Indiana and Ohio are not part of the South. And a good argument can be made that KY, WV and OK aren't either.
Still, this is surprising how? Imagine if the election hadn't been about Democratic-favorable issues (for now) in a very Democratic-favorable environment, for a sec...
Well, we don't have to imagine it; 2004 was about Republican favorable issues (at the time) and in a Republican favorable environment, and Kerry didn't do much worse with the white southern vote (better in some places).
Kerry had one thing against him - Catholic. Obama has three - black, Muslim and *exotic*.
Not talking about Alabama or Mississippi, Nym. You know what states I'm referring to. They weren't voting on economic issues there this election anyway (even though they were the issues).
Oh, I knew you weren't talking about those states. I was.
There seems to be pretty clear evidence that the "exotic" and "Muslim" problems went away far better in areas Obama actually campaigned in both in physically and also in terms of having a campaign organization and ad spending, as opposed to those in which he didn't, which shows people are at least persuadable when provided with evidence (although, maybe he deliberately didn't target areas where he knew his message would get a less receptive audience? It's a chicken and egg problem to a certain extent, the relationship between campaigning and ad spending and electoral performance).
I think Al is on to something too in that Obama very much avoided a class based campaign, especially considering how potentially successful such a campaign could've been in such troubled economic times. Thus, the white working poor who didn't have a cultural connection to Obama like those with similar melanin levels to him felt saw no real reason to vote for him for economic reasons, especially since they saw nothing of him either personally or on tv (and as Al has also pointed out, they may have little or no access to the internet also, so combined with never seeing him or his ads, it allowed myths to propagate about him in these areas). I think economic issues are still definitely winners for Democrats in states like West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma, much as they have been for local Democrats in these states even in recent times, it just takes a Democrat willing to work to win these states. I certainly hope to see Obama make more of an effort here come 2012 (especially since if he's in a position politically where he can afford to, it's obviously a good sign for the health of the economy and the nation).
