Black-Brown Divide

Race didn't figure to be a front-burner issue in the 2008 presidential primary campaign. That is, until Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama verbally sparred over remarks Clinton made about Martin Luther King Jr. and President Lyndon Johnson. Now racial issues are starting to simmer along the campaign trail, and the flames could be turned up as the pols head deeper into the Southern and Southwestern states. The candidates quickly tried to tone down any discussion of race and gender, but political analyst and author Earl Hutchinson, whose latest book, "The Ethnic Presidency: How Race Decides the Race to the White House," comes out next month, suggests that race is always an issue in presidential politics, be it covert or overt, and that there's a much more significant racial subtext to the current race than many may realize.

Hutchinson, who believes the shortage of white votes for Barack Obama in Nevada is more indicative of what will happen in the fall than the support he got from whites in Iowa, cites the "Bradley Effect," the label for the alleged penchant of many white voters to lie to pollsters when they tell them that race isn't a consideration when they vote. The term derives from the 1982 election involving former Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley, which showed that a smaller percentage of white voters actually voted for Bradley, an African-American, than had said they planned to vote for him.

Hutchinson believes this effect is even more pronounced among Hispanics. He writes at length in his new book that the tensions in this country between blacks and Latinos are alive and well. NEWSWEEK's Jamie Reno talked to Hutchinson about how those tensions could affect the Obama candidacy and the overall election. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: In your new book you look at how racial issues came into play in political races dating as far back as the 1964 election of Lyndon Johnson, who signed the Civil Rights Act that year. What were some of your findings?
Earl Hutchinson: I found that, one way or another, racial and ethnic factors are a constant undercurrent of the American political debate. I also found that, historically, even winning African-American candidates often get little support from Latino voters. Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, for example, who was elected five times, was largely ignored by the Latino vote. Lee Brown ran for mayor of Houston in 2001, and in a runoff he got less than 30 percent of the Latino vote. There is a long history here that is hard to overcome.

How do you think this will play out in the 2008 presidential election?
If you look at the Western states—California, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona—there are some 1,000 delegates, and in each of these states the Latino population is in double digits. The tensions between blacks and Latinos and negative perceptions that have marred relations between these groups for so long unfortunately still resonate, and I believe there will still be reluctance among many Latinos to vote for an African-American candidate. It can be devastating for Obama and good for Hillary Clinton, especially given the fact that the Latino vote is growing and could be a much more significant factor, depending on the turnout.

In a CNN poll released on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, nearly three out of four whites said they believe America is ready for a black president. Isn't that a positive sign that race is less a factor than it once was?
White voters have shown they are perhaps ready to vote for an African-American candidate. The Bradley Effect may not be as significant now. That remains to be seen. But the rules of political engagement fall apart when you talk about black and Latino candidates. I do not believe Latino voters will vote even for a candidate like Obama who is an appealing, well-financed liberal Democrat. It doesn't bode well. At the end of day I expect the Latino vote nationwide to be 60 to 65 percent for Clinton. If Obama gets 30 percent he should count his blessings.