’)Iowa is a state with a 95% white population. It went for Bush by 1%. And yet, Sen. Obama has consistently been double digits ahead of Sen. McCain there (and he beat Sen. Clinton and Sen. Edwards in the caucuses, of course).
What’s the deal?
It can’t all be geography – Indiana, Missouri, and Kentucky also share a border with Illinois and are much closer races.
Is it the corn? Or perhaps the after effects of James Earl Jones in Field Of Dreams?
I remember hearing something about this during the primary campaign (probably from your blog) but might it have to do with the fact that Iowa doesn’t have the history of racial strife that, say, a Southern state would, but it doesn’t have the black population to overcompensate an Obama-hesitant white population, like a North Carolina, etc. Did that make any sense?
Or maybe Iowans are just awesomer, which I would argue is probably the case.
Clearly it must be because other states are full of racists. There can be no other reason to oppose Obama.
Iowans are pragmatists. Plus they can smell bullshit from a pretty good distance.
Journalist David Sirota has a theory on that topic which he called the “race chasm” – in the primary Obama did well in states that were either less than 6% black (race is not a significant issue there – e.g. Maine, Montana, North Dakota, etc.) or more than 17% black (so the black vote would be decisive in a Democratic primary – e.g. most Southern states) but came out worse in states that were between 6% and 17% black (in states where race often is an issue and the black vote wasn’t enough to make the difference – e.g. New York, California, Michigan).
“It can’t all be geography – Indiana, Missouri, and Kentucky also share a border with Illinois and are much closer races.”
Also, a large part of the white population in Iowa (as well as Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Dakotas) is German-American or Scandinavian-American. Those groups tend to be more liberal than the general white population.
There are so few black people, that there are no racial tensions in the state. This seems to have been a pattern in most states with large white populations during the primaries.
JWG: Oliver is talking about why, nation wide, Obama gets about 35% of the white vote (IIRC from the last DailyKos poll I looked at), yet he gets over 50% of the vote in Iowa which is 95% white. That’s not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, but it does seem to indicate that there’s something different about Iowa. No one said or implied anything about other states being racist.
My hypothesis, at least specifically for Iowa, is that Iowa knows Obama better than possibly any other state, except perhaps Illinois. It’s considerably harder to apply one’s prejudices to someone you know well.
I don’t know what it is, but there are good folks there, and that state is going to prove to be (already is) for Obama in 2008 what West Virginia was for JFK in 1960. God bless the Hawkeye State.
Maybe, just maybe, race has nothing to do with whom you vote for?
I grew up in Iowa and yes (gasp) there is a white, rural flyover state where people care about tradition, god, and apple pie but don’t think Republicans heed their best interests. Remember Iowa was one of the lone Dukakis states twenty years ago. It was brought into the union to balance the (then) slave-state of Texas. Lots of progressive, eco-friendly, humble folk who value education and organic food, last I knew.
Consider also Vermont, which is even whiter than Iowa. Obama beats McCain by over 20 points here. Maine, the whitest state, likewise has a double digit advantage for Obama.
“McCain’s winning Iowa”-Mark Halperin
I am a native Iowan. Ever seen Fargo (the movie)? It gets the upper midwestern culture down cold–hard working, nice, oh so stoic, and absolutely not tolerating any BS. The financial meltdown is not playing well in Iowa City. Plus, this doesn’t jibe with most people’s stereotypes, but Iowa is a very progressive state. Ethanol, wind farms, prairie restoration. Ever wondered why Iowa is always on pundits’ lists of competitive Congressional races? B/c they have a bipartisan commission that doesn’t gerrymander Congressional districts.
But don’t ever get on an interstate highway there. It is literally hundreds of miles of flat corn fields stretching to the horizon.
Hate to be a downer about this, but I think part of this has to do with McCain’s disdain for the Iowa caucuses.
Another native Iowan here, though I’ve since relocated to KC. I think there’s a lot of truth in Iceman’s Minnesota/Scandinavian-liberal observation. And while it’s largely a conservative state, it’s mostly not the sort of batshit racist Southern style neo-conservativism. Many/most Iowa Republicans are much closer in ideology to Truman Dems than Bush Repubs.
My thinking, having spent my life all over the Midwest, is that Democrats could, with the right strategy, turn Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin and Missouri permanently blue. Forget about the Dakotas and Nebraska (especially this time- Nebraska has to be the most racist state I’ve ever spent time in). Haven’t made up my mind on Kansas yet. . . lots of very bad stuff there, but I keep seeing glimmers of hope from across the border (about six blocks away). My impression of Missouri is that we desperately, desperately want to be swept off our feet by the Democratic party, but that that just hasn’t happened yet. (Don’t get me started on McCaskill)
IIRC, Obama set up a very strong ground-level organization in Iowa very early, which probably also has something to do with it, right?
McCain had been against ethanol subsidies for a long time. That wouldn’t help.
I grew up in Omaha, went to Iowa State for undergrad, went to Wash U in St. Louis for lawschool and have settled in St. Louis, so I think I have a decent feel for the difference between Iowa and the other states, though they have been spelled out pretty well already.
I think one other reason that has yet to be discussed is that there are a decent number of fairly liberal universities and colleges for a state so small (when compared to, say, Nebraska) and I think that has an effect.
I do have to say that I don’t think Nebraska is any more racist than anywhere else and I don’t think Missouri is going to bo permanently blue any time soon. Unfortunately, I think that there are tons of “batshit racist Southern style neo-cons” here that will never flip.
In 2003, my ex and I went to Nebraska to visit her family; while we were there, we went to Omaha and met two high-school friends of hers for dinner. Afterwards, she said, “Well, you just met the entire Nebraska anti-war movement”. I didn’t SEE racism while I was there, maybe because I didn’t see one person who wasn’t white.
oh, and Iowa has the highest per capita enlistment in the military (or maybe just the Marines, I can’t remember) of any state. They’ve seen five years of Republican Iraq BS firsthand.
Iowa has a highly educated population, which makes it fairly liberal, especially for a largely rural state. I would also argue that the Iowa Caucuses — which I know Oliver dislikes — play a part. The great thing about the caucuses is that people have to spend time here, almost all politically active Iowans come in direct contact with the candidates and they form well grounded impressions of them. As a result voters here are less likely to see either candidate as “strange” or “unknown.” All of this works to Obama’s advantage, as does the fact that Iowans are less likely to be rigidly ideological than core voters, especialy on the right. –TexasPete, now living happily in Iowa