What I was hoping to do was get an idea of the kind of true representative breakdown nationally that Scott did for North Carolina about a third of the way down the previous page.

I know you can easily find the breakdown of votes for each candidate by state but not sure about the percentage based on race.  The only reason I knew about the 1/3 and 90% thing for North Carolina was I saw it on the news.  I haven't see similar breakdowns on other states.

Here is where I got the total number of voters for North Carolina.  There is a drop down on the page where you can select each state individually to see the breakdown for that state.

http://news.aol.com/elections/primary/state/nc

I think the "Identification" motive for voting is highly overrated. The idea that black people vote for Obama because he's black or women vote for Hillary because she's a woman is quite shaky. (Not to mention a little condescending.)

In my country we have a concept that we call "the Law of Jante". It's basically a fictional, satirical town charter that goes "Who the hell do you think you are" and lists rules that go "Thou shalt not think thou art cleverer than us." etc.

In some contexts, people are actually less likely to vote for people who are "like them". The idea being "I know me. I know what kind of pig-headed, greedy and selfish bastard I can be. I also know the difference between what I promise I'll do and what I'll actually do. This guy is like me. Which means I can't trust the Bastard!"

Or the ever popular: "This guy is like me. Except enormously succesful and popular. If I'd only applied myself I could've been like him. The Bastard! showing me up for a slacker, will he? Thinks he's too good for the likes of us? Is he never!"

There may be a portion of black voters that vote for him because he's black, just as there may be black voters more inclined to vote against him because he's black. (Certainly during the early years of female suffrage many women absolutely loathed the idea of voting for a woman. The attitude still prevails with some. )

For there to be a demonstrated unequivocal correlation between black people voting for Obama and Obama being black, they'd have to be going in a direction on the issues that is the opposite of where they'd go if both candidates were white.

Now, we know there's a certain slant in many black communities where they favor Democrats over Republicans (to a statistically significant degree), so that accounts for them voting democrat. It also accounts for a lot of people choosing the candidate that is furthest away from the Republican candidate (and most press I've seen points to Hillary being more conservative (i.e. Republican) on a lot of issues. I've certainly never seen anyone who votes Obama propose McCain as a preferrable alternative (on political grounds)  if Hillary is the one who gets the nod.)

Are there any political issues that have historically been seen as issues of interest to the Black community (With a statistically significant slant in favor of a specific "side" of the issue") where Hillary has credibly presented herself as a more attractive "black" candidate than Obama? And yet loses?

That, to me, would be the test of "racial voting". And I just haven't seen that point being made. A mere statistical correlation without context, without accounting for other possible factors, is just sensationalist and uninformative.

I'm curious about the relevance of bringing up this sort of racial data - not aimed at you, Keith, or anyone in the thread - but a lot of attention is given to, say, Obama doing well with blacks or Hillary doing well with uneducated (well, that one makes me smirk, but is otherwise meaningless)  - and I guess I'm dense but I don't get the meaning of it?  The relevance?  (Relevence?  how do you spell that?)

I have heard among some of my black friends a sense of disillusionment with the Clintons.  In January I knew some black women who supported Obama, but were sympathetic toward Hillary (one even referring to her as "my girl").  All of that changed with South Carolina and the "fairy tale" comments (which in fairness to President Clinton were misconstrued).  Based on my conversations with black friends many have articulated a feeling that the Clinton campaign has played the race card against Obama.  I haven't really probed why they feel that way -- but I think among my firends at least (and I'm doing a little mind reading here) there is a feeling that a white person (Hillary Clinton) is trying to use connections (the superdelegates) to keep a black person out of a job (the democratic nod).  And that is not a new story to black americans, particularly of African-American descent.

That said Obama really needs to reach out to working class whites and white women, he cannot win without them.

Mike:

In response to your question I think the relevance is that Obama can't win the General Election if he can't get working class whites to vote for him.  It is part of Senator Clinton's pitch that she is the candidate better able to defeat John McCain in November.  A failing of Obama's campaign has been that he has not gotten a significant number of working class whites to support him.  He needs to do that.  But I am not convinced that those whites who are voting for Mrs. Clinton now, would vote for her in Novemeber when she faces McCain.  So I think the support Obama has among Black voters -- who rarely cross party lines -- maybe stronger for November than the support Mrs. Clinton has with "working class" whites -- who often cross party lines (known as "Reagan Democrats").  A lot of people (including this writer) will often vote against their own ideology if they believe one candidate is a better person than the other or presents a new opportunity for America.  I am not convinced that Hillary Clinton can win that battle against John McCain, I think Barack Obama maybe able to (whether thats fair or not thats just my read). 

I think I agree, but I think the logic is a bit off - the facts show that Obama does REALLY well among blacks and does about 50/50 with some whites - this backs up what was just said - it's not that Obama can't win whites - he's winning them left and right - (just not as many as Hillary) - it's that she can't win blacks.

And this is just the primary - it's not that every vote for Clinton is a vote against Obama - they won't all turn to McCain - some will - but most of the votes she got in the primary will be cast again for Obama in the fall election - unless America really is race-motivated - but I keep hearing that it's not - so... while, deep down inside the pessimist in me thinks it might be, but the optimist in me says - "Ok, America!  Prove you don't care!  Judge on the issues, and vote for who you think is the best candidate!"

By those grounds, anyone who supports what the Democratic Party represents can only support Obama. 

So... challange is on, America!

News just broke - Edwards has endorsed Obama.

I knew I liked that guy!