I seriously have a tough time believing that some Illinois State Senate bill I have not heard of until now was the reason for such a swing in 2008. It never came up in the campaign.
Take a look at the county swing maps, Appalachia CLEARLY stands out. There were plenty of socially conservative areas to swing heavily to Obama, Upper South and Appalachia are the exceptions, these also voted heavily against Obama in the primary. The reason becomes kind of obvious. Stating that this was simply due to Obama being far to the left of Kerry is not only based on inaccurate premise but doesn't hold up everywhere, it's almost as bad as J. J.'s argument for the Bradley Effect.
First off, he voted against it because the law was already on the books. Secondly, it didn't have any impact elsewhere. Is Appalachia really the only are where that bill was made into an issue?
Come on. Coal was part of the reason, as was a continuation of the trend in more rural socially conservative areas to move more Republican. However, you really need to have your head in the sand to believe race wasn't part of it. Or the fear of Obama being a Muslim, or whatever.
In 2008, race had to have been a factor.
North Dakota and South Dakota both swung heavily toward Obama in 2008 despite being religious and socially conservative.
Certainly social issues could have hurt, but it seems absurd to say race wasn't big there. Same with Arkansas, TN, KY, LA, etc. in 2008
