Replies

"How did Scott Brown turn that 26-point deficit into a 6-point victory? By winning the white vote as massively as did Obama."

This article fails to analyze, in depth, the black vote for Obama VS Scott.

Buchanan says the black voting for Obama was 24-1 (96%). It appears, from my on-line search of availabe data, that about 20-24% of black voters voted for Brown (only 77% of black voters voted for Coakley). This means that 5 to 6 times as many black voters voted for Brown than voted for Obama.This is a very significant increase, especially if you see the Scott Brown vote as a vote against Obama or his agenda.

On his inauguration day, Obama was asked about how it felt to be the first black President. He said something like, "that lasted for about half an hour and then he had to deal with the problems that any other President had to deal with."

He was accurate with that statement. And, it appears from the Brown election results that an argument could be made that some black voters may have voted for him because he was black, but now that he is President it is apparent that a significant number of black voters are judging him based on his performance, and possibly ideology, in dealing with the "problems that any other President had to deal with", i.e. the issues that Scott Brown presented to the black voter in Massachusetts.

I think your figure on black vote for Brown is from pre-election polling, and it must be on a tiny sample, as the mass electorate is 5% or less black. However, news accounts of precinct returns in, e.g., Ward 12 of Boston (Roxbury, almost all black) was about 4%. Sadly, polling data almost always overstates what actually turns out at the ballot box in solidly black areas.

It may be possible to look at individual precincts in e.,g. randolph (city is about 30% black), parts of cambridge, worcester, etc, but I haven't seen those.