History will thank the African-American, Latino, and Asian-American voters who saved the world

[RainDog]

57. Obama won the largest share of the white vote since 1976

for Democrat, in a two-person presidential race.

Yet you left this out - even tho it's the first sentence in the first link you have here.

But that doesn't fit the race baiting in your post - which you have been doing here since you joined DU.

Where are those African-American voters living - the ones who voted for Obama?

The overwhelming number of African-Americans live in the south. Since we have an electoral college voting system, those votes count toward a presidential election when the states in which they are made have their electoral college votes assigned to one person or another.

So, who won those southern states?

Again, the reality is that voting populations of those states whose electoral votes went to Obama were made up of a coalition of blacks, Hispanics, Asian-Americans and whites. All were part of this win and the votes from whites were essential for the Democratic candidate in the last two elections... and in every election. It's not a "white vs. black" issue. It's a conservative vs. liberal issue.

A stunning 54 percent of young white voters supported Obama, compared with 44 percent who went for McCain, the senator from Arizona. In the past three decades, no Democratic presidential nominee has won more than 45 percent of young whites.

again, from your first link. So, Obama won more white votes among those who will be voting most often in future presidential elections - and more votes from these white voters than for any white candidate in 30 years.

...which is, again, something you leave out because you are race baiting.

Hispanics are 8% of the voting population.
Asian-Americans are 3.4% of the voting population
African-Americans are 12% of the voting population (I'm using census numbers that show an increase in the last election.)

So, less than 24% of all votes were cast by the group you talk about in your OP. The point is that elections are about coalitions of people, no matter their ethnicity. The reality is that white people voted for Obama more than any other Democratic president in the recent past. So, if this is about Obama - the reality is that white people voted him into office as much as any other racial or ethnic category, and more whites voted for him than voted for white candidates in the past.

Although blacks voted at higher rates than non-Hispanic whites nationally in 2012, this result was not uniform across the country. In the East North Central, East South Central, Middle Atlantic, and South Atlantic divisions, blacks voted at higher rates than non-Hispanic whites. In the Mountain and Pacific divisions, non-Hispanic whites voted at higher rates than blacks. In the New England, West North Central and West South Central divisions, voting rates for the two groups were not significantly different from each other.

So, in areas of the nation with large white populations, those states include many who voted for and carried the electoral college votes for Obama and the Democratic Party. It was, again, a coalition of voters, across many different categories.

However, the population in this nation that is white and Republican-voting is also the population that considers itself strongly religious.

The categories that lost votes from Obama to Romney were among white Protestant and Catholic voters. But, overwhelmingly, white protestants vote for Republicans. No matter who the Democratic nominee may be. This has been the case since the 1980s.

You could've broken this down in other ways... more people who hold no strong religious belief voted for Obama than voted for Romney or McCain.

The religiously unaffiliated voted 75% for Obama in 2008 and 70% in 2012. This vote for Obama is larger than votes for Gore or Kerry.

This demographic is 20% of the adult population, and growing. This vote is greater than or equal to than any two of the three categories you selected, and nearly equal to all them, combined.

So, those with religious affiliations, other than African-Americans, match your totals for "voting while white." Maybe the problem is certain religion beliefs, as far as voting for any Democrat, since this voting pattern holds no matter who the Democrats run because the religious right is ideologically opposed to those issues that constitute the core of the Democratic platform coalition among black, Latino, Asian-American, white, male, female, straight, gay, religious or non-religious, environmentalist, believer in the public good...

Surprise! (or not, actually) Those same white protestant voters oppose women's rights, gblt rights, equal rights and opportunities for minorities, environmental regulations, business regulation, social safety net upholding...

These same percentages for religious voters will hold true when or if Hillary Clinton runs for president. They will have held true since before she ran, as well, just as they do now, with President Obama.

The good news in all this is that the white religious voter is older and dying off. Younger people continue to disassociate themselves with religion. It seems an effective "southern strategy" for Democrats would be to form coalitions of non-religious voters, of all races, to encourage their other non-religious friends to vote and to become involved in the political process. In the south, such a coalition could help with voter registration and making sure people in their states have valid voter i.d.s.

But this would be inclusive, rather than divisive, so obviously it's not pertinent to your OP.