massachusetts 35.5
3 Colorado 33.5
4 Maryland 33.1
5 Connecticut 32.9
6 Virginia 31.7
7 New Jersey 31.6
8 Vermont 30.8
9 New Hampshire 30.2
10 Minnesota 29.8
11 Washington 29.7
12 New York 29.3
13 California 28.5
14 Illinois 28.1
15 Alaska 28
16 Hawaii 27.9
17 Utah 27.3
18 Kansas 26.7
18 Rhode Island 26.7
20 New Mexico 25.9
20 Oregon 25.9
22 Delaware 25.1
23 Montana 24.8
23 Nebraska 24.8
25 Texas 24.5
26 Georgia 24.4
27 Florida 24.1
28 Maine 24
29 Missouri 23.9
30 North Dakota 23.8
31 Michigan 23.6
31 Pennsylvania 23.6
31 South Dakota 23.6
34 North Carolina 23.4
34 Wyoming 23.4
36 Arizona 23.2
36 Wisconsin 23.2
38 South Carolina 22.7
39 Idaho 22.6
40 Iowa 22.2
41 Ohio 21.9
42 Tennessee 21
43 Oklahoma 20.7
44 Alabama 20.6
44 Indiana 20.6
46 Louisiana 20.4
47 Arkansas 19.7
48 Kentucky 18.8
49 Nevada 18.6
50 Mississippi 17.7
51 West Virginia 16.1

Obama, the Old St. Louis Courthouse, & the Dred Scott Decision

A reader sent us this picture and the following text in a email message. We thought we would share it with our readers.


The picture above (link provided) is from today's Obama rally in St. Louis. I guess the eye is first drawn to the sheer number of people. Impressive, I agree. But that's not the point of this picture to a historian.

If you look in the distance there, you can see a building with a greenish-copper dome. That's the Old St. Louis Courthouse. For years and years, slaves were auctioned on the steps of that courthouse.


The Old Courthouse used to be called the St. Louis State and Federal Courthouse. Back in 1850, two escaped slaves named Dred and Harriett Scott had their petition for freedom overturned in a case there. Montgomery Blair took the case to the US Supreme Court on Scott's behalf and had Chief Justice Roger Taney throw it out because, as he wrote, the Scotts were 'beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relat ions, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.'


I found it rather uplifting that, 158 years later, the man who will most likely be the first black US President was able to stand outside this very same courthouse and gather that crowd. Today, America looked back on one of the darkest moments in its history, and resoundingly told Judge Taney to go to hell.

How the Obama Effort in Medina County Paid Off

The headline of this article might seem a little strange given that Obama lost Medina County by 7184 votes. As far as the Obama campaign was concerned, though, it wasn't just the total spread between the candidates that mattered. What mattered was how the Obama campaign did in Ohio's counties compared to the Kerry campaign in 2004. Applying that standard, the Obama effort in Medina County paid off.

In 2004, George W. Bush got 48196 votes and John Kerry got 11924. The spread between Bush and Kerry was 11924. The total Medina County vote for the two candidates was 84468. In 2008 John McCain got 46829 and Barack Obama got 39645. As mentioned above, those figures meant that the spread between the two was 7184. The total Medina County vote for the two candidates was 86474.

This meant that on a higher total vote, Barack Obama reduced the GOP lead in Medina County by over 4000 votes. Medina County wasn't unique. In almost every "red" county, Barack Obama did better than John Kerry. This meant that when he got 60% of the vote in the eight largest Ohio counties, John McCain couldn't offset that vote with votes from smaller counties like Bush did in 2004. By fighting for every county, Barack Obama was able to carry Ohio.

Obama Wins Dixville Notch and Hartville's Location in N.H.

You know that you are obessing about an election when you get up at 3:00 am to check out whether Obama carried Dixville Notch in New Hampshire. Dixville Notch, and another little town, Hartville's Location, have a tradition of getting their voters out at midnight on Election Day to cast the first votes in the nation. By the way, when we say "little", we aren't kidding. The total votes cast this year in these two towns numbered 50.

