North Carolina Bound

In conference calls this morning and afternoon, Barack Obama's campaign chieftains claimed that Obama would be quite competitive in the general election in North Carolina. That pricked the ears of the Republican National Committee.

Alex Conant, a spokesman there, wanted to get this response on the record: "the Senate’s ‘most liberal’ member is not going to win a state Republicans carried by double digits in the last two cycles and haven’t lost since voters wore bell-bottoms.”

True, John Edwards said he'd help deliver the state for John Kerry in 2004; Bush won it by 12 points that year; by 14 points in '00, and Jimmy Carter was the last Democrat to win there.

But the state is-a-changin'. The counties around Raleigh, Durham and Fayetteville are growing very fast, and suburbs like Clayton and Holly Springs might, under the right circumstances, vote for the right Democrat.

Comments

I think the North Carolina republicans underestimate the impact Obama will have. I live in North Carolina. I have never voted for any presidential candidate because there was never one who met my criteria and thereby earned my vote.

Obama has met that criteria and I will be voting for him.

I am not alone on this. I know quite a few people who voted Republican last time who will vote for Obama this time.

Posted by sewells | March 12, 2008 4:23 PM

Well of course they're going to say that. North Carolina will probably be a reliably swing state within the next decade, and like Marc says, I think the right Democrat has a chance today. I also think that that right Democrat might well be Barack Obama -- so all the more reason for the Republicans to beg not to be thrown into that particular briar patch. Whoops, sorry, was that race baiting?

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 12, 2008 4:25 PM

The great mystery of the 2008 primaries is why more professional-class whites in Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia vote Democratic than in Ohio or Pennsylvania.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | March 12, 2008 4:25 PM

Yeah not going to happen. Does anyone know that back in Illinois Obama blocked a bill and then twice voted against it called BAIPA. It would have blocked the killing of babies that "failed to abort" ie. who had been BORN during an abortion proceeding.

Suddenly all the inroads with the south that Obama has cultivated will dissappear when people start hearing about his actual record and not just the hype.

Posted by Jesse | March 12, 2008 4:33 PM

Also, Alex Conant is a known fabricator of the truth, especially when it suits his short-term goals. I should know, I've worked with him and watched him respond to unpleasant facts with a well-spun version of reality.

Come to think of it, that makes him a perfect RNC spokesman!

Posted by DSG | March 12, 2008 4:34 PM

Don't speak for us, Jesse! You don't know how we feel! Trust us, not being born beats living any day of the week!

Posted by Dead Babies for Obama! | March 12, 2008 4:38 PM

That comment is aimed squarely at NC Democratic primary voters, so they think they will get attn after primary day.

Posted by tate | March 12, 2008 5:04 PM

Obama's voting record makes him unelectable in a general election, as Jesse pointed out. It's indefensible.

Posted by Rock | March 12, 2008 5:07 PM

It is worth noting that in the 50 state SurveyUSA polls released last week, the results in North Carolina were McCain 47%, Obama 45%... which is pretty close... within the margin of error and certainly "in play".

Posted by Samuel Minter | March 12, 2008 5:31 PM

Hey hey! Good to see Holly Springs getting some love. When I lived there it was nothing but a small town...now we're getting mentioned in blogs!

It's good to grow up.

Posted by Jake | March 12, 2008 5:36 PM

It is worth noting that in the 50 state SurveyUSA polls released last week, the results in North Carolina were McCain 47%, Obama 45%... which is pretty close... within the margin of error and certainly "in play".

Yup. North Carolina is, at this point, not exactly the typical southern state in the old Mississippi/Alabama/South Carolina mold. While NC isn't quite on the Virginia level, that's certainly the direction it's trending with education levels and other demographics. It's certainly an important state for the Democratic candidate to contest.

Posted by jbryan | March 12, 2008 5:46 PM

I see the most liberal senator bullshit has now become unversally acknowledged truth. Russ Feingold apparently sells shoes for a living, and Bernie Sanders manages rock bands. Oh, and John Kerry, who was "most liberal" four years ago (funny coincidence, that) has gone into recreational consulting.

