There's something going on down South.

[kentuck]

Obama won huge victories in SC, NC, and Georgia. Also, there have been two "special" elections in the South in recent weeks. The latest was last night. Both elections were in very "red" districts - one of which was formerly occupied by Trent Lott, the former Majority Leader of the Republican Party. The other election was in a Republican district in Louisiana. The Democrat won an upset victory there also. This is very, very significant because Republicans seldom lose "special" elections. In the interim, the Republicans also lost the seat in Illinois that had been held by former Speaker Denny Hastert.

Perhaps it is time we re-think our preconceptions and steretypes? For those that say the South is solidly Republican and Democrats cannot win may want to take a second look? There's something happening here and what it is ain't exactly clear...But, we should not forfeit any area of the country. The people are ready for change - even in the South.

The big win by Hillary in WV last night does not mean that the people of WV will vote for John McCain in the fall. The people of WV and KY are in dire straits in many parts of their states. There is a drug epidemic. They are desperate. They are looking for economic solutions, in my opinion, and that is why they went so heavily for Hillary Clinton. It was not because of racism or stupidity. They want the promise of jobs and they feel that Hillary is the best candidate for them. Obama did not put enough hope on the table for them.

[ashling]

1. I agree with your conclusion

However, Trent Lott never occupied the seat that Travis Childers just won in Mississippi. That is anotherone the media got wrong and has made no effort to correct.

[kentuck]

I did not know that...

I assumed they were talking about the seat that Lott held when he was in the House?

[MonkeyFunk]

10. No

Lott was in Mississippi's 5th House district. Last night's seat was the 1st.

[kentuck]

15. Thanks for the correction.

Proof that we cannot depend on news to give 100% accurate reports.

[jobycom]

16. No, Trent Lott's district was the Coast, and has long been held by a Democrat.

The district that Childers won last night was the district of the Republican chosen to replace Lott in the Senate, not Lott's Congressional District, which has long been held by Gene Taylor, a moderate Dem.

An interesting but not irrelevant point--both Tayor and Lott are from the Coast, and both had houses destroyed by Katrina--on opposite ends of the region struck by Katrina. Katrina struck Republicans and Democrats alike, and Bush and his corporate buddies screwed the victims, Republicans and Democrats alike. I've met a lot of former Republicans who changed allegiances after Katrina. That's the point when Bush's popularity began to plummet, too. The Republican colors were exposed on that one, and many common folk who believed in the Republican Party were very disillusioned.

Good post, Kentuck.

[underpants]

2. There is a drug epidemic

Along with the pending Medicaid and Medicare collapses and the need to change the poverty level indicators (to name a few) THIS is the most ignored news topic out there.

I know someone in the medical field in WV and I asked her about this the last I saw her. She said that something like 80% of burns that they see in ER's are meth related.

[NightWatcher]

3. Georgia will be some work, but it's possible

from Super Tuesday
Obama 700,366
Clinton 328,129
total dem votes: 1,028,495

Huckabee 326,069
McCain 303,639
Romney 289,737
Paul 27,978
total pug votes: 947,423

Democratic Advantage: 81,072

It's going to be rough but TOGETHER we can do it.

Remember, it's all about 1.20.09

[Teaser]

4. South vs. Appalachia

It's pretty clear from this post at Josh Marshall's blog that whatever Obama's problems are, demographically, it's almost entirely an Appalachian phenomenon.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to determine the cause of this geographic disparity.

[kentuck]

12. Thanks for this link:

"These regions were settled disproportionately by Scots-Irish immigrants who pushed into the hill country to the west in part because that's where the affordable land was but also because they wanted to get away from the more stratified and inegalitarian society of the east which was built by English settlers and their African slaves. Crucially, slavery never really took root in these areas. And this is why during the Civil War, Unionism (as in support for the federal union and opposition to the treason of secession) ran strong through the Appalachian upcountry, even into Deep South states like Alabama and Mississippi.

As I alluded to earlier, this was the origin of West Virginia, which was originally the westernmost part of Virginia. The anti-slavery, anti-slaveholding upcountry seceded from Virginia to remain in the Union after Virginia seceded from the Union. Each of these regions was fiercely anti-Slavery. And most ended up raising regiments that fought in the Union Army. But they were as anti-slave as they were anti-slavery, both of which they viewed as the lynchpins of the aristocratic and inegalitarian society they loathed. It was a society that was both more violent and more self-reliant.