So here I am at 3:00 am checking out the numbers. It turns out that Obama won both towns. In Dixville Notch he won by a vote of 15 to 6 and Hartville's Location by 17 to 10, for a total of 32 to 16. In Hartville's Location there were two write-in votes for Ron Paul. Ralph Nader was on the ballot in both locations, but got no votes.

Dixville Notch almost always votes Republican. In fact, since 1960, it has only gone Democrat for President one time, and that was in 1968. So, the fact that Obama won could mean something, or it might not mean a thing. In any event, there it is. You can read the whole article about Dixville Notch and Hartville's Location here.

The image to the left is from the Columbus Dispatch website. The headline is from an article that appeared on Sunday, November 2, 2008. The article reports on the last of the Dispatch polls for the 2008 presidential race. The last poll that the Dispatch did showed Obama with a 7 point lead. This poll shows him with a 6 point lead, both margins are outside of the margin of error. 

The Dispatch claims that its poll has always predicted the winner of what it refers to as "modern" presidential elections, although it also points out that the last poll taken on the 2004 election had Kerry and Bush tied. Bush went on to win by 2.1% of the vote. I am assuming that the 2004 Dispatch poll showing them tied was within the poll's margin of error. 

The Dispatch poll shows Cordray easily winning election as Ohio's Attorney General. It also shows casino gambling failing and it shows the regulations on payday lending being supported by Ohio voters. 

When you look at the internal numbers for the poll, it shows Obama leading in the Northeast, the Northwest, and what the poll calls the Central, parts of Ohio. It shows Obama losing in the Southeast, Southwest, and what it calls the West Central, parts of Ohio. 

Interestingly, for all the talk about how Obama would have trouble with working class white voters, the poll shows Obama winning every income group up to $70,000, and then losing every income group above that figure. The next group after $70,000, which is $70,000 to $80,000, Obama only loses by four points. 

Another interesting statistic is the difference between early voters and those who have not yet voted. Among those who reported already casting their absentee ballots, Obama leads by 14%, but among those who have not yet voted, he only leads by 2%. 

You can read the whole article here. 

Interesting WaPo Article on Obama Campaign and Techology

According to the Washington Post's article on how the Obama campaign uses technology, this woman is one of over 10,000 volunteers working for Barack Obama in Virginia. The article is about how the Obama campaign has used technology such as text messaging, cell phones, and e-mail to get younger workers involved in the Obama campaign.

The article contains this interesting quote:

According to the Post poll, Obama had a 75 to 22 percent advantage among likely voters who had heard from his campaign in person, on the phone or via e-mail or text message but had not been reached by Sen. John McCain's campaign.

If you have any interest in technology and politics, be sure to check out this article.

The Kicker's Prediction for 2008 Electoral College

RealClearPolitics.com has this great tool where you can predict which states will be carried by which presidential candidate. Here's ours:

The Vet Who Did Not Vet Video Clip

This is pretty funny. Check it out.

The Barack Obama Thirty Minute Special

In case you missed it, here is the Barack Obama 30 minute special that was on Wednesday evening. It is well worth the time it takes to view it.

McCain Campaign Running Robocalls in AZ

Okay, now this is interesting. Talking Points Memo is reporting that several of its readers who live in Arizona have received robocalls attacking Obama. The robocalls are being paid by the Republican National Committee. Apparently the RNC is freaking out over recent polls that show Obama within two points of Angry John in his homestate. So this means that in the closing week of the campaign, the RNC is being forced to play defense on McCain's home turf. Gee, how is that selection of Sarah Palin working out for you now, Johnny?

ACORN Releases First Video Ad

Former GOP Senator Backs Obama

The online publication Politco is reporting that former GOP Senator Larry Pressler voted for Barack Obama and donated $500.00 to his campaign. Pressler was the first Vietnam veteran to serve in the U.S. Senate. The reason he gave for backing Obama was the economy. Here is a quote from the article:

"I just got the feeling that Obama will be able to handle this financial crisis better, and I like his financial team of [former Treasury Secretary Robert] Rubin and [former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul] Volcker better," he said. By contrast, John McCain's "handling of the financial crisis made me feel nervous."

