Chait - "Probably the biggest impediment white voters have voting for Obama is the primal fear that he's "for the blacks," not for them."

Huh? Did you read the report? That's not at all what it concludes.

In fact, it comes through overwhelmingly that, in sharp contrast to the earlier study done by Greenberg and Carville in 1985, these Macomb County voters today are NOT agitated by racial issues-- despite living next door to the continuing freak show of Detroit's mayor, who makes Marion Barry look like Calvin Coolidge. Greenbeout hte Ameircan middle rg and Carville's data and analysis show these voters as intensely nationalistic and despairing about the prospects for the vanishing Michigan working middle class.

Their villains are China, NAFTA, Granholm and Bush-- not Wright or Obama or any african-american. These are national security/economic security Democrats. They're lukewarm about Obama mainly because he has never made their particular plight central to his project.

Excerpts from the PDF of the report:

"Macomb voters, and particularly the Democratic Defectors, are angry about the economy

in a unique way because they are focused more on lost jobs and the conscious decisions of the

powerful that have undermined the middle class....

"The Squeezed Middle Class: Beyond Minorities

"Voters in Macomb County, even more so than in the rest of the country, view the

challenges facing them, their communities, and the country as a whole through the prism of the

middle class. On the one hand, these voters strongly believe that America was built by a vibrant,

growing middle class, and that a thriving middle class is essential for our economy. On the other

hand, when they look at our country and their own communities today, they see a middle class

that is disappearing...."

"So why are these voters in Macomb holding back from Obama? ...First, they are not sure he is consumed with the economy and consumed with it in the way they are. They are angry at the elites of business and politics who have sold out the Reagan Democrats and American worker and middle class and they want to vote for a Democrat or a leader who gets that this is project number one....

"[McCain's pro-middle class taxcuts] message, however, also brings in the aspiration for a “strong” country and economy and “defeating” extremists in Iraq – alluding to the other and perhaps most important reason why many of the Democratic defectors are holding back: they are strong defense Democrats who give Obama lower marks on national security than voters across the state and nation.

"Second, it is hard to underestimate the importance of American strength, respect for

the military and American soldiers, and love of country and their role in holding voters back....

"Our regression modeling shows that trust on national security is nearly as strong as the

economy as a driver of the vote. When combined with trust on Iraq, national security actually

trumps the economy and becomes the most important factor in changing the mind of these

Macomb County voters.

"National security is the one area where McCain is demolishing Obama – way beyond

anything we have seen in our national surveys. Nationally, McCain has a 26-point advantage on

handling national security, but in Macomb his lead grows to 43 points and among Democratic

Defectors to a breathtaking 69 points. While not as dramatic, a similar pattern exists on Iraq.

Nationally, McCain is somewhat more trusted to handle Iraq by 6 points, but in Macomb, it is 17

points. Just 36 percent of Macomb voters choose Obama to handle the issue, falling to 30

percent among Democratic Defectors...."

Sure, I wouldn't crass calculating beyond politicians and their advisers, but do you really believe 80,000 blacks were going to purchase tickets and travel to Denver? I don't think so.

To follow up on what Jon wrote below , I think the stadium calculation may have been right. The visuals

An Obama banana republic rally!

Well, the TV feed shots seemed to focus on the Democratic Party delegates in all of their multicultural glory, so if that was their goal, I don't think it worked.  

David Brooks on PBS thought the speech was flat, and blamed it on the size of the stadium venue, which prevented him from connecting with and feeding off the crowd to the extent he would in a packed indoor arena.  

Jonathan Chait, who as a leftie is predictably obsessed with race, makes the following comment. Yes, they want to let the public in, and yes, they want to showcase the enthusiasm for Obama. But I have to think they also...

Maybe that was the aim -- though I doubt it.  If it was, then it failed.  Watching at home, the crowd shots I saw were of an America I recognize:  white, black, Asian, Latino, young, old, pierced, fat, thin, etc.  No, the thing that was most spectacular, and probably the most calculated, was when the camera pulled back for a live shot of the whole damn stadium, packed w/ people.  My roommate and I, mild-mannered schoolteachers both, erupted as one, bringing hands to our faces and whistling, underbreath:  "Holy Sh--!"

I'm not surprised to see this ridiculous nonsense coming from Jonathan Chait, he's as out of touch is John McCain, and his words will be just as irrelevant after November.

Thanks for relaying Brooks' comments, gurdie. Now I KNOW Obama's speech hit its targets.

how does that song go? "Party like a rock star?"

ROFL

"Well, the TV feed shots seemed to focus on the Democratic Party delegates in all of their multicultural glory, so if that was their goal, I don't think it worked."

What exactly are you saying, other than that the Republican delegates to their convention are, as usual, in danger of looking as multicultural as a golf club photo-shoot in a middle-aged white retirement community?