Posted by Bloix | March 12, 2008 6:06 PM

This RNC spokesman doesn't speak for North Carolina.

I can guarantee McCain is going to have to work for my good old state, and Obama has a very, VERY real chance of getting NC.

Does he realize how many northerners have moved down here? Raleigh is exploding like no other city around because of this. It's quickly becoming part of the "New South" along with our neighbors that drive horribly. (Virginia.)

Thanks for the Holly Springs mention by the way. I'm moving there from Cary in about a month.

Posted by Britt | March 12, 2008 6:10 PM

North Carolina was one of the eight states that Cornell Belcher was commissioned to study for the DNC by Howard Dean. Belcher now works for the Obama campaign. I think that North Carolina will be more winnable than some people think.

Posted by Anthony | March 12, 2008 6:28 PM

McCain wins NC by at least 8 points. Obama will do very well with the large African American population in that state that already votes overwhelmingly Democratic. Those are not the voters a Democrats needs to win over in order to win the state.

Posted by Tim K | March 12, 2008 6:39 PM

Also, did Edwards really promise he could deliver NC? I'm sure he helped there (not sure why else Kerry would have gained two points in that state over Gore) but considering he would have been, at best, probably an even money shot to hang on to his Senate seat, that seems overpromising on something that he was almost certain to underdeliver on.

That said, I reiterate my statement that NC absolutely is winnable. I've spent some time there and I think within a decade, this state will be up in the air every election. (Thought experiment: which current state, reliably Democratic, as of late, seems likely to slip in that same direction?) Winnable this year? 3-1 if Obama is the nominee, 12-1 if it's Hillary.

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 12, 2008 7:56 PM

Jeff:

I think you may be right about "within a decade" but I don't think it will be this year. Maybe in 2012 or 2016, all things being equal.

Posted by Tim K | March 12, 2008 8:43 PM

In Raleigh here. I think North Carolina's very much in play. There are an awful lot of liberal white professionals in the Triangle, there's a big black population, and the state is trending more purple. Clinton would lose in a landslide here, but I think Obama's got a real shot at it. If nothing else, he'll definitely force McCain to commit resources to defending a state he would have been able to take for granted even a few years ago.

Posted by EarBucket | March 12, 2008 9:26 PM

While I am looking forward to having a meaningful presidential primary for a change, I am not looking forward to having the national press corps write uninformed stories about the state's politics.

As other commentators have observed, many of the same trends at work in VA are at work in NC (though not as developed).

Many aspects of NC play to Obama's strength. The state has a large group of highly educated professional in the Research Triangle (the state's richest source of votes), a sizable African-American population (especially in the rural East) and an open primary structure.

A weakness is that many parts of the state have been grappling with severe economic problems for years. Voters in those counties, especially white working-class folks in the West, many not feel the Obama magic.

As an aside, the press may need to brush up on its geography. Clayton and Holly Springs, for instance, are in the Raleigh area. Also the trends playing out in the Triangle are very different from those in other parts.

Posted by Johne | March 13, 2008 7:41 AM

What people like Tim K don't understand is that Obama does well among moderate white suburbanites, the population that has been growing rapidly in North Carolina. He also has a particularly high standing among technology folks (this is an underreported story, but people like Lawrence Lessig have been making this case for Obama). So, I do in fact think North Carolina is a possible pickup for him.

That said, if the North-South demarcation line between Obama and McCain is located anywhere in the Carolinas, he has probably already won the election anyway.

Posted by DTM | March 13, 2008 8:00 AM

I moved to Raleigh, NC about 18 months ago from the DC metro area. Since my first day here, I've met dozens of people from "up north" who've moved here in the last 1 to 4 years.

Areas around Raleigh, Greensboro and Charlotte are not your typical, southern town of old and Sen. Obama can do very well here in the general election.