You can read the rest of the Politco article here.

PD Story on Early Voting in NE Ohio

The Cleveland Plain Dealer ran a atory on early voting in Northeast Ohio. Of the counties that it could get statistics for, Summit County leads in the percentage of its voters who have voted early. The statistics displayed, according to the article, are as of Friday, October 24th. The article can be read here.

Home Made Democratic Yard Sign

A Medina County Democrat who lives near Wadsworth, Ohio in southern Medina County has been putting up a message board near his home with Democratic inspired messages. Here's a picture of one that a friend of his sent us. If you would like to suggest a message, send your suggestion to joycekimbler@medinacountydemocraticactioncommittee.org and we will pass it on.

A Funny Get Out the Vote Video

One of our readers sent us this email message. The idea is to get people who you think might not vote to vote. Our reader used our Treasurer's, Joyce Kimbler, name to show how it works. Don't worry, though, Joyce definitely plans on voting this election. Here's the message:

Joyce ,

Ok, this video is funny. A little outrageous and a little over the top, but really funny. And a little bit scary.

Plus, Joyce , you're in it. Yes, you. Check it out:

http://www.cnnbcvideo.com/index.html?nid=0JZYe7lzONp.lKCZYFXTDjQwMjczODE-&referred_by=11300921-ws2ZEQx

P.S. Don't worry, this is not a virus or anything. I just sent the message using the "email a friend" tool on their site.

Bush Asks Justice Department to Look at New Ohio Voters

The Washington Post and the Cleveland Plain Dealer are both reporting that President Bush asked Attorney General Mukasey to review concerns raised by the GOP over approximately 200,000 new voter registrations. This action was taken as a result of a letter that Bush received from the House Minority Leader, John Boehner. Boehner first asked Attorney General Mukasey to take action, but didn't receive a response to that request. He then sent his letter to Bush.

This action may explain why a GOP donor dismissed his lawsuit against Brunner that he had filed in the Ohio Supreme Court. That lawsuit was subject to possible dismissal because he wouldn't have standing to bring such an action against Brunner.
One of the arguments that Secretary of State Brunner raised in Federal Court is that a private person or entity doesn't have standing to raise claims under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). The U.S. Supreme Court apparently agreed with her since it cited cases in its opinion that deal with that issue and since it voted 9-0 not to hear the case. The same argument wouldn't apply to a lawsuit brought against Brunner by the Federal Government.

The issue between Brunner and the GOP deals with the approximately 200,000 voter registrations where the information in the voter database doesn't match the information in databases maintained by the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles or the Social Security Administration. The GOP sees this as evidence of voter fraud. It cites as evidence reports of problems with registrations obtained by ACORN workers. Brunner counters that most discrepancies are caused by typographical errors and other errors made by clerical workers at local Boards of Elections.

Brunner's attorneys point out that the HAVA mandates that no voter can be removed from the voting rolls within 60 days of an election due to computer database mismatches. They could, however, be required to vote provisional ballots. Brunner believes that requiring provisional ballots in such cases carries the potential of such votes not being counted. Additionally, there is the possibility that many Ohioans who registered this year may not vote if they think that their votes won't be counted. One suspects that depressing the turnout is what is behind Bo

Given the track record of Bush's Department of Justice on supposed voter fraud issues, this is not a good thing. One of the many scandals that has rocked the Bush Administration is the firing of nine U.S. Attorneys because they wouldn't bring bogus criminal prosecutions for supposed voter fraud. We don't know whether any of the political appointees who were behind the firing of the U.S. Attorneys are still in office under Mukasey.

On the other hand, we don't know if Mukasey is as much of a political partisan as Gonzales. We don't know if he wants to further sully the reputation of the Department of Justice by ordering the possible disenfranchisment of up to 200,000 voters. We don't know if he wants to be preceived as a partisan hack on his way out the door.