This is history. But it shapes the region. It's overwhelmingly white, economically underdeveloped (another legacy of the pre-civil war pattern) and arguably because of that underdevelopment has very low education rates and disproportionately old populations. "

=================

Also, I would add, in regards to WV and KY, they are different from other "Appalachian" states in that they are very poor and get very little help from their state governments. They depend on Federal aid if they get any help at all. That is why there is so much poverty centered there. They are not stupid. They are enslaved by their circumstances. Obama does not understand this area or these people, in my opinion.

[myrna minx]

5. This is why I think Dean and Obama's 50 state strategy was genius.

Why did Obama do so well in a state like Idaho? He actually went there and talked to the good people there. The Dems have neglected the south for too long. There are people who are really hurting and I believe we can bring them aboard, but we, the Dems haven't asked for their support nor have we listened to them for a very long time.

[FSogol]

9. You are entirely correct. Obama and the Democratic party are making

huge gains thanks to Dean's policies.

[myrna minx]

21. We've abandoned good Dems is southern states to fend for themselves for too long.

Thank you Dr Dean for having the simple yet brilliant plan to actually pay attention and not write off a good portion of the electorate.

[caledesi]

27. I agree! NT

[Straight Shooter]

6. Thank you for a positive interpretation of the perceptions of West Virginians

:thumbsup:

[underpants]

7. Chuck Todd weighth in

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/14/1018632.aspx



From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** Last night’s bigger story: So what event last night was more consequential: Obama’s substantial defeat in a state few had considered a general election battleground until Clinton declared it so last week? Or the Republicans losing a third-straight special congressional election in what was considered a solid GOP seat -- this one a Mississippi district where Bush won 62% of the vote in 2004? It was none other than NRCC chair Tom Cole who seemed to answer this question. “The political environment is such that voters remain pessimistic about the direction of the country and the Republican Party in general,” he said in a statement last night. “Therefore, Republicans must undertake bold efforts to define a forward-looking agenda that offers the kind of positive change voters are looking for. This is something we can do in cooperation with our Presidential nominee, but time is short.” Yes, Obama might indeed have a problem with some white working-class voters, although crosstabs from national polls and key state polls, not exit polls from a Democratic primary, might offer better clues to this. And, yes, McCain is better positioned than any other Republican out there to compete in this environment. But the Republican Party’s poor brand and its voters’ lack of enthusiasm right now tell us a WHOLE lot more about the overall political climate than last night’s West Virginia results do.

*** Staying with the bigger story a minute longer: How are congressional Republicans reacting? If our email boxes and voicemail boxes are any indication, there are two guys on the firing line: House GOP leader John Boehner and the NRCC’s Tom Cole. The two may attempt to shoot at each other a bit (watch Eric Cantor; he's already be looked to by some as the NEXT great savior of the House GOP), though the person who may ultimately be blamed is Bush. After all, Republicans aren't running Congress anymore so if voters are still punishing the GOP, they are punishing them for Bush. If this isn't proof that 2006 was about Bush and not corruption, we don't know what else you need. Remember, not a single Democratic incumbent lost in ’06. Cole, in his statement last night, is advising Republicans to become change candidates. It's tough to break through the presidential clutter to do that. And the thing that ought to scare the GOP even more is that if a Democrat is elected president, he'll appear to have massive coattails and that, in turn, will create the appearance of a mandate, a la Reagan in 1980. No wonder Clinton isn't ready to throw in the towel just yet: If Democrats win this presidential election, it will be the biggest mandate any Democrat has had for governing since LBJ in '64.

[Chulanowa]

8. Feel free to send a thank-you card to Howard Dean

Republican dominance in the south is a consequence of the Democrats neglecting the south for all those years. What we're seeing now is a direct result of Dean's fifty-state strategy.

Also, you might want to remember which part of the Democratic party laughed at the idea of attempting to win states besides New York, Massachusetts, California, and Michigan.

[grantcart]

25. good point you should start a thread on that point specifically

[dchill]

34. I second that emotion.

[Dhalgren]

11. One thing to bear in mind about the MS win,

the guy who won in Mississippi last night is hugely right-wing. He is anti-choice, pro War on Terra, pro-MIC, anti affirmative action. This guy is a Democrat in name only. I know it is a "win" for the Party and that this is all about trends and majorities and everything, but a lot of these Southern victories are going to be in name only...

[carolinayellowdog]

13. Don't forget Virginia-- 64% Obama

and IIRC the only Southern state where he won the "white vote" which probably makes us the most winnable in November. The Kos dairy cited upthread shows more than 2-1 margins for Obama in nearly every county east of the mountains.