I've already begun to see a lot of Obama bumper stickers here in Raleigh and Obama has only made one public appearance here in Nov.

Posted by Bob | March 13, 2008 9:03 AM

DTM:

Do you really have to say that I don't understand something just because I don't agree with you? I accept the argument that NC is trending more Democratic than in the past because of highly skilled workers and their families moving to the state. It's a very similar argument to the one about Virginia, with the sprawling north-eastern suburbs of D.C. painting it more purple than red. I understand this. However, I remember many of the same things said about Virginia in 2004, yet Kerry lost VA by 8.2% to Gore's 8.05% four years earlier. It simply wasn't enough to make a significant difference. Why would there be such a dramatic change between 2004 and 2008, but not 2000 and 2004? So while I accept the Democratic nominee is likely to do better in those two states in 2008 than in either 2004 and 2000, I am very skeptical of a victory.

Posted by Tim K | March 13, 2008 9:33 AM

There are a few things to consider. The first is whether we would compete for the long-term or the short-term in the state. I hate to sound like an amateur here, but my guess is, there are fairly strong signals that the insiders will see in the next few months about which states will be competitive in the general election. If North Carolina is one of those states, then by all means, we should throw some resources into it. If the efforts of Team Obama volunteers can work in other states, why not in this one? It'll be a tall order to reduce the 500,000 margin that Bush had over Kerry four years ago, but in a Democratic year, with several things going for us, perhaps it can be done. If we are competing more for the long-term, as in trying to build a better party organization and voter database in the state, then we should still focus our energy there, but perhaps less than we would on, say, Ohio or Virginia. The second issue to consider is money. If Obama is the nominee and is so flush with cash, then why not force the Republicans to spend time defending the state? At worst, it'll be money that'll help us down the line. At best, it could put the state in our column.

And for all of those who might wonder why we would compete in a Southern state when there is currently friendlier territory, let me remind you guys that the state has fifteen Electoral votes. That's the same number as New Jersey, and more than Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Mexico, Missouri, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, Virginia, Iowa, and Colorado.

Posted by Brian | March 13, 2008 12:15 PM

For the record NC, unlike many souther states, has a Democratic Governor, Lt. Governor, almost all statewide elected officials. Democrats also have working majorities in both the State senate and house. The state is ripe for Obama to do very well and to help the down ticket dems. Harold Ickes has announced that the Clinton campaign sees the Carolinas as "red states" that are not in play. This morning democratic gubernatorial candidate, Beverly Perdue, announced her support for Obama. Her opponent, Richard Moore had already done so. The Ickes announcement along with the democratic polling in NC showing that Clinton may not pull as much as 42% of the vote in NC will lead to a big Obama win in the primary and may push NC into the Democratic column in November.

Posted by john g | March 13, 2008 12:52 PM

For the record NC, unlike many souther states, has a Democratic Governor, Lt. Governor, almost all statewide elected officials. Democrats also have working majorities in both the State senate and house. The state is ripe for Obama to do very well and to help the down ticket dems. Harold Ickes has announced that the Clinton campaign sees the Carolinas as "red states" that are not in play. This morning democratic gubernatorial candidate, Beverly Perdue, announced her support for Obama. Her opponent, Richard Moore had already done so. The Ickes announcement along with the democratic polling in NC showing that Clinton may not pull as much as 42% of the vote in NC will lead to a big Obama win in the primary and may push NC into the Democratic column in November.

Posted by john g | March 13, 2008 12:52 PM

For the record NC, unlike many souther states, has a Democratic Governor, Lt. Governor, almost all statewide elected officials. Democrats also have working majorities in both the State senate and house. The state is ripe for Obama to do very well and to help the down ticket dems. Harold Ickes has announced that the Clinton campaign sees the Carolinas as "red states" that are not in play. This morning democratic gubernatorial candidate, Beverly Perdue, announced her support for Obama. Her opponent, Richard Moore had already done so. The Ickes announcement along with the democratic polling in NC showing that Clinton may not pull as much as 42% of the vote in NC will lead to a big Obama win in the primary and may push NC into the Democratic column in November.

