Barack Obama's mythical problem with whites

There's been no shortage of public handwringing about whether or not Barack Obama can attract support from white voters, particularly white men. Some of it has even been pushed by Hillary Clinton's campaign itself.

Most of the analysis has overlooked one important fact, however: Hillary Clinton has a bigger problem with white voters than Barack Obama.

New data from the Pew Research Center illustrates my point: although Hillary Clinton leads McCain among white women by three points, she trails among white men by twenty-three points. Meanwhile, Obama trails among white women by just one point, and trails among white men by fifteen. Obama's net margin relative to Clinton drops by four points among white women, but increases by eight points among white men.

Overall, that means Obama is doing slightly better with white voters than is Hillary Clinton.

And this is according to a poll conducted entirely after the Wright controversy played itself out.

Here's the data:

Update II: I neglected to make the point that that Obama's 43% support among white voters is actually strong -- especially in the wake of Wright. In 1992, Bill Clinton won 39% of white voters. In 1996, he won 43%. In 2000, Gore won 42%. In 2004, Kerry won 41%. So 43% is a pretty good starting point, especially with 7% undecided. (Obama currently trails McCain by 7%, while Gore lost by 12% and Kerry lost by 17%.)

Despite the clear evidence to the contrary, a myth seems to have taken root that Barack Obama has a problem with white voters.

Why have some people have come to hold this false belief? Here are some likely reasons:

• Hillary Clinton leads Barack Obama among white voters in the Democratic nomination process. This is true, but it is a function of Hillary Clinton's popularity among white females. Barack Obama actually leads Clinton among white men, even excluding caucus states. Mark Blumenthal wrote about this over a month ago.
• Many Hillary Clinton advocates (Ed Rendell and Taylor Marsh come to mind) have pushed this argument, fueled by material advanced by the Clinton campaign. Moreover, recently it's become obvious the only way Clinton can win is by exploiting race to turn whites against Obama. In desperation mode, it's likely a lot of Clinton supporters are now doing and saying things they will regret within a matter of weeks if not days.
• People are lazy and let false stereotypes cloud their perception of reality. They figure Obama's black, therefore he must have a problem with whites. Fears generated by the Wright story may also have exacerbated this tendency.
• The media has done a horrible job of covering this aspect of the campaign and in many ways have been the laziest of all.

Probably the most important of these reasons is the fact that Hillary Clinton has won more white votes during the Democratic nomination contest than Barack Obama. But that only tells part of the story.

The full story is that while white women have strongly preferred Hillary Clinton, white men have mildly preferred Barack Obama. The reason for Hillary Clinton's strength among white women is largely because she is a woman; it's the same reason that Barack Obama does so well among blacks.

There's nothing wrong with this. Each candidate has his or her own strengths, and these demographic trends reflect those strengths. It's not a huge sign of weakness for Hillary Clinton to win just 15% of black voters in primary contests as she would still win the support of 85% of blacks in the general.

Similarly, Hillary Clinton's lead among white women does not suggest that Barack Obama has some sort of a problem with white voters. If that were true, how could he possibly be leading her amongst white men?

In primary states with exits polls (and delegates at stake), by my calculation, Barack Obama has won 3.3 million votes from white men, and Hillary Clinton has won 3.2 million. Considering that at least 100,000 of Hillary Clinton's votes come from "Limbaugh Effect" cross-over voting, Obama's lead is probably slightly larger by 50,000 or more votes.

More importantly, these numbers do not reflect the millions who have voted in caucuses, many of which took place in states with very high white populations, like Idaho (need I say more).

Truth be told, Obama's lead among white men is real, but narrow. In that sense, it's a good reflection of the overall state of the campaign.

And given that there's no such thing as essentially tied, it's just one more reason to feel comfortable about the fact that Barack Obama will be the Democratic Party's nominee in 2008.