Polls Yield Tricky Answers on Race

Discussion Policy

Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Before passing judgment, consider this: Among the whites in Vermont who said race was important, 61 percent voted for Obama. Does that make Vermont less racist?

"I would hesitate to draw too broad a conclusion from the Democratic electorate," Mokrzycki said, "but it does seem that Democratic voters in Vermont who told us that race was an important factor were much more likely than their counterparts in other states to vote for Obama."

Some news analyses about the poll have concluded that if you are a white male, didn't attend college and don't earn more than $50,000 a year and if race was an important factor in your vote and you didn't vote for Obama, you are under a cloud of racial suspicion.

I'd like to hear from someone in that group to help me clear the air. Could it be that those voters simply preferred Clinton's position on the issues?

As for black voters, 29 percent of the 6,700 polled said the race of the candidate was the most important or one of several important factors in determining who got their vote. Although that is twice the percentage of white race-conscious voters, the number still strikes me as low. Obama routinely pulls 90 to 99 percent of the black vote.

Would that make them racist? Or could it just be that black voters are saying that having a black president would mean a lot to them?

And what would be wrong with that?

E-mail:milloyc@washpost.com

< 2