There's been a lot of talk from the Clinton campaign and the talking head pundits about Obama's trouble getting white voters to vote for him, but I'd like to make a couple points.

First of all, I think that the racial divide is much more likely a geographic divide. Metropolitan areas have favored Obama, and rural areas have favored Hillary. This makes perfect sense if you admit that Hillary is a hawkish centrist democrat (and I know many here won't) because the rural areas are generally stronger for republicans in general elections. It stands to reason that the rural democrats would be a lot closer to the center than the urban democrats, and therefore Hillary, as a centrist, probably does better reflect their values.

Now if you consider that the rural areas are almost exclusively white and that African Americans live almost entirely in metropolitan areas, is it not possible, even likely, that the black/white patterns we've seen are just a byproduct of a rural/urban divide? Especially when that divide is almost unmistakable when looking at the county by county maps of primary results?

And lastly, whether Obama's issue is with white voters or rural voters, it needs to be said again that it is only a problem in one specific area, namely the Apalachian region. He did very well in many midwestern and western states that are quite white and rural. Keep that in mind when you want to claim he can't win votes from working-class whites.