How Similar are Milwaukee and Cleveland???

Coming out of Tuesday's primary in Ohio, I was somewhat surprised that while Obama won Cleveland, his numbers weren't as high as I would have thought. As a Wisconsin native, I've always viewed Milwaukee and Cleveland as, in many ways, sister cities. Therefore, I figured they'd vote the same. They're roughly the same size rust belt metropolises with a history of heavy manufacturing, ethnic based neighborhoods and politics, and a not too pleasant legacy of segregation and racial strife. To be more specific, I've dug up some demographic statistics, as well as the voting data from the Wisconsin and Ohio primaries.

I should note first off that I haven't been able to find the final vote tally for the city of Cleveland yet. Also, for the city of Milwaukee, the best I've been able to find, apart from the overall city totals (89,899 Obama to 34,462 Clinton) is the above map produced by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. So I've decided to go out a level and look at Milwaukee county and Cuyahoga county (essentially the 10th and 11th congressional districts). What we see are two very, very similar metropolitan areas.

While Cuyahoga County is larger (1.4 million vs. 915 thousand), in all other respects these two counties are almost identical. Milwaukee county is 66% white, 25% African American, and 9% Hispanic (Milwaukee city is 44% white, 40% African American, 15% Hispanic). Cuyahoga is 67% white, 27% African American, and 3% Hispanic (Cleveland city is 42% white, 51% African American, 7% Hispanic). The median household income in both counties is $39,000/year. Milwaukee county's poverty rate is a bit higher at 18.5% versus 13% in Cuyahoga.

In the Wisconsin primary, Obama won Milwaukee county 64% to 35% for Clinton. So, going into the primary, what might we have expected?? Given that Clinton was polling ahead of Obama among voters making less than $50,000/year, we might not have expected much advantage to Clinton given the parity of the two counties in terms of median income. In fact, the county's lower poverty rate might have actually been a net benefit to Obama. Cuyahoga county is slightly more African American than Milwaukee, which should have helped Obama, especially within the city of Cleveland.

How did Cuyahoga county go?? While Obama won, his numbers were much smaller than he saw a few weeks earlier in Milwaukee. The final vote was 53% Obama to 46% Clinton. So what happened? There are a number of workable explanations that I'm sure will be fleshed out over the coming weeks. First, given Clinton's success statewide, there was obviously some spillover effect within Cuyahoga county and the city of Cleveland. Just compare the county by county maps of both states to see this. A second hypothesis would by the role that race may have played. The Milwaukee city map above shows that Clinton did indeed win a few wards in the city of Milwaukee, namely on the Polish and German dominated south side. John highlighted a few days ago how this dynamic may have played out in Cleveland, especially with Dennis Kucinich facing a tough primary (which would drive up turnout). Indeed, Clinton won in Kucinich's district. Again using the county by county data, Obama did much better in the overwhelmingly white counties in outer Wisconsin (he won the vast majority of them) than he did in Ohio (he lost the vast majority). Looking at this more historically (see earlier posts), George Wallace did much better in Cleveland than he did in Milwaukee in 1968, so maybe there's some faint remnances of this dynamic still at work. A third hypothesis would be the attention each candidate paid to these states. In the compressed schedule between the Potomac Primaries and Wisconsin, Obama was much more visible and active in Wisconsin than Clinton was. He spent much more money and was on the air to a greater extent. A final explanation might be the role of local leaders and their advocacy for each candidate. In Milwaukee, Obama had the support and network of both Governor Jim Doyle and Congresswoman Gwen Moore. In Ohio, it was Clinton with the advantage, having the endorsement of Governor Ted Strickland and Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones (11th district).

Anyhow, there is a lot of work yet to be done examining these numbers but this offers a jumping off point. It shows, though, that we can't assume all cities--even those that look very similar on the surface--are going to behave the same. There will be other factors at work.

Hillary's Hail Mary: Ripped from the Koach Karl's (Rove) Playbook?

It’s Ohio primary eve and HRC is pausing, on its 68th anniversary, to “mark the Katyn Massacre of Polish prisoners during World War II” by Soviet troops. Sen. Clinton is also speaking up for Polish Americans and the “Polish nation and for all the peoples of Eastern Europe who have emerged from the darkness of the 20th century,” who also just so happen to enjoy a long and storied legacy in Cleveland’s historically working class white neighborhoods. Turnout in ethnic Cleveland is likely to be boosted even higher in Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s OH10 CD where the former presidential candidate is struggling to win renomination.

When you consider the strategy, it’s hard to not speculate that HRC really is making her last stand in Ohio; even taking a cue from Karl Rove’s playbook. Cuyahoga County is now famous as ground zero in George W. Bush’s reelection campaign, where Rove reportedly stanched steep losses with a ground game that fanned out to Catholic and Orthodox churches on Sundays with leaflets appealing to the conservatism of elderly parishioners in historically labor heavy precincts, tying John Kerry with the opposition to a statewide gay marriage ban initiative on the ballot that year. That minimized loss in urban areas, coupled with heavy gains in rural and exurban counties, the legend goes, saved Ohio, and reelection, for Bush.

It may have pulled a Republican electoral majority out of the fire one more time, but it’s not a very forward looking strategy as it relies on voters who may turnout in big numbers now, but who are literally dying out. Prof. Murray documented how George Wallace identified these voters decades ago - and taught Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan how to win them over - when they were far more numerous. (Check out Ward 14, home to St. Stanislaus Church, an anchor of Cleveland’s Polish community, and nearby wards where Wallace cracked 20%.) But, it was their very “white flight” - and hence, diminishing numbers - that defined their new voting habits.

While working these areas - home to the white working class voters and where HRC’s strongest demographic, older white women, turn out in droves, may pay off one more time - just like it did for Bush in 2004, the socially conservative or anti-foreign trade messages that win votes here are likely to alienate the growing numbers of younger, increasingly college educated white voters moving into the city and swelling the inner suburbs - or bleeding electoral votes to places like Northern Virginia or the Denver suburbs, coloring previously deep red states in a purple hue. More affluent, educated, liberal and integrated Shaker Heights, in contrast, is likely to be Obama territory.

The fantastic map above highlights this divide starkly by overlapping the 2004 presidential vote with results from the gay marriage referendum on the same day. It includes all of Cuyahoga County, but Cleveland’s cleavages are clear, too. HRC will try to maximize her performance with “Blue Collar Whites” and “Rural/Exurban Whites” - dwindling demographics in decimated precincts - and minimize her own losses in areas heavy with black voters and among “rich conservatives” and “urban liberal sophisticates,” groups that have performed well this cycle for Obama.