Posted by john g | March 13, 2008 12:53 PM

For the record NC, unlike many souther states, has a Democratic Governor, Lt. Governor, almost all statewide elected officials. Democrats also have working majorities in both the State senate and house. The state is ripe for Obama to do very well and to help the down ticket dems. Harold Ickes has announced that the Clinton campaign sees the Carolinas as "red states" that are not in play. This morning democratic gubernatorial candidate, Beverly Perdue, announced her support for Obama. Her opponent, Richard Moore had already done so. The Ickes announcement along with the democratic polling in NC showing that Clinton may not pull as much as 42% of the vote in NC will lead to a big Obama win in the primary and may push NC into the Democratic column in November.

Posted by john g | March 13, 2008 1:07 PM

Until relative recently the congressional delegations and state-wide officials throughout the Deep South were nearly all Democrats, but that didn't stop the Republicans from carrying those electoral votes in most elections except 1976.

Posted by Tim K | March 13, 2008 1:38 PM

Tim K,

It is not the bare fact we disagree: we have had enough conversations that I do in fact know some of things which you don't understand. What I was referencing this time is that you do not understand to whom Obama appeals. And I know that because you consistently misrepresent to whom he appeals.

Generally, you don't seem to understand that Obama is not Kerry or Gore, and that 2008 is not 2004 or 2000. Unfortunately, while I have tried to improve your understanding by sharing relevant information with you, you have demonstrated no inclination to actually consider that information.

In the end, you appear to be someone who takes it on faith that 2008 will be a repeat of 2004 and 2000, and there is nothing anyone can say that will cause you to critically examine your convictions. Which makes it rather pointless for me to keep trying to correct your misunderstandings--but reality will in the end assert itself.

Posted by DTM | March 13, 2008 3:40 PM

Michelle Obama should be ashamed.

"GLORK" Michelle Obama should be ashamed of her separatist-racist connection to Farrakhan and Chicago's Trinity United Church trumpeting Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama as the second coming of the messiah. Beneath that Darth-Vader-Mace-Windu-Jedi-Me ssiah Helmet Hairdo of Michelle Obama lurks a Wildabeast. If Michelle Obama new what her husband -- the Hope-A-Dope, Fonster Monster -- Barack Obama AKA Barack Hussein Obama did in Harlem, she would wash her wide-open, Hus-suey loving MUSILM mouth out, with twenty-four (24) mule-team double-cross X-boX-BorraX. The Lexis-Nexis-Albatross-Abacus-Complex of Barack and Michelle's relationship with MUSLIM "PATWANG-FWEEE" Rev. Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and black demagoguery of Obama's Stump Lines Echo Malcolm X; is about as much of a Hoax as Oxfam volunteers believe in HIV-- AIDS Witch Doctors in Africa they feed.
"God damn America" - Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama.
"God bless America" - Pope Benedict XVI and Hillary Clinton --
Michelle Obama AKA Wildabeast -- failed the Illinois Bar Exam. If Barack Obama had married Shaniqua instead of the leftist-separatist-racist-beast-'ist Michelle, his jackanapes' excitedly-fixed-elitism, Nemet-Oure-Saxas Our Father Our King -- black rage, and "GLORK" black demagoguery of Obama's Stump Lines Echo Malcolm X; would be taken a lot more expeditiously. Its expected that Obam will manage his explosive MUSLIM JIHADI -- FATIMA EXTREMISM obsession bitter. He is a MUSLIM "Glork" It’s time to introduce this false, fake "GLORK" Xerox - X box Obama and invite the self-indicting thief plagiarizing pipsqueke Xerox - X box to meet the Buffalo "GAZOWNT-GAZIKKA" Police Department Buffalo Creek. He's MAD!!!

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/

Posted by Janet Reno | May 4, 2008 12:03 AM