[kentuck]

17. True.

And it was reported that he won 40% of the white vote in GA ! Of all places.

[Frances]

18. 40% of the Dem white vote, not the whole white population

I don't think Obama has a chance of actually winning Georgia, but I hope he will do better than expected. I think Obama will energize AFrican American and white liberals, which bodes well for the future.

Obama has strength in the West, which should compensate for some of the Deep South states.

[kentuck]

19. I think he has a chance...

but I'm an optimist. :-)

[AndyTiedye]

36. NO Democrat Has a Chance in Georgia as Long as DIEBOLD Counts ALL the Votes

[onehandle]

22. Virginia is the only other state where Obama has a chance.

Georgia and Virginia are about it.

Florida is 50% of a Southern state, but I'm not sure Obama can take it.

[kentuck]

23. That is the preconception and stereotype i was talking about...

In my opinion, it is defeatist. You may say it is "realistic"?

[H2O Man]

14. We have the ability

to make huge gains for the democratic party this fall, includding the White House, Congress, and state and local elections. "Strike when the irons are hot."

[onehandle]

20. Bush is the worst President in history.

Things are changing...slowly, but these trends are all mostly Bush's fault.

Don't expect a Southern sweep. Maybe Georgia (big maybe fueled by Bob Barr's candidacy)

I live here in the most liberal district in Georgia. Step outside of it and it's still mostly 1955.

Good for Governor Dean for fighting everywhere.

[terrell9584]

24. South never was Republican

They just began winning congressional seats after 1994 so everyone starting trying to categorize things. The Democrats retained control of the countryside. With gas as high as it is, the Republicans are pretty much done down here, at least non-presidentially

[onehandle]

26. Uh... No.

Massive amounts of Democrats became Republican because of the Democratic stand on civil rights.

That's not changing any time soon, although Bush fatigue may give Democrats a bump in the short term.

[terrell9584]

28. Ok, I'm a Southerner so.....

Here is the Congressional makeup of the Southern states in 1991

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/102nd_United_States_Congress

The present composition of the legislatures in this country

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_legislatures_of_the_United_States

Note that no Southern legislature was controlled by the Republicans until 1994, when both South Carolina and Florida were taken

The whole "The South became Republican argument because of Civil Rights" is a dog that won't hunt, especially when every redneck rural county in the region remains under the control of a Democratic courthouse ring, with a notable exception in areas that supported the Union and in a few counties of South Carolina

[onehandle]

29. It didn't happen overnight.

When "uber-liberal" Bill Clinton was elected, that was the last straw.

The old Democrats are getting older and dying off. And young Republicans hate taxes down here.

The Southern Strategy will keep the South red for a while longer.

[terrell9584]

33. yeah, but they hate fundamentalists just as much

Before the Republicans began their zenith in the 1990s, they were a party identified with the rich, and essentially, with Reagan and Goldwater. Johnny Isakson began his career as someone who was pro-choice, as did Haley Barbour, as did many Southern Republicans in the South. What changed the GOP is that you had Rove down here in the 1990s, recruiting these hardcore fundamentalists, who were lower in class, looked down upon by the descendants of the planter class and who had always been excluded.

And they began talking casino gambling, they began talking alcohol, you suddenly saw counties embroiled in disputes over whether to stay dry or not.

Most areas that vote straight GOP today voted straight Dem in 1990, the effect of the rise of the Evangelical right. The otherside of this is......people who are not in the evangelical right, or to be blunt, people who aren't Southern Baptist, want nothing to do with those who are, and while Baptists are a loud group, they are still a minority and there remains a silent majority down here who really doesn't like them or all their moral pontificating, especially not "rednecks" as people would call them. Rednecks/Good Ol' Boys and Baptists don't get along. Baptists are too high tone in how they act towards people, and for the Rednecks part, they drink too much and raise too much hell.

The Republicans made a temporary voter gain by appealing to the Baptists, but they have also begun losing many of the old Goldwater-Reagan voters who simply don't want to vote for what they are increasingly seeing as the "Baptist Party"

[Window]

30. K/R.

:kick:

[barack the house]

31. YES, the country is ready for change votes transfer once the nominee is decided. WE WIN.

[barack the house]

32. YES, the country is ready for change votes transfer once the nominee is decided. WE WIN.

[Texas Hill Country]

35. if obama is the nominee (which i admit is likely) he has a ton of work to do in those states.